Calvinism

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Alright, I have had questions about Calvinists and Non-Calvinists stemming from another post. What is it? How are they different? What makes the difference?

Any clear definition would be great, too. Try it as though you were speaking to your kids when trying to explain. I'm a little slow on this subject.

God Bless

 

[C.I. Scofield]

Alright, I have had questions about Calvinists and Non-Calvinists stemming from another post. What is it? How are they different? What makes the difference?

Any clear definition would be great, too. Try it as though you were speaking to your kids when trying to explain. I'm a little slow on this subject.

God Bless

First Calvinism:

Basically, Calvinism is known by an acronym: T.U.L.I.P.
​

Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)
​

These five categories do not comprise Calvinism in totality. They simply represent some of its main points.

​

Total Depravity:
Sin has affected all parts of man. The heart, emotions, will, mind, and body are all affected by sin. We are completely sinful. We are not as sinful as we could be, but we are completely affected by sin.
The doctrine of Total Depravity is derived from scriptures that reveal human character: Man’s heart is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and sick (Jer. 17:9). Man is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20). He does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12). He cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). He is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15). And, is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3). The Calvinist asks the question, "In light of the scriptures that declare man’s true nature as being utterly lost and incapable, how is it possible for anyone to choose or desire God?" The answer is, "He cannot. Therefore God must predestine."
Calvinism also maintains that because of our s fallen nature we are born again not by our own will but God’s will (John 1:12-13); God grants that we believe (Phil. 1:29); faith is the work of God (John 6:28-29); God appoints people to believe (Acts 13:48); and God predestines (Eph. 1:1-11; Rom. 8:29; 9:9-23).
​

Unconditional Election:
God does not base His election on anything He sees in the individual. He chooses the elect according to the kind intention of His will (Eph. 1:4-8; Rom. 9:11) without any consideration of merit within the individual. Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him. (Rom. 9:15, 21).
​

(On a personal note... I don't really believe personally that God "elects" or chooses anyone in the hell, But people choose that themselves, by rejecting the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Not to contradict myself... But I do believe we have a choice in that matter.)
​

​

Limited Atonement:
Jesus died only for the elect. Though Jesus’ sacrifice was sufficient for all, it was not efficacious for all. Jesus only bore the sins of the elect. Support for this position is drawn from such scriptures as Matt. 26:28 where Jesus died for ‘many'; John 10:11, 15 which say that Jesus died for the sheep (not the goats, per Matt. 25:32-33); John 17:9 where Jesus in prayer interceded for the ones given Him, not those of the entire world; Acts 20:28 and Eph. 5:25-27 which state that the Church was purchased by Christ, not all people; and Isaiah 53:12 which is a prophecy of Jesus’ crucifixion where he would bore the sins of many (not all).

Irresistible Grace:
When God calls his elect into salvation, they cannot resist. God offers to all people the gospel message. This is called the external call. But to the elect, God extends an internal call and it cannot be resisted. This call is by the Holy Spirit who works in the hearts and minds of the elect to bring them to repentance and regeneration whereby they willingly and freely come to God. Some of the verses used in support of this teaching are Romans 9:16 where it says that "it is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who has mercy"; Philippians 2:12-13 where God is said to be the one working salvation in the individual; John 6:28-29 where faith is declared to be the work of God; Acts 13:48 where God appoints people to believe; and John 1:12-13 where being born again is not by man’s will, but by God’s.
​

Perseverance of the Saints:
You cannot lose your salvation. Because the Father has elected, the Son has redeemed, and the Holy Spirit has applied salvation, those thus saved are eternally secure. They are eternally secure in Christ. Some of the verses for this position are John 10:27-28 where Jesus said His sheep will never perish; John 6:47 where salvation is described as everlasting life; Romans 8:1 where it is said we have passed out of judgment; 1 Corinthians 10:13 where God promises to never let us be tempted beyond what we can handle; and Phil. 1:6 where God is the one being faithful to perfect us until the day of Jesus’ return.​

​

and Now Arminianism:

Theology

The Arminians suggested five, anti-Calvinist corrections, which are summarized below:

• Conditional Election: God has decreed to save through Jesus Christ, out of the fallen and sinful human race, those foreknown by him who through the grace of the Holy Spirit believe in Christ; but God leaves in sin those foreseen, who are incorrigible and unbelieving.

• Universal Atonement: Christ's death was suffered on behalf of all men, but God elects for salvation only those who believe in Christ.

• Free Will with Partial Depravity: Freedom of will is man's natural state, not a spiritual gift - and thus free will was not lost in the Fall. The grace of Christ works upon all men to influence them for good, but only those who freely choose to agree with grace by faith and repentance are given new spiritual power to make effectual the good they otherwise impotently intend.

• Resistible Grace: The grace of God works for good in all men, and brings about newness of life through faith. But grace can be resisted even by the regenerate.

• Uncertain Perseverance: Those who are incorporated into Christ by a true faith have power given them through the assisting grace of the Holy Spirit, sufficient to enable them to persevere in the faith. But it may be possible for a believer to fall from grace.

More info on this can be found....:

Calvinism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism

and

Arminianism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminianism

Hope this Helps!

CIS

 

[Crazy Liz]

Any clear definition would be great, too. Try it as though you were speaking to your kids when trying to explain. I'm a little slow on this subject.

CIS has posted some pretty concise definitions, so I'll just try to simplify as much as possible the most basic difference. Arminians believe humans have free will, and can choose to come to God or not. Calvinists believe all humans are predestined, either to heaven or hell. Many Calvinists do not believe in double predestination - God only predestines the Elect, not the non-elect, who go to hell. I've never understood the mental gymnastics that deny both free will and double predestination, unless one accepts universalism (all will eventually be saved).

Anyway, the basic difference is predestination vs. free will.

BTW, Calvinism and Arminianism are both constructs of Reformed theology and Reformed soteriology. There are other Christian views on free will and predestination besides these.

 

[ps139]

What are the other views called Liz? Is one called Molinism? This area of theology is all a mystery to me.

 

[ZiSunka]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Crazy Liz again.

​

 

[BBAS 64]

Alright, I have had questions about Calvinists and Non-Calvinists stemming from another post. What is it? How are they different? What makes the difference?

Any clear definition would be great, too. Try it as though you were speaking to your kids when trying to explain. I'm a little slow on this subject.

God Bless

Good Day, DiscipleOfIam

Have you read any work by a Baptist on this issue ie Spurgeon?

http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm

The basics is this IMO. One who hold to the Doctrines of grace "Calvinism" Believe that Jesus died on the cross for a known group of people "elect".

They are his Sheep, the ones given to the Son by the Father, those who are drawn by the Father, those who where chosen in Him, those who were ordained to eternal life, the predestined ones according to the Father's good pleasure, His people, the ones Jesus obtained enternal life for, the ones God works belif in... ect...


It is all about what God whats and wills to happen, some think that Jesus died for all or for those who of there own chose would believe in him. if that were the case then there remains some major problem with the will and power of God.

By the way Calvism does not say that man does not have a free will, if you search for Augustine work on that issue you will gleen some historical insights to that issue.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[rural_preacher]

Another good website to read on this matter is:

http://www.calvarychapel.com/library/smith-chuck/books/caatwog.htm



--

 

[theseed]

Alright, I have had questions about Calvinists and Non-Calvinists stemming from another post. What is it? How are they different? What makes the difference?

Any clear definition would be great, too. Try it as though you were speaking to your kids when trying to explain. I'm a little slow on this subject.

God Bless

That's an interesting question. How would/do you explain Calvinist theology to your kids? I would probably not lecture my own kids on the finer points of theology--at least not until they got older.

 

[Crazy Liz]

What are the other views called Liz? Is one called Molinism? This area of theology is all a mystery to me.

No. Molinism is a theory about God's foreknowledge, but does not include a theory of soteriology. Because Calvinism posits that God not only knows everything that will happen in the future, but actually dictates every detail, it would disagree with Molinism, which is one theory that attempts to explain how God might not control every detail of the future.

Since open theism can't be discussed in CO forums, I choose not to discuss any issues of God's foreknowledge here. Post in LT with links from here and from GT, and you'll probably be able to get a good idea of different views of divine foreknowledge. Erwin wants open theism discussed in UT, but most members who hold or sympathize with that view refuse to post in UT.

 

[Crazy Liz]

What are the other views called Liz? Is one called Molinism? This area of theology is all a mystery to me.

I'm not sure whether they all have names that describe them in categorically equivalent terms. Calvinism and Arminianism are opposing views within the Reformed framework. Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans and Orthodox Christians don't seem to ask exactly the same questions, so they have not defined the same types of categories to simultaneously explain God's foreknowledge, God's sovereignty and the mechanics of salvation.

BTW, "The Doctrines of Grace" is another phrase that means Calvinism. It is basically a code phrase because it is understood by Calvinists to have a technical meaning (TULIP), but non-Calvinists do not necessarily understand how it is used in this technical sense.

 

[Glisten]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Crazy Liz again.

​

I did it for you.

 

[ZiSunka]

Thanks!!

 

[Crazy Liz]

Awww... Thanks, ladies!

 

[Gwenyfur]

WOW...at this point I think I'm going to be reading for a week just to catch up here LOL

Thanks y'all for giving me a reason to do some research again

 

[theseed]

What are the other views called Liz? Is one called Molinism? This area of theology is all a mystery to me.

I got in a discussion once with thereslittleflower(I think), and she made a good case for the Roman Catholic position of sacraments, but it was based the premise that we can resist God's prevenient grace. She might have had me convinced that infant baptism is necessary for the sanctifying grace. I kept it secret from her that I was a Calvinist, when she found it, then she stopped. Very interesting discussion indeed.

 

[BT]

I don't think that there is much difference between (some of) Catholic theology and (some of) Calvinist theology. Most of Calvins writings were derived from Augustine who is considered (by some) the "father of Roman Catholicism", and coming from a reformer it's not a big surprise (since the reformers weren't breaking away from the RCC but rather wanting to reform it "fix it" and stick with it). That's why we see a lot of Catholicish (yay I made up a word!) concepts in Luther's (and others') writings. Which is yet another reason that I hold to the definition of myself as a non-Catholic and not a protestant...

Anyway, there are (as Liz noted) other branches of theological thought aside from Calvinism and Arminianism. Speaking soteriologically (doctrine of salvation), that is. There was a major thrust from the "church fathers" on the doctrines of salvation in case you've never noticed. This should come as no great surprise, since, if you're going to learn about theology the first and utmost important subject matter is figuring out how to be saved. The rest (as the dog from Bugs Bunny says) is gravy...

 

[BBAS 64]

I don't think that there is much difference between (some of) Catholic theology and (some of) Calvinist theology. Most of Calvins writings were derived from Augustine who is considered (by some) the "father of Roman Catholicism", and coming from a reformer it's not a big surprise (since the reformers weren't breaking away from the RCC but rather wanting to reform it "fix it" and stick with it). That's why we see a lot of Catholicish (yay I made up a word!) concepts in Luther's (and others') writings. Which is yet another reason that I hold to the definition of myself as a non-Catholic and not a protestant...

Anyway, there are (as Liz noted) other branches of theological thought aside from Calvinism and Arminianism. Speaking soteriologically (doctrine of salvation), that is. There was a major thrust from the "church fathers" on the doctrines of salvation in case you've never noticed. This should come as no great surprise, since, if you're going to learn about theology the first and utmost important subject matter is figuring out how to be saved. The rest (as the dog from Bugs Bunny says) is gravy...

Good Day, BT

Hope things are well with you and yours! I would be interested in some of the things you see as the same? Do you think that Augustine is true a representation of the current state of the Roman Church, on what basis of his writings do come to that conclusion?

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[theseed]

I don't think that there is much difference between (some of) Catholic theology and (some of) Calvinist theology. Most of Calvins writings were derived from Augustine who is considered (by some) the "father of Roman Catholicism", and coming from a reformer it's not a big surprise (since the reformers weren't breaking away from the RCC but rather wanting to reform it "fix it" and stick with it). That's why we see a lot of Catholicish (yay I made up a word!) concepts in Luther's (and others') writings. Which is yet another reason that I hold to the definition of myself as a non-Catholic and not a protestant...

Anyway, there are (as Liz noted) other branches of theological thought aside from Calvinism and Arminianism. Speaking soteriologically (doctrine of salvation), that is. There was a major thrust from the "church fathers" on the doctrines of salvation in case you've never noticed. This should come as no great surprise, since, if you're going to learn about theology the first and utmost important subject matter is figuring out how to be saved. The rest (as the dog from Bugs Bunny says) is gravy...

Yeah, I must say, that most RC's would disagree strongly with you, and they would say that St. Augustine is misunderstood.

 

[ps139]

I don't think that there is much difference between (some of) Catholic theology and (some of) Calvinist theology. Most of Calvins writings were derived from Augustine who is considered (by some) the "father of Roman Catholicism", and coming from a reformer it's not a big surprise (since the reformers weren't breaking away from the RCC but rather wanting to reform it "fix it" and stick with it). That's why we see a lot of Catholicish (yay I made up a word!) concepts in Luther's (and others') writings. Which is yet another reason that I hold to the definition of myself as a non-Catholic and not a protestant...

Yah, I have noticed that the Thomists (Thomist comes from Thomas Aquinas) and Calvinists are more similar that I'd originally thought. There are a few things Calvinists accept and Thomists reject, but they do not seem to me as different as you might think. I'm I'm not mistaken though Calvin and Luther disagreed on a lot of issues, even though they both used Augustine as a basis, Luther seems more "Catholic." (LOL I never thought I'd say that!).

 

[BBAS 64]

Yah, I have noticed that the Thomists (Thomist comes from Thomas Aquinas) and Calvinists are more similar that I'd originally thought. There are a few things Calvinists accept and Thomists reject, but they do not seem to me as different as you might think. I'm I'm not mistaken though Calvin and Luther disagreed on a lot of issues, even though they both used Augustine as a basis, Luther seems more "Catholic." (LOL I never thought I'd say that!).

Good Day, Ps139

Can I copy this to my HDD for future use ??

Peace to u,

Bill