The insecurity of Calvinism

[Si_monfaith]

Therein lies one, if not the biggest problem people have with and against Calvinism.

In every theology you read, man plays some part in whatever (insert topic).

Calvinism is the only theology that takes man almost completely out of the equation.

And even at that, not to my recollection have I once cited John Calvin.

Even in this thread, we see hints of it. God draws, the Holy Spirit convicts and brings us to salvation, after that...its up to man to "do the rest".

Take the example of Pharaoh. I admit it from a 3 sided view as said in the article I quoted from.

Yet some want to argue that it was Pharaoh who did it all, (cf. Ex. 8:3, when God said He did it, Ex. 7:3) and that took advantage of it.

" For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;" -2 Tim. 4:3 (KJV)

There is an old saying and I swear it is true:

"People will let God be Sovereign everywhere but on His throne."



God Bless

Till all are one.

Can you do the rest?

Please read Philippians 2:13.

 

[DeaconDean]

Can you do the rest?

Please read Philippians 2:13.

The rest of what?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Biblicist]

Therein lies one, if not the biggest problem people have with and against Calvinism.

In every theology you read, man plays some part in whatever (insert topic).

Calvinism is the only theology that takes man almost completely out of the equation.

I was reading about a Pentecostal back in the late 60's who was being interviewed by a doctoral committee; one of the three members who was an old-school Calvinist was obviously being antagonistic toward the candidate who he deemed to be a Pentecostal upstart and in frustration the Doctoral candidate said "Oh well, as you are a Calvinist you do not need your Bible as you have Calvin!" where the Calvinist interviewer immediately walked out of the session.

To be fair, I haven't read through this particular forum but I should add in (hopefully somebody already has) that there is often a great difference or a divide between those who are old-school Calvinists and with those who are the New Calvinists.

 

[DeaconDean]

I was reading about a Pentecostal back in the late 60's who was being interviewed by a doctoral committee; one of the three members who was an old-school Calvinist was obviously being antagonistic toward the candidate who he deemed to be a Pentecostal upstart and in frustration the Doctoral candidate said "Oh well, as you are a Calvinist you do not need your Bible as you have Calvin!" where the Calvinist interviewer immediately walked out of the session.

To be fair, I haven't read through this particular forum but I should add in (hopefully somebody already has) that there is often a great difference or a divide between those who are old-school Calvinists and with those who are the New Calvinists.

I agree.

Calvinism, as a systematic theology, is relatively new. Only about 500 years.

The problem I have ran into, especially here on this forum, are the people who make blanket statements without reading for themselves what the man (John Calvin) taught.

I disagree with Arminianism, but while in seminary classes, I did take the time to read what James Arminius wrote himself.

The problem is, most hear or take the opinions of others and believe that when somebody posts something Calvinism says they take it for fact. Like: Calvinism makes preaching the gospel to the world null since the elect will be saved no matter what.

That is completely untrue.

And most would have you to believe that we follow John Calvin rather than Jesus Christ as in the example you showed.

John Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion" is a systematic theology. Just like Thomas Aquinas' or Charles Hodge.

As with everything, things change. Old Calvinists, New Calvinists, etc. The only thing that I do know that does not, never has, never will change is God.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Biblicist]

I agree.

Calvinism, as a systematic theology, is relatively new. Only about 500 years.

The problem I have ran into, especially here on this forum, are the people who make blanket statements without reading for themselves what the man (John Calvin) taught.

I disagree with Arminianism, but while in seminary classes, I did take the time to read what James Arminius wrote himself.

Yes, how true indeed.

Even though I am one of those who loves to use labels, I know that Calvinism (as with most other positions) is not a set of harmonious viewpoints which makes it hard to say that as someone is a Calvinist (or an Arminian for that matter) that they will necessarily hold to a set of specific views.

As I am also aware of those who are old-Calvinists and those who are new-Calvinists and that many Calvinists are not true 5-Pointers, but four, three, two and strangely even one pointers I have given up with trying to define someone by how they label themselves as being Calvinist, in that are they old or new or 5, 4, 3, 2 or 1 pointers - aagghhhh!

Being an Arminian who has probably only ever read about a single paragraph of James Harmonsen's (Arminius) writings, I am also well aware that we have about as many variations among us as well.

 

[DeaconDean]

Yes, how true indeed.

Even though I am one of those who loves to use labels, I know that Calvinism (as with most other positions) is not a set of harmonious viewpoints which makes it hard to say that as someone is a Calvinist (or an Arminian for that matter) that they will necessarily hold to a set of specific views.

As I am also aware of those who are old-Calvinists and those who are new-Calvinists and that many Calvinists are not true 5-Pointers, but four, three, two and strangely even one pointers I have given up with trying to define someone by how they label themselves as being Calvinist, in that are they old or new or 5, 4, 3, 2 or 1 pointers - aagghhhh!

Being an Arminian who has probably only ever read about a single paragraph of James Harmonsen's (Arminius) writings, I am also well aware that we have about as many variations among us as well.

Agreed.

I guess I would be a old time 5-pointer as I do agree with the T.U.L.I.P. outline.

But I also say that I disagree with John Calvin in his beliefs on infant baptism.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Biblicist]

Agreed.

I guess I would be a old time 5-pointer as I do agree with the T.U.L.I.P. outline.

From what I can observe it seems that both the old and new Calvinists believe in T.U.L.I.P, otherwise one cannot be a Calvinist, but they seem to differ on many points such as the nature of prayer in that does God speak to us via his Holy Spirit or do we only receive answers to prayer from the Bible. There seem to be a host of other things as well which in my view makes it very hard to work out what a Calvinist really is and of course some believe in single predestination whereas others believe in double predestination.

From my perspective, even though many new-Calvinists hold to T.U.L.I.P it seems that they are only Calvinists in thought but in practice they differ very little from that of Arminians - life can be so confusing at times.

Signing off!

 

[bbbbbbb]

From what I can observe it seems that both the old and new Calvinists believe in T.U.L.I.P, otherwise one cannot be a Calvinist, but they seem to differ on many points such as the nature of prayer in that does God speak to us via his Holy Spirit or do we only receive answers to prayer from the Bible. There seem to be a host of other things as well which in my view makes it very hard to work out what a Calvinist really is and of course some believe in single predestination whereas others believe in double predestination.

From my perspective, even though many new-Calvinists hold to T.U.L.I.P it seems that they are only Calvinists in thought but in practice they differ very little from that of Arminians - life can be so confusing at times.

Signing off!

I have also observed similar divisions within the Arminian camp, especially in regard to the belief in personal eternal security. Although many modern Arminians deny OSAS, they are frequently quite convinced of their own security.

I have a circular view of the matter where both extremes meet each other and it becomes extremely difficult to tell any difference between the two.

 

[DeaconDean]

I have also observed similar divisions within the Arminian camp, especially in regard to the belief in personal eternal security. Although many modern Arminians deny OSAS, they are frequently quite convinced of their own security.

I have a circular view of the matter where both extremes meet each other and it becomes extremely difficult to tell any difference between the two.

I would say that if it wasn't two (2) of James Arminius' points of theology, I could be Arminian.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I would say that if it wasn't two (2) of James Arminius' points of theology, I could be Arminian.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Yes, that is what it actually comes down to. I hold a similar opinion regarding Lutheran doctrines. Many are quite excellent, but there are two which I cannot, in good conscience, agree with.

 

[Si_monfaith]

The rest of what?

God Bless

Till all are one.

Can we do something without God giving us the desires? Philippians 2:13

 

[DeaconDean]

Can we do something without God giving us the desires? Philippians 2:13

Could you come to God without Him drawing your first?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Could you come to God without Him drawing your first?

God Bless

Till all are one.

So you believe in unconditional election.

 

[DeaconDean]

So you believe in unconditional election.

Yes I do.

What "conditions" must one meet, to be "elected"?

I'd like to see scripture for that please.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes I do.

What "conditions" must one meet, to be "elected"?

I'd like to see scripture for that please.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Wait a minute. That was not the right answer. This was the question that is supposed to be as theologically incriminating as asking if, in fact, you are a racist in modern life. You are supposed to cower in fear and attempt to deny the charge to the best of your ability. Then your accuser can gleefully pepper you with further charges.

The reality, of course, is that, as you correctly point out, if God has set conditions for His choice of His people then He would have clearly stated them. Why did God choose Abraham? My Chinese friends are really mystified as to why God picked such a small, insignificant culture such as the Jews to be His people when the Chinese are vastly superior to them.

 

[DeaconDean]

Wait a minute. That was not the right answer. This was the question that is supposed to be as theologically incriminating as asking if, in fact, you are a racist in modern life. You are supposed to cower in fear and attempt to deny the charge to the best of your ability. Then your accuser can gleefully pepper you with further charges.

The reality, of course, is that, as you correctly point out, if God has set conditions for His choice of His people then He would have clearly stated them. Why did God choose Abraham? My Chinese friends are really mystified as to why God picked such a small, insignificant culture such as the Jews to be His people when the Chinese are vastly superior to them.

I know various denominations thoughts and doctrines concerning "election".

I am interested in knowing how Word of Faith believers in India think and believe about this.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Yes I do.

What "conditions" must one meet, to be "elected"?

I'd like to see scripture for that please.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Jesus has fulfilled all conditions.

 

[DeaconDean]

Jesus has fulfilled all conditions.

But we're not talking about Jesus.

Election is about man.

What condition must man must meet to be among the "elect"?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Si_monfaith]

But we're not talking about Jesus.

Election is about man.

What condition must man must meet to be among the "elect"?

God Bless

Till all are one.

None.

 

[DeaconDean]

None.

SO why question me about my believing "unconditional election" unless you disagree with it?

God Bless

Till all are one.