Calvinist?

[truthman]

I have never met someone who agreed that the tenets of Calvinism are true, but that they were not one of the chosen ones.

Hmmm, veeerrry interesting.

truthman

[Solly]

And I have never met someone who said that Christianity was true who wasn't one. LOL, waddya expect?

BTW, read some memoirs, such as Bunyan's Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners; you'll see it is not quite so cut and dried.

[truthman]

but that's just it

To be a Christian, one must choose.

But in the mind of individual predestination, once I choose, I find out that I was already chosen.

So therefore, the choosing was done extant of me, which means I can agree with the doctrine without having been chosen.

truthman

[Solly]

Errr...yes. I think so.


Truly, there are people who consdier themselves REformed, who are yet dead in their sins; doctrines are made of words, and words can be understood. They might even consider themselves of the elect. The same goes for Christianity at large, esp where baptismal regerneation is insisted upon. But "true religion's more than notion, something must ben known and felt", as one of our hymn writers wrote.

Equally, there are those who agree with the doctrine - because catechised in childhood for instance - who would not believe they were of the elect, although that would tend to happen in presbyterian churches where they again believe in a covenant act covering children.

is there anything specific on your mind?

[GrayPilgrim]

As a Calvinist, I would say that experientially one choses, however, once they look back at the process that brought them to faith they see that it was the grace of God leading them and protecting them, which broguht them to slavation.

GP

[Pereynol of Sheer Dread]

Originally posted by Solly


BTW, read some memoirs, such as Bunyan's Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners; you'll see it is not quite so cut and dried.

Though I'm generally a fan of the Puritans, despite not being a Calvinist in any strict sense, I found this book among the most depressing I've ever read. It's as if Bunyan was possessed of every possible neurosis. I suppose his struggles demonstrate just how he came by his immense wisdom so wonderfully displayed in his other writings....

[Revolg]

I'm not an extremist Calvinist who is going to call the Arminian unsaved. Predestination to the Arminianians is different and you can find views all over if you search on google.

[Jaltus]

As a Calvinist, I would say that experientially one choses, however, once they look back at the process that brought them to faith they see that it was the grace of God leading them and protecting them, which broguht them to slavation. I'll turn you into a Molinist yet!

[GrayPilgrim]

bah humbug

[Pereynol of Sheer Dread]

Originally posted by GrayPilgrim
As a Calvinist, I would say that experientially one choses, however, once they look back at the process that brought them to faith they see that it was the grace of God leading them and protecting them, which broguht them to slavation.



I have the utmost respect for you, GP, but I couldn't help pointing out the last word in your post---"slavation."

:rofl:

[Pereynol of Sheer Dread]

And Jaltus, you're a Molinist? You just keep getting more interesting....

[GrayPilgrim]

:o :no: Gp and spelling go together like fire and ice or oil and water!

[Jaltus]

Or low post count and Cirisme....

Yes, I am a Molinist. William Lane Craig converted me.

Oh, perey, you missed his "broguht" also.

[GrayPilgrim]

I acn emss pu amyn ohtre owrds oto!

[Jaltus]

I acn emss pu amyn ohtre owrds oto!There should be a comma before "oto."

[GrayPilgrim]

Without you to proof my posts, you will have to excuse my poor gramamr, besides you know that Mrs. GP hates commas!

[Blake Reas]

Everyone is saved an Arminian and you become a Calvinist sooner or later. Just kidding!

In christ,
Blake reas

P.S. Trying to get my 25 post so I can have an Avatar

[Blake Reas]

Everyone is saved an Arminian and you become a Calvinist sooner or later. Just kidding!

In christ,
Blake reas

P.S. Trying to get my 25 post so I can have an Avatar
:argue:

[efta777]

There are different degrees of Calvanists. I know many who believe that if you have accepted Christ then there is no question that you are one of the elect, yet I know some that believe that you can never know until you die. I read in a book that there was a view prevelant in colonial America that taught that as Christians we should be glad if we are predestined to hell, because that is where God wants us to be.

Just as there are different views on any other theological issue.

I don't agree with any of these however.

[GrayPilgrim]

Originally posted by efta777
There are different degrees of Calvanists. I know many who believe that if you have accepted Christ then there is no question that you are one of the elect, yet I know some that believe that you can never know until you die. I read in a book that there was a view prevelant in colonial America that taught that as Christians we should be glad if we are predestined to hell, because that is where God wants us to be.

Just as there are different views on any other theological issue.

I don't agree with any of these however.

I think that when the doctrine of election is used outside of its rightful place it becomes abominable. What do I mean? To quote J.I. Packer


Election is the household secret of the family of God.

It is not in Scripture to use as a question "Are you elect?" Rather it is meant as a comfort to the suffering that God will not leave you or forsake you. It has been used terrible, but rightly applied it is one of the most beautiful doctrines in the Bible, that God not only loves me but he will preserve me through firey trials, too.

[bar Jonah]

Originally posted by Solly
And I have never met someone who said that Christianity was true who wasn't one. LOL, waddya expect?

BTW, read some memoirs, such as Bunyan's Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners; you'll see it is not quite so cut and dried.
Actually, I have met a couple such individuals, but they are very rare, and they generally have serious issues with God, some harm done to them through the church or in their personal life for which they blame God. They literally accept that Christianity is true and yet reject the God they know is real. I can think of few things as tragic as that.

[yxboom]

I would agree completely with that assesment. And to which I would echo Sanders' words in TGWRs that people do not hate the God who loves them but rather the teaching of who they think that God is. :idea:

[Dee Dee Warren]

I'll turn you into a Molinist yet!

I keep trying to get you to turn me into one, and you keep declining. It would be an interesting addition to my sig line don't you think?

[Jaltus]

LOL. How about I start a thread on it?

[smilax]

Originally posted by Blake Reas
Everyone is saved an Arminian and you become a Calvinist sooner or later.I thought it was, "Everyone is born an Arminian. It's only by the grace of God that you become a Calvinist."

[Pilgrim]

Originally posted by truthman
I have never met someone who agreed that the tenets of Calvinism are true, but that they were not one of the chosen ones.

Hmmm, veeerrry interesting.

truthman

Interestingly enough, I have.

[friarx]

There are different degrees of Calvanists. I know many who believe that if you have accepted Christ then there is no question that you are one of the elect, yet I know some that believe that you can never know until you die. I read in a book that there was a view prevelant in colonial America that taught that as Christians we should be glad if we are predestined to hell, because that is where God wants us to be.

Just as there are different views on any other theological issue.

I don't agree with any of these however.


I have to say that the scriptures do not contradict each other but rather compliment each other in that the truth is not in Arminianism or Calvanism but rather in the middle.

imagine if you will that you have to children in your imperfect love you could not send one to hell and save one giving them all they need to live. Then how could God in His perfect love do that. on the flip side God will not force you to be in His presence for eternity if you do not want it it would be like God was forcing Himself on you spiritualy which we all know is not possible due to His attributes.Also what about the passage that say's that Jesus died for the ungodly.... in this Calvanistic view would God then send the Godly to hell since Christ only died for the ungodly?

Now on the Arminian side God will not boot you out of heaven simply because of one mistake without confession. if this was the case their would be no one left that could enter heaven for thier are things in all our lives that have yet to be revealed to us as sin, yet in the Old Testament if you notice their is a sacrafice that covers the sin that you comitted and did not realize so then I would have to say that in essance thier is sin that we have committed yet did not realize it that we would be guilty of.


Just an observation

[Anoetos]

Hmm..

Solly pointed out the importance of feeling as well as knowing one is redeemed, referencing a hymn-writer...

Someone else pointed out that though our choice is logically subsequent to God's choice of us it is nonetheless our choice...

I want to echo both of these important points.

This is not a solely intellectual exercise, it involves the heart. True repentance involves a strong emotional reaction to one's sin and God's utter beauty in Holiness.

And, when we are regenerated, and we begin to see all this, we want it, like the prodigal we desire to return, we turn our hearts and our minds to Him.

Real Calvinism is HOT with love and feeling and true choice.

Read Edwards' "Treatise on the Religious Affections" but with a warning, read the whole thing, a skimming or a partial reading can lead one to completely mistaken conclusions as it has done for several of the 'signs and wonders' crowd.

[seer]

Though I'm generally a fan of the Puritans, despite not being a Calvinist in any strict sense, I found this book among the most depressing I've ever read. It's as if Bunyan was possessed of every possible neurosis. I suppose his struggles demonstrate just how he came by his immense wisdom so wonderfully displayed in his other writings....

Hehe, I just reread "Grace Abounding" about two weeks ago. It's like - ok Johnny boy, we know you are a complete lout - get on with it...

[Thomas2003]

It is not in Scripture to use as a question "Are you elect?" Rather it is meant as a comfort to the suffering that God will not leave you or forsake you. It has been used terrible, but rightly applied it is one of the most beautiful doctrines in the Bible, that God not only loves me but he will preserve me through firey trials, too.

Excellent point, thank you.

[Colossians]

Those who think Calvinism teaches that God forces Himself on us, need to understand who "us" is.

There is an old "us", the old man, and a new "us", the New Man, Christ.

There is no point in God's forcing Himself on the old man: even God cannot convert the old man to a new man.
There is no need for God to force Himself on the New Man: the New Man is the required result.

Rather, the old man is 'forced' in that he is not converted, but crucified. The New Man then replaces Him.
So it is important to avoid the error of the Seventh Day Adventists who teach that we merely receive a new nature (we continue on as the same entity of being, only now with a new nature). A nature cannot be crucified, only a person: there were no natures hanging on crosses outside Jerusalem.

[Ormly]

Those who think Calvinism teaches that God forces Himself on us, need to understand who "us" is.

There is an old "us", the old man, and a new "us", the New Man, Christ.

There is no point in God's forcing Himself on the old man: even God cannot convert the old man to a new man.
There is no need for God to force Himself on the New Man: the New Man is the required result.

Rather, the old man is 'forced' in that he is not converted, but crucified. The New Man then replaces Him.
So it is important to avoid the error of the Seventh Day Adventists who teach that we merely receive a new nature (we continue on as the same entity of being, only now with a new nature). A nature cannot be crucified, only a person: there were no natures hanging on crosses outside Jerusalem.

Your error needs to be avoided. The new man overcomes the old man. Ergo, He must come in for that to ever happen. After He comes in, one is then to learn Him and begin doing what He did so that he can overcome as He did. The chief thing He did in His overcoming was loving God with all His heart, soul, mind and strength. That's the touch stone, the beginning of the adventure. Are you beginning there or have you jumped ahead?

Orm

[Colossians]

Ormly,


The new man overcomes the old man.
The New Man only exists by virtue of the death of the old man, so He cannot overcome the old man: they are no concurrent.

The old man was crucified. The new man is the born-again man.

[Ormly]

Ormly,


The new man overcomes the old man.
The New Man only exists by virtue of the death of the old man, so He cannot overcome the old man: they are no concurrent.

The old man was crucified. The new man is the born-again man.

NOPE! The old man is only crucified when you crucify him, not before.

[Colossians]

New and old are disjunctive.

The new man has not arrived on the scene until the old man has departed.
The new man is the risen Christ. The risen Christ did not crucify the crucified Christ. He came afterward.

[Ormly]

New and old are disjunctive.

[QUOTE]The new man has not arrived on the scene until the old man has departed.

Nonsense! You still got yours, to be sure.



The new man is the risen Christ. The risen Christ did not crucify the crucified Christ. He came afterward.

You don't seem to know the difference between apples and milk shakes. I'd hate for you to be the one sent out for pizza.

1 Peter 2:1 (GW)
So get rid of every kind of evil, every kind of deception, hypocrisy, jealousy, and every kind of slander.

Who is Peter speaking to???

[Colossians]

Ormly,

The crucified Christ necessarily preceded the risen Christ.
Old necessarily precedes new. This is the foundation (both philosophical and theological).

The pragmatics of it:
In the realm of time, the new man and old man are in a state of flux: neither are there at the same time. (This is evident by the fact that each is only known by his works, and both cannot work simultaneously.)

Positionally, by declaration:
The old man is permanently crucified.

[Ormly]

Ormly,

The crucified Christ necessarily preceded the risen Christ.
Old necessarily precedes new. This is the foundation (both philosophical and theological).

The pragmatics of it:
In the realm of time, the new man and old man are in a state of flux: neither are there at the same time. (This is evident by the fact that each is only known by his works, and both cannot work simultaneously.)

Positionally, by declaration:
The old man is permanently crucified.

I'll not buy a pizza from you -- or an apple either.

[Colossians]

If you don't understand something, just question it. No good sticking your fingers in your ears and talking about pizzas.

[Ormly]

You might have to add "debater" to the list. If you don't understand something, just question it. No good sticking your fingers in your ears.

Colossians, I know debaters. You are no debater. You are irrational.

[Colossians]

No I'm not. But I am waiting for a rational response rather than pretense.

[Ormly]

No I'm not. But I am waiting for a rational response rather than pretense.

Sorry, I'm off to pound sand.

[Colossians]

You need to respond to the point.

[Ormly]

You need to respond to the point.


My sandpile is waiting. I can be more be productive on it. Sorry.

[Colossians]

My sandpile is waiting. I can be more be productive on it. Sorry.
You stopped being productive a while back.

[Arcofillius]

This is a topic that i wrestled with as a young convert. My question was, "How can God demand it of us, if we are utterly incapable of obedience?" Yet, it is because of our state that we are condemned - we are the 'wicked.' We are the Orks who are bent on evil. We are thoroughly deserving of death, and yet the Lord has shown mercy to the humble, and gives them salvation. Praise God!

[Arcofillius]

Colossians, it seems to me like you are taking a similar approach to Charles Finney. Yet, my question is, does your view imply Christian Perfection? Or do we fluctuate between carnality and holiness? To say that the old man must be crucified before the new can exist, sounds to me to be saying that Christians no longer sin.

[One Bad Pig]

Colossians has been gone so long I don't even remember why he was booted.

[Littlejoe]

:hi: Arcofillius. When looking at threads and responding to people, I find it is important to click on their name and find out what you can from their profile. One thing (as OBP pointed out) that you can find out is if the person is still active here. The term "caught in the matrix" means they have been given either a temporary or permanent ban. Your profile is very eclectic mix...:lol:...you are a Pentecostal, Trinitarian,Charismatic Calvinist? Very interesting. Hope to see you around the campus!

LJ

[Arcofillius]

ha lol shows how new i am!

[Arcofillius]

So LittleJoe,
I just did a paper on Open Theism and I was wondering what drew you to the doctrine. Was it Boyd or someone else?? And what do you think Calvin would say to the open theory?

[Littlejoe]

So LittleJoe,
I just did a paper on Open Theism and I was wondering what drew you to the doctrine. Was it Boyd or someone else?? And what do you think Calvin would say to the open theory?
I was an OVT before I even knew there was such a term, just from reading and reasoning from Scripture. After I found out there was name for what I believed, I began to study it more in depth. If your interested, I and Arminius_Wesley, (now Bridge for Sale) who at the time was a Calvinst, but has since deconverted from the faith, did a formal debate over this topic. It's a long read, but I thought AW did a good job defending his position. I belong ot an Assemblies of God who consider themselves "pentacostal", but many people see us as "charimatic"...:shrug: Is Calvinism common in your church?

I imagine Calvin would not agree with me as I take Calvin to task for his special pleading in my debate ...:lol: I don't usually identify with people in my theology, but try to let scripture interpret scripture. If some has a position similar to what I discern the Bible espouses then I research it.

LJ