Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

[BABerean2]

Listen you keep saying the WCF says Adam was given the 10 commandments but it does not. I

Westminster Confession of Faith


Chapter XIX

Of the Law of God



I. God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity, to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.

II. This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables: the first four command- ments containing our duty towards God; and the other six, our duty to man.

III. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly, holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the New Testament.

.

 

[redleghunter]

Westminster Confession of Faith


Chapter XIX

Of the Law of God



I. God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity, to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.

II. This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables: the first four command- ments containing our duty towards God; and the other six, our duty to man.

III. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly, holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the New Testament.

.

Once again it is not showing Sinai was given to Adam.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter XIX

Of the Law of God

I. God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity, to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.

II. This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables: the first four command- ments containing our duty towards God; and the other six, our duty to man.

III. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly, holding forth divers instructions of moral duties. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the New Testament.

Because God is omniscient, ALL knowledge has it's origin in the mind of God INCLUDING moral knowledge, even specific moral laws. So ALL moral knowledge existed from eternity before the foundation of the world. Looking at it from man's perspective, ignoring God's perspective, you might have a point, and you have to ignore God's perspective of the law to even make a point. One of the most lovely and wholesome effects of Calvinism, is that it is God centered theology. A Reformed person can become a bit nauseated with all the "I" me, myself, etc. focus and emphasis that is so prevalent in other versions of the Christian faith. It is not difficult to find, go to a Christian bookstore, notice all the "self-help" books? Listen to a dozen different Christian artists/bands and ask yourself where the emphasis is directed. Listen to the words of "worship" music carefully, are the lyrics focused on praise to God or is something else going on, maybe even something some might consider prideful. In the end my friend, God leaves nobody room for boasting, in the meantime here on earth, boasting abounds. His ways are not our ways, that's for sure.

 

[BABerean2]

One of the most lovely and wholesome effects of Calvinism, is that it is God centered theology.

In the video below a former "Calvinist" explains how he finally realized he was lost, even though he served as a worship leader in his church, and asks if Southern Baptists are going to adopt "Calvinism".

.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

In the video below a former "Calvinist" explains how he finally realized he was lost, even though he served as a worship leader in his church, and asks if Southern Baptists are going to adopt "Calvinism".

Whoever claimed that just because one considers themselves a Calvinist/Christian, it is the guarantee they are saved? Nobody in this thread that I'm aware. Is this an assumption you hold to? Countless from Every branch and denomination of Christianity have once made professions of faith only later to realize they were not saved. What gets to me the most, are leaders, pastors who come to realize they are not in the faith and have the heart of an unbeliever. Those scenarios bother me the most. Reformed believers have Always believed in apostasy, while the video may not be an instance of apostasy, from this site alone it Is evident many play hop scotch with theology and denominations, some more than others. I hope SBC adopts Calvinism, it would be a Major step in the right direction for Baptists, in my humble opinion, but God knows what is best for the past, present, and future, ultimately the situation is in His sovereign hands. Maybe things need to get worse before they get better? Of this I know, I do not know the future of specific denominations. However, it is possible to look at the present situation, and make general observations which lead to a general view of the present situation. But personally I do not have time to try and keep up with even one denomination, let alone however many fall under the umbrella of Christianity. In summary, I think the video you posted is a poor choice for video debate, considering what I have laid out in this post. Sorry but this is just...

 

[BABerean2]

Whoever claimed that just because one considers themselves a Calvinist/Christian, it is the guarantee they are saved? Nobody in this thread that I'm aware. Is this an assumption you hold to? Countless from Every branch and denomination of Christianity have once made professions of faith only later to realize they were not saved. What gets to me the most, are leaders, pastors who come to realize they are not in the faith and have the heart of an unbeliever. Those scenarios bother me the most. Reformed believers have Always believed in apostasy, while the video may not be an instance of apostasy, from this site alone it Is evident many play hop scotch with theology and denominations, some more than others. I hope SBC adopts Calvinism, it would be a Major step in the right direction for Baptists, in my humble opinion, but God knows what is best for the past, present, and future, ultimately the situation is in His sovereign hands. Maybe things need to get worse before they get better? Of this I know, I do not know the future of specific denominations. However, it is possible to look at the present situation, and make general observations which lead to a general view of the present situation. But personally I do not have time to try and keep up with even one denomination, let alone however many fall under the umbrella of Christianity. In summary, I think the video you posted is a poor choice for video debate, considering what I have laid out in this post. Sorry but this is just...

Based on the teachings of John Calvin, the man should have become one of the "Elect" when he was baptized into the covenant as an infant.

What went wrong?


.

 

[twin1954]

Based on the teachings of John Calvin, the man should have become one of the "Elect" when he was baptized into the covenant as an infant.

What went wrong?


.

That is not what John Calvin or Presbyterian Covenant Theology teaches. While I am a Baptist and my Covenant Theology differs from Presbyterians, their view of infant baptism doesn’t automatically make one “elect”. They view them as in the Covenant the same way that the lost Hebrews were. They consider baptism as the same as circumcision. It in no way saves but it does put you under the Covenant.

 

[BABerean2]

That is not what John Calvin or Presbyterian Covenant Theology teaches. While I am a Baptist and my Covenant Theology differs from Presbyterians, their view of infant baptism doesn’t automatically make one “elect”. They view them as in the Covenant the same way that the lost Hebrews were. They consider baptism as the same as circumcision. It in no way saves but it does put you under the Covenant.

Baptizing a baby does not put them under any Covenant found in the New Testament.
However, the early Calvinists did believe that baptizing a baby made them part of the "election".

Most Calvinists are clueless about the link between their doctrine and the teachings of Augustine.

Find out what Augustine taught about Baptismal Regeneration.


Listen to the following while you are taking a trip somewhere if you want to know the truth about what the Early Church Fathers taught before the time of Augustine.
The last hour contains the changes that Augustine brought in to Christian thinking.

You will also find out how Augustine and many of the Reformers used persecution against those who dared to disagree with their doctrine.

.

 

[Radagast]

Based on the teachings of John Calvin, the man should have become one of the "Elect" when he was baptized into the covenant as an infant.

That's a complete misrepresentation of what Calvinism teaches. The Elect are chosen by God. Being baptised doesn't make you one of the Elect. Not all baptised people are saved.

And what people call Calvinism isn't actually based on the "teachings of John Calvin," it's based on the Canons of Dordt.

 

[Radagast]

They consider baptism as the same as circumcision. It in no way saves but it does put you under the Covenant.

Exactly!

To quote the Belgic Confession: "... the infants of believers, whom we believe ought to be baptized and sealed with the sign of the covenant, as the children in Israel formerly were circumcised, upon the same promises which are made unto our children. And indeed Christ shed his blood no less for the washing of the children of the faithful, than for adult persons; and therefore they ought to receive the sign and sacrament of that, which Christ hath done for them; as the Lord commanded in the law, that they should be made partakers of the sacrament of Christ's suffering and death, shortly after they were born, by offering for them a lamb (Leviticus 12:6), which was a sacrament of Jesus Christ. Moreover, what circumcision was to the Jews, that baptism is for our children. And for this reason Paul calls baptism the circumcision of Christ (Colossians 2:11)."

 

[Radagast]

However, the early Calvinists did believe that baptizing a baby made them part of the "election".

Absolutely false.

Most Calvinists are clueless about the link between their doctrine and the teachings of Augustine.

No, we're not. But Augustine doesn't say what you think he says, and (while we love Augustine) we don't agree with everything he wrote.

Also, Augustine didn't "persecute people."

 

[BABerean2]

That's a complete misrepresentation of what Calvinism teaches. The Elect are chosen by God. Being baptised doesn't make you one of the Elect. Not all baptised people are saved.

And what people call Calvinism isn't actually based on the "teachings of John Calvin," it's based on the Canons of Dordt.

The early Calvinists taught that the children of the Elect were also the election chosen by God, who were regenerated through infant baptism.
They believed that children were brought into the covenant at the point of infant baptism.
This concept came from Augustine.
However, this idea is not found in the New Testament.

The Canons of Dordt is a manmade doctrine.
Calvinism is based on the teachings of Augustine.

Augustine condoned using persecution against those who disagreed with him, as did some of the Reformers.

On March 10, 1528 Balthasar Hubmaier was burned at the stake over his stand for believer's baptism.

He had previously been imprisoned and tortured for 7 months in Zwingli's Zurich.
It was Zwingli who had ordered that he be arrested, and a dispute over baptism was convened.

He was later imprisoned, and tortured, and burned at the stake in Catholic Vienna.
His wife was drowned.

See the link below.

Balthasar Hubmaier and Reformation Day

.

 

[Radagast]

The early Calvinists taught that the children of the Elect were also the election chosen by God

False. And if you make accusations like that, you should provide evidence from actual Calvinist writings.

The Canons of Dordt is a manmade doctrine.

It's a doctrine based on the Bible.

Calvinism is based on the teachings of Augustine.

No, based on the Apostle Paul.

Augustine condoned using persecution against those who disagreed with him

False, afaik. And again, no evidence.

On March 10, 1528 Balthasar Hubmaier was burned at the stake over his stand for believer's baptism.

I thought it was for his political opinions. But, in any case, it was in Austria. No Calvinists were involved.

 

[BABerean2]

False. And if you make accusations like that, you should provide evidence from actual Calvinist writings.

Ok.

Take a look below at what Calvin said about infant baptism.

https://www.reformedtheology.ca/baptism.html


Why are you attempting to ignore the fact that Hubmaier was arrested and tortured in Geneva?

.

 

[twin1954]

Ok.

Take a look below at what Calvin said about infant baptism.

https://www.reformedtheology.ca/baptism.html


Why are you attempting to ignore the fact that Hubmaier was arrested and tortured in Geneva?

.

Your biggest mistake is to lump all Calvinists into the infant baptism mold. I am a Calvinist and a Baptist.

Your second mistake is to argue guilt by association which is fallacious.

Your third mistake. The name of the thread is, “Is Calvin’s Biblical “. You are arguing history not Bible. That would be a red herring.

I haven’t read the whole thread yet but will do so when I have time. Until then know that the strongest argument for Calvinism is the Bible.

 

[Radagast]

Ok.

Take a look below at what Calvin said about infant baptism.

https://www.reformedtheology.ca/baptism.html

That does not even mention election, thus is not evidence for your ridiculous and false assertion.

Why are you attempting to ignore the fact that Hubmaier was arrested and tortured in Geneva?

He wasn't. I can find no mention of him ever even visiting Geneva.

 

[BABerean2]

He wasn't. I can find no mention of him ever even visiting Geneva.

"These passages make it obvious to Calvin, that circumcision is the sign of mortification, and that Israel has been chosen as the people of God out of all the nations of the earth(Deut.10:15; Inst.4, 16, 3). As Abraham commands them[the people of Israel] to be circumcised, so Moses declares that they ought to be circumcised in heart, "explaining the true meaning of this carnal circumcision"(Deut. 30:6; Inst.4, 16, 3). Calvin concludes that "we have, therefore, a spiritual promise given to the patriarches in circumcision such as is given us in baptism, since it represented for them[the Jews] forgiveness of sins and mortification of the flesh"(Inst.4, 16, 3). Calvin argues that the symbols of the promise represent the same thing, "namely, regeneration"(Inst.4, 16, 4). For Calvin it appears "incontrovertible" that baptism has taken the place of circumcision "to fulfill the same office among us"(Inst.4, 16, 4)."



It was Zurich, instead of Geneva.
Sorry for the mistake on my part.

From the article below...

"Hubmaier himself had the distinction of being imprisoned and tortured in Zwingli’s Zurich as well as in Catholic Vienna."


Today Balthasar Hubmaier was Martyred - The Scriptorium Daily

.

 

[BABerean2]

I am a Calvinist and a Baptist.

That would be like saying you are a Republican Democrat.

You are a semi-Baptist who has tried to correct Calvinism's error of infant baptism, but kept other errors of the doctrine.

The verse below proves that regeneration does not occur before faith.

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,


You would have been arrested and tortured in Zurich by Zwingli and his followers for your doctrine, as was Hubmaier.
Any "Baptist" who witnessed what Zwingli and those under his direction did to Hubmaier, would be ashamed of themselves for claiming to be a "Calvinist".

.

 

[twin1954]

That would be like saying you are a Republican Democrat.

You are a semi-Baptist who has tried to correct Calvinism's error of infant baptism, but kept other errors of the doctrine.

The verse below proves that regeneration does not occur before faith.

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,


You would have been arrested and tortured in Zurich by Zwingli and his followers for your doctrine, as was Hubmaier.
Any "Baptist" who witnessed what Zwingli and those under his direction did to Hubmaier, would be ashamed of themselves for claiming to be a "Calvinist".

.

Nonsense! I hold to a different Covenant Theology than paedobaptists. It is distinctly different. Yet it is biblical Covenant Theology. We,as Baptists, do not hold to the idea of one covenant under two administrations but to two separate covenants. We do agree with them on Progressive Revelation though. The New Covenant is promised and progressively revealed in the Old. You seem to not know so much about history as you would have us believe. Almost all of the great Baptist theologians of history held to a theology which encompasses the points of the Canons of Dort.

Maybe instead of parroting others you should actually study history yourself.

 

[BABerean2]

Nonsense! I hold to a different Covenant Theology than paedobaptists. It is distinctly different. Yet it is biblical Covenant Theology.

the Canons of Dort.

"Article 17: The Salvation of the Infants of Believers
Since we must make judgments about God's will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy."

The above text can be found at the link below.

Canons of Dort | Reformed Church in America

.