What is the Foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism?

[BABerean2]

Dr. Ken Wilson has written a simplified version of his book on the origin of what has come to be known as "Calvinism".

The title of the new book is "The Foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism".

The book reveals the fact that after about 25 years of ministry Augustine changed his view on election, in order to justify infant baptism.
Augustine decided that infant baptism was correct, and then set about to find the scripture which proved him correct.

Since the child had not come to faith, it must be based on the will of another. It could have nothing to do with the will of the child. This fact produced Augustine's need to deny free will.

.

 

[Dave L]

F. Grace in the Theology of the Christian Church
The doctrine of grace came to its fullest exposition in the theology of Augustine. He rejected Pelagianism, the contemporary movement which stressed the freedom of the will and the natural human ability to serve God. Augustine countered that the fall of Adam ensures that no individual is able to turn to God, much less obey him. Thus all of salvation must flow from God’s grace. Even the decision to receive salvation arises from God’s call, in which grace to believe is given. God’s grace is prerequisite to any true movement toward God. As a later heterodox reaction to Augustinianism, semi-Pelagianism taught that the beginning of faith and perseverance were to be regarded as the fruits of the human will.

The Reformation brought about a revival of Augustinian theology, finding its expression in the slogan sola gratia: salvation is of God’s gracious inclination toward us from beginning to end, and does not depend on works nor Church nor sacrament. It has its beginning in the gracious election of some to salvation, without regard to merit or spiritual inclination, and leading to the gift of regeneration. Calvin in particular dismissed the medieval view of grace as “magic” (Institutes 4.14.14–17).

Shogren, G. S. (1992). Grace: New Testament. In D. N. Freedman (Ed.), The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (Vol. 2, p. 1088). New York: Doubleday.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

People who cannot answer Calvinism, such as Leighton Flowers, look for loopholes to avoid scriptural exposition of truth. They look for sources to twist history such as this book.

 

[BABerean2]

F. Grace in the Theology of the Christian Church

What you have described was not the Theology of the Early Church before Augustine. All of the Early Church Fathers before Augustine held to a different viewpoint of free will.

.

 

[BABerean2]

People who cannot answer Calvinism, such as Leighton Flowers, look for loopholes to avoid scriptural exposition of truth. They look for sources to twist history such as this book.

Yes.
These people actually believe that "grace" is the subject of the verse below, instead of Augustine redefining "faith" as the subject of the verse.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

They read the verse below to understand the reference to Jacob, and Esau in Romans 9.

Gen 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.


Dr. Ken Wilson's book on Augustine's view of election reveal this "twist" of history.

.

 

[sdowney717]

If the children are holy to God, then they can be baptized, was the thinking that I recall Calvin saying.
Calvin said why deny to them baptism and membership in the church as they are Holy to the Lord, if they will be going back to God at their deaths, and back then infant mortality was very high. And many times children were unwanted and abandoned to die. Such an action would have been a consolation to the infants parents to then consider them, even dying infants part of His church and saved.

1 Corinthians 7:13-14 New King James Version (NKJV)
13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.

 

[BABerean2]

If the children are holy to God, then they can be baptized, was the thinking that I recall Calvin saying.
Calvin said why deny to them baptism and membership in the church as they are Holy to the Lord, if they will be going back to God at their deaths, and back then infant mortality was very high. And many times children were unwanted and abandoned to die. Such an action would have been a consolation to the infants parents to then consider them, even dying infants part of His church and saved.

1 Corinthians 7:13-14 New King James Version (NKJV)
13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.

1Co 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
1Co 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Co 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Co 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
1Co 7:16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

When viewed in context, the instructions above came from Paul, instead of God.

Paul was showing that the believing spouse could be preaching the Gospel to the unbelieving spouse, and children.

.

 

[sdowney717]

1Co 7:12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
1Co 7:13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
1Co 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
1Co 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
1Co 7:16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

When viewed in context, the instructions above came from Paul, instead of God.

Paul was showing that the believing spouse could be preaching the Gospel to the unbelieving spouse, and children.

.

Paul as a chosen apostle will not presume to say these children are Holy to God, when they are not Holy.
Paul is not speaking outside of the authority given to Him by God and Christ.
Paul has just said, I not the Lord, so there was no written scripture from Christ specifically saying such, but this does not mean what Paul sad is a lie. In much of scripture Paul does not preface his writings with that type phrase, yet its still scripture from God meant for instruction to the church.

The reason these children are holy, is that the believing parent is a saved person and God sanctifies the marriage, so the products of the marriage are then holy to Him.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Yes.
These people actually believe that "grace" is the subject of the verse below, instead of Augustine redefining "faith" as the subject of the verse.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

They read the verse below to understand the reference to Jacob, and Esau in Romans 9.

Gen 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.


Dr. Ken Wilson's book on Augustine's view of election reveal this "twist" of history.

.

Neither of these ideas are being discussed by Paul.

 

[renniks]

The doctrine of grace came to its fullest exposition in the theology of Augustine. He rejected Pelagianism, the contemporary movement which stressed the freedom of the will and the natural human ability to serve God. Augustine countered that the fall of Adam ensures that no individual is able to turn to God, much less obey him. Thus all of salvation must flow from God’s grace. Even the decision to receive salvation arises from God’s call, in which grace to believe is given. God’s grace is prerequisite to any true movement toward God. As a later heterodox reaction to Augustinianism, semi-Pelagianism taught that the beginning of faith and perseverance were to be regarded as the fruits of the human will.

Except that this does not mention that all the early church fathers, then, must have been semi-pelagian. And the fact, that Augustine only came to this conclusion later in life and unconditional election was taught by the gnostics all along and reputed by the church. So, really Augustines ideas on election most likely didn't come from the Bible, they came from his earlier gnostic teachings.

 

[Dave L]

Except that this does not mention that all the early church fathers, then, must have been semi-pelagian. And that fact, the Augustine only came to this conclusion later in life and unconditional election was taught by the gnostics all along and reputed by the church. So, really Augustines ideas on election most likely didn't come from the Bible, they came from his earlier gnostic teachings.

Paul taught what Augustine and Calvin believed.

 

[renniks]

Paul taught what Augustine and Calvin believed.

No, they mis interpreted what Paul wrote. And Augustine most likely only had the Latin texts which would not have given the best understanding.

 

[BABerean2]

Paul as a chosen apostle will not presume to say these children are Holy to God, when they are not Holy.
Paul is not speaking outside of the authority given to Him by God and Christ.
Paul has just said, I not the Lord, so there was no written scripture from Christ specifically saying such, but this does not mean what Paul sad is a lie. In much of scripture Paul does not preface his writings with that type phrase, yet its still scripture from God meant for instruction to the church.

The reason these children are holy, is that the believing parent is a saved person and God sanctifies the marriage, so the products of the marriage are then holy to Him.

Based on what you have said above, all children born to Christians are holy no matter what their sin might be.
This is the fruit of Augustine's doctrine of election.

As a retired public school teacher, I would ask you to be a substitute teacher for a few days to see if you can make your viewpoint work in the real world.

Why are you are attempting to ignore the last verse in the passage to make your viewpoint work?


1Co 7:16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

.

 

[Dave L]

No, they mis interpreted what Paul wrote. And Augustine most likely only had the Latin texts which would not have given the best understanding.

Really? And you know more about scripture than Augustine?

 

[BABerean2]

Really? And you know more about scripture than Augustine?

Augustine's inferior Latin version of Romans 5:12 led him to believe that not only was Adam's sin nature inherited by all men, but that Adam's actual sin was inherited by infants.

Therefore, according to Augustine, they must be quickly baptized to remove the sin they had inherited from Adam.

See the link below.

How is the Vulgate rendering of Romans 5:12 explained (Roman Catholic perspective)?

.

 

[renniks]

Really? And you know more about scripture than Augustine?

No, but I have access to more accurate translations.

 

[Dave L]

No, but I have access to more accurate translations.

Why hasn't anyone revised Augustine, that being the case?

 

[renniks]

Why hasn't anyone revised Augustine, that being the case?

I don't know how you go back and "revise" someone's writings who is long dead? But there are obviously people studying and correcting his mistakes.

 

[Dave L]

I don't know how you go back and "revise" someone's writings who is long dead? But there are obviously people studying and correcting his mistakes.

Were the Ecumenical Creeds defective too?

 

[sdowney717]

Based on what you have said above, all children born to Christians are holy no matter what their sin might be.
This is the fruit of Augustine's doctrine of election.

As a retired public school teacher, I would ask you to be a substitute teacher for a few days to see if you can make your viewpoint work in the real world.

Why are you are attempting to ignore the last verse in the passage to make your viewpoint work?


1Co 7:16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

.

Because that verse is talking about unbelieving adults and has nothing to do with children being unclean or holy...
Yes, well my wife teaches high school and I view them as not children either.
It is referring to infants and little children, like the ones Jesus says for such is the kingdom of heaven. The disciples rebuked the people bringing to Him the little children and HE said do not prevent them from coming to me , they were trying to keep them away from Him. And HE blessed them.

What did Paul mean in 1 Corinthians 7: 14 when he said children of a believer are holy, not unclean?