TULIP from Calvinism and the Conflict With Arminianism.

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: WarminIndy

We are Calvinists as well - didn't know you were though! lol..

I think very few are truly Calvinists... but I think where people misunderstand Calvinism is the doctrine of election, and this person puts it so eloquently that I will simply copy a this portion of what this man said:

O let one object fix your eye and one theme fill your mind—Christ and His salvation. Absorbed in the contemplation and study of these two points, you may safely defer all further inquiry to another and a more advanced stage of your Christian course. Remember that the fact of your predestination, the certainty of your election, can only be inferred from your conversion. We must hold you firmly to this truth. It is the subtle and fatal reasoning of Satan, a species of atheistical fatalism, to argue, “If I am elected I shall be saved whether I am regenerated or not.” The path to eternal woe is paved with arguments like this. Men have cajoled their souls with such vain excuses until they have found themselves beyond the region of hope!

But we must rise to the fountain by pursuing the stream. Conversion and not predestination, is the end of the chain we are to grasp. We must ascend from ourselves to God, and not descend from God to ourselves, in settling this great question. We must judge of God’s objective purpose of love concerning us, by His subjective work of grace within us. One of the martyr Reformers has wisely remarked, “We need not go about to trouble ourselves with curious questions of the predestination of God; but let us rather endeavor ourselves that we may be in Christ. For, when we are in Him, then are we well: and then we may be sure that we are ordained to everlasting life. When you find these three things in your hearts, repentance, faith, and a desire to leave sin, then you may be sure your names are written in the book, and you may be sure also, that you are elected and predestinated to eternal life.” Again he observes, “If thou art desiring to know whether thou art chosen to everlasting life, thou mayest not begin with God, for God is too high, thou canst not comprehend Him. Begin with Christ, and learn to know Christ, and wherefore He came; namely, that He came to save sinners, and made Himself subject to the law, and a fulfiller of the law, to deliver us from the wrath and danger thereof. If thou knowest Christ, then thou mayest know further of thy election.” And illustrating his idea by his own personal experience, he says, “If I believe in Christ alone for salvation, I am certainly interested in Christ; and interested in Christ I could not be, if I were not chosen and elected of God.”

In conclusion, we earnestly entreat you to lay aside all fruitless speculations, and to give yourself to prayer. Let reason bow to faith, and faith shut you up to Christ, and Christ be all in all to you. Once more we solemnly affirm that, conversion, and not predestination, is the doctrine with which, in your present state of inquiry, you have to do. Beware that you come not short of true conversion—a changed heart, and a renewed mind, so that you become “a new creature in Christ Jesus.” And if as a poor lost sinner you repair to the Savior, all vile, guilty, unworthy, and weak as you are, He will receive you, and shelter you within the bosom that bled on the cross, to provide an atonement and an asylum for the very chief of sinners. Intermeddle not, therefore, with a state which you can only ascertain to be yours by the Spirit’s work upon your heart. “Your election will be known by your interest in Christ; and your interest in Christ by the sanctification of the Spirit. Here is a chain of salvation; the beginning of it is from the Father; the dispensation of it through the Son; the application of it by the Spirit. In looking after the comfort of election, you must look inward to the work of the Spirit in your heart; then outward to the work of Christ on the cross; then upward to the heart of the Father in heaven.” Oh, let your prayer be “God be merciful to me a sinner,” until that prayer is answered in the assurance of full pardon sealed upon your conscience by the Holy Ghost. Thus knocking at mercy’s door, the heart of God will fly open, and admit you to all the hidden treasures of its love.

www.reformedreader.org...

No, I am not a Calvinist...lol.

I was merely pointing out that people who are not Christian get the idea that all of Christianity has the same doctrine.
I trust that the author of your post makes it clear that salvation isn't just something that happens without your ability to receive it, it is from true acceptance and belief, then faith, that salvation is effected in the heart of the individual.

I worked on a radio station that had live preaching. I was a radio announcer so it was my job to broadcast their sermons. One of the most dangerous things I heard them say was "I couldn't sin now if I tried, because sin is no longer sin".

Too many have taken that road, to believe salvation is merely believing, that regeneration is once and no more, leaving them in a state of perfection, sealed to the day of redemption. I have heard many of them say that adultery is no longer a sin, the believer is still not going to be judged, he is simply not going to get as many rewards.

The ultimate reward is the full fellowship with God, if one goes wants to go to heaven because they think they will get crowns and stars in their crowns, they haven't addressed the fundamental message, that God cannot fellowship with sin. So by not calling it sin, they lead others into a false security of believing that because they only had to believe in Jesus once, then they are eternally saved.

What fellowship hath the light with darkness?

I don't think you are a hard line Calvinist, maybe you are a Soft Calvinist, because I don't see you as being so fundamental as some are. You present yourself as being one who understood the need for salvation in Christ, that you also want to move beyond just an initial belief. Let the work that was begun in you....some people end the work after confession.

a reply to: WarminIndy

I am one who believes the work begun, is never over before death.. a beginning is only a beginning.. if a person thinks its over no more to do back to regular.. then that work never began in the first place..

but it is my understanding that most people miss what Calvin actually taught, they never get past the first couple of sentences to get the whole teaching of it..

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: WarminIndy

I am one who believes the work begun, is never over before death.. a beginning is only a beginning.. if a person thinks its over no more to do back to regular.. then that work never began in the first place..

but it is my understanding that most people miss what Calvin actually taught, they never get past the first couple of sentences to get the whole teaching of it..

Calvin argued his point with Jacobus Arminius. I think they knew very well what he meant back then, it is the basis of Reform Theology. As Disraeli mentioned, it was the official statement of the Synod of Dort that was adopted by the Church of England, subsequently to the Church of Scotland, which is what we call Presbyterians.

Synod of Dort came from the earlier Belgic Confessions and the Westminster Confessions. What it really meant to do was explain theology from outside of the Roman Catholic church.

This is the article of faith in the Synod of Dort.

FIRST HEAD: ARTICLE 7. Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He has out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from the primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect and the foundation of salvation. This elect number, though by nature neither better nor more deserving than others, but with them involved in one common misery, God has decreed to give to Christ to be saved by Him, and effectually to call an draw them to His communion by His Word and Spirit; to bestow upon them true faith, justification, and sanctification; and having powerfully preserved them in the fellowship of His son, finally to glorify them for the demonstration of His mercy, and for the praise of the riches of His glorious grace; as it is written "For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves." (Eph 1:4-6). And elsewhere: "And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified." (Rom 8:30).

That is the predestination of T = total depravity, U = Unconditional Election, L = Limited Atonement, I = Irresistible Grace, P = Preservation of the Saints.

The exact wording of the statement in the C of E 17th Article is this;
"Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them through Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season; they through Grace obey the calling; they be justified freely; they be made sons of God by adoption; they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ; they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity."

After some enthusiastic words about how this teaching is "full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons", they add this warning;
"For curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall; whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchedness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation."

These articles were agreed by the English bishops in 1562, about half a century before the Synod of Dort.

a reply to: DISRAELI

As I said, I have never been Calvinist, so the points of their theology is something perhaps you are better at explaining than I am.

I have heard many of them quoting R.C. Sproul, Wayne Gruden, Charles Stanley and others. But what I don't really understand is why they believe in such a way that allows within their theology the idea that even if you have been born again, you just might not be predestined. It seems then that according to the teaching of Calvinism, that one can only be introduced to Christ through their church or family.

As they cannot say who is predestined, that it was up to God alone who predestined certain individuals, then it only stands to reason on that point that maybe entire churches are never predestined while some groups of people outside the church might be predestined, and yet they preach against those very groups who just might be predestined.

And by that, they say that God will eventually give them grace by putting them in the right place and the right time to meet the right person who will lead them to Christ because God is making the choice of salvation for mankind's inability to do so, and even if he could, it would not matter because God may have never predestined them, because God only appointed SOME people to salvation.

I hope the true believers find comfort in knowing they are predestined. But how do they know?

a reply to: WarminIndy
The C of E is not very Calvinist nowadays. They lost ground after helping to start a Civil War to get rid of the bishops, and being involved in the execution of Charles I, and never quite recovered.
So I don't make a good spokesman for them.
I would have thought that Calvin's idea of election would have been based on the individual; that the only ground for limiting it to specific churches would be if only those churches could be trusted to present the true gospel teaching, so that the elect could respond to it.

I don't know what they say about being born again. I understand there is a doctrine of Perseverance, which means that the elect cannot "fall away", which in turn means that anyone who does "fall away" can't have been one of the elect in the first place. So I think they would have to say that he was not genuinely "born again" either. He just thought he was.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: WarminIndy
The C of E is not very Calvinist nowadays. They lost ground after helping to start a Civil War to get rid of the bishops, and being involved in the execution of Charles I, and never quite recovered.
So I don't make a good spokesman for them.
I would have thought that Calvin's idea of election would have been based on the individual; that the only ground for limiting it to specific churches would be if only those churches could be trusted to present the true gospel teaching, so that the elect could respond to it.

I don't know what they say about being born again. I understand there is a doctrine of Perseverance, which means that the elect cannot "fall away", which in turn means that anyone who does "fall away" can't have been one of the elect in the first place. So I think they would have to say that he was not genuinely "born again" either. He just thought he was.

If John Calvin were truly born again, he would not have had to agree to his friend being burned at the stake.

I like George Fox much better. At least George Fox taught that one should seek after the light.

I remember a calvinist minister who said he would refuse allowing the great old English preacher Wesley to teach in his church because Wesley was deluded.

That to me sounds like a cult leader. Two things scared me, only his opinion was valid and it was his church, not Gods.

Irrespective I do believe there is a semblance of truth to what Calvinists believe, I havnt quite worked it out but there is something valid.
Somewhere between Calvinism and Arminianism lays the truth

The book of straw 2:26

originally posted by: WarminIndy
The difference in Calvinism and Arminianism is one of the most hotly debated subjects in Christendom, which began when John Calvin and Jacobus Arminius began their theological disputes. Both men lived in Europe during the late Middle Ages.

Some date the renaissance as starting in 1401 (partly as a result of humanism and translations of Greek texts as well as scientific and medical literature from Arabic.) Calvin and Arminius were squarely in the mid part of the renaissance.