Is Calvinism A Hill To Die On?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed Thug Life

Puritan Board Freshman
If someone denies the U. L. or I. of T.U.L.I.P are they commiting heresy, or is this just kind of an issue that we can disagree on? For some, calvinism is the gospel, and for others its a debatable area of theology grouped in with the Nephilim, Melchizedek, and eschatology. Is Calvinism a hill to die on? Is it something that is worth starting debates over?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
If you are willing to be "killed" or spoken of uncharitably towards the belief in TULIP, it is a hill one may choose to die on or suffer for.
 
If someone denies the U. L. or I. of T.U.L.I.P are they commiting heresy, or is this just kind of an issue that we can disagree on? For some, calvinism is the gospel, and for others its a debatable area of theology grouped in with the Nephilim, Melchizedek, and eschatology. Is Calvinism a hill to die on? Is it something that is worth starting debates over?

Keep in mind that TULIP is not a summary of Calvinism. It is a part of it. TULIP can be problematic as it sometimes over-simplifies the doctrines.

I would also suggest that "debating" these points is generally the wrong way to go. Rather, tell people why these doctrines are a comfort to you. Let the doctrines of total depravity and unconditional election embolden you to be a witness, both in words and life.

I would not say that it's "okay" to disagree on these issues as if they were not important. They are taught in God's word explicitly. It's not okay to disagree with God's word. But as they can be difficult to understand-- especially at first-- it requires patience on our part. Also, be careful not to exceed the boundaries of scripture on these points. An unbalanced doctrine is dangerous. Hyper-calvinism tries to take these doctrines to their "logical" end and in the process mutilates scripture to fit within their system.
 
I could not in good conscience become a communicant member of a church that embraced Arminianism, so yes I guess for myself, it is a hill to die on in regards to soteriology.
 
If someone denies the U. L. or I. of T.U.L.I.P are they commiting heresy, or is this just kind of an issue that we can disagree on? For some, calvinism is the gospel, and for others its a debatable area of theology grouped in with the Nephilim, Melchizedek, and eschatology. Is Calvinism a hill to die on? Is it something that is worth starting debates over?

Keep in mind that TULIP is not a summary of Calvinism. It is a part of it. TULIP can be problematic as it sometimes over-simplifies the doctrines.

I would also suggest that "debating" these points is generally the wrong way to go. Rather, tell people why these doctrines are a comfort to you. Let the doctrines of total depravity and unconditional election embolden you to be a witness, both in words and life.

I would not say that it's "okay" to disagree on these issues as if they were not important. They are taught in God's word explicitly. It's not okay to disagree with God's word. But as they can be difficult to understand-- especially at first-- it requires patience on our part. Also, be careful not to exceed the boundaries of scripture on these points. An unbalanced doctrine is dangerous. Hyper-calvinism tries to take these doctrines to their "logical" end and in the process mutilates scripture to fit within their system.
Good answer. I understand that tulip is not a summary of calvinism. I just threw that in because it is the area that I have seen most commonly objected to.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top