John Calvin versus the rest of early Christian

Jesusthekingofking · Nov 28, 2020

John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology, his influence is huge in the protestant circle. He's an avid bible person and had summarised the bible into his work called the the Institutes of the Christian Religion. His work emphasis on the majestic God, our sins and God's choosing in salvation.

However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything. To put it simply, I don't think Calvin is 100% orthodox or accurate. I've read other theologian or pastor on their view on Calvin, they said Calvin was wrong on issue like double predestination. To me, it seems like Calvin failed to grasp a loving God like Luther did.

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christians before him, especially the early fathers, to see how they interpret the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. Because the early fathers live and learn from the apostles, from there we can know what is orthodox teachings. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologians.

What do you think? Because doctrines shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different a way but the message cannot be altered, otherwise we might becoming less and less orthodox Christian over time.

chevyontheriver · Nov 28, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology, his influence is huge in the protestant circle. He's a avid bible person and had summarize the bible into his work called the Christian institute. His work emphasis the majestic God, our sins and God's choosing in salvation.

However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything. To put it simply, I don't think Calvin is 100% orthodox or accurate. I've read other theologian or pastor on their view on Calvin, they said Calvin was wrong on issue like double predestination. To me, it seems like Calvin failed to grasp a loving God like Luther did.

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christian before him, to see how they interpretate the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologian. What do you think? Because doctrine shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different ways but the message cannot be altered otherwise we became less orthodox Christian.

Comparing Calvin and Augustine should be enlightening. Comparing Calvin and Aquinas might be too.

rockytopva · Nov 28, 2020

And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. - 1 Corinthians 13:2

John Calvin never came across to me as a charitable soul.... And a sample from his "Treatise Against Ana-Baptist" book.....

TO write against all the false opinions & errours of the Anabaptists, should be a thing too long, & such a bottomless pit, as I could not well come out of. For this canker differeth in this thing from all other sects of hereticks: that she hath not erred only in certain points: but she hath engendered a whole sea, as it were, of foolish & false opinions. In such wise that scant shall a man find one Anabaptist which hath not some fantasy singular: which his fellows have not. So that if we would pluck out, or rehearse all their wicked doctrines, we should never make an end. But now at length they become unto two principal sects: whereof the one, though she be full of wicked & pernicious errours, yet doth she abide in much more simplicity. For she yet receiveth the holy scripture, as we do. And if rmen do dispute with those that be of that sect, it shall be perceived wherein they differ from us, & they will express their meaning, & in conclusion it may be perceived in what they accord, & wherein they dissent. The second sect is a mass of such foolish & beastly opinions, as the like cannot be found, insomuch that it is wonder how creatures which bear the figure of a man, can be so clean without sense & reason, as to suffer themselves so to be deceived, & fall into fantasies more than brutish. This sect call themselves libertines. And counterfeit so much the spiritual, that they set no more by the word of God, than they do by fables: except it be when it pleaseth them, and when as they may deprave it, and by force make it to serve for their devilish opinions. And besides this they have a charming or croaking as it were Cranes, so that a man cannot tell what it is, that they would say, and no more do they wot what it is themselves: but that by this craft they cover the filthiness of their doctrine. For their principles are to confound all differences between good & ill, & to mingle God so with the Devil that it should not be discerned between the one and the other, and so to make men not only without all feeling in their consciences before God: but also without shame before the world. Now see you wherefore they drive themselves into such caves of obscure and doubtful words, to the end that their villainy should not be perceived, lest we should have them in horror and execration. As indeed our nature repugneth against such monstrous things as they bring forth. So now to write in a sum against the errours of the Anabaptists, the shortest and most expedient way is to keep this division, and to gather apart in one treatise the errours of them which be not altogether so mad and desperate: and in another treatise to discover the venomous malice of those wicked, which under the colour of spirituality, would make men like unto brute beasts. - John Calvin

Devin Hammond · Nov 28, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology, his influence is huge in the protestant circle. He's a avid bible person and had summarize the bible into his work called the Christian institute. His work emphasis the majestic God, our sins and God's choosing in salvation.

However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything. To put it simply, I don't think Calvin is 100% orthodox or accurate. I've read other theologian or pastor on their view on Calvin, they said Calvin was wrong on issue like double predestination. To me, it seems like Calvin failed to grasp a loving God like Luther did.

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christian before him, to see how they interpretate the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologian. What do you think? Because doctrine shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different ways but the message cannot be altered otherwise we became less orthodox Christian.

The scriptures say that we know in part and we prophesy in part and that we see through a glass darkly. 1 Corinthians 13:9-12

Calvin was a flawed man so he wasn’t right about everything but he was a very solid Bible teacher.

Rachel20 · Nov 28, 2020

rockytopva said:
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. - 1 Corinthians 13:2

The ultimate test and yet the simplest of theology: what is the greatest commandment?

nonaeroterraqueous · Nov 28, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything.

I hope you don't think anyone got it right one hundred percent of the time. If ever there were a man with a perfect theology, I like to think that God would put a stumbling block in his path to keep him humble.

Jesusthekingofking said:
Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christians before him, especially the early fathers, to see how they interpret the bible and see their core theology.

Well, around here people seem to think that the first three hundred years constitutes "early." That's longer than the United States has been around, and we can see how that nation drifted from its original intent.

The early Christians wrote the Bible. The early commentators...also have to be interpreted by us who have no common language and culture, who live so many years later. What makes a two-thousand-year-old document harder to understand than a nineteen-hundred-year-old document? Not much. Yet, one comes from eye witnesses, and the other comes from mere commentators.

This is not to say that their words hold no value, but they are human, and their words are not scripture.

wandering misfit · Nov 30, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology, his influence is huge in the protestant circle. He's an avid bible person and had summarised the bible into his work called the the Institutes of the Christian Religion. His work emphasis on the majestic God, our sins and God's choosing in salvation.

However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything. To put it simply, I don't think Calvin is 100% orthodox or accurate. I've read other theologian or pastor on their view on Calvin, they said Calvin was wrong on issue like double predestination. To me, it seems like Calvin failed to grasp a loving God like Luther did.

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christians before him, especially the early fathers, to see how they interpret the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. Because the early fathers live and learn from the apostles, from there we can know what is orthodox teachings. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologians.

What do you think? Because doctrines shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different a way but the message cannot be altered, otherwise we might becoming less and less orthodox Christian over time.

wandering misfit · Nov 30, 2020

If you are truly wanting to expand your Christian life, The Council of Orange and Augustine is the appropriate starting point.

chevyontheriver · Nov 30, 2020

wandering misfit said:
If you are truly wanting to expand your Christian life, The Council of Orange and Augustine is the appropriate starting point.

But do not neglect the earlier Fathers, even if they are more challenging.

wandering misfit · Nov 30, 2020

chevyontheriver said:
But do not neglect the earlier Fathers, even if they are more challenging.

Do you think that Augustine and the others didn't allow for orthodox Christology?

chevyontheriver · Dec 1, 2020

wandering misfit said:
Do you think that Augustine and the others didn't allow for orthodox Christology?

I don't think that at all. Just that not all of the earlier Fathers were what we would call 'systematic' and they don't present a polished whole system of Christology. You get bits and pieces and all of those bits and pieces need to be held together and contemplated considering that some bits and pieces might not be there in this or that Father. Patrology is not simple. It is rewarding.

FreeGrace2 · Dec 1, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology, his influence is huge in the protestant circle. He's an avid bible person and had summarised the bible into his work called the the Institutes of the Christian Religion. His work emphasis on the majestic God, our sins and God's choosing in salvation.

Are you referring to "election" in the words "God's choosing in salvation"? If so, that is one of Calvin's biggest mistakes.

Election isn't even about salvation. It is about service. And God has chosen unbelievers to accomplish His will. Judas being just one example, from John 6:70,71.

However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything. To put it simply, I don't think Calvin is 100% orthodox or accurate.

You are absolutely correct!

I've read other theologian or pastor on their view on Calvin, they said Calvin was wrong on issue like double predestination. To me, it seems like Calvin failed to grasp a loving God like Luther did.[/QUOTE]
Among other things.

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christians before him, especially the early fathers, to see how they interpret the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. Because the early fathers live and learn from the apostles, from there we can know what is orthodox teachings. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologians.

Not a bad idea, but be careful. By the early 2nd Century, the so-called "divines" (I don't like that word at all. None of the early "fathers" were close to 'divine') had drifted far from the biblical concept of grace. So their writings contain inaccuracies.

What do you think? Because doctrines shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different a way but the message cannot be altered, otherwise we might becoming less and less orthodox Christian over time.

Correct, doctrines don't change over time. The key is to ensure that any verse or doctrine isn't contradicted by any other verse/passage.

For example, the reformed doctrine of election says that God unconditionally chooses who will be saved.

1 Cor 1:21 says "God is pleased...to save those who believe". So, this makes clear that God's choice in who to save is found in the condition of believing. iow, God chooses to save believers. And that election IS unconditional. ALL who believe in Christ are saved.

Even Simon the sorcerer, who believed and was baptized. Yet, he didn't show it by his behavior.

Marc Perry · Dec 1, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology, his influence is huge in the protestant circle. He's an avid bible person and had summarised the bible into his work called the the Institutes of the Christian Religion. His work emphasis on the majestic God, our sins and God's choosing in salvation.

However, I doubt Calvin got it right 100% in everything. To put it simply, I don't think Calvin is 100% orthodox or accurate. I've read other theologian or pastor on their view on Calvin, they said Calvin was wrong on issue like double predestination. To me, it seems like Calvin failed to grasp a loving God like Luther did.

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christians before him, especially the early fathers, to see how they interpret the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. Because the early fathers live and learn from the apostles, from there we can know what is orthodox teachings. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologians.

What do you think? Because doctrines shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different a way but the message cannot be altered, otherwise we might becoming less and less orthodox Christian over time.

Let me ask you this ... Do you know the mind of God? Did Calvin? He never claimed to know anything. He was just following the ancient Greek approach of questioning everything. It doesn't mean he actually believed anything he had to say.

fhansen · Dec 2, 2020

rockytopva said:
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. - 1 Corinthians 13:2

John Calvin never came across to me as a charitable soul.... And a sample from his "Treatise Against Ana-Baptist" book.....

TO write against all the false opinions & errours of the Anabaptists, should be a thing too long, & such a bottomless pit, as I could not well come out of. For this canker differeth in this thing from all other sects of hereticks: that she hath not erred only in certain points: but she hath engendered a whole sea, as it were, of foolish & false opinions. In such wise that scant shall a man find one Anabaptist which hath not some fantasy singular: which his fellows have not. So that if we would pluck out, or rehearse all their wicked doctrines, we should never make an end. But now at length they become unto two principal sects: whereof the one, though she be full of wicked & pernicious errours, yet doth she abide in much more simplicity. For she yet receiveth the holy scripture, as we do. And if rmen do dispute with those that be of that sect, it shall be perceived wherein they differ from us, & they will express their meaning, & in conclusion it may be perceived in what they accord, & wherein they dissent. The second sect is a mass of such foolish & beastly opinions, as the like cannot be found, insomuch that it is wonder how creatures which bear the figure of a man, can be so clean without sense & reason, as to suffer themselves so to be deceived, & fall into fantasies more than brutish. This sect call themselves libertines. And counterfeit so much the spiritual, that they set no more by the word of God, than they do by fables: except it be when it pleaseth them, and when as they may deprave it, and by force make it to serve for their devilish opinions. And besides this they have a charming or croaking as it were Cranes, so that a man cannot tell what it is, that they would say, and no more do they wot what it is themselves: but that by this craft they cover the filthiness of their doctrine. For their principles are to confound all differences between good & ill, & to mingle God so with the Devil that it should not be discerned between the one and the other, and so to make men not only without all feeling in their consciences before God: but also without shame before the world. Now see you wherefore they drive themselves into such caves of obscure and doubtful words, to the end that their villainy should not be perceived, lest we should have them in horror and execration. As indeed our nature repugneth against such monstrous things as they bring forth. So now to write in a sum against the errours of the Anabaptists, the shortest and most expedient way is to keep this division, and to gather apart in one treatise the errours of them which be not altogether so mad and desperate: and in another treatise to discover the venomous malice of those wicked, which under the colour of spirituality, would make men like unto brute beasts. - John Calvin

I agree. And if that love isn’t known and held as the highest, most valuable goal in Christianity, being its heart and soul and the motivation behind everything Jesus said and did, then I doubt that person knows God very well. Despite their knowledge of Scripture or anything else.

fhansen · Dec 2, 2020

wandering misfit said:
If you are truly wanting to expand your Christian life, The Council of Orange and Augustine is the appropriate starting point.

I absolutely agree-not necessarily the only starting point but a very valuable point to arrive at nonetheless. A good discussion would be on the 2nd Council of Orange where the Church’s basic doctrines on grace are firmly laid down. Most of those teachings derive from Augustine’s battle against Pelagianism less than a century earlier. Anyway, they serve to benefit all of Christianity.

5thKingdom · Dec 3, 2020

fhansen said:
I agree. And if that love isn’t known and held as the highest, most valuable goal in Christianity, being its heart and soul and the motivation behind everything Jesus said and did, then I doubt that person knows God very well. Despite their knowledge of Scripture or anything else.

Where us the "love" here?

Mar 6:11-12
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom
and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

Where is the "love" here?

Luk 19:26-27
For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given;
and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away
from him. But those mine enemies, which would not that I should
reign over them, bring hither, and SLAY THEM before me.

Where is the "love" here?

Mat 25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand,
Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,
prepared for the devil and his angels:

Where is the "love" here?

Heb 12:29
For our God is a consuming fire.

To preach "God is love" is to willfully preach a HALF-TRUTH (lie).
Yes, God is "love" to "His Sheep"... but God is also a righteous
and just JUDGE that sends untold BILLIONS of people into the
same eternal torment prepared for Satan and his demons.
To INTENTIONALLY ignore that reality is to preach a LIE.

Jim

fhansen · Dec 4, 2020

5thKingdom said:
Where us the "love" here?

Mar 6:11-12
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom
and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

Where is the "love" here?

Luk 19:26-27
For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given;
and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away
from him. But those mine enemies, which would not that I should
reign over them, bring hither, and SLAY THEM before me.

Where is the "love" here?

Mat 25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand,
Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,
prepared for the devil and his angels:

Where is the "love" here?

Heb 12:29
For our God is a consuming fire.

To preach "God is love" is to willfully preach a HALF-TRUTH (lie).
Yes, God is "love" to "His Sheep"... but God is also a righteous
and just JUDGE that sends untold BILLIONS of people into the
same eternal torment prepared for Satan and his demons.
To INTENTIONALLY ignore that reality is to preach a LIE.

Jim

Jim, if the love of God isn't as I described then I doubt life with God would be much better than life without. Just saying. So those passages you mentioned are consistent with love or their inconsistent with God. And IMO they're consistent with love because they're consistent with His justice, which opposes evil by its nature, evil being opposed to love by its nature even as God is patient or longsuffering in enduring it, for now, not wanting any to perish.

5thKingdom · Dec 4, 2020

fhansen said:
Jim, if the love of God isn't as I described then life with God
will not be anything better than life without. Just saying.

Right... eternal life with God is no better than eternal torment
with Satan. That makes sense. Just saying.

So those passages you mentioned are consistent with love or their inconsistent with God. And IMO they're consistent with love because they're consistent with His justice...

Then why did you "agree" with the previous comments about
Calvin not showing the "love" of God because he DARED to say
the same thing... that God's JUSTICE requires those preaching
heresy (unsaved "tares" in the church) to experience the same
eternal torment as their father Satan?

When someone says that Calvin did not preach the "love"
of God because he preached about God's JUSTICE in sending
all heretics into the same eternal fire as Satan... and you "agree"
then you demonstrate that (despite your words above) you
DO NOT believe sending people to hell is part of God's "love".
Regardless of what you NOW write.

Make no mistake, the Bible (not John Calvin) teaches that
heretics will NOT enter into the "Kingdom of God" and all
heretics are "accursed". And MANY in the church are heretics
(being unsaved "tares" sown by Satan and destined to hell)

Those preaching God's "love" rarely (if ever) say that "love"
requires the MAJORITY OF THE WORLD... and even the majority
of the church (all the unsaved "tares") to spend eternity in hell.

Jim

wandering misfit · Dec 4, 2020

fhansen said:
I absolutely agree-not necessarily the only starting point but a very valuable point to arrive at nonetheless. A good discussion would be on the 2nd Council of Orange where the Church’s basic doctrines on grace are firmly laid down. Most of those teachings derive from Augustine’s battle against Pelagianism less than a century earlier. Anyway, they serve to benefit all of Christianity.

Agreed, the 2nd council would be a good conversation. For todays age and it is good for the ones who are willing to discuss and debate things know good topics of discussion without being unchristian (flaming). A little soapbox for my view is that it is in Augustine's diligence of Christology at this point in history that systematic theology is sewn. ty

wandering misfit · Dec 4, 2020

Jesusthekingofking said:
John Calvin is the father of Reformed theology......

Now to test Calvin's theology we have to read the writing of the early Christians before him, especially the early fathers, to see how they interpret the bible and see their core theology. To compare and discern. Because the early fathers live and learn from the apostles, from there we can know what is orthodox teachings. That's my methodology to study the rest of the theological framework and theologians.

What do you think? Because doctrines shouldn't change over time, we can explain it in different a way but the message cannot be altered, otherwise we might becoming less and less orthodox Christian over time.

John Calvin versus the rest of early Christian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Love to pray! :)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Nonexistent Member

Nowhere man

Nowhere man

Well-Known Member

Nowhere man

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Oldbie

Oldbie

Newbie

Oldbie

Newbie

Nowhere man

Nowhere man

Similar threads