[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]

Author Topic: Do You Call Yourself A Calvinist?  (Read 27122 times)

Tony Warren

  • Administrator
  • Affiliate Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2059
  • Gender: Male
    • The Mountain Retreat
Re: Do You Call Yourself A Calvinist?
« Reply #105 on: May 19, 2017, 11:09:52 AM »
>>>
Yes, that is the history and source of this misnomer. And instead of them arguing that this doctrine has nothing to do with John Calvin, but is the divine word of God testified faithfully and "directly" from the pages of Scriptures, they unwisely embraced the label for the doctrine and began regurgitating it, causing needless confusion and distractions from the doctrine's source (the Bible) for generations to come. But the real problem is not the errors of Christians of the past, but the errors of those of the present. IMHO.

Tony,
I talked to Matt slick of C.A.R.M and he denies that that calling yourself Calvinist implies a follower of Calvin.
<<<

..and I talked to a Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church and he denied that their idea of grace implies a salvation of works. So, what does that really mean? It means we disagree! My point is that (generally speaking) no Calvinist is ever going to "admit" Calvinism implies ...Calvin-ism. They're too deep into it and too invested in it. So the old saying applies, "Denial is the most predictable of all human responses!" Nevertheless, the English language is quite specific that an -ism at the end of a person's name "implies" a following of that person. Calvinists (for self-preservation of the term) of course don't like that fact and choose to ignore it, nevertheless, it is a fact. Plus we have the biblical record of just such an occurance, and the Apostle Paul condemned it.

1st Corinthians 1:12-13
  • "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
  • Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?"

We could just as easily say, how is it that every one of you say, I am of Calvinism, I am of Lutherianism, I am of Wesleyanism and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Calvin crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Martin Luther? The point is the same, that dividing into sects by name of the adherents of certain traits of these people, should not be. But, we know that there is nothing new under the sun, so the same mistakes in history are made over and over again.  Man still attempts to divide Christ into sects under the guise of necessary clarification through the names of their leaders, which should not be. Paul saw the error in this, why can't we? As I attempted to explain before, Confucianism implies a follower of the methods of Chinese philosopher Confucius, Wesleyan implies a follower of the methods of John Wesley, Arminianism implies a follower of the methods of the Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius, a Lutheran implies a follower of the methods of theology of the Martin Luther, and in like manner a Calvinist implies a follower of the methods and theology of Reformer John Calvin. To deny this bridges on cult-like behavior. i.e., the man whose name is attached in all these instances, is attached to the doctrine for a reason! The reason is that by all normal, common idiom, a name attached this way "implies" they look to these men as the basis of certain doctrines that they hold--rather than the actual basis and root, which is the Word of God.


Quote
>>>
He says it jut identifies you as a believer in Predestination.
<<<

Actually, Calvinist (by definition) identifies you as a believer in Calvinism. The word Predestinarian identifies you as a believer in Predestination--Obviously. That is the difference. Of course the objection by Calvinists is that belief in Predestination is not enough, it needs to be better defined. My retort, it is better defined, within Scripture. Predestination can be found and defined within the word of God, Calvinism cannot. Selah.

We identify ourselves as believers by quoting God concerning Election, Predestination and Sovereignty, not Calvin.  Why name a doctrine delineated in Scripture after a man who didn't author, reinvent or altar irt in any way. It makes no sense. There's "only one HONEST reason for it," which we all should know by now--and it's not to identify a Biblical doctrine (as we have seen), but to connect that doctrine to a man named John Calvin. To deny that is to dabble in absurity. And that is the problem, denials notwithstanding.


Quote
>>>
While I tend to agree with you on this, because Reformed will identify you as believing in Predestination,
<<<

EXACTLY! See, it's not really that difficult to understand "if" one has an open mind. Even as the word Reformed identifies a people who reformed themselves from unlawful beliefs by getting back to the Bible, so Calvinism identifies a doctrine with Calvin. Obviously. To deny this I believe is deceitful and spurious at best. It's like claiming that alcoholism doesn't identify with alcohol, or that Anglicanism doesn't identify with the Anglican church of england. It's insincere or it is delusory. Take your pick.


Quote
>>>
he compared it with the trinity saying it identifies a biblical doctrine in shorthand.
<<<

Apples and Oranges. The Trinity is not the name of a man selected to encompass or identify the doctrine of Predestination instituted by God two thousand years ago. The word Trinity means three and "points" all glory of the word to God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. By contrast, the name glorified in Calvinism is obviously John Calvin, and the word CLEARLY/UNAMBIGUOUSLY points to Him when referencing this doctrine. It's basic logic 101.


Quote
>>>
What do you think?
<<<

I think that those who hold to a doctrine of Calvinism, hold to a doctrine of Calvinism. And those who hold to a doctrine of God's Predestination and Sovereignty, hold to a doctrine of God's Predestination and Sovereignty. It's no more complicated than that.  Therefore, render to Calvin the things that are Calvin's, and to God the things that are God's.

"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

Tony Warren

  • Administrator
  • Affiliate Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2059
  • Gender: Male
    • The Mountain Retreat
Re: Do You Call Yourself A Calvinist?
« Reply #106 on: May 19, 2017, 11:52:14 AM »
>>>
They didn't have to argue it, everyone knows it has nothing to do with John Calvin. That's just silly.
<<<

Actually, what is truly silly is arguing that a doctrine named after John Calvin, actually has nothing whatsoever to do with John Calvin. Now that's truly silly. If it has nothing to do with Calvin, as you propose, why is it called Calvin-ism? It's a misnomer, isn't it? Therefore, it should not be. My opinion is that wisdom and knowledge is an important and recurring theme in the Bible, and Calvinists seem to have a lot of spiritual knowledge but very little spiritual wisdom.
 

Quote
>>>
Furthermore, I don't like that you choose logic over doctrine.
<<<

I don't choose logic over doctrine, I choose doctrine over tradition. There is a difference. Calvinism is not a doctrine, except it is the doctrine of John Calvin. You wouldn't say the doctrine of Lutheranism and the Book of Concord was the doctrine of John Paul, or the doctrine of Calvinism is the doctrine of Jocob Arminius, would you? No, because logically speaking the "name" identifies origin and where the doctrine is from. My logic works with the spirit, which works with reason, conscience and Scriptures, it doesn't oppose it.


Quote
>>>
Calvinists know there is a complete absence of any basic science in man made logic to support the proposed physiological benefits of denying Calvinism.
<<<

Physiological? I have no idea what you meant by that, but there are no physiological benefits of denying Calvinism. Maybe you used the wrong word. There is the Spiritual benefit of rejecting such a term to define God's doctrine, and the joy teaching righteously and of honoring God, holding correct ideas and of growing in grace. And a absence of science would be demonstrated in someone claiming Calvinism doesn't imply origin or John Calvin. Nothing is more unscientific than that.


Quote
>>>
The author of sounddoctrine says:

Many believe John Calvin is the founder of a new religion called ‘Calvinism’.  Calvin never started a new religion called Calvinism, he simply taught the Bible.
<<<

Totally overlooked the key phrase there, which was him saying, "Many believe John Calvin is the founder of a new religion called ‘Calvinism’." BINGO! By his own words he identifies one of the problems. That my friend is exactly what we are attempting to combat, the inescapable conclusion that a doctrine called Calvinism "has" to imply it originated with John Calvin--a FACT that Calvinists seem willfully oblivious and blinded to. The fact that many would not think this if the doctrine was called what God called it instead of what Calvinists choose to label it, is reason enough for anyone but Calvinists who have a lot of knowledge but very little wisdom to go with it. Selah! :S_Confused:
 

Quote
>>>
So you can claim it implies this all you want, implication is not fact. Listen to Charles H. Spurgeon's words:

"We only use the term "Calvinism" for shortness. That doctrine which is called  "Calvinism" did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps
<<<

They/You only use the term Calvinism for shortness? Calvinism and Predestination have only five letters difference, and rather than shorten, it lengthens the identification because it creates so many more problems that have to be explained concerning the name. Much more than explaining the different ideas about Predestination. So it really doesn't shorten anything, much less God's doctrine of Predestination.


Quote
>>>
Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine.
<<<

Then shame on him, because he should have derived it from the Bible (which I believe he did) not the writings of Augustine, but God's word through the Holy Spirit (which I believe he did/i]).


Quote
>>>
 Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church.
<<<

As I believe Spurgeon did. These quotes only serve to illustrate one thing. That Spurgeon was just a man, like the rest of us. People have to learn to subjugate the writings of men to the divinely inspired words of God. When man's writings don't agree with the writing of God, then we must reject them, even if from Christian theologians we admire.  Tradition is not holy canon, faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.


Quote
>>>
So then, it comes as no surprise to me that your beliefs are subject to your own personal biases and logical fallacies.
<<<

I would say that in most instances all men are fallible and subject to personal biases, but that is just my point. That we turn loose of our personal biases and illogical fallacies and become conscientious Christians who have God in mind, rather than blindly holding to personal biases and traditions. I have no personal bias against Calvinist, my best friends are Calvinists. But when it comes to being conscientious, God's will comes first.


"nosce te ipsum"
 
Peace,
Tony Warren
"I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. -Psalms 32:5"

R. Anspach

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 41
  • Gender: Male
  • No condemnation for those who are in Christ
Re: Do You Call Yourself A Calvinist?
« Reply #107 on: May 19, 2017, 08:30:57 PM »
>>>
They didn't have to argue it, everyone knows it has nothing to do with John Calvin. That's just silly.
<<<

Actually, what is truly silly is arguing that a doctrine named after John Calvin, actually has nothing whatsoever to do with John Calvin. Now that's truly silly. If it has nothing to do with Calvin, as you propose, why is it called Calvin-ism? It's a misnomer, isn't it?

Yup!  :Goodpoint:
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." Galatians 3:11

Reuben

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Do You Call Yourself A Calvinist?
« Reply #108 on: May 21, 2017, 01:46:58 PM »
I just read this thread again. Calvinists!! But you gotta love the devotion to their tradition, even though it's misplaced.

 


[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]