Why are some christians calvinist?

Follow up post - the reason I ask this is that many of the 'great evangelists' of the 17/1800's were, to my knowledge, Calvinists?? (Spurgeon, Edwards, etc.)

Ken

KenBrauckmann said:

Actually, J4J, TULIP has long been the easy way to remember those points. But it is catchy!

Question, if I may?

How would strict Calvinist teaching deal with Personal Evangelism? If God is sovereign (in their definition) then how can we "choose life" - if we have no influence, how can we 'decide' to repent and follow Jesus??

Ken

Click to expand...

The few I know do NOT evangalize for that very reason ,because they think GOD decides not us.

There are extremists on both sides of the Calvinist/Arminian fence. The extreme Calvinist says that God absolutely predestines who is going to be saved or lost; and the extreme Arminian says that a person can make a decision for Christ today and then walk away from Christ tomorrow and be lost.

Both extremes take the ideas on both sides to ridiculous extremes. Like not evangelising people because those who are going to be saved regardless of what we do to try and get them into the kingdom; and the poor Arminian Christian who has to make a fresh decision for Christ every day of his life because he has committed some sin that has made him lost again.

It is interesting that the strict Holiness movements (Pentecostal and non-Pentecostal), tend toward the Arminian side of the fence. Of course, this makes an excellent control strategy to keep the plebs in line. Of course, there are the 'sanctified' ones (usually the ruling body of the church) who impose their standards on the rest, and keep their own shortcomings well hidden. Using the fear of apostacy is an excellent strategy of keeping backsides on seats if the pastor is a boring preacher. Stops them going down the road to another church where the preacher is more interesting and spiritually upbuilding.

Of course, extreme Calvinism breeds complacency in that people think they are automatically protected from losing their salvation no matter how they decide to live. This has caused a set of what we would identify as nominal Christians who roll up to church on Sunday, warm a pew but take no real or meaningful part in the life of the church. Many traditional churches suffer from this.

I think that most healthy Christians are somewhere in the middle between the two, because both sides has strengths as well as weaknesses, and we can learn from both positions and live fruitful Christian lives as a result.

KenBrauckmann said:

Question, if I may?

How would strict Calvinist teaching deal with Personal Evangelism? If God is sovereign (in their definition) then how can we "choose life" - if we have no influence, how can we 'decide' to repent and follow Jesus??

Ken

Click to expand...

As a former Calvanist I used to be so excited about evangelism...I thought... imagine there are millions of people out there that are already predestined for salvation and they just don't know it yet, I need to find them and tell them...

I also remember the old preachers saying...preach like an arminian and pray like a calvanist...

...preach like it all depends on man and pray like it all depends on God...

God bless, Mike.

The problem with Calvinists who are NOT hyper is that they hold to an inconsistent theology. They believe one thing theologically but practice something different entirely. When we see an avowed Calvinist who is passionate for soul winning we often give compliments like "at least he does not let his Calvinism get in the way" but still, this is rather silly. Is God this inconsistent that He would ask us to embrace a theology but practice something that is seemingly opposed to our theology?

Furthermore, Calvinism from a theological viewpoint is still an attack on God's true character. To say that God would save some and damn others by nothing more than an eternal decree which He made even BEFORE the world was ever created is a blight on God's love, justice, and mercy. This teaching claims that God went so far as to even ordain the fall of Adam and Eve for this very purpose. This makes God even worse than the devil by default.

This also makes God the author of sin since Calvinism teaches that nothing happens outside the will of God (though they use a lot of word gymnastics to make the claim that God is not responsible for what He supposedly foreordained man to do).

This eternal decree also puts a blight on the sacrifice of Jesus. It no longer becomes salvation by the blood but rather salvation by an eternal decree.

One other thing I want to point out (as I can point out many things) is that this teaching is that regardless of what some may claim, one's theology REALLY does have an effect on the fervency of what they do. I may believe that God wants me to evangelize and pray for the lost, but if I fail to do that on any given day I can always comfort myself with the belief that my lack of witnessing or intercession had no real effect in the first since if it is the will of God for someone to be saved, they will be. Sometimes, embracing this theology could take away the FERVENCY and desperate desire to intercede for the lost even when we believe that it is the right thing.

Personally, IF I must embrace a particular type of theological system, I would rather embrace one that is consistent with what is practical. I do not want to be inconsistent in what I believe and what I practice and I certainly don't my God portrayed in an inconsistent manner. Calvinism does that.

I am not too crazy with a number of aspects of Arminianism either, but I have more in common with them than I do with Calvinism. However, I see no middle gorund. I think they both should be rejected and we should stick with the BIBLE.

KenBrauckmann said:

Follow up post - the reason I ask this is that many of the 'great evangelists' of the 17/1800's were, to my knowledge, Calvinists?? (Spurgeon, Edwards, etc.)

Ken

Click to expand...

God uses people IN SPITE of (and not because of) themselves. Spurgeon, though an avowed Calvinist, was definitely a passionate soul winner. The funny thing is that both Calvinists and non calvinists alike like to quote Spurgeon in the debates with one another. You can find excerpts in Spurgeon's sermons to support both sides.

To me, this only demonstrates Spurgeon's inconsistency. I happen to love a lot of Spurgeon's teachings but I have also had to reject many things he taught as well due to this inconsistent pattern as a result of having his foot in Calvinism and at the same time refuting the hyper-calvinists.

I don't know that much about Edwards though I have read some things.

But some of the greatest Evangelist in recent years were men such as Charles G. Finney and D. L. Moody. Finney certainly found Calvinism to be offensive and was not afraid to say so. It is significantly inmportant to note that in Finney's revivals, sometimes whole towns and citeies were converted and bars would close for years. They also say that 80 percent of Finney's converts stayed true to the Lord. Moody also seemed opposed to Calvinism.

If you really want to know the truth about the reformed faith, in Semper Reformanda there is a section entitled "Ask a Calvinist". I would suggest taking your questions there.

Many of the ideas that are being put forth as being reformed doctrine are not quite accurate. Come on over and ask us directly, we won't bite. We're not all like that one poster.....

victoryword said:

Yep. You can add that guy's post to the many reasons why I could never embrace Calvinism. The main reason, of course, is that nearly all Calvinist concepts are lacking any real Scriptural support. They do a lot of "prooftexting" and re-interpretting but when their theology is examined in the context of God's full revelation, it definitely comes up short.

But from my internet discussions with a number of the "Reformed" people, the fruit is also lacking. The intellectualism inherent within this theology seems to give its adherents an air of arrogance. And look at that post. This Calvinist is using curse words. So much for "meekness". We should all be thanking him for showing us why we should reject the Calvinist system of theology.

Click to expand...

Victoryword--I notice that you don't have many from the Reformed camp responding to these Arminian posts. I notice also that there are two things about the fellow with the foul tongue that make me wonder if he is really a Calvinist, or someone trying to defame Calvinist people. First, being one of the Reformed people, I spend quite a bit of time on threads which specialize in Reformed doctrine and in that time I have never seen anyone using profanity. Also, Reformed people prefer to cite Scripture to back up their statements concerning doctrine and I notice that he didn't use any Scripture. These two differences indicate that perhaps he is someone just trying to entertain the people posting here.

I admit that it is unfair for us to be discussing Calvinist issues on the Word-faith forum where our Reformed brethren are unable to respond in full. I also apologize for having allowed one person to cloud my feelings about the Reformed doctrine. It is the doctrine I am opposed to and not those who embrace it, so my reaction was not a right one.

My apologies to all REformed folks reading this.

I do wish to offer a couple of notes.

1) Calvin did not murder or have anything to do with Michael Servetus' death. Michael Servetus had been declared a heretic due to his denial of the trinity amoung other basic tenets of the Christian faith. He had been banished from the city of Geneva and told not to show his face again on the punishment of death. Calvin, though in disagreement with Servetus, asked Servetus to obey the order for the sake of his life. Servetus came back into the city anyway. The Council of Geneva ordered Servetus burned at the stake. Calvin took no part in this, if anything, he had tried to encourage Servetus to save his own life.

2) to the person that felt TULIP was funny...it was created as a response to the five points of Armianism that preceded it.

3) as stated from another above...not all reformed ppl are like the one who posted in anger and terrible language. I know many charismatics/WoF that speak that way...however, I don't hold it against all charismatics/WoF.

PuritanLady said:

I do wish to offer a couple of notes.

1) Calvin did not murder or have anything to do with Michael Servetus' death. Michael Servetus had been declared a heretic due to his denial of the trinity amoung other basic tenets of the Christian faith. He had been banished from the city of Geneva and told not to show his face again on the punishment of death. Calvin, though in disagreement with Servetus, asked Servetus to obey the order for the sake of his life. Servetus came back into the city anyway. The Council of Geneva ordered Servetus burned at the stake. Calvin took no part in this, if anything, he had tried to encourage Servetus to save his own life.

Click to expand...

Calvin also visited Servetus prior to his execution and pleaded with him to recant. He also appealed for his sentence be carried out by another swifter means!

As a Calvinist myself, I will explain exactly why I came to believe Calvinism. I have not always been a Calvinist, but came to believe it several years ago.

Before I begin though, I would like to point out a potential misunderstanding. I'm not sure if this is the way the post was originally intended, but it is deductively invalid to make an argument based on the "real reason" that someone believes something - e.g. the "real reason" that people believe in Calvinism. It is a form of a genetic fallacy (which is when the origin of an idea is confused with its justification - problem being that the reason that someone believes something may not be the same as the reason something is true) - more specifically it is a form of the ad hominem class of arguments.

The simplist answer to why I became a Calvinist is that I became a Calvinist because of Scripture. Calvinism is defined essentially by the five following points:
1. Total depravity - men do not have any innate spiritual goodness in and of themselves and are not inclined towards spiritual good. We are completely unable to please God on our own strength. Jesus says in John 6:44, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day." Is. 64:6 compares our righteousness to "filthy rags," and Romans 8:7-8 says "...the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature [NASB "in the flesh"] cannot please God." (NIV)
2. Unconditional Election - God has chosen for salvation and has rejected others (see, for example, Romans 9 or Ephesians 1, which make no sense except in light of predestination; these chapters are about as clear an affirmation of predestination as you could ask for).
3. Limited Atonement - Jesus died only for the elect (those who would accept him). The meaning of this point may not immediately be clear, but in any case the easiest way to think of it is that, if God had not predestined any to salvation, Jesus would not have died. In John 10, Jesus states that He will lay down His life for His sheep.
4. Irresistable grace - it is only by the Grace of God that we are able to accept salvation. God's grace is, moreover, irresistable - i.e. those whom God has predestined are unable to choose to resist that.
5. Perseverence of the Saints - someone who has been truly saved cannot "turn away" or lose their salvation. 1 John 2:19 implies that those who do turn away were never really saved to begin with: "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." (NIV) Our Lord says in John 10:26-29, "...you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand." (NIV, emphasis mine). Here, Jesus implies several things: first, only His sheep will believe (and, in light of the rest of Scripture, only His sheep are even capable of believing). Second, our Salvation is guaranteed by Jesus Himself.

People Are Calvinist Because They Believe That Is What The Bible Teaches.
Unfortunately Calvinist Are Believe The Sign Gifts Are No Longer Valid. Dispensationalists Also Think Like This But For Different Reasons.

I Have Read John Mcarthur's Book "charismatic Chaos". I Think This Is A Horrible Book But This Book Has Influenced Many People. His Arguements Are Not Convincing On The Cesession Of Gifts. The Word Of Faith Movement According To Him Is Cultish. Mcarthur Is A Calvinist And A Dispensationalist In Eschatology.

PastorJ said:

Why are people Calvinist?
What would you say, from a word of faith perspective, are the underlying motivations of a person to believe the calvinistic doctrine.


Your thoughts are appreciated. Thanks,
PastorJ

Click to expand...

I think the WoF posts were fair and cosistant with the origional question.

I Paster wanted to know the Calvinists view point ..He could have went to a Calvinst forum.

While other remarks were graciously accepted by the Wofers, I don't think this was intended to be a calvinist/ Word of Faith debate. I recieved a lot of answers to some of my questions for sure.
sincerely Pony

Good Day, All

I would like to invite you all to listen to some teaching on the Doctrines of Grace "Calvinism".

Link to Thread:

http://www.christianforums.com/t2318516-a-baptist-teaches-the-tulip.html

If for no other reason, it will give you some good insights as to what a Cavinist is and why they believe as they do.


Peace to u,

Bill

PastorJ said:

Why are people Calvinist?

Click to expand...

Because they don't understand God.

justinstout said:

Because they don't understand God.

Click to expand...

Thats a rather simplistic and quite unrealistic answer. Predictable though!!

IMHO, there is an error in their thought that leads them to their conclusions.
They think the the power of God is directly linked to His will - hence the "irresistable will". It all goes downhill from there. If the will of God was directly linked to His almighty power, then ALL things would bend to the irresistable power of His will and be perfect. Not only would believers be puppets, but the entire universe would be a reflection of His mind. It may have started like that on day one... but He let it loose from there. What we see in creation is certainly not a reflection of the mind and will of God.

Yet another instance of the "mere theism" general attributes being magnified above the Jesus revelation.

oworm said:

Thats a rather simplistic and quite unrealistic answer. Predictable though!!

Click to expand...

It makes sense to me. Only someone who doesn't truly understand our heavenly Father would claim that He "predestines" some to burn in hell and some to spend eternity in heaven with Him. That's not the God that I love and serve.

justinstout said:

It makes sense to me. Only someone who doesn't truly understand our heavenly Father would claim that He "predestines" some to burn in hell and some to spend eternity in heaven with Him. That's not the God that I love and serve.

Click to expand...

PR 16:4 The LORD works out everything for his own ends--

even the wicked for a day of disaster


rom 9:18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

RO 9:22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 2