-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
R
Well..I do believe that He would have used whatever means, had it not been Luther, I believe God would have used someone else after him had Luther refused to be that catalyst,or 'reformer' What I do believe is that Arminius and others after Luther and Calvin were wanting to reform the reformation. Arminius himself considered himself a calvinist actually,and knew reform theology quite well..he was a student of Beze/Beza.
My issue with some who hold to reform doctrine is this, they have pretty much hijacked the reformation as Dave Hunt says. They made it 'known' or have made it seem to be known that al those who are protestant, or 'reform' must be calvinist, if you are against calvinism in anyway and are not even arminian you will be called arminian,non christian, or what they love to tell us all, Catholic.
My question is this..Is the gospel Calvinism?
And must one accept Calvinism to be saved?
(I ask this because i have been called by one,not here, who denied being a calvinist,i suspect he is one..that i am a goat and had another calvinist on another forum tell me I 'have not the gospel' simply because i reject Calvinism)
Is saying, I accepted Christ as my savior a true response and a declaration of faith or is it what the calvinist says it is, Taking Credit.
Did the calvinist also accept Christ? Are they walking with him? So they too accepted, why is my simply saying that i 'accepted' the message an accusation that i am 'proud' or seeking to save myself?
Who ever said they save themself?
Where does this come from?
Show me one Arminian theologian that said he saved himself. Arminius pointed to God, Wesley did, Roger E Olson does. So why does the Calvinist seek to advertise and market that only he/she is a true Christian?
My issue with some who hold to reform doctrine is this, they have pretty much hijacked the reformation as Dave Hunt says. They made it 'known' or have made it seem to be known that al those who are protestant, or 'reform' must be calvinist, if you are against calvinism in anyway and are not even arminian you will be called arminian,non christian, or what they love to tell us all, Catholic.
My question is this..Is the gospel Calvinism?
And must one accept Calvinism to be saved?
(I ask this because i have been called by one,not here, who denied being a calvinist,i suspect he is one..that i am a goat and had another calvinist on another forum tell me I 'have not the gospel' simply because i reject Calvinism)
Is saying, I accepted Christ as my savior a true response and a declaration of faith or is it what the calvinist says it is, Taking Credit.
Did the calvinist also accept Christ? Are they walking with him? So they too accepted, why is my simply saying that i 'accepted' the message an accusation that i am 'proud' or seeking to save myself?
Who ever said they save themself?
Where does this come from?
Show me one Arminian theologian that said he saved himself. Arminius pointed to God, Wesley did, Roger E Olson does. So why does the Calvinist seek to advertise and market that only he/she is a true Christian?
A
Have you sat down yet and really looked at the differences? See im against some doctrines
but you have to admit reformed and calvanists have a whole lot of good doctrine.
the evil is in their emotions/sentment and as some would call it connecting the dots. Which to me
is simply adding to the word of God. Get over the name calling...for your own good.
Youve received the gospel and growing in grace and knowledge. Isnt that enuf?
P.S. if you do contend with calvanists...just expect to take your cuts and dont be surprised. Right?
R
Btw. you mispelled calvinist sir.
As far as name calling..no one is calling names I have read enough of calvinism to disagree with it. What good are you talking about again? All the good I see in 'calvinism' is actually in Classical Arminianism actually.
I do know the difference far more than you know, its all I do is read theology books. So I know of this far more than you think..
As far as name calling..no one is calling names I have read enough of calvinism to disagree with it. What good are you talking about again? All the good I see in 'calvinism' is actually in Classical Arminianism actually.
I do know the difference far more than you know, its all I do is read theology books. So I know of this far more than you think..
A
Oh i wasnt saying anything about your knowledge at all. If you disagree with
my major point thats ok.
Oh my yes there is name calling all the time. Ive watched it forever.
And heard the howling.
I think you didnt see a thing i was saying and suppose you took it the
opposite from the way i intended it. But that can happen easy with
type. So as a consolation prize ill give you my 6000 post.
some latte shop will give you something for it i think.
my major point thats ok.
Oh my yes there is name calling all the time. Ive watched it forever.
And heard the howling.
I think you didnt see a thing i was saying and suppose you took it the
opposite from the way i intended it. But that can happen easy with
type. So as a consolation prize ill give you my 6000 post.
some latte shop will give you something for it i think.
1. Irrelevant. That is the way events transpired. The provocateurs of the reformation almost had to be people with catholic roots, because those were the ones closest the text in order for it to be translated and proliferated.
The "what if" question is a fun and sometimes brilliant one to ask. But before we go about doing this we have to accept things for what they are and learn why they transpired the way the did. Someone may have picked up the Reformation torch. We have no clear idea who because actual events did not leave breadcrumbs for us to follow.
2. I think a lot of calvinists are conservative in temperament and want to remind Christian brothers and sisters of their importance to doctrine and Church history before the accusations pile on.
Look buddy, the treatment goes the other way too. Half the reason I am a calvinist is that in one of my churches early reformation history and theology were unduly distorted. I was labeled a heretic and non-christian by some and, due to my choice of schools, continue to take the same treatment. The quarrel you have is not with calvinists, but human nature itself.
Now I'll answer your questions directly, and there will be much rejoicing.
1. Is the gospel Calvinism?
No. The gospel is the gospel. To say the gospel is anything else would be heresy. Ad fontes.
I consider myself a Christian first, then a calvinist. My calvinism on these forums is more pronounced because I like having friends in real life and you all actually understand what the calvinist v. ariminian argument is about at least on a basic level.
2. Must one accept calvinism to be saved?
Calvinism is a muddled term. Calvinists do not follow everything Calvin ever wrote because Calvin was a humble writer who in not so many words said "don't believe everything I write, as I'm only a man."
Certain planks of calvinism? Of course. But those are simple. Did you recognize you are a sinner in need of redemption? Do you accept Jesus as the son of God and perfect sacrifice? Do you accept him as Lord? Have you given your life to him in exchange for a new found liberty?
If the answer to all those questions is yes, then you have accepted enough calvinism to enter the Kingdom!
Oh wait! That's the gospel all Christians share!
3. Am I taking credit when I say I accepted Jesus as my Savior?
At the risk of making it sound like I'm contradicting myself above, yes. If you think I am, just point this out later and I'll iron things out. I have to get to school in an hour. In a rush.
4. Is the Calvinist walking with Christ?
Nope, those same people who were burned at the stake for opposition to the Catholic church and Anglican church were not. Charles Spurgeon was clearly not walking with the Lord, and those largely responsible for ministering to Indians in the New World were not really Christians.
Or were they?
5. Why is my saying x merit an accusation of pride?
It doesn't. But it does reveal a certain level of ignorance of the truth and lack of appreciation for sound doctrine. Perhaps pride also has a part in it. Depends on how you are telling the Calvinist all this.
6. Who said they save themselves? Various Pelagians throughout history.
7. Where does this come from? Heretical doctrine and pride.
8. Show me one Ariminian theologian...Why do they advertise themselves as the only Christian on the Market?
My aren't we making a whole lot of assumptions? Like I said, Ariminians pull the same ol' song and dance on us too. Again Ariminians are not that bad. When you drift from there to Pelagianism, well, that's when it becomes truly heretical.
George Whitefield (calvinist) and John Weseley (Ariminian) were brilliant friends and got along famously. Each appreciated the other for what they brought to their period of time as ministers. One just had a better handle on the scope of truth in the Scriptures. That man was good ol' George.
I hate to sound like a fence writer. I am not. The question is not who is a Christian brother or isn't in this instance.
The question is who has the edge in understanding the true nature of Salvation History? Who has a better method of scriptural interperetation?
The answer is the Calvinist.
Soli Deo Gloria
The "what if" question is a fun and sometimes brilliant one to ask. But before we go about doing this we have to accept things for what they are and learn why they transpired the way the did. Someone may have picked up the Reformation torch. We have no clear idea who because actual events did not leave breadcrumbs for us to follow.
2. I think a lot of calvinists are conservative in temperament and want to remind Christian brothers and sisters of their importance to doctrine and Church history before the accusations pile on.
Look buddy, the treatment goes the other way too. Half the reason I am a calvinist is that in one of my churches early reformation history and theology were unduly distorted. I was labeled a heretic and non-christian by some and, due to my choice of schools, continue to take the same treatment. The quarrel you have is not with calvinists, but human nature itself.
Now I'll answer your questions directly, and there will be much rejoicing.
1. Is the gospel Calvinism?
No. The gospel is the gospel. To say the gospel is anything else would be heresy. Ad fontes.
I consider myself a Christian first, then a calvinist. My calvinism on these forums is more pronounced because I like having friends in real life and you all actually understand what the calvinist v. ariminian argument is about at least on a basic level.
2. Must one accept calvinism to be saved?
Calvinism is a muddled term. Calvinists do not follow everything Calvin ever wrote because Calvin was a humble writer who in not so many words said "don't believe everything I write, as I'm only a man."
Certain planks of calvinism? Of course. But those are simple. Did you recognize you are a sinner in need of redemption? Do you accept Jesus as the son of God and perfect sacrifice? Do you accept him as Lord? Have you given your life to him in exchange for a new found liberty?
If the answer to all those questions is yes, then you have accepted enough calvinism to enter the Kingdom!
Oh wait! That's the gospel all Christians share!
3. Am I taking credit when I say I accepted Jesus as my Savior?
At the risk of making it sound like I'm contradicting myself above, yes. If you think I am, just point this out later and I'll iron things out. I have to get to school in an hour. In a rush.
4. Is the Calvinist walking with Christ?
Nope, those same people who were burned at the stake for opposition to the Catholic church and Anglican church were not. Charles Spurgeon was clearly not walking with the Lord, and those largely responsible for ministering to Indians in the New World were not really Christians.
Or were they?
5. Why is my saying x merit an accusation of pride?
It doesn't. But it does reveal a certain level of ignorance of the truth and lack of appreciation for sound doctrine. Perhaps pride also has a part in it. Depends on how you are telling the Calvinist all this.
6. Who said they save themselves? Various Pelagians throughout history.
7. Where does this come from? Heretical doctrine and pride.
8. Show me one Ariminian theologian...Why do they advertise themselves as the only Christian on the Market?
My aren't we making a whole lot of assumptions? Like I said, Ariminians pull the same ol' song and dance on us too. Again Ariminians are not that bad. When you drift from there to Pelagianism, well, that's when it becomes truly heretical.
George Whitefield (calvinist) and John Weseley (Ariminian) were brilliant friends and got along famously. Each appreciated the other for what they brought to their period of time as ministers. One just had a better handle on the scope of truth in the Scriptures. That man was good ol' George.
I hate to sound like a fence writer. I am not. The question is not who is a Christian brother or isn't in this instance.
The question is who has the edge in understanding the true nature of Salvation History? Who has a better method of scriptural interperetation?
The answer is the Calvinist.
Soli Deo Gloria
Okay, now that I know I have no ride to school, I have time to sit down and iron out the contradiction and re-read sections of the thread.
1. I apologize for the variation of capitalization in use of the word "calvinist." Though it is technically wrong to lowercase the "c" in the word Calvinist, I do so anyway. I am a Christian and then a calvinist. I would also like to think of myself as a descendent of the Commonwealthsman. Which would then make me a Christian, calvinist, Commonwealthsman person or a CCCP.
Tadada ch.
2. It is a question of how you view the Lord's sovereignty in the Bible. I realize we're playing the "what if" game again (and one I largely detest). God had the choice of not reaching down to man, of letting us mire in our sin. He didn't have to raise up the Hebrew race to give us a Bible or laws. Nope, he could have simply grabbed the popcorn and reclined his throne as the self-destruction of the human race unfolded before him.
But he didn't! He reached out in the sphere of human affairs and inclined his hand to us! He does the same thing in the lives of individuals too. That, my friend, is where the doctrine of election begins. It is also a part of the Bible the human mind apparently has the hardest time accepting.
Not to mention apparent contradiction and mystery that are essential grounds of the faith. How does God choose? Why does God choose? How does liberty of individual conscience fit in? All are questions we can debate from sunrise to sunset with Tevye. The central truth is that the Lord is the one we can trust to handle them and perhaps clarify them for us on the Day of Redemption.
1. I apologize for the variation of capitalization in use of the word "calvinist." Though it is technically wrong to lowercase the "c" in the word Calvinist, I do so anyway. I am a Christian and then a calvinist. I would also like to think of myself as a descendent of the Commonwealthsman. Which would then make me a Christian, calvinist, Commonwealthsman person or a CCCP.
Tadada ch.
2. It is a question of how you view the Lord's sovereignty in the Bible. I realize we're playing the "what if" game again (and one I largely detest). God had the choice of not reaching down to man, of letting us mire in our sin. He didn't have to raise up the Hebrew race to give us a Bible or laws. Nope, he could have simply grabbed the popcorn and reclined his throne as the self-destruction of the human race unfolded before him.
But he didn't! He reached out in the sphere of human affairs and inclined his hand to us! He does the same thing in the lives of individuals too. That, my friend, is where the doctrine of election begins. It is also a part of the Bible the human mind apparently has the hardest time accepting.
Not to mention apparent contradiction and mystery that are essential grounds of the faith. How does God choose? Why does God choose? How does liberty of individual conscience fit in? All are questions we can debate from sunrise to sunset with Tevye. The central truth is that the Lord is the one we can trust to handle them and perhaps clarify them for us on the Day of Redemption.
Ah, Ritter, you're like a breath of fresh air.
And the new avatar is, er, epic, if that's still what the kidz are sayin'.
-ellie
And the new avatar is, er, epic, if that's still what the kidz are sayin'.
-ellie
Oh yeah. I just saw Das Boot. I really don't think there is a scene in which Prochnow does not look epic. Even when he is shaved!