KJV & Calvinism - A Connexion?

That's true. However, the doctrines of Grace commonly known as Calvinism has very solid scriptural support whether you agree with it or not.

Someone here once commented in effect that the doctrine popularly known as Calvinism is the only one that allows the tension in scripture between God's sovereignty and man's free will stand without disputing/denying either one.

I have only known one KJVO Calvinist in all my time of dealing with this issue. I would never claim that there aren't more but simply that as a rule, they are anti-calvinist every bit as much as anti-MV.

Every non-calvinist I have ever heard, seen, or debated with are forced to redefine the words in these verses so that they do not say what they say and no longer fit their context.

"whosoever" most certainly will. However in context, Jesus had just finished using the new birth as an analogy for salvation. No one is born or conceived of their own free will. Does birth violate a person's will? No. But it is not an act of will... it is an act of physical nature just like the "whosoevers" choose salvation as their nature is changed.

For further proof, go back to John 1 and see who gives a person the power to become a son of God.

Sorry Roby, I agree with you much of the time and can respectfully disagree with you. However, I can't in good conscience give you a pass on associating Calvinism with KJVOnlyism. One has biblical and logical proofs. The other doesn't.

 

That's your right, as it is mine. I believe that Calvinism ignores several Scriptures, and that's that. I shall continue to evangelize and witness to the lost as Jesus said to do; my part is planting the seed while it's JESUS' part to make it grow as He will. There are as many Scriptures against most of Calvinism as there are for it, & I believe the TRUTH lies somewhere in between Calvinism & Armininiasm.

But I see that MOST KJVOs are NOT Calvinist, with a notable exception being a certain member here.

 

You will not find any 5 point calvinist who agree with this statement.

I agree with roby here, that is why I will not take on either one of the theological labels. They require the person to only see the Scripture through their pre-conceived theological bias.

Bro Tony

 

You will not find any 5 point calvinist who agree with this statement.
</font>[/QUOTE] Really? Myself and the man who made the statement would probably both consider ourselves 5-point Cavinists.

I have never known a 5-pointer that did not believe in man's free will. It is the hyper-calvinists that believe man has no free will.

Nope. I believed the Bible first then discovered that my sotierology was calvinistic.

God is sovereign and has chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world. Man has free will that he exercises according to his nature in rebellion against God.

 

Thanx for clearing this up, Scott, although that wasn't your intent, I don't believe! You said the magic words I'd forgotten-HYPER-Calvinist!

That's the type of Calvinist with whom I've had the most face-to-face experience, & I've found them to be quite weird. I only hope they're right with God as YOU are.

I believe that other member here is saved, and says he's a Baptist. I don't know how hyper his Calvinism is, but you've prolly seen his admissions that he's a rare bird-KJVO and Calvinist.

Another big reason that Calvinism & KJVO are generally apart is that Calvin sheltered, aided, & abetted Coverdale & the others as they made the GENEVA BIBLE. I believe that, while KJ was against the GB for its footnotes denying the Divine rights of kings, Bancroft & Co.(The Anglican heirarchy, not necessarily the AV translators) were against its Calvinist bias.(although Calvinism as we know it wasn't yet developed)