Quiz: Are you Calvinist or Arminian?

9Rock9

Sinner in need of grace.
Nov 28, 2018
214
128
South Carolina
✟70,940.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Can anyone please point out for me anywhere in Calvin's writings in which he explicitly taught the doctrine of limited atonement?

I don't think he did. Iirc, limited atonement came about later after Calvin's death.
 
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
I don't think he did. Iirc, limited atonement came about later after Calvin's death.

This would mean that John Calvin was not a Calvinist, at least not according to how the term is understood today.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: StillGods
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
This should lay to rest any doubt that John Calvin taught unlimited atonement:

How Calvinistic was John Calvin? What did he teach concerning the extent of the atonement? Let us ponder his own words:

Isaiah 53:12- "I approve of the ordinary reading, that He alone bore the punishment of many, because on Him was laid the guilt of the whole world. It is evident from other passages, and especially from the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, that many sometimes denotes all."
Mark 14:24- "The word many does not mean a part of the world only, but the whole human race." In other words, Christ’s blood was shed for the whole human race.
Matthew 20:28- "‘Many’ is used, not for a definite number, but for a large number, in that He sets Himself over against all others. And this is its meaning also in Rom. 5:15, where Paul is not talking of a part of mankind but of the whole human race."
John 1:29- "And when he says the sin OF THE WORLD, He extends this favour indiscriminately to the whole human race....all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God and need to be reconciled to Him....Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by...faith."
John 3:16- "He has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers....He shows Himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when He invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ."
Romans 5:18- "He makes this favor common to all, because it is propoundable to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all (i.e. in the experience); for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive Him."
2 Corinthians 5:19- God "shows Himself to be reconciled to the whole world" and Calvin goes on to say that the "whole world" means "all men without exception."
Galatians 5:12- "It is the will of God that we should seek the salvation of all men without exception, as Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world."
Colossians 1:15- "This redemption was procured by the blood of Christ, for by the sacrifice of His death all the sins of the world have been expiated."
Hebrews 5:9- "He (the writer of Hebrews) has inserted the universal term ‘to all’ to show that no one is excluded from this salvation who proves to be attentive and obedient to the Gospel of Christ."


Calvin even taught that the lost were purchased by Christ's blood: "It is no small matter to have the souls perish who were bought by the blood of Christ" (The Myster of Godliness, p. 83).
Skip's Lighthouse: CALVIN'S FAVORITE FLOWER WAS NOT A T.U.L.I.P.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

9Rock9

Sinner in need of grace.
Nov 28, 2018
214
128
South Carolina
✟70,940.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
This would mean that John Calvin was not a Calvinist, at least not according to how the term is understood today.

There are four point Calvinists. Granted, he wouldn't want any aspect of theology named after him.
 
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
There are four point Calvinists. Granted, he wouldn't want any aspect of theology named after him.

I admire John Calvin but I don't particularly like Calvinism. If Protestants believe in Scripture alone and Christ alone, it doesn't seem right to call oneself a Calvinist.

1 Corinthians 3
4
For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?
5
What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe--as the Lord has assigned to each his task.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Well, I believe that Christ's death was enough for all sins you commit: past, present and future.

True.. True for "our sins and NOT for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1 John 2:2

Our ordination is a gift from God. We cannot earn it. We all deserve eternal damnation, yet God is merciful.

But God does not arbitrarily pick one vs another - rather He supernaturally "convicts the WORLD" of sin and righteousness and judgment. John 16.

God is "not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance" - 2 Peter 3

God "came to His OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11

"God is not partial" Rom 2:11

So the fact that only "the few" of Matt 7 make it to heaven is not an act of God stopping them or not caring for them or not dying for them or not drawing them.

The much-ignored verse of Isaiah 5:4 comes to mind

"What more was there to do for My vineyard that I have not done in it?
Why, when I expected it to produce good grapes did it produce worthless ones?"
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I found many of the alternatives omitted things that I would have preferred to choose. I also don't think it captures the actual differences between Calvin and Arminius, though maybe it gets many current Calvinists and Arminians. Arminius was much nearer Calvin, and has been noted, Calvin was at most a 4-point Calvinist.

Arminius agreed with Calvin that we are incapable of responding to God on our own. He agreed with Calvin that God enables us to do so by grace. I think Calvin would even agree that God gave everyone grace. But Calvin would say that he didn't give everyone enough grace to actually be effective, and this was by his choice. Arminius wanted to place more responsibility on the individual as to whether grace was effective.

If Calvin and Arminius are the choices, it isn't useful for people who doubt that basic Augustinian concept that everyone starts out damned. (Or the modern version that infants start out saved, but at some point it reverses and everyone id damned unless they do or believe the right thing.) Is there a way to challenge that without being Pelagian? I think there is. I think we can adopt Jesus' concept of God as like a father. Kids don't start our rejected by their parents and need to do something to be accepted. Parents love their children. Their children can reject them. They can also do things for which they need to be held accountable.

When I started thinking like that I wondered if I was being Pelagian. There aren't a lot of works by Pelagius or his close followers left. But I read what I could. I think Pelagius really did downplay God's grace too much. He thought you needed to live right to be saved, and didn't see God's grace as very important to that. So I think you can accuse him of requiring us to earn salvation mostly on our own. I think God's grace is critical. But I place it earlier. I think his grace shows in that he loves everyone. As noted, that doesn't mean that people can't reject him or need discipline. But I don't think we need to do anything to be accepted by God.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I think it is impossible to avoid some level of Calvinism, if we think God has any level of control. Depending upon whether you accept omnipotence or something like open theology, God is either fully in control of history or nudged us in a direction that led to the development of humanity as we know it. Whether his plan included the specific identities of those who are lost or whether he simply knew that some would be, the responsibility is there.

Indeed that’s what Calvin says. He starts the section on predestination in the Institutes by saying the following: “The covenant of life is not preached equally to all, and among those to whom it is preached, does not always meet with the same reception. This diversity displays the unsearchable depth of the divine judgment, and is without doubt subordinate to God’s purpose of eternal election. But if it is plainly owing to the mere pleasure of God that salvation is spontaneously offered to some, while others have no access to it, great and difficult questions immediately arise, questions which are inexplicable, when just views are not entertained concerning election and predestination.”

He is not starting from some concept of God's glory, and saying that he glories in some people's destruction. He's saying that we observe that some are saved and some are damned, and this has to be the result of God's plan. (There is a famous quote that does invoke God's glory, but I'm not sure it means what most peole think it does.)

Just what this says about God’s character depends to some extent upon what you think happens in judgement. Are some people tortured forever or are they destroyed or ultimately saved? Is it 90% of the human race or a few people who developed into monsters?

It also depends upon what we think God’s intent was. Did he arbitrarily pick some people and make sure that their character and environment developed in a way that guarantee that they were damned? Did he set things up so that people had to make real decisions, and that made it inevitable that some people were damned?

The distinction between predestination and foreknowledge isn't so clear for an omnipotent being. If when you make a decision you immediately know what the consequences are, then in choosing a decision you also choose the consequences. So in a standard model of God's nature, I don't think you can say he elected based on foreknowledge.

That's assuming he is omniscient. If not, things are more complex. But not complex enough for God to avoid responsibility for some people being subject to damnation, although under the weakest assumptions about God's power and foresight one could conceivably claim that he doesn't know specifically which people it's going to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radicchio
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
The central theme of Calvin's writings was not predestination or limited atonement but God's grace, and I believe that those who claim to be Calvin's followers neglect this theme when they act ungracious to anyone who disagrees with their soteriology.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
The central theme of Calvin's writings was not predestination or limited atonement but God's grace, and I believe that those who claim to be Calvin's followers neglect this theme when they act ungracious to anyone who disagrees with their soteriology.
There are several views on that. Another view is that his central concept is what he calls our mystical union with Christ. I think you can make a good argument that this is what Paul meant by faith, or at least was the most important thing that faith led to. Predestination wasn’t even in the first edition of the Institutes. This is part of why there can be liberals who admire Calvin. I hesitate to say Calvinists, because that term has come to mean believers in TULIP.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
I just re-took the test and it says I am a Calvinist. I guess I am not against Calvinism perse, I am simply against the doctrine of limited atonement, especially since it appears that Calvin himself never taught it. Perhaps, then, I am a four-point Calvinist.

The passage of scripture most supportive of Calvinism seems to be Romans 9:

10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” 18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: StillGods
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
The most important concept of John Calvin's theology is God's grace, that our election unto salvation is completely the unmerited gift of God.

If you truly believe yourself to be among God's elect, then your attitude should be that of thankfulness and humility, with a desire to serve God the rest of your life, no matter how many times you might fail.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
Calvinist - Arminian = Lutheran :sorry:

I don't know what you mean.

Martin Luther, like John Calvin, taught total depravity and unconditional election. This is from Luther's 97 Theses, which he wrote before the 95 Theses:

29. The best and infallible preparation for grace and the sole disposition toward grace is the eternal election and predestination of God.
30. On the part of man, however, nothing precedes grace except indisposition and even rebellion against grace.
31. It is said with the idlest demonstrations that the predestined can be damned individually but not collectively. This in opposition to the scholastics.
32. Moreover, nothing is achieved by the following saying: Predestination is necessary by virtue of the consequence of God’s willing, but not of what actually followed, namely, that God had to elect a certain person.
33. And this is false, that doing all that one is able to do can remove the obstacles to grace. This in opposition to several authorities.
34. In brief, man by nature has neither correct precept nor good will.
Contend Earnestly: Luther's 97 Theses: Disputation Against Scholastic Theology
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: Neostarwcc
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
This article explains how I am feeling right now:

The doctrine of unconditional election says that God chooses those who will be saved free of any condition in himself or in us. It says that there is nothing in us that warrants God choosing us. Paul argues for unconditional election in Romans 9:6-13, where he explains that God chose Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau without regard to anything they had done.

He anticipates the common objection, “Not fair!” in verse 14. Paul continues in building his case, stating that mercy is not mercy and grace is not grace unless God is free to give them to whomever he chooses...

This is what unconditional election teaches us: God, in his grace, moves first to free our wills from the bondage of sin, so we can hear and see and believe the beauty of the Gospel. Why do I love this doctrine?

It humbles me. I bring nothing. I add nothing. I accomplish nothing apart from the grace of God. By grace I have been saved through faith. This is not my own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of my works, so that I may not boast (Eph. 2:8-9). I am no better than anyone else because I have faith in Christ. My faith is not an accomplishment that I can boast about. It is the gift of God.

It comforts me. I believe in Christ because of God’s gracious and free act of choosing me before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). There is nothing I can do to “un-deserve” his gracious act because I have done nothing to deserve it in the first place. I can rest in God’s love because it moves toward me unconditionally.

It astonishes me... I have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. I was dead in my trespasses and sins. Why me? I am astonished at God’s free, unmerited love and grace which he has lavished on me.
Why I Love the Doctrine of Unconditional Election

Rather than boastful, I am humbled that God has chosen me unto salvation due to no merit of my own. It makes me want to live in such as a way as to show gratitude to Him for His unmerited favor.

It also gives me assurance of my salvation, knowing that my election is not something that I've earned, and that God will preserve me in faith and keep me from permanently falling away.
 
Upvote 0

Humble_Disciple

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2021
1,121
387
38
Northwest
✟39,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Divorced
Augustine and Luther interpreted Romans 9 in the same way that Calvinists do today:

Augustine of Hippo produced a first concise interpretation of Romans 9 to which reformed commentators approach Romans 9:14-25. Expositing Romans 9:16, Augustine noted that God “loved Jacob in unmerited mercy, yet hated Esau with merited justice”. He explained,

Since this judgment [of wrath] was due them both, the former learned from what happened to the other that the fact that he had not, with equal merit, incurred the same penalty gave him no ground to boast of his own distinctive merits (Augustine 2005: n.p)

None, according Augustine, “is set free saved by unmerited mercy” and none “is damned save by a merited condemnation.”(ibid). God chose some individuals to bestow His mercy and others, the not chosen, His justice. Augustine expounded,

Certainly wrath is not repaid unless it is due, lest there be unrighteousness with God; but mercy, even when it is bestowed, and not due, is not unrighteousness with God. And hence, let the vessels of mercy understand how freely mercy is afforded to them, because to the vessels of wrath with whom they have common cause and measure of perdition, is repaid wrath, righteous and due.(Augustine 1887: 423–4)

Martin Luther understood Romans 9:15 to mean, “I will have mercy on whom I intended to have mercy, or whom I predestinated for mercy.”(Luther 1976: 139), He went further,

“I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion (9:15). That means: I will give grace, in time and life, to him concerning whom I purposed from eternity to show mercy. On him will I have compassion and forgive his sin in time and life whom I forgave and pardoned from all eternity.(ibid)
Reformed Approach to Romans 9:14-25
 
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟910,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I don't think he did. Iirc, limited atonement came about later after Calvin's death.

Have you ever read Calvin's Institutes? Protestants came up with T.U.L.I.P from his Institutes.

So yes, Calvin believed in Limited Atonement, predestination ...etc. He talked about all of it a lot in his Institutes and when he preached in Geneva.

I've heard several of Calvin's sermons (Not live obviously, he died nearly 500 years ago) and would suggest even if you are an Arminian to hear the man speak. He was a fantastic Theologian and quite arguably the greatest of all time.
 
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟910,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I don't know what you mean.

Martin Luther, like John Calvin, taught total depravity and unconditional election. This is from Luther's 97 Theses, which he wrote before the 95 Theses:

Naturally. There's also Luther's book "Bondage of the Will" I recommend picking it up and reading it. You would have sworn Calvin wrote the book but it was in fact, written by Luther.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tigger45

Romans 12:2…be transformed…
Supporter
Aug 24, 2012
20,713
13,149
E. Eden
✟1,264,386.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Because confessional Lutheran teaches the bandage of the will which fits on the Calvinists side and also that one can shipwreck one's faith like on the Arminian side.
I don't know what you mean.

Martin Luther, like John Calvin, taught total depravity and unconditional election. This is from Luther's 97 Theses, which he wrote before the 95 Theses:
 
Upvote 0