Comment of Calvinism
- Thread starter superdave5221
- Start date
-
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.
C
Personally I don't have a problem with Calvinism in it's purest form. It's the more modern versions I really don't care for. The idea that a person supposedly repented 5, 10, 20 years ago yet lives his life indulging in sin after sin without remorse or repenance tells me (by his fruit) that he was never sincere in the first place and that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in him. Many pure Calvinists would agree with me on this issue however, many modern calvinists, or "hyper-calvinism", would not only debate that this man is still saved but also insist that I am not for doubting his salvation. They would say I'm not saved because I have wrongly judged this man yet they do not seem to realize they they are guilty of the same thing by judging me.
That's why I want no part of it.
That's why I want no part of it.
D
1 Corinthians 9
17 For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a stewardship.
18 What is my reward then? That when I preach the gospel, I may present the gospel of Christ without charge, that I may not abuse my authority in the gospel.
loooooooooooooooooool
Oh Paul!
17 For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a stewardship.
18 What is my reward then? That when I preach the gospel, I may present the gospel of Christ without charge, that I may not abuse my authority in the gospel.
loooooooooooooooooool
Oh Paul!
C
In my opinion, John Calvin was every bit as double minded as the doctrine that he held on to. Here's a guy who preached unconditional love yet did the exact opposite. For starters, Calvin tricked his #1 opponent in the faith into coming to a meeting to debate the issue. When the man got there he instead found himself on trial inquistion)- standing in front of panel of biased judges who refused to listen to his objections yet instead insisted that the man co-operate or die. When the man refused to compromise his convictions the panel had the man beheaded per Calvin's orders.
The hypocrisy doesn't stop there. When people began to hear about it, several protested. Calvin had them all burned at the stake because Calvin believed they were all "pre-destined" for hell anyway. This the reason why opponents of Calvinism are refer to themselves "Arminians", as a testament to the protesters so that Calvinist will never forget the atrocities committed by their so-called christian leader.
Not once did Calvin or his band of bullies repent for what they did because they believed that they were the "elect", predestined before the foundations of the world as God's chosen. They did not feel that they needed to repent of their sins because they felt that were somehow "pre-ordained" to execute what they believed to be God's agenda.
Calvinism is no better than Catholicism and Calvin was every bit as corrupt as the Catholic pope. If these events were to occur today, Calvin and his supporters would be arrested and their belief system dismissed as nothing more than a cult.
The hypocrisy doesn't stop there. When people began to hear about it, several protested. Calvin had them all burned at the stake because Calvin believed they were all "pre-destined" for hell anyway. This the reason why opponents of Calvinism are refer to themselves "Arminians", as a testament to the protesters so that Calvinist will never forget the atrocities committed by their so-called christian leader.
Not once did Calvin or his band of bullies repent for what they did because they believed that they were the "elect", predestined before the foundations of the world as God's chosen. They did not feel that they needed to repent of their sins because they felt that were somehow "pre-ordained" to execute what they believed to be God's agenda.
Calvinism is no better than Catholicism and Calvin was every bit as corrupt as the Catholic pope. If these events were to occur today, Calvin and his supporters would be arrested and their belief system dismissed as nothing more than a cult.
Last edited:
C
Now please don't think I am accusing modern calvinists of being part of a cult. I am merely stating that historically Calvinism did in deed begin as a cult.
Personally, I know several people who hold to Calvinism that good godly people as I'm sure there were many Calvinists throughout history that were truly sincere about their salvation. In fact I believe that to be the motivation behind the concept of TULIP, this was there attempt to legitamize Calvinism as a christian concept. HOWEVER do not be mistaken, Calvinism did begin as a cult.
Personally, I know several people who hold to Calvinism that good godly people as I'm sure there were many Calvinists throughout history that were truly sincere about their salvation. In fact I believe that to be the motivation behind the concept of TULIP, this was there attempt to legitamize Calvinism as a christian concept. HOWEVER do not be mistaken, Calvinism did begin as a cult.
well I have said it before and will say it over and over, will one calvinist explain , If paul truely taught the doctrine of Grace as calvinist do why did He say:
2ti 2:10Therefore I endure all things for THE ELECT's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
if the elect are predestined into heaven before time begin and God Elected those and they had no say in it , why did paul say; he did something that the elect might obtain the salvation, one would think that if God had already choosen them then they would already have the salvation! hhhhhhmmmmm!
and no it didn't say that paul didn't know who the elect was, it says that the elect needs to obtain salvation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2ti 2:10Therefore I endure all things for THE ELECT's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
if the elect are predestined into heaven before time begin and God Elected those and they had no say in it , why did paul say; he did something that the elect might obtain the salvation, one would think that if God had already choosen them then they would already have the salvation! hhhhhhmmmmm!
and no it didn't say that paul didn't know who the elect was, it says that the elect needs to obtain salvation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited:
C
well I have said it before and will say it over and over, will one calvinist explain , If paul truely taught the doctrine of Grace as calvinist do why did He say:
2ti 2:10Therefore I endure all things for THE ELECT's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
if the elect are predestined into heaven before time begin and God Elected those and they had no say in it , why did paul say; he did something that the elect might obtain the salvation, one would think that if God had already choosen them then they would already have the salvation! hhhhhhmmmmm! and no it didn't say that paul didn't know who the elect was, it sys that the elect needs to obtain salvation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2ti 2:10Therefore I endure all things for THE ELECT's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
if the elect are predestined into heaven before time begin and God Elected those and they had no say in it , why did paul say; he did something that the elect might obtain the salvation, one would think that if God had already choosen them then they would already have the salvation! hhhhhhmmmmm!
and no it didn't say that paul didn't know who the elect was, it sys that the elect needs to obtain salvation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thaddeus, yes the bible does refer to christians as being elect. However that does not mean that the idea that Calvin and his buddies believed (which was later fine tuned) was indeed biblical.
When Calvin killed the Arminians he did so out of the idea that He and his men were predestined for heaven and all of his opponents were predestined for hell thus he was justified in murdering them. This is most likely where modern Calvinist get the idea that one must be calvinist to be saved, it evolved out of Calvin's warped elitist idea of "the elect".
C
I'm going to do some further research on this issue. Taking into consideration serveral conversations I have in the past with Calvinists concerning Calvinistic views on salvation which seem to reveal a major under emphasis on repentence, I'm beginning to wonder if Calvin and his original band of followers were indeed "saved" as far as modern christian standards consider salavation or if Calvin's ideas on "believing" were more along the lines of Catholicism where one simply has to "believe" which many Calvinists here have implied in the forums.
Very interesting study indeed!
Very interesting study indeed!
Last edited:
oh, so because they believed something that justifies, so muslems are justified, Hitler was justified, hey everybody is safe as long as they believe what they did was right?? thats how we explain homosexual pastors, pastor leaving their family and ministries and running away with other women, wow I'm glad you shared this with Me. but wait, if this is true then why did Jesus have to die??? so I didn't even know calvin killed people and did it in the name of Jesus and we call the Muslems the bad people , and tell people we shouldn't follow the bad people, unless it is the bad people we believe in.
Last edited:
C
Thaddeus keep in mind that the Calvinism that you know and the beliefs Calvin held could very well be different. The Calvinism that you know was fined tuned later. Calvin killed people under the assumption that he was predestined for heaven and that they were predestined for hell.
However I do think it's funny that a Calvinist would bring up Hitler in this conversation considering Calvisn's elitists views seem to be close to Hitler's thus both men justified killing those they opposed under the assumption that they were somehow superior.
However I do think it's funny that a Calvinist would bring up Hitler in this conversation considering Calvisn's elitists views seem to be close to Hitler's thus both men justified killing those they opposed under the assumption that they were somehow superior.
Last edited: