Why do other Christians hate Calvinist so much?

[Rhamiel]

Gods glory is only relevant to the saved.

that seems rather shallow and utilitarian

 

[Skala]

Salvation should be the main point, There is only way to it. The only way to the Father is through the Son. There is no salvation any other way. Not with Calvanism, catholosism, baptistism, or my words or yours.

I think you're confusing categories here brother.

Calvinism etc are doctrines. They are not "ways of salvation". Every Christian, regardless of his doctrines, believe that salvation is by faith in Christ alone.

 

[Skala]

Why are there Christians who are identifying themselves as proponents of another sinful men instead of just followers of Christ?

You are confused. They are not proponents of men. Those labels (Calvinist, Arminian, etc) are just doctrinal catch-all terms that explain (in one word), one's soteriology. They are just labels for doctrines.

All Christians follow Christ. All Christians follow the Bible for their doctrine. The divide is over interpretations of scripture, not which "man" one is following.

 

[Zaac]

You are confused. They are not proponents of men. Those labels (Calvinist, Arminian, etc) are just doctrinal catch-all terms that explain (in one word), one's soteriology. They are just labels for doctrines.

So why don't folks just say they doctrinally believe what God's word says instead of separating doctrine according to what men have said?

All Christians follow Christ. All Christians follow the Bible for their doctrine. The divide is over interpretations of scripture, not which "man" one is following.

So what is being accomplished here by discussing back and forth people's interpretations? It's obvious that one side or the other is not consulting with the Holy Spirit or else this would have been dealt with a long time ago.

These soteriologies seem to have taken on an idolatrous life of their own.

 

[Robs07M6S]

yeah its one big party down there!......


they're all so happy to be eternally separated from God..........If their so happy to be where there at, then what do you suppose all the cursing and swearing is about (of course this is your own rendition of what hell is like) they didn't have all the bud light they thought they would?

No one said they were happy, no one said it was a big party. The part that you dont seem to understand is that those who are in hell hate God, they despise God and their hearts are anything but repetant towards the God who is punishing them for their sins.

Just like the man who gets caught in his crime will do anything to avoid jail but will do nothing to change his ways, he is only sorry for getting caught in his crime just as those who are in hell are only sorry because of where their sin got them to in the end.

But go ahead, keep on twisting the point because your an entertaining guy to debate with. Its just too bad that you dont know what your talking about.

 

[DeaconDean]

So why don't folks just say they doctrinally believe what God's word says instead of separating doctrine according to what men have said?

Because I believe Calvinism is right when it teaches all men are born depraved, and I don't believe the Arminian theory that man is not depraved, and has prevelent grace applied to them when born.

Basicially:

Arminianism:

Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man's freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man's freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God's Spirit and be regenerated or resist God's grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit's assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man's act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation.

Man was not affected by the fall of Adam, and man co-operates with God to bring about his own salvation.

Calvinism:

Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ - it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation - it is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner's gift to God.

Comparison of Calvinism and Arminianism

So what is being accomplished here by discussing back and forth people's interpretations? It's obvious that one side or the other is not consulting with the Holy Spirit or else this would have been dealt with a long time ago.

These soteriologies seem to have taken on an idolatrous life of their own.

You would think so wouldn't you.

The truth is, we are just continuing the debate that has raged for the last 600 years.

 

[phoenixdem]

So why don't folks just say they doctrinally believe what God's word says instead of separating doctrine according to what men have said?



So what is being accomplished here by discussing back and forth people's interpretations? It's obvious that one side or the other is not consulting with the Holy Spirit or else this would have been dealt with a long time ago.

These soteriologies seem to have taken on an idolatrous life of their own.

There may well be people who follow perhaps too closely to the words of some "prophet" or another, like the SDA Church or the LDS Church. However, most Christians believe the Scriptures and they read the writings of other people who see what they see in the Holy Bible.

I will give you one example, myself. When I read Scripture I see Predestination and the Sovereignty of God as Calvin did. I haven't read Calvin's writings. I do read the Bible. If Calvin and I believe the same thing, does that make me a Calvinist? It does only when someone who doesn't agree with Predestination finds it necessary to label me a Calvinist in order to attempt to marginalize me. Even Christians have caught on to the Communist method of winning debates and that is to call names and attribute things to me and others like me that exist only in the minds of my opponents.

 

[German Guy]

Again, religions divide. As we can clearly see, every denomination and religion has a different view point. The entire bible has one message, Jesus Christ. The O.T. is Jesus concealed, the N.T. is Jesus revealed.

 

[Skala]

So why don't folks just say they doctrinally believe what God's word says instead of separating doctrine according to what men have said?

Don't you see there's no difference here lol. If I, a man, say, "I doctrinally believe what God's word says..and I, a man, say it says this ____". I'm still guilty of doing what you are accusing me of: following a man. Myself.

Everyone believes a man's interpretation of scripture. Either a historical figure, or a local church pastor, or a father, or himself. What difference does it make? People say "Calvinism" because the historic controversy attached to that label is easy to look up and research. The foundations are already laid for people to go study.

The fact is the Bible says that God gives gifts to the Church in the form of teachers and preachers and pastors. They are gifted with an ability to understand and explain the Bible to the rest of us.

it's more wise to listen to the counsel of our christian forefathers than to just ignore them altogether.

 

[Hammster]

Gods glory is only relevant to the saved.

I'm pretty sure God's glory is relevant to God.

 

[phoenixdem]

Isa 48:11 For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how

should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto​

another.

 

[Hammster]

Isa 48:11 For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how
should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto
another.

 

[Hammster]

I guess sone assume that God's glory is dependent upon His creation.

 

[faceofbear]

The reason why I've seen people frustrated with calvinism is not over free will, but is a question as to the nature of G-D.

 

[German Guy]

Absolutely, but not to the non believer

 

[Hammster]

Absolutely, but not to the non believer

Irrelevant. His glory is most important above all. And that is what the debate us about.

 

[greatdivide46]

That's true. God doesn't want to save them because their salvation is not included in his purpose. Their damnation serves a better purpose.

What a strange god who creates people and then wants to destroy them -- or at least doesn't want them to be with him.

 

[German Guy]

certainaly, but the non believer doesn't glorify the Lord, nor does the Lords Glory entertain the thoughts of the un-saved.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

What a strange god who creates people and then wants to destroy them -- or at least doesn't want them to be with him.

It's to display his goodness and glory to his elect. The destruction of wickedness serves a good purpose. So even the devils and reprobates serve a good purpose ultimately.

 

[Skala]

What a strange god who creates people and then wants to destroy them -- or at least doesn't want them to be with him.

God is as He is revealed in the Bible. If that's strange to you, then its not God that's strange, but your idea of God!

What I mean is, we have to submit to the God of the Bible. We cannot make our own idea of God "should" be like the standard by which to judge the God of the Bible.

The Bible is clear that God has mercy on whom he wants, and hardens whom he wants. It is clear he makes vessels of wrath and other vessels of mercy.