Calvin Was A Man...

Of course it is a good analogy. They are labels given by men to believers. Kinda like being called a Baptist. We may not care for the label, but it can be useful.

Surely you understand words have denotative and connotative meanings. Words are symbols to represent realities and meaning. In order to communicate with someone you have got to reach a point of shared meaning. When people do not share meaning, then communication breaks down and mis-communication occurs.

You must also be willing to negotiate meaning with the one you wish to communicate with.

There is a theological, definitional meaning to the term Calvinist. There are 1000s of connotative meanings men apply to the term, either positive or negative.

So, rather than fruitless wranglings about terminolgy, let's negotiate what we mean by the terms being used and accept what each other means by the terminolgy they use. :thumbs:

 

How about the biblical teaching called Trinity, since the word doesn't exsist in scripture, maybe we should call it man made and throw it out too along with grace.

 

Sadly, people have done that.

 

Well "trinity" is of the english language, but we do have scripture to support it, so I don't think we should throw it out. It doesn't matter to me what you want to be called, if its Calvinist, so be it, but Calvinist does not mean Christian, period. Calvinism is a label for those who hold to the TULIP, as I understand it. When someone says "you are Calvinist" to me they are saying you see the scripture in a certain way. Calvinism does not have a "lock" on Grace. It seems to me that most believe we are saved by Grace.

1Jo 5:7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

I believe that three is "trinity"

 

I believe in the Triunity of course . However , the KJV's rendering of 1 John 5:7 have some extra added stuff that was no part of the originals .

 

So, I gues that makes you a Trinitarian. :smilewinkgrin:

 

Calvinists DON'T "negotiate" meanings else their whole system fails. Ask me -- I've tried. They'd just rather we compromise on OUR meanings.

skypair

 

Calvin is rarely the issue, friend. It's usually those "inventions" that followed on later that make up Calvinism.

Not it what I'm hearing from RB is what you believe. Denying "belief" on our part and any "receptional regeneration" (receiving), it denies the most basic truths of salvation! 1Cor 15:1-2 "I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved .... For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures..."

Some of you are actually standing outside the gates of the KoH keeping people away with your gospels of predestination and total sovereignty of God. Quite like the religionists of Jesus day, you puff yourselves up with themes that don't appear in scripture (TULIP, "doctrines of grace") and alter the meaning of common words so that they become your own little "jardon" -- your "technical lingo" -- to keep seeking eyes away from the truth.

I guess that answers pretty honestly what you asked for.

skypair

 

Does being a Trinitarian mean one follows Trini Lopez instead of Christ? :tongue3:

 

I Cor 1: 10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?


Your compariison lacks equivilency. The terms you refer to is not the same as using the name of a man.

 

Please use the quoting system where I have said I am of Calvin.

 

It should be obvious to anyone who read my post that I never said such.


Now to clarify my post anyone who claims the term calvinist or calls someone else a calvinist is using the name of a man which is fundamentally different than using terms like "the way', or disciples.

 

From my experience, Calvinism can be problematic. Not that the doctrinal stances of Sovereign Grace are a problem, but when used as a mark of fellowship and separation, they can cause a lot of strife.

We separate on the basis of blatant sin, not system. There are arguments for both sides; for “elect” and “one” and then for “all”. A simple word study can show that. We use systematic theology to group and link together like thoughts and themes in Scripture, however, it remains just that…a system, based on Scripture. The contention comes when it is said that the system = Scripture and to deny any tenant of the system is to deny Scripture. Five basic tenants do not sum up the mysteries of Soteriology.

In the end, I have no problem with Calvinism when it is worn as a button, not a badge. A button has function and helps hold things together. A badge has no function other than the proclamation of worth.

IMHO, I wish the actions of a wicked world and lack of humble heart in believers would fire the church up half as much as Calvinism and KJVO do…

 

Friend, you have so misunderstand the use of the word its not funny.

 

Excellent post, and welcome to the BB, btw.

 

Is it Calvinism that is problematic, or the person who has pride in their heart about their belief? i.e. knowledge puffs up? I think the latter.

 

There can be no misunderstanding. "Calvinism" is based on the name of John Calvin and his teachings. It may have morphed into teachings not ascribed by him but that is just silly doings of men. To use the names of Calvinist or Armenian is to be divided under the heading of men and their teaching.

 

You are simply just wrong. That is not the meaning of those words.

 

Let me help you out.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism

 

I am not sure why reformed guys like to fall under the heading of men so much unless it is to hang on to your false accusations of those who do not ascribe to tulip as Arminians.