What about these men?

[nobdysfool]

And I am supposed to take your word for it?

Why not? You expect others to take your word for the things you say...

.

 

[EmSw]

Why not? You expect others to take your word for the things you say...

Now back to the topic presented in the OP. Why do men who call themselves Calvinists, reject its teachings and leave?

 

[Patmos]

Here is the thread....

Also http://www.christianforums.com/threads/question-for-former-calvinists.5330740/

 

[EmSw]

I make no claim to know the hearts and minds of these men, so I cannot give you an answer. As this is still, at best, anecdotal evidence, it does not rise to the level of proof of anything other than their own individual stories, and their own individual decisions. I cannot answer for them, nor would I try. Each of us will stand before Christ, and give account of our own lives, and not the lives of any others.

We don't have to speculate on the hearts and minds of these people. If you would read what they say, they will tell you why they left. No need for rigorous study of why they left; they tell us.

I am not asking you to answer for them. What I am asking, is why do men leave Calvinism, according to Reformed teachings. Why would some, after 30 years of following, and heavily influenced by Reformed teachings, leave?

 

[EmSw]

Also http://www.christianforums.com/threads/question-for-former-calvinists.5330740/

Thank you Patmos.

 

[nobdysfool]

We don't have to speculate on the hearts and minds of these people. If you would read what they say, they will tell you why they left. No need for rigorous study of why they left; they tell us.

I am not asking you to answer for them. What I am asking, is why do men leave Calvinism, according to Reformed teachings. Why would some, after 30 years of following, and heavily influenced by Reformed teachings, leave?

Some people get led away into error. Men are fallible, they don't always do the right thing. The Enemy is constantly trying to lead men away from the Truth. Unfortunately some are snared and get led away. It's a fact of life.

 

[EmSw]

Some people get led away into error. Men are fallible, they don't always do the right thing. The Enemy is constantly trying to lead men away from the Truth. Unfortunately some are snared and get led away. It's a fact of life.

Thank you for your answer NF. This is exactly what non-Calvinists believe also.

Do you think believing and staying in Calvinism is the right thing?
Do you think these men were lead away from the truth?
Do you think rejecting and leaving Calvinism is a snare?

 

[Albion]

I am not asking you to answer for them. What I am asking, is why do men leave Calvinism, according to Reformed teachings. Why would some, after 30 years of following, and heavily influenced by Reformed teachings, leave?

There are dozens of reasons why people leave any denomination and join another one. There's nothing special in this case, and it certainly doesn't disprove the beliefs of the former church. There is always a different denomination somewhere "out there" that teaches the opposite idea, no matter what the issue may be--predestination, the sacraments, baptism by immersion, salvation by faith or by works, Apostolic Succession, etc. The list is endless.

 

[EmSw]

There a dozens of reasons why people leave any denomination and join another one. There's nothing special in this case, and it certainly doesn't disprove the beliefs of the former church. There is always a different denomination somewhere "out there" that teaches the opposite idea, no matter what the issue may be--predestination, the sacraments, baptism by immersion, salvation by faith or by works, Apostolic Succession, etc. The list is endless.

So Albion, which one is of the truth?

 

[nobdysfool]

Thank you for your answer NF. This is exactly what non-Calvinists believe also.

Do you think believing and staying in Calvinism is the right thing?
Do you think these men were lead away from the truth?
Do you think rejecting and leaving Calvinism is a snare?

Since I'm not a full-fledged Calvinist, My answer doesn't fit into your little boxes. You're obviously trying to make a case against Calvinism, but I think you're going about it exactly backwards. You would be much better off sticking to Scripture, than to rely on the actions of fallible, imperfect humans, and anecdotal evidence, which does not rise to the level of "proof".

So, I'm not going to give you answers to your questions, because they are clearly born of an agenda, and I'm not playing that game.

 

[Albion]

So Albion, which one is of the truth?

But that's not the question you put to us. You have been talking as though the fact of some people changing churches IN ITSELF shows us something about which doctrines or churches are right and which are wrong. It doesn't.

 

[Patmos]

Now back to the topic presented in the OP. Why do men who call themselves Calvinists, reject its teachings and leave?

You mentioned Spurgeon in post 19. He called himself a Calvinist but rejected some of its major teachings. Calvinists with whom I talk to face to face tend to say that Spurgeon rejected what is now called Hyper Calvinism. This is a dodge as can be proven by reading one of his most famous sermons.

Many Calvinists today, ones I talk to personally and even some who post here on CF hold to some Hyper Calvinist doctrine but will usually deny it.
E.g from http://www.theopedia.com/hyper-calvinism

"It is called Hyper-Calvinism by its critics (Calvinists), who maintain that it deviates from the biblical gospel by (1) denying that the call of the gospel to repent and believe is universal, i.e. for all alike, and (2) denying that the unregenerate (natural) man has a duty to repent and believe in Christ for salvation.
.......

While this doctrine has always been a minority view, it has not been relegated to the past and may still be found in some small (many) denominations and church communities today.
....."

This article then give a "list of theological positions which fall outside mainstream Calvinism". I have copied some of this list ( AND NOT TWISTED ANYTHING). Comments in blue are mine and elucidate what I have seen on CF in my short time here where Calvinists (E,g sdowny, thatbrian and tulipbee, clothedingrace) although deny holding to the hyper position have posted agreement with this list.

• that God is the source of sin and of evil (Deny these words but not the meaning. E.g promote predestination of the saved and the reprobate. Or agree with the Canon of Dort which does the same)
• that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect ( just about every Calvinist I have met agrees with the Hyper position)
• that God does not command everyone to repent ( same comment as previous)
• God only cares for his elect and has nothing but hatred for the non-elect.( same comment as previous)

Why do men who call themselves mainstream Calvinists but reject its teachings, holding instead some Hyper Calvinism, unlike Spurgeon who slated it ?

 

[EmSw]

Since I'm not a full-fledged Calvinist, My answer doesn't fit into your little boxes. You're obviously trying to make a case against Calvinism, but I think you're going about it exactly backwards. You would be much better off sticking to Scripture, than to rely on the actions of fallible, imperfect humans, and anecdotal evidence, which does not rise to the level of "proof".

So, I'm not going to give you answers to your questions, because they are clearly born of an agenda, and I'm not playing that game.

In other words, your answers would indict Calvinism.

 

[nobdysfool]

You mentioned Spurgeon in post 19. He called himself a Calvinist but rejected some of its major teachings. Calvinists with whom I talk to face to face tend to say that Spurgeon rejected what is now called Hyper Calvinism. This is a dodge as can be proven by reading one of his most famous sermons.

Many Calvinists today, ones I talk to personally and even some who post here on CF hold to some Hyper Calvinist doctrine but will usually deny it.
E.g from http://www.theopedia.com/hyper-calvinism

"It is called Hyper-Calvinism by its critics (Calvinists), who maintain that it deviates from the biblical gospel by (1) denying that the call of the gospel to repent and believe is universal, i.e. for all alike, and (2) denying that the unregenerate (natural) man has a duty to repent and believe in Christ for salvation.
.......

While this doctrine has always been a minority view, it has not been relegated to the past and may still be found in some small (many) denominations and church communities today.
....."

This article then give a "list of theological positions which fall outside mainstream Calvinism". I have copied some of this list ( AND NOT TWISTED ANYTHING). Comments in blue are mine and elucidate what I have seen on CF in my short time here where Calvinists (E,g sdowny, thatbrian and tulipbee, clothedingrace) although deny holding to the hyper position have posted agreement with this list.

• that God is the source of sin and of evil (Deny these words but not the meaning. E.g promote predestination of the saved and the reprobate. Or agree with the Canon of Dort which does the same)
• that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect ( just about every Calvinist I have met agrees with the Hyper position)
• that God does not command everyone to repent ( same comment as previous)
• God only cares for his elect and has nothing but hatred for the non-elect.( same comment as previous)

Why do men who call themselves mainstream Calvinists but reject its teachings, holding instead some Hyper Calvinism, unlike Spurgeon who slated it ?

I guess you'll have to ask them. I answer only for myself, I do not know the thoughts and intents of anyone else's hearts. I reject authentic Hyper-Calvinist teachings, always have. Of course, not all that is claimed to be Hyper-Calvinist is actually true. Too many look no farther than the nearest screed online that confirms what they want to believe, and then regurgitate it as though it were God's own Truth, and get upset when others poke it full of holes, and show it to be a false witness, not only of Calvinists, but even Hyper-Calvinists. In order to properly debate something, it is incumbent on the participants to engage in truthful arguments, free from bias, and the agendas of others who post falsehoods for personal gain.

Not everything you read in the internet is true. Not everything you believe to be true is objectively true. We all have our blind spots. We all have our favorite ways of looking at things. None of us wants to change, believing that we have arrived at the Truth. Most Christians' beliefs are a mile wide, but only an inch deep, whereas God's Word has depths that we have yet to plumb, Truths that are still hidden to all but the most diligent among us. There is far more that we don't know than even the most erudite among us do know. And to think that one "knows" is a sure sign that they don't.


Rom 11:33-36 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! (34) For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? (35) Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? (36) For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

 

[nobdysfool]

In other words, your answers would indict Calvinism.

No, that's what YOU'RE trying to do.

 

[Patmos]

.... And to think that one "knows" is a sure sign that they don't.


Rom 11:33-36 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! ...Amen.

Amen

 

[EmSw]

But that's not the question you put to us. You have been talking as though the fact of some people changing churches IN ITSELF shows us something about which doctrines or churches are right and which are wrong. It doesn't.

But that's the direction you have taken it.

 

[EmSw]

No, that's what YOU'RE trying to do.

Why should I believe anything you say, when you can't answer questions about your belief?

 

[EmSw]

Since I'm not a full-fledged Calvinist,

There are so many divisions of Calvinism, it's no wonder nobody can understand what they believe. So, to what division do you belong? Are other divisions telling us falsehoods? It seems if God predestines all these divisions, He is the author of confusion.

 

[EmSw]

You mentioned Spurgeon in post 19. He called himself a Calvinist but rejected some of its major teachings. Calvinists with whom I talk to face to face tend to say that Spurgeon rejected what is now called Hyper Calvinism. This is a dodge as can be proven by reading one of his most famous sermons.

Many Calvinists today, ones I talk to personally and even some who post here on CF hold to some Hyper Calvinist doctrine but will usually deny it.
E.g from http://www.theopedia.com/hyper-calvinism

"It is called Hyper-Calvinism by its critics (Calvinists), who maintain that it deviates from the biblical gospel by (1) denying that the call of the gospel to repent and believe is universal, i.e. for all alike, and (2) denying that the unregenerate (natural) man has a duty to repent and believe in Christ for salvation.
.......

While this doctrine has always been a minority view, it has not been relegated to the past and may still be found in some small (many) denominations and church communities today.
....."

This article then give a "list of theological positions which fall outside mainstream Calvinism". I have copied some of this list ( AND NOT TWISTED ANYTHING). Comments in blue are mine and elucidate what I have seen on CF in my short time here where Calvinists (E,g sdowny, thatbrian and tulipbee, clothedingrace) although deny holding to the hyper position have posted agreement with this list.

• that God is the source of sin and of evil (Deny these words but not the meaning. E.g promote predestination of the saved and the reprobate. Or agree with the Canon of Dort which does the same)
• that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect ( just about every Calvinist I have met agrees with the Hyper position)
• that God does not command everyone to repent ( same comment as previous)
• God only cares for his elect and has nothing but hatred for the non-elect.( same comment as previous)

Why do men who call themselves mainstream Calvinists but reject its teachings, holding instead some Hyper Calvinism, unlike Spurgeon who slated it ?

So Patmos, which division of Calvinism is the truth?