Is Calvinism of the Bible?

[Biblereader]

I have a relative who recently turned to Calvinism.

What do any of you know of it? I've studied my KJV bible, and can not
make Calvinism agree with the teachings of Jesus.

Basically, my relative says there is no hope of being saved if you weren't
pre-elected.
He puts all the responsibility for those going to heaven, and those going to
eternal damnation, on God's shoulders.

 

[Ormly]

It is not there to be found.

 

[Biblereader]

please be more specific

 

[Drew]

I see no evidence at all that the Scriptures support the specific brand of Calvinism that we see promoted in these forums. There are a number of threads in the theology section that deal with this issue. In particular, some of those threads deal with the doctrine of "pre-destination" that you refer to in your OP. I think that powerful arguments have been made, or are being made, in this very site that the following texts, often claimed by Calvinists as support for pre-destination of people for salvation or loss, are in fact, not evidence for that view at all:

1. The potter's account in Romans 9
2. Ephesians 1
3. John 6:36-44

I can go into more detail and / or point to the relevant material.

 

[Biblereader]

The potter account is one he has been stuck on for a long time, now.

Calvin was a good man, who was so impressed by the holiness of God, that he found it
impossible to believe God could allow us to exercise free will, without his intervention.

My argument with him is this: if we have no free will, before we are "irresistably" drawn
to be born again, then how could a just and loving God, how could Jesus Christ, judge a person
for their sins, since Calvin seems to claim the unregenerate are without knowledge or desire
to turn from sin?

Also, Calvinism takes away responsibility for sin, in general, and can make a person so apathetic in their witnessing, and in their reading of the bible, etc., that the end result is a slovenly religious person.
All through the Holy Scriptures Jesus calls us to repentence, calls all of us, and tells us, especially in Romans 10:9-12 the results of our CHOICES concerning Jesus the Christ.

 

[Ormly]

But the love of Christ was not in him.

Can a man be devoid of it and be considered born again?

 

[stovebolts]

I've only done some lighter studies on John Calvin and his actual belief's, but so far, I've seen some people that have taken his words and have really taken his ideas to the extreem. (Hyper Calvinism for example).

I've heard it said, for instance, that Calvinism believes all faith is a gift from God. If we look at the great thinkers within Christianity, we see that Calvin's initial thoughts were spured from both Luther and Augustine. In the matter of faith, Augustine makes a comment in one of his writings called "On Christian Doctrine" that all faith is a gift from God. However, when one looks at the context in which this statment is made, it does not resemble what I've heard expressed by some, how shhould I say, overly zeleous Calvinists...

From my own perspective on the "Pre-Elected", should it really matter, especially if I am living in accordance of Christ's example? On this note, I would like to post a view of Augustine taken from his writing, "On Christian Doctrine" in regard to Christ's words about loving one's enemy and the good Samaritan

And hence it is that we love even our enemies. For we do not fear them, seeing they cannot take away from us what we love; but we pity them rather, because the more they hate us the more are they separated from Him whom we love. For if they would turn to Him, they must of necessity love Him as the supreme good, and love us too as partakers with them in so great a blessing.

 

[Biblereader]

Yes, the calvin view of pre election does matter.
It reduces man to apathy, and blaming God for who goes to hell,
and for who is tempted.

Calvinists say, why bother to witness to someone? God will draw them irresistably, anyways, when their time comes.

 

[Vic C.]

May I ask why this topic was put here? Historically, Calvinism is not "another religion". I'm seeing some misrepresentation of the Calvinistic position. I don't think the Calvinists know this topic is here and if they do, I don't think they'd want to post in this particular forum.

I'm wanting to move this to another forum... maybe Bible Study or Apologetics. Hmmm...

 

[Biblereader]

Vic, Calvinism is not Christianity, but, some people believe it is.
Hence, the reason for my posting here.

I see no valid reason for moving this topic, unless doing so will INCREASE the reader
total.

 

[Vic C.]

No, Calvinism is part of Christianity and has been for well, way before Calvin. It is an accepted form of Systematic Theology. As mentioned above, he took much of his theology from Augustine and even Luther. Lets not confuse the teachings of John Calvin with today's hyper-Calvinistic teachings.

Just so you know, I'm not defending Calvinism as much as I am defending the Calvinists here their right of opinion. With that said, I will move this to the Apologetics Forum so it doesn't continued to be a one-sided bash fest.

Peace,
Vic

 

[guibox]

Calvinists say, why bother to witness to someone? God will draw them irresistably, anyways, when their time comes.

Actually, this is not true. It is the Arminianist who asks the Calvinist "What is the sense of witnessing if God will draw all of them irresistibly?" The answer given to me which has not been satisfactory is, 'We and our witnessing is the method God chooses to draw them out'.

Still doesn't make sense when the message going out to all the people is basically falling on deaf ears. The message we basically are giving is,

"Jesus says 'repent' and confess your sins!' However, this is only going to apply to a few of you here. We don't know which ones, and you might not at first. If this message stirs your soul, you are one of the elect. If it doesn't, well, God never chose you to begin with. Carry on with your life and we'll see you at the judgement where you will be judged and eternally tormented for sins you had no way to escape from!"


:-? Great God to serve. The only excuse that is hidden behind is "God is God and His choices are sovereign. Who are you to question Him?'

 

[francisdesales]

No, Calvinism is part of Christianity and has been for well, way before Calvin. It is an accepted form of Systematic Theology. As mentioned above, he took much of his theology from Augustine and even Luther. Lets not confuse the teachings of John Calvin with today's hyper-Calvinistic teachings.

The ONLY thing that Calvin "took" from St. Augustine is some of his thoughts on predestination. St. Augustine believed in free will and that men COULD obey God's commandments, since God does not command what God does not allow men to do. Calvin did not. Nor did Augustine ever believe that God predestined men to reprobation without viewing their merits.

Where does Calvin stand regarding St. Augustine's view of the Eucharist, the Sacrifice of the Mass, Saints, Mary, Purgatory, the canon of the Old Testament, the Papacy, Apostolic Succession, the Catholic Church and salvation, the sacrament's effectiveness, being saved by faith and works, and other such notably Catholic ideas?

Calvin certainly did not follow St. Augustine in ANY of these ideas. Calvin decided his theology before hand and found someone reputable that could be twisted to back his predetermined ideas. IF Calvin respected St. Augustine's opinion so much, why is it so narrowly restricted to one subject???

Regards

 

[Preacherhc]

I have to go to only one scripture to find that View that we can only come to the Lord if we
are elected to

That is John 3;16
God so loved the world that He Gave His only begotten son
THAT WHOSOEVER believes on Him Shall have EVERYLASTING LIFE

and the other one is They that call up on the name of the Lord
shall be saved

Preacherhc

 

[handy]

Thank you Vic, for moving the topic to an appropriate venue.

Is Calvinism of the Bible?

Yes. Can you tell me even one petal on the TULIP that isn't based upon Scripture?

Let's see:
Total Depravity
Romans 5:12
Mark 4:11-12
Ephesians 2:1-5
Unconditional Election
Romans 9:10-24
Ephesians 1:4-8
Limited Atonement
John 17:9
Matthew 26:28
Ephesians 5:25
John 6:37
Irresistible Grace
John 6:37
John 6:44
Romans 8:14
1 Peter 5:10
Preservation of the Saints
Romans 8:28-39
Philippians 1:16
John 6:39

Hmmmm, can't come up with one that doesn't have Scripture as it's basis. And, this is just a short list of key verses. One can study these themes in-depth and come up with many other passages that speak to these subjects in the same way that Calvinism teaches.

And here is something to think about. When I was a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and the Presbyterian Church of America (which are about as Calvinistic as they come), we did not study John Calvin or his writings or the work of John Knox or even Charles Spurgeon or R. C. Sproul. We studied the BIBLE. When I left the Calvinistic churches, (because I have come to disagree with their interpretations of the above verses) I was surprised by a number of things. Things like adult Sunday School going through books and preprinted study material instead of just doing Chapter Studies and Theme Studies straight out of Scripture. I was also surprised to find that at none of other churches were there weekly Evangelism classes and door-to-door witnessing.

Now, one can disagree with the interpretations that the Calvinists apply to the above verses. After years of study on these key doctrines, I've come to different conclusions on just about every point exept the preservation of the Saints. (Which differs greatly from "Once saved, always saved".)

But, just because there is disagreement doesn't mean that "Calvinism is not Christianity". There is not one denomination, catechism or systematic theology out there that is 100% correct. The Calvinistic churches that I belonged to were filled with the Spirit and full of loving, Godly people who took their Chrisitanity to heart and were committed to seeking after all of God's truth and committed to sharing God's truth with the world.

Biblereader, if you are truly concerned about your relative, here's an idea. Go to church with him, visit with his congregation and his pastor. Even if you don't agree with their interpretation of the Bible, I think if you go to his church a couple of times, you will find that the services will be very focused on God and the Bible. You might even find that your relative, being so new to Calvinism has become "hyper-Calvinist" in which case, more study and teaching from his pastor and elders will help him come to a better understanding of his new church's doctrines.

Listen, I live deep in the heart of Mormon country. They don't just 'preach a different gospel' they believe in a totally different God and Jesus than what the Bible teaches. Calvinistic churches might have different interpretations that lead to a different view of how the gospel works, but they preach, teach, love and are committed to God the Father, Son and Spirit as the Bible exhorts us to.

 

[Drew]

Unconditional Election
Romans 9:10-24
Ephesians 1:4-8

I am going to politely disagree and refer the interested reader to arguments to the effect that these texts do not teach uncondtional election.

With respect to Romans 9: Romans 9 has precisely nothing to say on the matter of giving faith to individuals.

Romans 9 is about how God has been faithful to the covenant with national Israel and, more specifically, the "potter's account" in verses 20 - 23 is Paul's explanation of how God "has the right" to use national Israel for a specific purpose in his redemptive plans. It has nothing to do with matters of individual persons being elected to receive or not receive faith.

Any interested reader can consult the following threads and look for posts by me that address this issue. Of course, readers are invited to find errors in these arguments:

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30089&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=45

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30197

With respect to Ephesians 1: I think that this material indicates that a particular set of persons was elected - the text can be shown to not be applicable to people in general. The relevant arguments are at:

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30240

 

[stranger]

Calvin and a pauper's grave.

'Calvinism' is roughly a Protestant way of making a saint of John Calvin in the way that the Catholic Church recognises those who are saints. But how is it that a man buried in an unmarked grave can stir up so much fuss? It is clear that the anti-Calvinist element is dealing with a straw man's theology that they have created.

Should Christians follow the example of society judging the instrinic worth of society by its lowest common denominator? In other words should 'reformed theology' be judged by it's worst proponents or far worse - by 'the interpretation of the Reformed faith' by the enemies of the Reformed faith?

Those who try to rob the Reformed faith in this blatant manner (fair treatment and reasonable argument aside) would do better trying to rob a pauper's grave.

 

[stranger]

Jacob and Esau . .

Hi Drew,

In the scriptures we tend to find concrete examples so when a person or persons are named such as 'Jacob and Easu' a general truth can very well be illustrated and intended. An example of something abstract would be a parable of the wheat and weeds.

In Romans 9 after Paul talks about the specific persons of Jacob and Esau, and yes they are fathers of 'nations' , a general principle is drawn out after God says: Jacob I loved and Esau I hated. . .

Romans 9:14ff

What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy.

So after the specifics pertaining to Israel and even the individuals Jacob and Easu - note the change in language : It does not therefore (Conclusion being drawn - therefore) depend on man's desire or effort (talking about man is generic implying all men) but on God's mercy. The conclusion is beautiful, as is God who elects!

 

[Drew]

Hello stranger:

I am not entirely sure what you are objecting to here. It may be true that people like myself have used the word "Calvinism" in a manner that is not strictly fair to Calvin.

When I refer to Calvinism, I am referring to a set of ideas that we often hear in these forums - the existence of a predestined elect, for example.

Let me try to be clear. When I argue against the doctrine of election / predestination, I may indeed be unfairly attributing such a position to Calvin, but it is nevertheless true that people do believe in it. And it is perfectly fair game to present Scriptural arguments against this position. In so doing, I may be attacking a straw man from poor old Calvin's perspective (and he cannot post, of course), but it is not a strawman in the global sense - people here do advocate for the election / predestination position.

I am not sure who you think are the enemies of the "reformed" faith in this context. Surely, you are not objecting to people providing scriptural arguments whether or not they happen to line up with the content of the reformer's view of Scripture. As I suspect you agree, the reformers were not infallible.

 

[stranger]

Jacob and Esau . .

Hi Drew,

In the scriptures we tend to find concrete examples so when a person or persons are named such as 'Jacob and Easu' a general truth can very well be illustrated and intended. An example of something abstract would be a parable of the wheat and weeds.

In Romans 9 after Paul talks about the specific persons of Jacob and Esau, and yes they both have the same father, a general principle is drawn out after God says: Jacob I loved and Esau I hated. . .

Romans 9:14ff

What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy.

So after the specifics pertaining to Israel and even the individuals Jacob and Easu - note the change in language : It does not therefore (Conclusion being drawn - therefore) depend on man's desire or effort (talking about man is generic implying all men) but on God's mercy. The conclusion is beautiful, as is God who elects!