Are you a Calvinist?

So I am told anyhow.

I hold to the five points and believe these "Doctrines of Grace" to be a correct distillation of biblical doctrine.

 

I am neither..
I hold to points from both.

Is that a fence sitter?

 

It just means you aren't done yet.

:thumbs:

 

Joining Tim. And please notice I cut out the fence sitter part.

 

It probably depends on what constitutes a Calvinist.

If this has been discussed here could someone link me to the conversation? I see a lot of people talking about it and it would be helpful to see if there was a board standard, or some abstract agreed to at least by the Calvinists here as to what constitutes it.

I find that everyone thinks they know what one is, or at least that they know one when they meet one but they don't always agree as to what it really is.

By the way, I am not saying that I can define it for anyone. I have an opinion of course but it may be just as useless as anyone else's.

If it is adherence to all five points then wouldn't that mean that anyone who doesn't adhere to all five isn't a Calvinist? Or is four enough? Is three the bare minimum with the idea that two is right out since it's less than half the max?

I'm not trying to be smart, I really would like to know.

 

Let me explain...
I grew up in a calvinist family, me and my dad still have discussions that would make the tenured BBoardian wince!!

But I have moved toward the center..
For instance in the TULIP

I believe in the Total depravity of man... It takes the Holy Spirit to draw.
I do not believe in Unconditional election.... I beleive God knows ahead of time who will accept them, and by his foreknowledge, he has chosen His.
In Limited atonement, I believe that Christ died for all, but his blood was shed for only those that accept it. Jesus is not going to waste one drop of his blood.
For Irresistable Grace, I believe we can resist the call. Why would Christ say, Many are CALLED, few are chosen?
As for Perserverance of the saints... I believe this... but to the extent that we will persevere because we are Preserved by the Holy Spirit.

So you can see.. I am a half breed...
.
.
.
A Calmenian!!! :laugh:
Or better yet...
.
.
.

a tinyist...

 

Tim, I think that's funny -- I grew up in an Arminian family and am way tooooo Calvinistic for their tastes.

 

I think when we all get to Heaven we will be somewhere in the middle....

And you will learn that Tiny was right all along...
You will be a tinyist also!!

Surrender now..
You will be assimilated...
Resistance is futile.

You and I were predestined to sit on the fence.

 

If you define Calvinism as being in agreement with the commonly refered to five points (TULIP) then yes I am a Calvinist. However I have never read the works of John Calvin. I own his commentary on Genesis but I have only read selected sections in that book and none of those sections deal with this issue. So I am not a follower of John Calvin.

Edit to add a question:

Has anyone here read the book "A Long Line of Godly Men" by Steven J Lawson. It is suppose to "a heart-stirring survey of the Scriptures to show that the Bible in its entirety teaches the doctrines of grace".

Link:
https://store.ligonier.org/product.asp?idDept=B&idCategory=TH&idProduct=FOU04BH

 

Ive thought this for a long time too. The problem is that some have characterized it as all Calvinists believe all 5 points, and anyone who won't call themself a Calvinist thus disagrees with all 5 points. Thats simply not how it is. Most Baptists I know believe in at least 3 points to some degree or other.

 

I yam a 5-er. If there were any more, I'd be them, too.

 

That's more or less what I am asking.

Is "Calvinist" an adjective or a noun that admits of degrees?

If a person holds to only two or three of the five points can they really consider themselves a Calvinist?

Why would they want to?

The sticker in the TULIP scheme is usually thought to be the L of Limited Atonement.

Usually, the non-technical definition of Calvinism includes the idea that they/we believe that the Atonement was limited; i.e. Christ died only for the elect.

So, if a person denies this, would anyone, should anyone, consider them a Calvinist? And if this idea is so central to this quiddity of Calvinism, why would anyone who denies it want to be considered one?

 

False options, to start with.

And there is really no difference, between the two, in the final analysis.

Ed

 

You might say I'm a calvinist...

 

I'm a four point Tinyist

 

I am really confused now...

Look at the poll.
At this point 22 have voted, and we don't have an arminian!

If there are no Arminians here, where do all the C/A threads come from?

This is weird.

 

That is a very good question brother tiny!

 

One admitted it... one admitted it...
We now have an arminian in the house!!!

I knew we were predestined to have at least one.!!

 

RJ , the particular proposition which requires the most yieldedness is not so-called limited atonement . The one which many claim to believe yet in practicality distort is total depravity . If folks get that one straight then the other four are no real problem .

The words Arminian and Calvinist are both adjectives and nouns . However , I think that "Calvinistic" admits to a little fudging of pure Calvinism or Dortism . "Arminianistic" may not be a word , but I think it applies to many who deny that that they are Arminian ( largely because they affirm OSAS -- a weakened version of the Synod of Dort's 5th point . )The Remonstants were charged with being Pelagian in their thinking . But I think the Calvinists at Dort meant that the Remonstrants were inclining toward Pelagianistic thought -- not out and out Pelagianism .