Help a new Presbyterian!!!

[edie19]

As I've said before, I'm a Christian first. I thought long and hard before choosing an icon - and chose Christian. I've thought about having it switched to Calvinist - but so far haven't done so (and likely won't). I'm reformed theologically - believe in election & predestination, believe the 5 solas are absolute, agree with all 5 points in the TULIP acronym. But, I'm a Christian - not a Calvinist (any more than I'm of Paul or Apollos or Peter).

So - my vote, don't worry about changing your icon. Anyone who reads your posts will know who you are and what you believe.

 

[Erinwilcox]

I voted Calvinist for many of the reasons already given. BTW, what did you end up wearing on Sunday? Did you go the pope route?
I can almost see you doing the following as the Presbyterians let you in. . . !!

Just kidding, of course!

 

[Augustine_Was_Calvinist]

I voted Calvinist for many of the reasons already given. BTW, what did you end up wearing on Sunday? Did you go the pope route?
I can almost see you doing the following as the Presbyterians let you in. . . !!

Just kidding, of course!

Some might even suggest substituting holy water for a fine aged, double malt scotch.

Do you know the difference between a Presbyterian and a Baptist?






A Presbyterian will say hello to you in the liquor store.

 

[Erinwilcox]

I suppose that you're right. . .in some ways. You wouldn't find me waving to you in a liquor store. Of course, I am underage . But even still, my family has a history of alcoholics. Therefore, I just choose not to drink so as not to risk anything (I'm told that it runs in the family). But I'm not opposed to drinking, so long as it's in moderation. But you sound proud of it! The difference, I mean.

 

[CCWoody]

As I've said before, I'm a Christian first. I thought long and hard before choosing an icon - and chose Christian. I've thought about having it switched to Calvinist - but so far haven't done so (and likely won't). I'm reformed theologically - believe in election & predestination, believe the 5 solas are absolute, agree with all 5 points in the TULIP acronym. But, I'm a Christian - not a Calvinist (any more than I'm of Paul or Apollos or Peter).

The problem is that you don't simply make yourself immune to the types of unnecessary division which Paul talks about by claiming the name of Christ. You see, evidently there were those that tried to make themselves appear to be above it by claiming the name of Christ:

1Co 1:12 GB

(12) Nowe this I say, that euery one of you saith,... and I am Christs.

​

When we say that we are a Calvinist, what we are doing is making a clear statement about our doctrinal position, just exactly the same as declaring that "I am Reformed."


It does seem to me as if the types of factions of which Paul spoke were those which seperated people in fellowship (see verse 9). Evidently those who claimed to be Paul's refused fellowship with other Christians just as those who claimed to be Christ's made the same faction. This is not to be tolerated.

I have freely mingled with my Arminian "Protestant" brothers for my entire Calvinistic walk. I would remain that way today except that for some Arminians, I was not to be tolerated; for others, shunned; still others, constantly contended against or ignored; etc. My Calvinistic stand is stricly along doctrinal lines, not lines of fellowship. I will freely sup with any who claim the name of Christ who adhere to some simple orthodoxy, even Catholics of which I do have friends. Now, that doesn't mean that I will be a part of their Eucharist. But, I make no division of the body solely for reasons that you don't believe all that I believe.

So - my vote, don't worry about changing your icon. Anyone who reads your posts will know who you are and what you believe.

Yeah, it is not like I have ever been stealth about who I am and what I believe. It does look like your opinion is not prevailing at this time. Last I cheched , it was 12 for a TULIP and 8 for all other's.

 

[CCWoody]

I voted Calvinist for many of the reasons already given. BTW, what did you end up wearing on Sunday? Did you go the pope route?
I can almost see you doing the following as the Presbyterians let you in. . . !!

Just kidding, of course!

If you check the first post, you will see that I didn't get it done. Unfortunately, and this would have been the icing on the cake, the Diocese of the Episcopal church where I grew up was meeting in our building and discussing all of their current problems. I would have created quite a stir (and probably some might have thought I was mocking them) had I had a hat, staff, & robe.

So, yeah, I know how to do "high church." HA!

 

[CCWoody]

Do you know the difference between a Presbyterian and a Baptist?

A Presbyterian will say hello to you in the liquor store.

I suppose that is another reason why I made a poor Baptist. I have a great memory for names and like to say hi to everyone I know.

Hey, at least I follow my Scottish/ Episcopal (and now Presbyterian) roots. I grew up as a wine aficionado, helping my dad make it. You can imagine my joy when, after decades of cana wine (read grape juice), I found a pleasant red in the cup of the Communion.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Right. Since it is such an old practice, the Conservatives argue that it doesn't fit under "cruel and unusual punishments." As for the Unitarian church, I agree it is heretical (thus unbiblical).

 

[lmnop9876]

As I've said before, I'm a Christian first. I thought long and hard before choosing an icon - and chose Christian. I've thought about having it switched to Calvinist - but so far haven't done so (and likely won't). I'm reformed theologically - believe in election & predestination, believe the 5 solas are absolute, agree with all 5 points in the TULIP acronym. But, I'm a Christian - not a Calvinist (any more than I'm of Paul or Apollos or Peter).

!!
finally, someone who agrees with me! i am a follower of Christ, not a follower of Calvin. i couldn't really care what Calvin said, if i can't find it in the Bible and see it as the historic faith of the church, i won't believe it. i tend to agree with George Whitefield, "I've never read Calvin, I got my teachings straight out of Paul" (paraphrase mine. lol). although i have read one book of Calvin's, "Truth for all time: a summary of the Christian faith" most of what i read in "truth for all time" i agreed with, although some parts i merely glanced over. i was thinking of giving it as a gift to a non-Christian friend, until i saw some of the deep doctrinal things in it, such as predestination and such things.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Did I completely misread edb19 or did he? Cause I really don't think that it was me.

 

[edie19]

Some might even suggest substituting holy water for a fine aged, double malt scotch.

Do you know the difference between a Presbyterian and a Baptist?

A Presbyterian will say hello to you in the liquor store.

I beg to differ - I'm a Baptist and I always say hello to people I know in the liquor store. Also in the refrigerated beer section of the grocery store. I especially like talking to the wine expert at Anderson's.

Of course, I say hello to people I don't know too so maybe I'm not a good example.

 

[edie19]

Yeah, it is not like I have ever been stealth about who I am and what I believe. It does look like your opinion is not prevailing at this time. Last I cheched , it was 12 for a TULIP and 8 for all other's.

The poll is just a general guideline. You can still go against the majority and choose Christian or Presbyterian.

edie

 

[lmnop9876]

Did I completely misread edb19 or did he? Cause I really don't think that it was me.

no, it must have been you. what i read in her was, I don't call myself after a mere man, I call myself after Christ.
i just added some more comments, such as, I couldn't really care what Calvin said, if it's not in the Bible, and it's not the historic faith of the Church, i don't believe it. not that i'm knocking Calvin, however, he's not the be-all and end-all of Christianity, he's a mere man attempting to interpret Scripture. in some areas he did a mighty fine job, and should be honoured for that, as should other great Christians. in other areas he was a little weak, and was too intent on applying reason to Holy Scripture.

I can almost see you doing the following as the Presbyterians let you in. . . !!

i guess that would make him too similar to Augustine, Athanasius, John Chrysostom, and other early Church bishops. lol.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Well, I am first a Christian. But, since the teachings of John Calvin (which were the teachings of Jesus, Paul, and others in the Bible) give a good summary of what I believe, I call myself a Calvinist so that other people know what I believe. No man is perfect (except Jesus, of course), but that doesn't make Calvin's teachings (the ones that hold to scripture) any less valid. And as for the historic faith of the church, tradition means nothing unless it is founded on scripture. IF you want the historic faith of the church, what about Rome since that is what most of the world believed until Martin Luther came along? Is that what you meant?

 

[lmnop9876]

And as for the historic faith of the church, tradition means nothing unless it is founded on scripture. IF you want the historic faith of the church, what about Rome since that is what most of the world believed until Martin Luther came along? Is that what you meant?

actually, no. i meant, the faith that the church held in its earliest days, as witnessed by the Early Church Fathers. the roman catholic church altered the faith of the church, introducing heresies such as papal supremacy, papal infallibility, purgatory, indulgences, the immaculate conception, the assumption of mary, co-redemptrix, mediatrix, &c. &c. their faith is not the historic faith of the Early Church Fathers.

 

[CCWoody]

no, it must have been you. what i read in her was, I don't call myself after a mere man, I call myself after Christ.

The problem is that merely claiming that you are called after Christ doesn't get you off the hook. Just read for yourself:

1Co 1:12 GB (12) Nowe this I say, that euery one of you saith,... I am Christs.
​

This verse is nothing about whether or not one bears the nickname Calvinist or Arminian or Christian or something else. If that were the case, then YOU would be just as guilty for bearing the name of Christ as anyone else. Paul would be speaking directly to you.

The nickname Calvinist is nothing but a theological statement the same as Reformed, and the same as Evangelist & Baptist.

And, the same as Christian I might add. Unfortunately, many false believers currently claim the name of Christian. Thus, the name has lost nearly all distinctiveness.

 

[edie19]

ok - to clarify, no I don't call myself by the name of a fallible man (other than my husband's last name). Calvinist might well be a synonym for Reformed - but as I see it, when I refer myself as Reformed I'm making a distinction based on many men's and many years of correct Scriptural interpretation. While my pastor would tell you that both he and I are Calvinist, he rarely uses the term either. Most members of my church feel as I do, we don't refer to ourselves by a man's name.

I also rarely refer to someone as Arminian - can't ever think of a time when I've called someone Arminian to their face. The times I do use the term is when discussing doctrinal differences.

edie

p.s. - if I do change anything it will be my user name, I regularly sign my name on posts, but folks still call me edb.

 

[lmnop9876]

The problem is that merely claiming that you are called after Christ doesn't get you off the hook. Just read for yourself:

1Co 1:12 GB (12) Nowe this I say, that euery one of you saith,... I am Christs.
​

This verse is nothing about whether or not one bears the nickname Calvinist or Arminian or Christian or something else. If that were the case, then YOU would be just as guilty for bearing the name of Christ as anyone else. Paul would be speaking directly to you.

The nickname Calvinist is nothing but a theological statement the same as Reformed, and the same as Evangelist & Baptist.

And, the same as Christian I might add. Unfortunately, many false believers currently claim the name of Christian. Thus, the name has lost nearly all distinctiveness.

what Paul goes on to say is, was Paul crucified for you? were you baptized in the name of Paul? what appears to have been happening was some people were 'paulites' and others 'peterites' and others 'appolossites' and others 'non-denominational.' some were saying they followed the teachings of paul, others the teachings of peter, others the teachings of apollos, and others the teachings of Christ alone, and each deriding the other as not having the true faith. Paul goes on to say, Is Christ divided? was i crucified for you? were you baptized in my name? uh uh. Christ is not divided. we belong to Christ and His Church, not to some mere man. the reason we should follow a teaching is because Christ taught it in His Word, not because Calvin taught it. if Calvin faithfully expounded a teaching of Christ, then very well, follow what he said on that teaching. however, if you call yourself a 'calvinist', then take up the teachings of the ever-virginity of Mary, the Sabbath as a type of Christ, the Lord's Supper as a mystical partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ, &c. &c. &c.

 

[Jon_]

p.s. - if I do change anything it will be my user name, I regularly sign my name on posts, but folks still call me edb.

I still bust up when people address me as "Jon_" (with the underscore). Come on, guys. Is it not obvious that the underscore was used because someone had already taken plain ol' "Jon"? And I've signed nearly every one of my 2000+ posts with "Jon." Yet, I still get "Jon_."

Yeah, that was off-topic and irrelevant, but... uh... Happy Reformation Day!!

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Gabriel]

Congratualtions, brother! You have come home.

I suggest using the Tulip and sporting the PCA avatar. That's what the cool people are doing these days.