John Calvin’s errant views

you asked me why I believe & I told you. I dont owe you any explainations other than my sharing with you my beliefs. I have lived it & so I believe it.... that simple. That you are not changing.

 

Yea Rippon but they dont get it .... the sinner contributes nothing to his or her own salvation --it is Gods work from beginning to end.

 

All Scripture Citations Are From the 1984 NIV

AMEN!

Say what? Anyone who comes to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ was elect (chosen)before the foundation of the world.

Faith is a fruit;not the cause of elction.

You are mixing things up. That passage is addressed to believers. Our spiritual state before coming to Christ is described in 1 Cor.2:14 :"The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God,for they are foolishness to him,and he cannot understand them,because they are spiritually discerned."

The passage of 2 Thess.2:13 says:"But we ought always to thank God for you,brothers loved by the Lord,because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief of the truth."

It says here that we were chosen from the beginning;that is before the world was made.

We were elect before the world was formed --but saved in time.

Citing that verse does not negate the biblical fact that Christ died only for the sheep. In 1 John 2:2 john is saying that the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is not only for those among the Jews,but the Gentiles scattered around the world.

Look at John 11:51b,52:"Jesus would die for the Jewish nation,and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God,to bring them together and make them one."

That's funny Van. The "I",stands for effectual calling.In Romans 8:30 it states:'And those he predestined,he also called;those he called,he also justified;those he justified,he also glorified."

Praise God for His distinguishing grace.The Lord seeks those He has predestined.I love that golden chain as it has been named.

 

I can always count on Jerome.

Below is the full text of the section. Please note what Jerome left out....

Please not that the words..."It appears unjust and arbitrary and would seem to make people unresponsible for their decisions."...is not Calvins words, but the writers take on what Calvin said.

I have already address Calvin's words 1st hand. No need to go over it again.

 

" Mans chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever" ....as per Westminster catechism. Do you disagree with this?

 

I am surprised! Jerome left out text...... NO!?!

 

BTW...Where is your ancestoral pride James. Pink is so last century. Try one of the Boyo's from the Valley. Might I suggest either David Martyn Lloyd-Jones or John Owen! :love2:

 

Good question! I remember after a few years of being a Christian when I heard about Calvinism. I could not understand why someone would spend so much time studying something so absurd. Why not just believe the scripture? In fact, that Calvinism has survived so long among Christians is still a mystery to me.

Perhaps it's a pride issue. After all, if I am elected by God and others are not, it must mean that God sees a value in me that others don't possess. This goes along with the fact that so many Calvinists come across as arrogant and full of themselves at their ability to understand this supposed mystery they claim to have found in the bible. Why not just believe the Gospel that whosoever will humble themselves and come to Christ will be accepted by God because of His sacrifice on the cross.

 

Y'all need to get your story straight. :laugh:


EWF, I left nothing out. The quote started with "It". I put the antecedent "double predestination" (the words at the the end of the sentence immediately preceding) in brackets for clarity. JArthur skipped over that, going further back in the book to concoct his false charge.

I remember once I quoted ten lines of Spurgeon. JArthur got upset, claiming I needed to quote a hundred lines. Bizarre.

 

Jerome,what specifically do disagree with in the Calvin blurb you provided?

 

Actually, that is EXACTLY what you say about faith, below. And it just does not work syntactically. You try to pry the "sanctification" part away, because then it reveals your true belief; salvation based on merit.

I did address what was actually said.

Agreed. It is showing instrumentality.

WRONG. Note the "AND." Faith and sanctification did the SAME thing.. So just apply what you said in statement #1, to faith as well. Like this...

"Faith describes the means of God making the choice and answers the question "how."

In other words, God chose US. Then, God USED the faith that He gave us, and the sanctification that He bestows upon us, to carry this choosing out. "Instrumentality," not cause.

What you are trying to say does not work. It would be like me asking, "Why did you nail that nail in a board?" And me replying "A hammer." I am answering the wrong question, and so are you. Faith is not the reason, faith is the hammer that drove the nail...

LOL. Try again. This is not a "because" statement. It is not saying "Obey your parents because of the Lord." It is saying "Obey your parents IN the Lord..." as in obey your parents "as far as the parents commands are according to the will and word of God..." (Clarke).

 

You were a new Christain and had not read much of anything by Calvinists and yet made the obervation that Calvinism was absurd. Now that you have reached the full maturity of your years ...you STILL haven't read much of anything by any Calvinists -- let alone by the the hand of John Calvin. And it is that servant of God whom you delight in disparaging. You are not running on all cylinders Robert.

Why not make an attempt at saying something edifying once in a blue moon? Why not acknowledge that Calvinists do in fact work from the Scripture and arrive at things that are far removed from your positions?

Why do you continue to say that Calvinism does not base its beliefs on the Bible? Could you eat some humble pie?

Because it is true to the Word of God.Calvinism is not so easily dismissed Robert. You keep refusing to read any Calvinistic works and yet maintain such a hateful posture regardless of the facts.

Why not point to any Calvinist (not hyper-Calvinist) and show where anyone thought heaven was populated by only Calvinists before entry was allowed?

If it was a matter of Calvinists believing that they,and they alone are going to glory -- then I could understand your anger and confusion -- but it is not the case that Calvinists believe such junk. However, that still leaves you in your anger and confusion despite the facts of the matter.

No one,regenerate Arminians or Calvinists,have any merits to claim. No one deserves to be saved. No one is special for their talents or strengths,intelligence or anything. There is no pride when we realize that we were all cut from the same quarry. We are all lumps of clay. By the Lord's mercy alone is anyone a recepient of distinguishing grace.

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Don't get me wrong, I too like the post.

POINT CALVIN DID NOT SAY IT.

That is what I said then..and what I say now.

What you left out...was what the guy from china said about double predestination

 

The real POINT is that you have yet to show any significant difference in what Van's paraphrase said and what Calvin teaches. Instead, you personally attack him as being a liar driven by hate. That is what is revealing and SAD...

 

To be fair, as a former Calvinist myself, I really don't believe my adherence to the doctrines were based in pride. In fact, I was quite humbled by the idea that God might have chosen a wretch like me. I don't believe Calvinists are lying about that.

As a Calvinist, I really believed I was supporting the gospel and the truth of scripture. Calvinism was the ONLY real answer I had for difficult passages such as Eph 1, John 6, and Romans 9. I wasn't aware of the more scholarly non-Calvinistic interpretations of these passages, so I accepted the Calvinistic perspective as truth without much question. Non-Calvinists in my life didn't offer any real answers to these difficult passages. The best they typically had was quoting John 3:16 over and over, so I had to believe what seemed to be the only viable interpretation to me at that time.

The pride came in when I would speak to people who appeared to be ignorant of my new found understanding of scripture. I think Piper explains that tendency pretty well here:

 

The guy from China?

What guy from China?

What IN THE WORLD are you talking about?

 

I recently made that very statement, (as one example of whey I have issues with Calvinism) using slightly different words, and was told that Calvinism doesnt really say that...but here it is, straight from Calvin himself.

Calvinism clearly teaches that God is a "respecter of persons"..(I pick Bob, but not Stan, Betty but not Annie, etc).

And yet the scriptures clearly teach that every person ever born will recieve revelation they can respond to and be saved,(even if they have not heard the gosple in the ordinary way) and that God is NOT a resprecter of persons.