How many Calvinists?

[Gavin]

Sorry to do another thread like this, but I am curious about where people stand.

I for one am a Calvinist, but I do not hold a real strong emotional attachment to it (I think), nor am I all that great at defending it (but I try). My main debating passion is about spiritual gifts.

Any others?

[GrayPilgrim]

I am a Calvinist. And after this class is over you will be a Calvinist too! Wait, out, out deomons of Sproul!:)

In reality. I am a Calvinist, but as I am wont to say I'd rather hang out with an Arminian any day! I find that the Scriptures teach a very high and exalted, sovereign God, hence my reformed soteriology and theology proper, but do not care much for some of their ecclesiology and other items as much.

GP

[Blake Reas]

I am a Calvinist. We can call it the Calvinist Elect Gang! HAAHAHAHAHAAH. Open Viewers are allowed in even if they don't know it! hahahaha:rant:



Warmly to All in Christ,
Blake

[Blake Reas]

And I want one now. :(

[bar Jonah]

Ironic that I am predestined to disbelieve Calvinist predestination. ;)

[Sozo]

Originally posted by RightIdea
Ironic that I am predestined to disbelieve Calvinist predestination. ;)

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You are the man!

[efta777]

I'm the first non-calvanist to post on this thread? Well then, I suppose I should feel special.

[bar Jonah]

Originally posted by efta777
I'm the first non-calvanist to post on this thread? Well then, I suppose I should feel special.

Sorry, Efta. Go back and read again. You are #3. :)

[smilax]

Present.

[efta777]

Smilax!!! Good to see ya! Where you been hiding?

[geebob]

I'm an anti calvinist. That means to figure out the total number of calvinists here, you have to subtract one after counting all the other calvinists.

Actually, I might be considered a .8 point calvinist.

[bar Jonah]

Wow, you too, GeeBob? LOL

I have jokingly called myself a one-point Calvie in the past, but an .8 Calvie may be more accurate, since I believe in OSAS for different reasons they do, I being a dispy. :)

[smilax]

Fortunately, we presuppositionalists know that everyone is a Calvinist deep down in his heart. People just can't admit it because of total depravity.

[GrayPilgrim]

Smilax,

I like it!:thumb: :thumb:

[bar Jonah]

Therefore God predestined me to disbelieve in Calvinist predestionation. ;)

[Pilgrim]

<----Calvinist in that I have read the institutes and like what I read and agree with much of it. Not in the sense of the word as it has come to be known in church culture.

I think the key point to Calvin and what he himself called the starting point for all theology is the recognition of "the fundamental benevolence of God."

Calvin himself never relaly concentrated on the predestination thing. What it was like 6 or 7 pages of info out of a two volume book and the topic was never raised by him in the first editions of the Institutes.

My $0.02

[GrayPilgrim]

If you want to discuss predestination, Luther is your man. He wrote about it a lot. The reason that Lutheran's are not considered "reformed" is that Melanchthon after Lutehr's death moved the movement towards a more LFW emphasis.

[geebob]

My understanding is the Luther himself moved away from a calvinistic view of predestination in his later life.

I believe he said something like "we must not think that the reasons for why some men accept the gospel and others not is to be located in the mysterious will of God" (very rough paraphrase from a very fuzzy memory).

I have the complete works of arminius and the editor says that Luther moved away from a calvinistic view of predestination.

[bar Jonah]

While I'm staunchly against Calvinist predestination, I would have to respond (GeeBob) by saying that Luther also moved toward tremendous anti-Semitism in the latter part of his life... so I'm not sure I would want to look at his theology during that time, regardless of whether it might support my views or not.

[Solly]

Originally posted by Pilgrim
<----Calvinist in that I have read the institutes and like what I read and agree with much of it. Not in the sense of the word as it has come to be known in church culture.

I think the key point to Calvin and what he himself called the starting point for all theology is the recognition of "the fundamental benevolence of God."

Calvin himself never relaly concentrated on the predestination thing. What it was like 6 or 7 pages of info out of a two volume book and the topic was never raised by him in the first editions of the Institutes.

My $0.02

But he did write two books: The Secret providence of God and The Eternal Predestination of God.

For myself, I am Calvinistic, being a Baptist of the High Calvinistic variety. We hold to the Gospel as the believer's rule of life, not the (so-called) moral law; we also deny "duty faith" and the "free offer" (as understood by later Reformed types, not such as John owen.)
I enjoy the mix between old style Puritans and modern Evangelical Academics out of TEDS, Westminster, etc.

[geebob]

While I'm staunchly against Calvinist predestination, I would have to respond (GeeBob) by saying that Luther also moved toward tremendous anti-Semitism in the latter part of his life... so I'm not sure I would want to look at his theology during that time, regardless of whether it might support my views or not.

That is of course very dissappointing, but it doesn't follow that because he moved in the wrong direction with regard to the jews that he did also in other areas in thought.

I'm curious if he moved consistently in that way. Richard Wurmbrand, a Jew and a Lutheran minister said that Luther was a mixed bag regarding the Jews saying that Luther wrote things to the effect that if we christians treated the jews with more charity, they would be more inclined to come to christ as well as the anti-semetic things.

It's very possible that Luther wasn't consistent. He was not a systematic theologian but addressed problems without always considering the whole picture that he himself was promoting.

It coudl be though that Wurmbrand wasn't reading Luther with an awareness of when Luther said and wrote what.

[GrayPilgrim]

Heiko Obermann in his biography attributed Luther's anti-semitism to his bi-polar view of the world. Therefore, according to Luther, either you were with Christ or with the devil, and since the Jews had rejected, by-in-large, Jesus as the Messiah they were on the side of Satan. Luther put the Jews in the same category as the Catholic Church. So for Luther it was not an ethnic category, so much as a religious one.

[Solly]

It was my understanding that he wasn't against Jews per se, but against theie continued rejection of Christ now that the Gospel was being made known at large. I think he would have said the same about the Moor, but did so particularly about the Jews for religious reason, not ethnic. The old Crusades mentality took a while to die out.

But I also agree with gb, Luther acted on the spur of the moment in many cases, rather than from a consistent world view. Was Luther a Lutheran?

[GrayPilgrim]

Solly & GB,

I concur Luther, especially as he grew older, became a contacerous grouch. One time Calvin came to visit him, but Melancthon knew he was in such a foul mood that it would have probably led to more division amongst the "evangelical movement", so Calvin and Luther never met.

[Solly]

Likewise, his actions in regard to the Anabaptists, to whom at first he was drawn, looking for a Saint's Church, but drew back in the end.

[geebob]

I concur Luther, especially as he grew older, became a contacerous grouch. One time Calvin came to visit him, but Melancthon knew he was in such a foul mood that it would have probably led to more division amongst the "evangelical movement", so Calvin and Luther never met.

Interesting. sounds like there's a connection with others who arguably go overboard on the faith/works distinction. *coughsozocough*

[GrayPilgrim]

:rofl:

[Iceman]

a simple question, turned into a debate. This is truly a good place for a few intellectual battles.

and I'm a Calvinist too... sorta

[GrayPilgrim]

Welcome aboard Iceman! :thumb:

[johnransom]

RightIdea:
Wow, you too, GeeBob? LOL

I have jokingly called myself a one-point Calvie in the past, but an .8 Calvie may be more accurate, since I believe in OSAS for different reasons they do, I being a dispy. :)

In that case, make me a 0.79. And falling. I generally have desribed myself as a Calarminian (as oppposed to a Calormenean;)), but the "Cal" part is fast fading.

[Hitch]

Calvinist.

[geebob]

I'm sticking with .8.

I like total depravity! :duh: :D

[Ishmael]

smilax:
Fortunately, we presuppositionalists know that everyone is a Calvinist deep down in his heart. People just can't admit it because of total depravity.

Everyone is born an Arminianist and by God's grace become a Calvinist.

Ummm... I am a Calvinist btw.

[Das Gort]

I'm a Calvinist, although not a very good one.

[Ishmael]

Das Gort:
I'm a Calvinist, although not a very good one.

What's a "good" one?

[Das Gort]

~exactly

[Das Gort]

Sorry, that was stupid. It's actually kinda hard to be a good anything.:(

[Iceman]

It wasn't stupid. I appreciated it.

Only God is good at anything. :)

[GrayPilgrim]

Iceman:
It wasn't stupid. I appreciated it.

Only God is good at anything. :)

I concur with your evaluation!

[geebob]

Ummm... I am a Calvinist btw.

What?!? No way! Since when! Man, life just holds surprises. :duh:

[smilax]

Calvinist:
Everyone is born an Arminianist and by God's grace become a Calvinist.Yep, yep. But I was playing on Sproul's concept of the non-existence of the atheist.

[bar Jonah]

Interesting. Similarly, I once had a theory that all Christians are dispensationalists. LOL :cool:

[SeriouslyFun]

I'm the first non-calvanist to post on this thread? Well then, I suppose I should feel special.

You are elect and predestined to think you are the first non-calvinist to post on this thread!

:eek: :lol: :yipee:

[Anoetos]

Look how many Calvinists there used to be and now there are, like four or five; three of them relative newcomers.

[Berean Todd]

I'm a Calvie, though I'm not a 'prominent' poster around here. Most of us just tire of the 500-page threads belaboring the same points over and over again. My goal in life is not to convince you Armies of your error, it is to lead the lost to Christ. I do enjoy occaisional debate and comraderie in here with brothers and sisters, but how much more good could we be doing if we just locked arms to stand against actual heresies (as opposed to acceptable differences like this), and to evangelize the lost and reach the helpless with the love of God?

[Tercel]

And I'm a Pelagian (at least, I am according to Calvinists who have never read anything Pelagius wrote but have been indoctrinated well into labelling things "Pelagian heresy" when they disagree). Hence I must count as -2 Calvinists or something on the Calvinist/Arminian scale...