now can a calvanist tell me this?

[rockytrails]

can
you tell me if this is correct understanding of your beliefs

T
total depravity
calvin taught than man is sinful from conception and birth and thus is a lost and condemned creature unable in any way by his own means to Come to faith in Jesus.


U
unconditional election
Calvin taught double predestination
election to both heaven and hell



L

Limited atonement

Calvin taught God never sent his son to die for all . Jesus only died for those God would bring to faith.

I


Irresistable Grace
Calvin taught God made his Grace Irresistable when The gospel is Given to His elect God makes them compells them to come to faith through a irresistable inner calling.

p

Preserverance of the saints

calvin taught that the elect once having received Gods Spirit can never loose him entirly and never fall out side of Gods grace and then be ultimatly lost.

 

[Elderone]

I believe you know what the answers to those questions are.

Now, what is the real question you wanted to ask?

 

[JustAsIam77]

Real question coming in 3...2...1...

 

[rockytrails]

I believe you know what the answers to those questions are.

Now, what is the real question you wanted to ask?

YOUR Right I know what i posted are calvanist's beliefs .
I just wanted to see . how many who claimed to be calvinists, also knew it.

after all there are a lot of people who claim to be such and such and they really are not.
after all Believing in single predestination That God before creation has chosen those who he would in time bring to faith in Jesus and
keep them in this true faith .

Does not make one a calvanist as some think .

only the belief in Double predestination to damnation does.

 

[mlqurgw]

YOUR Right I know what i posted are calvanist's beliefs .
I just wanted to see . how many who claimed to be calvinists, also knew it.

after all there are a lot of people who claim to be such and such and they really are not.
after all Believing in single predestination That God before creation has chosen those who he would in time bring to faith in Jesus and
keep them in this true faith .

Does not make one a calvanist as some think .

only the belief in Double predestination to damnation does.

Calvinism involves much more than just the 5 points developed by the Synod of Dort. There is a difference in being a true Calvinist and Calvinistic in soteriology. And it isn't double predestination as you assume.

 

[rockytrails]

Calvinism involves much more than just the 5 points developed by the Synod of Dort. There is a difference in being a true Calvinist and Calvinistic in soteriology. And it isn't double predestination as you assume.

the synod of Dort only recognized these points it was John Calvin who taught them so aptly.After all was he not a very able student of Augustine in his double predestination views.

But you are right a true Calvanist would have calvins view of baptism the lords supper the two natures of christ etc etc etc etc.


Infact many of calvins views are the most popular views of Christians to day .

in fact i remember a title of a essay at wisconsin lutheran seminary entitled the calvinist streak in the american people. i will give you the link.
but i will warn you it is not flattery. so read it at you own risk
http://www.wlsessays.net/authors/S/SchallerCalvinist/SchallerCalvinist.PDF

 

[JustAsIam77]

Your initial assesment (T.U.L.I.P.) of professing Calvinists is correct.

I believe Calvins understanding of scripture (properly) conforms with the 5 points he stated. Why else identify as Calvinist? Is there another question perhaps? Do you disagree.

Thanks for your inquiry.

 

[rockytrails]

reply to--------- just as iam


This is a place to seek answers . And not the place to disagree correct?
The place to disagree would be in the debate section correct?
I have posted there.
i will say though .
the puritans were calvanists and they held to may other points calvin made . Not just the 5 tulip points listed.
but yes like you I do think all 5 tulip points accuretly describe the bear minumum of what it takes to be concidered a calvanist
in to days circles.

 

[mlqurgw]

the synod of Dort only recognized these points it was John Calvin who taught them so aptly.After all was he not a very able student of Augustine in his double predestination views.

A matter of opinion of course. To a great many he was a theological genius. As you allude to further down, his influence in even this generation among the most ardent opponents of Calvinism is beyond measure.

But you are right a true Calvanist would have calvins view of baptism the lords supper the two natures of christ etc etc etc etc.

That is why I am not a Calvinist in the technical sense. I do hold to the 5 points and to the Covenant of Grace but differ in many respects with Reformed doctrine. Yet to many I am a Calvinist. It has now become a label for any and all who hold the sovereignty of God in the highest regard.

Infact many of calvins views are the most popular views of Christians to day .

I am of the opinion that he actually had more influence in the shaping of the Protestant doctrines than did Luther. Certainly his influence shaped much of European history and even more so of American history. Most of the founders of this country, those at least who were actually christians, were Calvinists.

in fact i remember a title of a essay at wisconsin lutheran seminary entitled the calvinist streak in the american people. i will give you the link.
but i will warn you it is not flattery. so read it at you own risk
http://www.wlsessays.net/authors/S/SchallerCalvinist/SchallerCalvinist.PDF

I will pass.

 

[JustAsIam77]

reply to--------- just as iam


This is a place to seek answers . And not the place to disagree correct?
The place to disagree would be in the debate section correct?
I have posted there.
i will say though .
the puritans were calvanists and they held to may other points calvin made . Not just the 5 tulip points listed.
but yes like you I do think all 5 tulip points accuretly describe the bear minumum of what it takes to be concidered a calvanist
in to days circles.

God bless. I'll take a look at your posting in the debate area soon.

 

[Iosias]

only the belief in Double predestination to damnation does.

Luther also held to double predestination

 

[heymikey80]

U
unconditional election
Calvin taught double predestination
election to both heaven and hell

No. They are not both unconditional.

L

Limited atonement

Calvin taught God never sent his son to die for all . Jesus only died for those God would bring to faith.

No. Christ died for other purposes than salvation. Actually Christ died for the entire universe.

I

Irresistable Grace
Calvin taught God made his Grace Irresistable when The gospel is Given to His elect God makes them compells them to come to faith through a irresistable inner calling.

No. The elect may well resist the call of God -- temporarily. But they ultimately submit to His call, because the Spirit transforms their will.

So there is no resistance that succeeds among the elect. God's call shall ultimately be heeded by the elect.

p

Preserverance of the saints

calvin taught that the elect once having received Gods Spirit can never loose him entirly and never fall out side of Gods grace and then be ultimatly lost.

No. Judas had God's Spirit. Saul had God's Spirit.

Oh, and btw -- I'm a Calvinist. a 5-pointer. So it might be a good idea to cite Calvinists when trying to comprehend the 5 points.

 

[heymikey80]

Believing in single predestination That God before creation has chosen those who he would in time bring to faith in Jesus and
keep them in this true faith .

Does not make one a calvanist as some think .

only the belief in Double predestination to damnation does.

Single predestination is itself a misunderstanding. God ordained the condemnation of the wicked based on their sins. Their destiny is sealed beforehand. God did so intentionally.

They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do. 1 Pt 2:8
​

That's double predestination. But it's not double unconditional election, which it appears you've shoehorned into the 5 points.

In reality the systematic Calvinist doctrine of predestination is the entire 5 points.

 

[Reformationist]

Despite any posturing to the contrary, the OP clearly builds off of an erroneous apprehension of Calvin's position on predestination. Calvin, and anyone else who purports a biblically based view of predestination, espouses double predestination, including Lutherans. What neither the Bible, nor Calvin, claimed was both the elect and the reprobate are predestined in the same fashion. That would be the view of equal ultimacy, which is, of course, unbiblical.

In short, just because Lutherans espouse the following equation:

1 + ? = 2

doesn't mean that they don't define the value of "?"

God bless

 

[MeanieCalvinist]

Greetings Reformationist,

I am not sure if I understood your last post .
Are you saying that the doctrine of Double Predestination is unbiblical?
I personally hold to the doctrine and believe it is the clear teaching of Scripture. Maybe you could expound on what you mean.
Thanks in advance Brother

Soli Deo Gloria!

NOTE: I am not looking to debate the issue just trying to understand.

 

[Reformationist]

Greetings Reformationist,

I am not sure if I understood your last post .
Are you saying that the doctrine of Double Predestination is unbiblical?
I personally hold to the doctrine and believe it is the clear teaching of Scripture. Maybe you could expound on what you mean.
Thanks in advance Brother

Soli Deo Gloria!

NOTE: I am not looking to debate the issue just trying to understand.

Certainly not. Double predestination is the only biblical form of predestination. What I was saying was that the double predestination view of equal ultimacy is unbiblical, as it contends that God added, or worked, evil in the nature of the reprobate to ensure their condemnation in the same fashion that He wrought good and supernaturally changed the spiritual polarity of the elect to ensure that they inherit eternal life.

Likewise, the Lutheran admission of single predestination on the basis that they endorse such a view is silly, as all they are really doing is refusing to verbally acknowledge what their view logically demands despite their failure to articulate it.

God bless

 

[MeanieCalvinist]

Certainly not. Double predestination is the only biblical form of predestination. What I was saying was that the double predestination view of equal ultimacy is unbiblical, as it contends that God added, or worked, evil in the nature of the reprobate to ensure their condemnation in the same fashion that He wrought good and supernaturally changed the spiritual polarity of the elect to ensure that they inherit eternal life.

Likewise, the Lutheran admission of single predestination on the basis that they endorse such a view is silly, as all they are really doing is refusing to verbally acknowledge what their view logically demands despite their failure to articulate it.

God bless

Reformationist,

Thanks for the clarification, I agree.

 

[DocNH]

Calvinism involves much more than just the 5 points developed by the Synod of Dort. There is a difference in being a true Calvinist and Calvinistic in soteriology. And it isn't double predestination as you assume.

A statement I like is “There is more to Calvinism than the Five Points, but there is no Calvinism without the Five Points.” Some of you may enjoy the book entitled, “Are five points enough?: The ten points of Calvinism” by Leonard J Coppes. (if you can find it)