Featured is calvinism based upon John Calvin, Or Upon Jesus And the Gospel?

The apostle Paul taught of a future rapture and tribulation, so he couldn't have been a Calvinist. Plus Paul never murdered nor caused to be murdered anyone after his conversion. Paul taught the WHOLE counsel of God, John Calvin skipped Revelation.

 

No one quotes Calvin to prove truth. Scripture is the basis among Cals. To say otherwise is just not being honest of fair. But when one attaches a system of theology to the name of a man then you will run into problems and accusations. Maybe Cals believe that it is worth it to keep his name attached. I do not understand why.

 

Calvinism's mantra

The claim someone found Calvinism in scripture before they were taught to misread scripture is one of the most common claims of Calvinism. Since it is read into scripture, these sort of claims provide inoculation.

However, since scripture clearly never teaches Calvinism in any verse ever, the claim is dubious.

What verse teaches the "T." Romans 3:11, ...there are none who seeks God? When are there none? At any time say Calvinists. But is that in scripture or read into it? Read in to it. So how was it found? Answer: It was taught!

Verse after verse oft cited in support do not support when read in context.

 

First of all, we were talking specifically about John Calvin. You can not justify Calvin vicariously through John MacArthur.

Secondly, if Mac thought Calvin's amillenialism was a valid position, why is he a pre-tribber!

 

You've become so accustomed to the word "SOME" in Calvinism that now you have admittedly conceded that Calvin only taught SOME truth! You're getting there

 

You're right, Calvin was not the founder. SO "Calvinists" should be honest and stop calling it Calvinism, and start calling it "Augustinianism" and finally ditch the anachronism.

 

And you're right, not all Calvinists agree which brings up the Calvinist Uniformity Conundrum.

According to Calvinist determinism God could establish everyone's belief system if He wanted to. That much must be admitted by the honest Calvinist. Therefore:

THE CALVINIST UNIFORMITY CONUNDRUM

1. God can determine belief systems and cause uniformity among believers if He wanted to.

2. God wants uniformity among believers. Philippians 2:2-5

3. God determines all things, and God especially determines all things that He wants.

4. Therefore all belief systems of the elect should be uniform and all Calvinists of one mind.

Subjectively, the arrogance of the Calvinists proves that they themselves believe that all belief systems should be uniform. The fact that they consistently condescend to anyone that does not agree with is proof of that. Calvinists themselves argue for uniformity of belief.

If a Calvinist was honest with his theology, he would say that all who disagree with him are not saved. After all, if "Calvinism IS the] gospel" then anyone who disagrees with it is not saved. Mark 1:15 ("Repent and believe the gospe]")

So even in a Calvinists own attempt to convince others of their position, if the Calvinist wholeheartedly believes he is right, then he is effectually arguing that uniformity of beliefs are predetermined. If the Calvinist does not admit this, he would have to admit there's a possibility that he could be wrong, but if there is a possibility he could be wrong, then that would cast doubt on his election, because 1 Peter 1:4 says to make your calling and election SURE.

Not all Calvinists are uniform. Not all Reformers are uniform. Reformers won't readily admit they are Calvinists and Calvinists won'd admit they are Augustinians.

The lack of uniformity in the belief system of Calvinism according to Calvinist determinism destroys the entire system. The Calvinist must either admit that God can NOT determine all things, or that God does not WANT to detemine all things, or that He does NOT determine all things to escape the conundrum.

 

You are spoutin' off again.

Paul wrote no commentaries on any book of the Bible,though he wrote some books of the Bible.

Calvin did not "skip" the book of Revelation. He didn't get to it. He was occupied. Do you think a man with as many ailments and as busy as he was in his not-quite 55 years had time to write commentaries on every book of the canon? Give credit where credit is due. He wrote commentaries on many of the books of the Bible and a fair share of sermons among the same.

He did a commentary on Daniel which should give you a clue as to what his approach to Revelation would have been.

 

From the pen of Charles H. Spurgeon:

"The old truth that Calvin preached,that Augustine preached,is the truth that I must preach today,or else be false to my conscience and my God."

"Calvinism did not spring from Calvin. We believe it sprang from the great Founder of all truth."

 

And..................Charles H. Spurgeon was WRONG on those issues........what's your point? Spurgeon is not the Baptist "Pope". You treat him as such. The fallacy of "appeal to authority" is meaningless if you aren't a Papist.......and I don't consider Spurgeon my Pope.
I like MANY of his writings, and adore his "Treasury of David" (his commentary on Psalms) but he isn't the Baptist Pope.

Never was, never will be.

 

No Calvinist on this board will adress the clearly defined and valid argument you pose here.....It will be ignored, and no one will respond to it:

Instead, they will call you a "plagiarizer" or, like many are doing.........
they will ignore the argument you post and falsely accuse the brethren of "blasphemy" as P4T and Icon and Herald have all done.

P4T, Iconoclast, and Herald, have all "Borne false witness" against a brother and falsely accused you of "blasphemy"........... they will ANSWER before God for those idle words one day.

Iconoclast is a false accuser of the brethren by bearing false witness in a charge of "blasphemy"
Preacher4Truth is a false accuser of the brethren by also bearing false witness in a charge of "blasphemy"
Herald is a false accuser of the brethren by bearing false witness in a charge of "blasphemy".

All three refuse to repent of their misdeeds and idle words.