1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Hyper-Calvinism and it's beliefs

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Allan, Apr 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bethelassoc

    Bethelassoc Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    1
    I don't believe that will sway the calvinists that already spoke on here even if both sides are in agreement. It depends on ones interpretation of John Calvin's writings as well as how they view scripture.

    Let me clarify my vagueness. I was referring to absolutism in reference to Hyper calvinism. An example is Absolute Predestination, in which man has no part in his "salvation". It didn't take place while hearing a gospel message preached, after a message was preached, etc. He just is one of God's elect. He was born that way. Historic calvinists don't agree with an absolute view such as that.

    I guess we could nitpick about OSAS, eternal security, but my focus for absolutism lies more in the man has no part, just like the extreme arminian view that man does all the foot work in getting saved/ God has no part.

    Of course there is a difference between the two systems. The problem at hand from what I understand when talking to calvinists is that they do redefine terms that don't coincide with what John Calvin penned in his writings. But does everyone fully understand what Calvin actually wrote?

    Right. But like what was mentioned before in this thread, HC is an extreme view. It is taking (some, if not most) tenets of calvinism to an absolute view. Does every HC believe this way? No. Does every calvinist believe in the 5 points?..... Here's where the fighting takes place. I think there's as much inner debating about calvinism as there is with the C/A conflict.

    Wouldn't it be extreme to arminianism as well? :) I think both sides of the C/A debate have extremes... even verging on heretical. I won't say that I have a clear understanding of HC, but I have studied denominations that hold to some of it's views, and it sure makes me search out the scriptures.

    David
     
  2. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Unfortunately you don't have it . Your 'your' should be the contraction -- 'you're' .
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
     
  4. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This is so old ...




     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It would be a hard task to round-up anyone who scores much of any score on Monergism's list . That hyper-Calvinist animal just might be mythological . ( With the possible exception of Outside the Camp folks and 5Solas ).

    Allan , if you're ( a contraction meaning you are ) serious about wanting to find an historical view of Hyper-Calvinism you need to study The Gospel Standard Church . Look at their creed ( or rather , Confession ) . You'll notice their departure from true Calvinism in 7 or so Articles of Faith .

    It's of no consequence if Phil and John H. say they agree with the list of the other , it will not alter the fact that the respective propositions have no bearing on the other . That's why I had scored some Hyper-points on Phil's list and 0% on Monergism . If there was any true kinship between 'P' and 'M' I would have had about the same score on each .You are so bent on harmonizing those two listings when there is no intersection to be had . There is no overlap . There is nothing in common .Your ( the correct spelling and usage ) examples of matches between the two were simply misfits .It's a case of comparing apples with artichokes .
     
  6. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    As I have stated and many others in their researching HC, that the Gospel Standard Church is not the only HC, but the Protestant Reformed Churches are also accounted in that group, along with Primitive Baptists, and another group of two (if I remember off the top of my head rightly). HC is not a mytholoicagal animals but a very real one. However that refenence is usually made by those of the HC persuation who don't like the truth.

    Again, the two lists are compatable and comparable and your the one who needs to clear up the contention with the Monergism. I simply am telling what a leading Calvinistic group (the go-to guys for Calvinism as JD puts it) states as a fairly accurate rendering of what an HC is. My list stands whether you think it is right or not, for one reason your the only one who really disagree's with the listing. As I said, it is you're problem not mine. This is something to help people know what constitutes HC according to poeple who know what the HC's believe and to give those of who are calvinistic something to help guage whether or not their views are historical or over-reaching and or extreme.
    Remember I didn't make up the lists nor declare them the same and compatable, they did!

    Hope your doing good. You're friend
    Allan
     
    #106 Allan, Apr 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 27, 2008
  7. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You don't read ( or spell )very well . I said that one would be hard pressed to find any Hyper-Calvinist who scores any points on Monergism's list . I did not say that hyper-Calvinists do not exist .

    "HC is not a mytholoicagal animals ..." ?! Have you been drinking again ?

    You're going to extremes with your wrongly spelled words .Think things out a bit before you type .
     
  8. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am not the only one who can read plainly enough to see glaring differences between the two lists Allan . J.D. is another on the BB who can tell the difference . Others are busy just reading this thread and not participating . I am sure others will come forward to expose the fraud of "they both say the same thing ."

    Allan :"My list stands" . What singular list are you speaking of ?

    You didn't address the specifics I made in particular with the two lists . I would say your cross-referencing skills are woefully deficient .

    So it is indeed "you're" problem , Buddy .
     
  9. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Anyone who puts the Protestant Reformed Churches into the category of being hyper-Calvinistic is in error ( perhaps willful error ) . A champion of the Calvinistic cause -- John Gerstner , wrote the Forward to Engelsma's book on Hyper-Calvinism . He defended the PRC from Hyper-Calvinistic charges .

    Gerstner was the mentor of R.C. Sproul . I had the pleasure of meeting both of these men . And I know some PRC folks also .
     
  10. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    My list of souces throughout this thread range from the Presby's , those of the website Puritans mind, John Hindrix (Monergism), and Phil Johnson (Spurgeon.com), and I"m pretty sure they know what they are talking about, especially when they are saying the same things. If you didn't notice, let me point out that they are all Calvinistic and not one sourse is from Non-Cal. So for someone who is 'supposedly' up on what is and isn't you are falling short on this. :thumbs: The only ones that I can find that say certain things do not fall into the HC catagroy are made from those who hold those particular views. There might be some out there who endorse such beliefs and not consider them HC but I haven't found one. Maybe you could help me there?

    Engelsma'a defense apparently toward other notable Calvinist's wasn't a very good one :tear:

    I realize you most likely know some PRC folks and my bet is they believe much similarly to your own view huh? :thumbs:

    However all funny aside, It is not stating that ALL PRC are hyper but using it in a general or majority fashion. Kinda like saying Baptists hold to the OSAS position. The majority do but not all.
     
    #110 Allan, Apr 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 27, 2008
  11. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    Your blindness is becoming amazing. The whole thing was written mocking your need to find something to say because everything else is refuted by those who understand Historic Calvinism. Nuff sed ! :wavey:
     
    #111 Allan, Apr 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 27, 2008
  12. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    Like I said, talk to Monergism and clear things up. We will wait patiently on the e-mail which they recant their agreement to and with Phil's.

    I think I know why you wont though. You know their right and if you do try to correct them, you will have your hands full. That is ok though, it is good to be reporved at times to help keep you were you aught to be with due regard to your historical view.
     
  13. Bethelassoc

    Bethelassoc Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ouch. Let me again clarify some things and maybe we can settle down the tempers, eh? I will use the term "some calvinists" rather than just calvinists. I do know some that claim calvinistic leanings that do define terms different than others. That was my point. Yes the bible is the standard for any christian, but when we mention historic calvinism, what is it? How do you know without looking at his writings?

    Rippon you've prejudged me without knowing where I stand. I do stand with the calvinists rather than the arminians but I believe my earlier quote about inner debates has shown through. I don't understand it all, don't claim to, don't think anyone on here is an expert on it either. But I was defending the fact that you may have your thoughts on calvinism aside from what two websites state.

    I appreciate Allan starting this thread to hash out some of the extreme teachings so both sides can see where the other stands.
     
  14. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    From.......
    http://www.opc.org/OS/html/V10/3f.html

    Comes from ...Ordained Servant

    Arminianism, Calvinism and Hyper-Calvinism
     
  15. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking of historic Calvinsm....
    Another site says about the same thing as the one I just posted...

    Site..... http://www.trinity-baptist-church.com/diff6.shtml

    From the pastor of Trinity Baptist Church

     
  16. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Tell me, brother, is this condition of being "saved" in the eternal sense ?
    I mean (and I have asked this question several times on the board) does hearing the gospel by the elect result in the blood of Christ being applied to him and being effective for him, washing away his sin, and acquiring for him the eternal salvation that God in eternity past planned he should have ?

    I have no objection about the gospel being preached to anyone who will listen wherever and whenever an opportunity to do so is presented but like the hyper-Calvinist I do not believe that just any man is obliged to repent.

    The obligation to repent and believe is to every elect child of God, who has already (as opposed to one who is to be) regenerate.

    What both Arminians and Calvinists fail to realize, or refuse to accept (because it will go against orthodox teaching as well as seminary teaching) is that Paul in the above quoted text is speaking of regenerate and elect Jews who are still caught up in their religion for the simple reason that Christians of his era are so fearful of orthodox Jewry that these have not been reached with the good news of Christ's finished salvation. Therefore the question: how then shall they hear without a preacher ?
     
  17. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am in full agreement with this article by the deceased William Payne .It is not comprehensive , but what it states about the stance of most Hyper-Calvinists is true .

    Allan , another list for ya'!
     
  18. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    YES! And it even agrees with what I have already presented with what little it sets forth but does not negate nor disagree with the rest :thumbs: You can see at the end of the article where it even states there is more but that basically what they give is enough to show that HC is distinctively different from Historical Calvnism.
    However the other list James gave equates much better :)
     
    #118 Allan, Apr 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 27, 2008
  19. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Allan , how would the points raised by Pastor Paine as being Hyper-Calvinistic be representative of the PRC ? Not one of those H-C propositions are held by the PRC . That's why it is wrong for anyone to lump them in the H-C category .Of course if you aren't familiar with the PRC you can pass on this .
     
  20. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    Because it is not an exhaustive list. It touches on a few of the main points such as no evangelism, God created some men with the express purpose of damning them simply as creatures (IOW - before man sinned), and the view of Antinomianism, but that is all he spoke on. There are more than 3 points in contention with Historical Calvinism, he knows that and is why he states:
    "Other factors might be added, but enough has been said to show that Hyper-Calvinism is as distinct from Historic Calvinism as is Arminianism. They are both extreme positions, though of course opposite extremes;"

    Now, the real question here is is he speaking for on behalf of the whole of PRC? Answer, no. Are all PRC Hyper? I never said that nor did the others of whom I quoted and have even stated such already. In any group there are always subgroups.

    Remember this thread is for allowing people to know the most common views which fairly accurately discribes the common views of those who are HC or have in their views HC tendencies. This is not about marking or labeling a person specifically an HC but being able to identify aspects or specific beliefs associated with HC.
     
    #120 Allan, Apr 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 27, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...