Dortian, not Calvinist

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by J.D., Apr 29, 2008.

  1. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    This never-ending red herring of "following Calvin" that we who believe in the Doctrines of Grace have to face would be alleviated if we had a more accurate label. And it seems to me that a label (since it is apparent that we must be labeled) that would better describe what we believe would be "Doritan", since in reality it was the Canons of Dort that set the parameters of that set of doctrines which are inaccurately called "calvinism". Isn't it true that nearly all of those of us on BB that are labeled "calvinists" would not profess entire agreement with Calvin's Institutes, but we would profess entire agreement with the Canons of Dort? So, "Dortian" would be an accurate descriptive, wouldn't it? What do you think?
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,268
    Likes Received:
    776
    Why have a label of any man? Characterizing what you hold to as a reformed belief is quite sufficient is it not?
     
  3. reformedbeliever

    reformedbeliever
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    It doesn't matter what label we have. The free willies will always get upset. By the way.... its ok to use the label "free willies".... one of our moderators uses the label "calvies."
     
  4. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    I am quite happy with the label "reformed". But some people contend that "reformed" would not accurately describe a calvinistic dispensationalist such as many on BB are.
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,268
    Likes Received:
    776

    How about "reformed dispensationalist'?
     
  6. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,602
    Likes Received:
    44
    Nacho cheesier!
     
  7. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    It's considered a contradiction in terms. I'm not advocating that position, just stating it. Covenantalism is considered an essential feature of "reformed" theology by many who carry the label "reformed".
     
  8. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Correct you are, here, on this last point. Those who usually follow the mis-named "Calvinism", would better be called as "Dordtist" or a "Counter-Remonstrant".

    Calvin was not a Calvinist, did not hold to any "5 Points" as we know them today, and had passed from this earth over 50 years before the Synod of Dordt, at the fairly young age of 55.
    Likewise, Arminius was not an Arminian, either, and he too, had departed this life at the fairly young age of 59, and had been gone 9 years "before Dordt".
    This is as good a place as any to throw in that Pelagius was not a Pelagian, either, but let's keep that discussion for another day.
    And the often overlooked and underappreciated Theodore de Beze`, who did amaze, or Beza - who would amaze ya', had likewise passed from this realm, at the ripe old age of 86, and that 13 years before Dordt. This hand-picked student of and successor to Calvin, at Geneva, equalled, or more accurately, surpassed his mentor, theologically speaking.

    ("Biblically speaking", there was no contest. In fact, IMO, among those among the "Reformers and Friends", only Erasmus, Luther, Tyndale, were playing in the same league as Beza, when it came to knowledge of and the handling of Bible texts, in the 16th Century. Beza is most likely the author/editor of the Greek NT text the KJV translators mostly used (regardless of how many times Stephanus' name is invoked, by KJVO advocates), had unlimited access to Codex Bezae & Codex Claramontanus, and published at least nine editions of the Greek NT.)

    So yes, let's call this what it actually is, the "Remonstrant/Dordtist" debate. Somehow, I think that that alone would cool down some of the rhetoric I often hear, in this.

    Now as to point two I am making, "Shame on you!", here, on this one. The attempt to "theologically kidnap" a 'praising' phrase is deplorable, IMO. I am referring to this one, and I quote you again.
    This implies that (a.) those of your belief system are the only ones who believe in grace., and (b.) that your belief systems has gotten it all rightly, for this system is the only one that properly understands grace.

    What
    hogwash! Not to mention what arrogance!!!


    Whether or not this is intentional, it is still an arrogant usage, IMO.

    The so-called "Calvinist", "Dordtist", "Counter-remonstrant", what have you as to "label" has no monoply on "the Doctines of Grace" (unless this happens to be a book title) by any stretch. (Nor is the term "Reformed" much better, FTR, although I will let that one slide, for now.)

    I subscribe to none of "the Five Points of Dordt" in their entirety; I also subscribe to none of the Five Points of Remonstrance, as written and worded, in their entirety. Yet I am also sure that I believe in "the doctrines of grace" as taught in Scripture, as well as you.

    And in fact, my greatest disagreement with both groups above is that they both actually deny grace, as they 'demand' perseverance to 'prove' the salvation of the one claiming to be a believer.

    Another way of stating this same thing is the doctrine of so-called "Lordship Salvation". If the two groups are diametrically opposed, as is the claim made, why do they wind up at the same point?? :BangHead: Think about it!

    Ed

    ("This phrase of 'the doctrines of grace' is properly not capitalized, here." Signed, Language Cop)
     
    #8 EdSutton, Apr 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 29, 2008
  9. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
     
  10. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    To say that Calvin did not hold to any of the so-called five points is silly Ed. Those specific propositions were not formulated in his time , but he held tenaciously to each one . Sometimes his views on Particular Redemption are brought into question by non-Cals but scholars such as Rainbow and Helm ( among others ) have countered that quite well . He believed and wrote extensively on each of those doctrinal planks . To deny that is avoiding reality Ed.
    Do want to do some revisionist history ? Do you think the Canons of Dort completely overturned Calvin's theology , or misinterpreted it ?!
     
  11. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    Correction : Jacob Harmenszoon was 49 at death.
     
  12. The Archangel

    The Archangel
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    Certainly the labels can be distracting. I prefer to call "Calvinism," "Dortism," "Doctrines of Grace," or "Reformed Theology" what it actually is-- Biblical Theology.

    Ok...I realize I just threw the proverbial gas on the fire. That's too bad. Calvinism is biblical theology.

    Many Blessings to all (even my beloved, non-calvinist brothers and sisters!)

    The Archangel
     
  13. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    WOW ! For someone who wants a "cooling down [of] some of the rhetoric" you sure heat things up Ed. You should "let it slide" just like the term "Reformed" .Before you have more of a fit , The Doctrines Of Grace" ( Regardless of Language Cop's sensitivities being aroused )is one of several designations for those holding to "Calvinism".
    We don't mean to suggest that we alone have an exclusive entitlement to the terminology . You have the perfect right to employ it as well . But in doing so you may be mistaken for a Calvinist in the process .:laugh:
     
  14. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, hit the wrong key. 49 is the correct number. I did not proof-read this, well enough, when posting, obviously.

    Again, I apologize.


    Ed.
     
    #14 EdSutton, Apr 30, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2008
  15. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't recall asking for a "cooling down" of any rhetoric, on this thread. In fact, I don't recall asking for this anywhere. I have suggested that I particularly like some threads that are not as "rhetoric filled", as some others. And I have surmised that the reason the Moderators may have closed some threads, was to let some of the rhetoric cool off, as well.

    However, my blood pressure is not in the least, raised by the rhetoric I see (or even use). Mine normally runs about 108- 112 over 60-65. And I still weigh about 220-225, not exactly rail-thin for one who stands just under 5'10" tall.

    Now to the 'theology speak'.

    Is the so-called (classical, or Dordtian) "Calvinism" any more 'Reformed' than is the so-called (classical, as opposed to Wesley's flavor of) "Arminianism"?

    If so, how?? Both are products of the same time of the Reformation.

    And is it not more accurate to say that those who do not believe in "Lordship Salvation" believe more in "the Doctrines of Grace" than those who do preach and teach LS?

    FTR, I occasionally call myself a "'0 point' Calvinist".

    Ed
     
  16. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    For Ed S. who couldn't recall .
     
  17. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    The above examples show my concern for your blood pressure EDS. It looks as though you're yelling at the top of your voice with veins bulging on your forehead .And what was all that for ? Nothing . J.D. was using an historically accepted designation . He did not invent it -- it's been around a lot longer than even you . So lighten-up guy .
     
  18. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    Again Ed, unless you're planning on doing some revisionist history -- Calvinism is called 'Reformed Theology' . 'Classical Arminianism' as you called it is not "Reformed'.Arminianism sprang up from within the ranks of Calvinism proper . Then Dort expelled it from those ranks -- because it was rank:laugh: .
     
  19. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0

    L.S. Salvation requires that one be at least a moderately leaning Calvinist. IF not, you turn it into a Galatians "Work righteous" heresy.

    God saves us, God Keeps us,
    He chose us before we were made,
    Why do you take Glory, for the choice that was His,
    Tell me, are you seeking a Grade?


    You make Faith a work,
    By the things you believe,
    You did not choose Him,
    You are most surely deceived,

    And how can YOU lose,
    what was not yours to take,
    He GAVE it to you,
    Before Eve and the Snake,

    You are a clay pot!
    you surely chose nothing,
    Next you'll be saying you hung
    on that cross, or something....

    Give GOD the Glory,
    For choosing you when,
    You were Wretched, and
    never would have chose Him,

    You hated him, true
    Now don't you deny it,
    I'll lay on you scripture,
    If you even try it!

    Shout, scream, yell, HOORAY!
    He loved me so TRUE,
    When I was lost and enslaved,
    with naught I could do,

    He touched my heart,
    And changed it complete,
    And I will now spend eternity,
    At my Savior's feet.

    Damon Rambo

    That's How I feel about it.
     
  20. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Observing that this would serve to 'cool down' the rhetoric, does not necessarily equal 'calling for' the rhetoric 'to be cooled down'.

    And this was a bit of a whimsical observation, as well.

    Somehow, "Dordtistism vs. Remonstrantism" and even more so, that of "Counter-Remonstrantism vs. Remonstrantism" just doesn't seem to flow off the tongue quite as easily as the more familiar words. :smilewinkgrin:

    Ed
     

Share This Page

Loading...