No Calvinism!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep. Lots of bells and whistles there. However, it doesn't matter how elaborate the dress is that you put on a pig, it's still just a pig in a dress. :2cents:
 
Here is another means for our confession to be propagated to the world. Perhaps some who have never really explored or considered these issues will eventually come to grips with sovereign grace, despite the intent of the website.
 
The neat thing is that God caused them to put that up on a website!

"He who sits in the heavens laughs." Ps.2:1-4
 
They are missing the big picture. They make false claims. Their claims fall short under the scrutiny of the Scriptures. It is like the one who takes a few snapshots of someone's life and says, "this is the sum of their life", when they are oblivios to 95% of what their life was really about. What a sad epitaph, what a waste.
 
It is definitely Dan Corner. His "evangelical outreach" site follows a very similar design. Pretty frontpage, cheap links.
 
All of that energy devoted to denying what the Bible teaches. The cocky self-confidence of those hiding behind the "apologetic" arguments of anti-Calvinism are sad.
 
Corner is saying that God does His part and believers contribute to their salvation by being faithful and persevering in the faith.
 
Typical "evangelical" with their mile-wide, inch deep theology. He's been discredited by James White, if my mind isn't failing me. It's all flash (literally) with no substance.
 
Do any of these guys admit the logical conclusion of their thinking...that they don't know if they'll be with God in eternity or consigned to hell?
 
blhowes;

Why does Calvinism seem to be so threatening to some people?

Mostly because they want to say they have a part in choosing God, it's the pride of self, wanting to be in control of where they spend eternity, and not in the control of the God who created them.

I know, I battled against God with this in the past...and I continue to watch others try and do battle against God concerning this as well...it's either God saves us completely, or WE do SOMETHING to help God save us, because God is some how not fully capable of saving us or wouldn't want to save us because we are so sinful..even if we don't acknowledge it, that is the underlying belief that must be rooted out:

Is God, God? or does He really need OUR help to save us?

If God needs our help to save us, then He really isn't God is He? As we the created are more mighty and powerful than the Creator Himself.
 
You should check out this site: Hyper-Calvinism Refuted Clearly With 3 Definitions, 3 Charts & 126 Verses

They basically define a form of 'practical hyper-calvinism' that supposedly many 'Calvinists' have. Of course, I disagree with some of the things they say like points 1 and 5 of the following:

"2. Overvalued-Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism: This type might also be called "Idolatrous-Calvinism." It turns Calvinism into an idol by giving it a role that God never intended. This usually results from trying to make logical deductions from human wisdom, instead of exegesis. (Satan is more than happy to pervert Bible truths, by transforming them into idols of worship.) Here are 6 examples...

6 Examples of Overvalued-Calvinism:

1. Making the basis of Christian fellowship Calvinism, instead of regeneration.

2. Making the standard of Christian maturity Calvinism, instead of total Christlikeness.

3. Transforming expository preaching into topical preaching by using passages as springboards to jump into Romans 9, Ephesians 1, John 6, etc. This is accomplished by using an implied hermeneutic (eisegesis,) rather than an explicit hermeneutic (exegesis.)

Real expository preaching gets its main points from one main text. But, topical preaching gets its main points from multiple texts, outside the main text.

4. Claiming that all major revivals have been by Calvinist evangelists, and none by Arminian evangelists. (That view quickly falls apart by studying the evangelical Anabaptists from the time of Augustine to Luther, and the present-day persecuted Church.)

5. Claiming that Calvinism is the gospel, or an essential part of the gospel. (Yes, even some good men like Spurgeon have erred here. Yet thankfully, they all don't preach like they believe. The gospel is Christ, a person, not Calvinism. This topic will be examined in-depth in the study "Is Calvinism Really the Gospel?")

6. Believing that Arminians can't be saved."

Some people are opposed to the doctrines of grace simply because those who promote them lack "grace." But again, if we do not want to become full-blown ecumenicals we will obviously have to draw a line and separate from those who reject Reformed Theology as is done on this board. What do you guys think?
 
Why does Calvinism seem to be so threatening to some people?

I just became convinced and at peace with calvinism in April of last year.

I can tell you why many people have trouble with calvinism because I struggled with it for 15 years.

The answer you always hear is Pride or something to that affect.

The truth is that it often has nothing to do with pride.

To all of my fellow calvinist brethren, please remember this the next time that you are tempted to put down an arminian or feel puffed up because God has given you grace that He has not chosen to give them.

Calvinism for many is a dark, depressing doctrine.

Many of you are probably already confused, but I assure you that this is the truth for many, as it was for me.
You may esspecially not understand if you don't have loved ones that are not saved. I mean truelly loved ones, not your distant uncle that you talk to once a year.

I won't go through all of the thinking of the struggling arminian and its' dark ends because honestly I don't like to revisit those thoughts and I certainly wouldn't want to cause anyone else to struggle.

Just don't be so quick to judge and label them prideful fools when they may just have a great love for the lost.
 
Jean-David,

Thanks for your thoughts! It truly is a shame that there can't be more examples of Whitefield/Wesley type of fellowships in these regards. Personally, I think that is why God enlightens his children in different areas at different times. The theological differences it creates fosters the growth of love within his church, by revealing to us its absence within us and by creating in us a desire and a prayer life towards the development of that very fruit. If Christ died for them, who am I to not share similar affections? Though I do draw some sort of line theologically, I try not to do so relationally, remembering how I got here in the first place. The realization that what little bit of enlightenment we Calvinists have is only by the grace of God is very humbling. At least they have enough grace to embrace the Savior. That ought to warm and stir our hearts towards them. Paul's heart, in Rom. 9, was stirred like this for those Jews who were so hardened that they rejected their own Messiah, so much so that he himself desired to part with his own election for that of their's. I think when we can make a similar statement, then we've arrived closer to the mark of what we're aiming at.

Blessings!
 
Folks hate the idea that God does not decree that all men can be saved. Not that they all will, but that despite the best preaching, singing, praying and cajoling, God may not have planned for their child, mother, father, etc to be saved so they perceive that all of that good work is for naught.

They really don't have a clue about the means being decreed to work out God's sovereign plan to display His Justice and Mercy, they desire probability and somehow see this as the more merciful path.
 
Folks hate the idea that God does not decree that all men can be saved. Not that they all will, but that despite the best preaching, singing, praying and cajoling, God may not have planned for their child, mother, father, etc to be saved so they perceive that all of that good work is for naught.

They really don't have a clue about the means being decreed to work out God's sovereign plan to display His Justice and Mercy, they desire probability and somehow see this as the more merciful path.

When you have a loved one that isn't saved it's not "all that good work" that is upsetting to the arminian. Its' the fact that the loved one isn't saved. I'm not trying to be hard on you, but it's this kind of thinking when dealing with the souls of people, esspecially loved ones that leaves me scratching my head with some calvinistic people.

If I was an arminian, and my child dies unchosen, I doubt I would be standing over their cascket saying "Man, and all that hard work!" Does that make sense?
 
Why does Calvinism seem to be so threatening to some people?

I just became convinced and at peace with calvinism in April of last year.

I can tell you why many people have trouble with calvinism because I struggled with it for 15 years.

The answer you always hear is Pride or something to that affect.

The truth is that it often has nothing to do with pride.

To all of my fellow calvinist brethren, please remember this the next time that you are tempted to put down an arminian or feel puffed up because God has given you grace that He has not chosen to give them.

Calvinism for many is a dark, depressing doctrine.

Many of you are probably already confused, but I assure you that this is the truth for many, as it was for me.
You may esspecially not understand if you don't have loved ones that are not saved. I mean truelly loved ones, not your distant uncle that you talk to once a year.

I won't go through all of the thinking of the struggling arminian and its' dark ends because honestly I don't like to revisit those thoughts and I certainly wouldn't want to cause anyone else to struggle.

Just don't be so quick to judge and label them prideful fools when they may just have a great love for the lost.


This was similar to my experience being introduced to Calvinism as well, likewise it took me a decade to come to grips with it. Not only was I presumed foolish, but I felt as though I was put on trial and condemned, not really having the width and breadth of the issues explained. What I found, for me, anyway - was that a proper understanding of Trinitarianism was critical for understanding the interpretational hermeneutic of Calvinism. More often than not, I find that the Arminian has a modalistic understanding of Trinitarianism just like I did - although they hold to the doctrine nominally. We can talk about predestination all we want, if a man is trying to take that and plug it into a errant concept of the Trinity he will never come to grips with what Scripture teaches. Truth has to be plugged into Truth, it's line upon line, precept upon precept.

The problem in my experience seems to stem from people being taught a canned system and never really understanding the syncretic thought of others. How often do we actually deal with a true Arminian? Not often, they are out there, but most often I find a syncretic concept in modern evangelicalism. I've found more success in dealing with where people actually are, not where someone else was in history, that they may hold to certain ideas flowing from them.
 
Folks hate the idea that God does not decree that all men can be saved. Not that they all will, but that despite the best preaching, singing, praying and cajoling, God may not have planned for their child, mother, father, etc to be saved so they perceive that all of that good work is for naught.

They really don't have a clue about the means being decreed to work out God's sovereign plan to display His Justice and Mercy, they desire probability and somehow see this as the more merciful path.

When you have a loved one that isn't saved it's not "all that good work" that is upsetting to the arminian. Its' the fact that the loved one isn't saved. I'm not trying to be hard on you, but it's this kind of thinking when dealing with the souls of people, esspecially loved ones that leaves me scratching my head with some calvinistic people.

If I was an arminian, and my child dies unchosen, I doubt I would be standing over their cascket saying "Man, and all that hard work!" Does that make sense?

Don't get me wrong, brother - I don't think that is what the Arminian is thinking - I think it is somewhat more along the lines of:

"If he/she just had a little more time maybe something would have broken through and they would have accepted Jesus as Savior. Maybe if I or (what I think is more oftentimes the case) the preacher had worked a little harder, presented the gospel a little clearer, there is a probability they would have chosen God."

This line of thinking is completely out of line with what Scripture teaches, but seems to be the practical gospel of the Arminian.
 
Agreed JD.

My point is that the desire to somehow persuade the individual is not always based on pride but just a love for the person, and to add to that, a view of God that the arminian is more comfortable with.
To the arminian, calvinism makes God a monster. I used to struggle with this myself.

It boils down to God giving people peace about:
Human importance
Gods importance

I am now at peace with the fact that I am not important and God is infinetly important.
Gods' Glory is paramount. Everything else is of no value.
 
Agreed JD.

My point is that the desire to somehow persuade the individual is not always based on pride but just a love for the person, and to add to that, a view of God that the arminian is more comfortable with.
To the arminian, calvinism makes God a monster. I used to struggle with this myself.

It boils down to God giving people peace about:
Human importance
Gods importance

I am now at peace with the fact that I am not important and God is infinetly important.
Gods' Glory is paramount. Everything else is of no value.

You have nailed it - the Arminian accuses the Calvinist of worshipping a God that capriciously chooses who is saved and who is damned, makes humanity worthless, God a monster, evangelism irrelevant and also makes the Calvinist prideful and judgmental for even thinking that not everyone can be saved.

They do not understand that the Calvinist is amazed and grateful that anyone is saved and see evangelism as a duty and an ordained means to fulfill our holy God's sovereign decree for the salvation of His precious Elect and ultimate judgment of those who are the enemy of God. They also fail to understand that the Calvinist does not judge anyone's ultimate salvation - we are just aware that Christ died for the sins of many, not all and that there is a component of personal accountability for assurance. That is - our assurance, not God's.

Also, brother, I know this is moot between us - I am simply reiterating for any lurkers. :)
 
That's why I personally don't wear certain doctrines on my sleeve to be noticed and read by all. That's the way God deals with us. God does not reveal all of our sin to us all at once, because he knows we would be crushed by its weight, so to speak; and he doesn't reveal all of his inner workings with us either. Water isn't dumped on a young plant from a 50 gallon drum, and food isn't given to a baby in the form of mashed potatoes and steak. However, it's easy for people to let their zeal get ahead of their wisdom. Calvinistic teaching is very freeing to believers, but in it's appropriate time and in its appropriate measures.

"But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready,..." I Cor.3:1,2.

That's what I think for now.
 
:agree: I believe, many times, it is about bearing with the weaker brother and the difference between the appropriate balance of milk and meat teaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top