No one is using Calvin over Jesus as criteria for judging Scripture. God did reveal himself perfectly in Jesus; no one disputes that. Although I am not sure how you can hold that position since the only place you learn anything about Jesus is flawed and contains errors. The apostles may indeed have made it all up. However, if you think they gave an accurate record of his words, then read what Christ said in John 6 and you will see that Jesus believed it long before Calvin did.
Chris, I should have changed "historically" for something more conducive to recent history. You are correct on that regard; I made a poor choice of words.
___________________
Note from the moderator. This post is a response to a post that David posted. This post is not by David at all but rather by me. The above quote is not by me but rather by David. When trying to reply, I apparently clicked on edit rather than reply and thus hijacked David's post to make him appear to say something he did not say. (Of course it is the closest David has come to being right in a while ) I am currently trying to think of things to blame this on. If you have any ideas get back to me in a hurry. Until then, accept my apologies.
Larry
[ April 04, 2002, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
Why must I be a Calvinist
Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Chris Temple, Apr 3, 2002.
Page 2 of 3
-
-
David, I am so sorry. I just realized that instead of reply I hit edit. It was unintentional. Often when I want to edit I will hit reply by mistake and have to go back. I didn't catch it until I looked in here to check my post. I was not trying to delete your post at all. I was trying to answer it.
Please accept my apologies. -
<<<So I guess I should stop associating Christ with Christianity as well, huh?>>>
<<<<<I know Christ apart from scripture, the same way Paul did. I experience Christ through prayer and a continued relationship with the almighty. Do you really think Paul was ignorant of Christ because he did not have the four gospels? Think about what you are saying.>>>>
You do not interpret Scripture by Christ.
<<<you do if you are a Christian. "You have heard it said...but I say to you...">>>>>
You would stand against apostasy and compromise because he did.
<<<<Maybe so but I wouldn't murder people over it.>>>
This hermeneutic of yours is a thinly veiled attempt to sound pious while being able to reject God's revelation to us.</font>[/QUOTE]Wow, you found me out. I thought no one could see through my piety veil-actually, I though it was more of a sarcasm veil but apparently its more of negligee. By the way, god's perfect revelation is Jesus, not Calvin. Why would someone use Calvin over Jesus as the criteria for judging scripture, unless they're worshipping Calvin( now that makes sense)?
__________________
Moderator's note -- This post should be read before the post attributed to David Cooke time stamped at 9:27 am (two posts above). Hopefully this will get things back on the right track. -- Larry
[ April 04, 2002, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ] -
-
Boarders,
This is a hot topic........you can hear a pin drop and the sweat on the brow of some. Oh well, I will add a link from a good friend. It essentially explains why *I must be a Calvinist* also.
http://www.apuritansmind.com/TULIP/WhyIAmACalvinist.htm
In HIM,
Scott Bushey
"Put your faith in God and keep your gunpowder dry."
-Oliver Cromwell -
Let's talk about the three reasons Sandlin gives that necessitate his Calvinism:
1. "I must be a Calvinist, first, because I can recognize no greater fact in the universe than the sovereignty of God."
2. "There is a second reason I must be a Calvinist. Calvinists believe that covenant is at the center of God's dealings with man, and I believe that this is just what the Bible teaches."
3. "Third, and finally, I must be a Calvinist because I am convinced that the Christian Faith must dominate the whole of man's life and existence. There is no expression of orthodox Christianity that historically has recognized this fact as much as Calvinism has."
So if I can paraphrase, Sandlin is claiming that a) Calvinist soteriology is most consistent with the view that God is sovereign in salvation, b) the Calvinistic understanding of 'covenant' (if not Covenant Theology itself) is the proper way to understand God's relationship to man, and c) Calvinism has the most developed awareness of worldview and antithesis within Christianity. All three of these arguments are strong (I agree with them, so what do you expect me to say?), but the one that is most interesting to me is the third. Non-Calvinists do not often appreciate the extent to which worldview thinking is Calvinistic thinking.
Mark -
You are so right. Calvinism is TULIP but not just TULIP; rather it is G.I.S.: God is Soverign! It is an entire worldview that says God is God and I am not.
I don't believe covenant theology is essential to the worldview (I am New Covenant myself) unless one is talking of "Classical Calvinism" (Presbyterianism). -
I am amazed that anyone would want to be associated with that man, much less use his ideas about God instead of Jesus'.</font>[/QUOTE]Calvin did act wrongly, but that whole thing with Servetus has been distorted by enemies of the truth. To speak as if people you agree with getting fired is the same as a burning at the stake is just whining.
What I find most interesting, though, is how you keep talking about putting Calvin's writtings over Scripture. The truth is that it's an issue of putting Scripture over yourself. No one naturally likes Calvinism. But it's true. I'll never understand how you can totally ignore the numerous clear statement of Scripture, subordinating it to your own human mind, while at the same time spouting rhetoric about the authority of Scripture. I take it by the fact that you call yourself a moderate that you don't hold to Biblical innerency, so I don't know what business you have talking like that anyway. -
Chris Temple said:
-
Arminian theologians and/or Biblical oriented Christians also believe in salvation by grace minus works. [Ephesians 2:8-9] We believe salvation comes solely by faith. [Romans 4:5] We also believe in sovereignty knowing that God is totally involved in the rule of His world and universe and will move human history to its final conclusion. We believe that God is sovereignly moving people, by His Spirit, to conviction of sins so they will yield to God savingly. [Revelation 22:17]
We do not have a lopsided theology that never speaks of 'good works' as valuable to people and God, or of rewards that Christ will give to worthy saints at the Judgment Seat of Christ. Neither do we disguise the non-elect under the umbrella of an autocratic, domineering, an secretive electing mind of the living God merely for the purpose of maintaining Reformation theology.
Respectfully,
Dr. Berrian -
Originally posted by J. Mark Bertrand:
-
I must be a Calvinist because I follow Jesus. I do not follow the humanistic error of Arminianism, which perverts the grace of God into something that can be obtained by works of righteousness.
"If any man doth ascribe aught of salvation, even the very least, to the free-will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright." --Martin Luther
"I do not come into this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will of his own free will return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, 'You are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for Myself.' My hope arises from the freeness of grace, and not from the freedom of the will." --Charles Haddon Spurgeon
By His grace, Christopher -
-
I am a advocate of "Calvinists" theology because it is the pure gospel and the absolute truth.
The Sovereignity of God, the position of Paul and all the Apostolic teaching, and of course the entire bible, is the most freeing truth I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. I praise God every day for opening my mind and enlightening me as to the gospel truth. Believe me, once you have "seen" it you will NEVER give in even one little bit to those that think they somehow have something to do with their own salvation. How God-dishonoring to think that man can thwart the Sovereign Will of God. It just goes to show how fallen man really is. He just CANNOT give up the notion that he can control God, instead of God controlling fallen man.
Get over it people!!! God is Sovereign, not man!!!
James2 -
Pastor Larry,
Perhaps you and your church might not try to maintain Reformation Theology but the Tenth Presbterian Church in Philadelphia every year has a seminar on Reformation Theology. Biblical theology is different from the framework of strict Reformation Theology. Much of Reformation Theology is good but some is incorrect.
Dr. Berrian -
Pastor Larry,
Do you understand the concept that sovereignty does not necessarily mean total dominance in all things. England is a sovereign state and yet they have a free will to buy and sell and to own property. This does not make the king of England without sovereignty. The king is sovereign in many areas but not all. The same is true of Almighty God. You, incorrectly, use the wide brush by saying that the Triune God is autocratic and domineering over His creation in matters of personal salvation.
Why do not all come? It is true that the Gospel is available to anyone who hears His truth. When they hear the truth the Holy Spirit convicts of sin and people make a choice to either receive Christ or to neglect His stupendous offer of eternal life. All do not come because He has given man the gift of choice/free will; He never coerces people to bow the knee to Him. [John 5:40] One day everyone will have to bow the knee and admit that He is the Sovereign over all things.
We both agree that Almighty God is infinite and you and I and all human beings are finite.
With reference to ‘good works' and the rewards given at the Judgment Seat of Christ, you said, ‘Who does believe this? This doesn't look familiar to me. Are you denying these Biblical truths as offered in His holy Word? Are you denying that these are precepts offered by God through His human penmen?
You are responsible, as a Christian pastor, to ' . . . declare all the counsel of God.' [Acts 20:27], including passages like Romans 14:10 & II Cor. 5:10. And as to free will we are reminded by God that He died on the Cross to make possible the salvation of every human being. The whole counsel of God included preaching John 3:16 and 17 as though God did not come to human beings to damn, autocratically the non-elect, but rather not to condemn anyone but that through Him {Jesus} His creatures ' . . . might be saved.'
Respectfully,
Dr. Berrian -
I do understand sovereignty and it means total control over all things. It is incorrect to draw an analogy of God's sovereignty from the King of England. It is apples and oranges. In the bottom line is boils down to whether or not we believe that God in is the heavens doing whatever he pleases. If you disagree with that, then you disagree with Scripture.
Why do not all come? It is true that the Gospel is available to anyone who hears His truth. When they hear the truth the Holy Spirit convicts of sin and people make a choice to either receive Christ or to neglect His stupendous offer of eternal life. All do not come because He has given man the gift of choice/free will; He never coerces people to bow the knee to Him. [John 5:40] One day everyone will have to bow the knee and admit that He is the Sovereign over all things.
We both agree that Almighty God is infinite and you and I and all human beings are finite.
If you want to declare the whole counsel of God then it must of necessity include the doctrines of grace as taught in Scripture. Only in this is hope offered by mankind. -
Acts 13:48 often quoted by Calvinists as an ‘iron clad' case for the unconditional election/special election of saints sounds good in the King James Version until a person checks what other Greek scholars say about this verse.
Number one the word ‘ordained' is not in our copies of the original Greek language. The word is {tetagmenoi}meaning disposed. The Authorized Version, Revised Standard Version, and others merely copied the Catholic/Vulgate translation. A closer and better translation would be, ‘ . . . and as many as were having been disposed to eternal life, believed.' The Holy Spirit had so worked on their lives that they were moved to savingly believe and trust in Him. Once again, men like Calvin, Beza, Zwingli believed the party line as to special election straight from the Augustinian text book.
Greek scholars like Alford and A.T. Robertson clearly portray the true meaning of the text at hand. Other men like Meyer, Rotherham, and Bloomfield assert the fact that the word is in the perfect-passive tense.
The perfect tense indicates a verbal that expresses an action or state completed at the time of speaking or at the time spoken of. . .
The passive aspect of this word indicates someone was acted on by an external agency, in this case God. It clearly suggests a receptivity to this outside influence which is God. The passive voice indicates ‘tending {not} to take an active or dominant part.'
Summary: ‘And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the Word of the Lord; and as many as were disposed to eternal life, believed.' In other words, ‘ . . . as many as were agreeable or inclined toward everlasting life, believed and trusted in Him. This Greek rendering leads to Biblical theology in counter-distinction to Augustinian Calvinism.
Also, without any deep grammatical research one understands the value that God places on the human volition. Note [Acts 13:46] ‘Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you; but seeing YE PUT IT FROM YOU, AND JUDGED YOURSELVES UNWORTHY OF EVERLASTING LIFE, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.'
My respects,
Dr. Berrian -
Ray, my friend, you have contradicted yourself here.
-
Pastor Larry,
You made a statement with reference to Acts 13:46. The verse reads: ' . . . but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.'
Your statement was this one. 'No one disagrees with this. They did willfully reject the offer of salvation.'
Would you agree with me that the Israelite's rejection, for the most part, of the Gospel was and is resisting the grace of God?
In like manner, Jesus statement to the people in John 5:40 was this. 'And ye would not come to Me, that ye might have life.' There was no impediment in our Lord that refused these unbelievers, the problem was in the lives of those who refused His love. Their refusal of His grace was because of their rebellion against Almighty God. For many of us we call this Resistible Grace.
A denial by some as to 'passive' in Acts 13:48 only brings lay people to confusion and prejudices their understanding of the Word. The passive, according to Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, means 'enduring without resistance; submissive, existing without being active, open or direct.
What this means is that the Lord was and remains submissive and not autocratic in bringing about anyone's destiny. Active--yes, but not overwhelming the will of the human being. As we both agree, the Spirit of God, was there in conviction or these people would not have believed in Jesus.
God was not there actively decreeing anyone's final destiny. 'As many as were disposed to eternal life believed.' Some were disposed to believe while others refused grace.
Some people ask the question why do some people choose not to believe in Jesus? Part of the answer is found in the Parable of the Sower found in Matt. 13:8; Mark 4:5 and Luke 8:8. The various soils is indicative of the lives/hearts of various people in this world. Human rebellion against God is the problem and not His appropriated salvation for all people. [I John 2:2; I Tim. 2:4 & 6].
Sincerely,
Dr. Berrian
Page 2 of 3