Calvinism and Darwinism

[Mr. Aaron]

Brother Bible Reader,
I didn't start a mutual admiration society - the group to which I was appealing was formed long ago. Its called the Church. And I sincerely meant what I said. I believe that the only way to heaven is to repent and believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross as the atoning sacrifice for your sins. I will show you the grace of assuming unless you tell me otherwise that you believe this, too. One does not have to have one's theology 100% correct (neither you nor me) in order to be saved. If we are both saved, then it is absolutely wrong for either one of us to treat the other as an enemy. After considering my ugly, sarcastic comments earlier (as much deserved as they were), it occurred to me that we are doing the actual athiests who ARE members on this site, as well as BROTHERS IN CHRIST WHO DON"T AGREE WITH US, a wretched injustice by fighting amongst ourselves. Who wants to become a Christian if it only gives you ammunition to shoot down people you disagree with? Brother even though our differences are passionate and significant, yet we have faith in Christ's sacrifice and love for God's word in common. The church is a place of love. In Christ I love you. Hear this: a faithful and very thorough Calvinist (though I prefer to call myself Reformed) LOVES YOU in Christ. I will not debate theology with you. If you have your mind made up already, I won't convince you, nor you me. So why don't we just love each other for what we have in common. It certainly beats sinning doesn't it?

 

[Biblereader]

I am saved, and sure of it
I never said you had to have 100% correctedness in what you believe, although, with the Holy Spirit inside a believer, like me, and I assume, like you, spotting error will be easy, and every true believer will
discern between truth and error, providing they read their bible, the KJV, and know what it says, and are able to remember what it says long enough to spot error when they hear or read it.

If Christians are fighting amongst themselves,well, that is talked about in the bible, but, the disagreements don't go for long, because the one in error will see his error, and repent.

Please read your bible.

 

[Mr. Aaron]

Brother Bible Reader,
I am thrilled to know that you know the Lord! And to be sure of your salvation is indeed a blessing. I, too share a deep assurance of salvation in Christ Jesus. I will take your advice wholeheartedly. I will continue enthusiastically reading my Bible; where would we be without the Word of truth? See - we have some things in common! :yes That's a good start. We also agree that Christians need to discern truth from error; placing yourself in subjection to God's word demands it. We have in common that we hold our own particular theological stance because we believe we have discerned truth from error - based on God's Word alone. (ironic isn't it?) And we agree that you don't have to be 100% right to go to heaven - you only get there by believing that Jesus died for you! See how much we agree on?! :yes It seems that our biggest disagreement is only over who is in error about the arminian/calvinist debate, but since we're both saved (and we've established that it is entirely possible to be saved on either side of the debate), we really do need to be loving and graceful even while holding a firm stance on the truth. After all, we both serve the same Lord who clearly shows grace to us both. To be forgiven an incalculably large debt, but then to fail to show grace to my brother is wrong. Matthew 18. For this reason I will not skewer your beliefs any longer, even though I do believe you to be in error. It isn't befitting someone who was saved by God's grace. I fully expect to go to Heaven correct about some things and corrected by the Lord on others. And I suspect we have that in common as well. So though I could lampoon Arminianism, do it with ease, do it with zeal, do it with biting words, do it while patting myself on the back about being scripturally correct, though I could paint Arminians in a very negative light, I WON'T do it any more. I will not return any longer the treatment I have recieved. And I have no right to do so: if I believe that my Lord DIED on the cross for my brother to show him grace; if I believe that my Lord Jesus is now risen to the Father's right hand and is interceding for my brother there; if I believe that God has the hairs on my brother's head counted and has as many thoughts of him as the grains of sand; if I believe that God works all things together for the good of my brother, then I have no business whatsoever to attempt to tear him down or ridicule him unless God and I are on opposite sides! I dare not treat with hostility one for whom the Lord paid an extraordinarily dear price; that is treating Christ's sacrifice as a light or common thing. I only have liberty to love my brother and try to build him up, remembering that God's KINDNESS leads him to repentance. (Romans 2:4) Not a proud or mean spirited debate.

 

[Biblereader]

but then to fail to show grace to my brother is wrong. Matthew 18. For this reason I will not skewer your beliefs any longer, even though I do believe you to be in error.


We are commanded to rebuke those in error, and to exhort, and to stand firmly in the truth.
Pointing out sin, and error in beliefs, is not failing to show grace, or kindness.
It is a greater sin to let the person in error continue on the broad path that leads to destruction.

People misunderstand, especially nowadays, conviction and a strong faith. Perhaps you have been
made lukewarm, by political correctness and it's noose. I don't know, but, I'm guessing you probably
don't like the "icky" parts of the bible, that deal with hell, damnation, and hating sin.

 

[Mr. Aaron]

I have PM'd my brother. Love you, Biblereader.
But I think I'm done with this thread. Life needs to be healthier than this.

 

[Biblereader]

I have PM'd my brother. Love you, Biblereader.
But I think I'm done with this thread. Life needs to be healthier than this.

Did anything get through to you?
I said: We are commanded to rebuke those in error, and to exhort, and to stand firmly in the truth.
Pointing out sin, and error in beliefs, is not failing to show grace, or kindness.
It is a greater sin to let the person in error continue on the broad path that leads to destruction.


I truly hope you see it's ok to exhort, rebuke, chastise, and expose sin.

 

[truthlover]

Some observatioms, from a new poster.

First, four basic sources of truth are trustworthy authority, inspiring art, verifiable science, and historical patterns. Switzerland since Calvin was called to Geneva has set the all time, all nations record for peace, prosperity, and national honor. (about 450 years. Patrick's Ireland is in second place) It is the best demonstration of an affirmative answer to the Scriptural prayer that we would "lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence." by praying "for all men ,...and all who are in authority."

Score one for Calvin.

But, Calvinism? "By your words you will be saved, and by your words you will be condemned." The word, "Calvinism," is idolatrous, saying "Calvin is" in place of "Jehovah is." "I am of Cephas, I am of Apollos, etc." Nor have Calvin's writings inspired the same historical testimony as his life. Not bad, but not the same.

Free will? That's easy. "Great minds" are of no value whatsoever, if scripture is a trustworthy authority. "The weak, foolish, and the base" are the ones God prefers to talk to. Guys Like us. So, ask your Daddy yourself.

If you are hoping for a loving Father who doesn't talk to His children, leaving them to squabble over a mysterious written letter, you deserve to be confused. That, as we say, is low. So ask Him yourself. Then tell us what He told you about free will.

Or not. Some of you will choose to do this, while others will choose to talk yourselves out of it. Let's see what God has to say about that.
Truthlover

 

[truthlover]

No reports? Well, I asked Daddy about whether I had a will that made me responsible. I felt responsible, and I talked responsible, but what do I know?

He spoke very slowly, after saying "Yes." He said that freedom of choice was the freedom Jesus was talking about when He said that He came to set us free. This freedom is seriously lost by spiritual bondage. For most people, the "Calvinist" :bigfrown doctrine is true for most practical purposes. Unless someone else chooses salvation for us, there is infinitessimal hope. So God, and/or we, choose for others, praying and fasting to "loose the bonds of wickedness, etc (Isaiah 58)", until the Lord hears our prayer and draws them to Himself.

But as they discover freedom, He said, the choices they make move them forward into greater faith and holiness, or backward into ease and comfort, from which many backslide. Most perish from a lack of knowledge, because, "The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable." spoke James Garfield, an utterance I (God) gave him for you. Unless you choose suffering for the truth, discipline, I have no place for you with Me.

God told me that He is generous, but wise, with His grace. He gives all men some free choice which is enough to multiply faith unto salvation, if they choose wisely, choose life. Few make that choice: too lazy. insubordinate, unruly. So He moves on, until one of us who chose better, makes them a friend and asks Him for a second chance.

But, for almost all practical purposes, human behavior is controlled by spiritual beings. The micro-bad choices in fleeting moments make us responsible for all resulting evil actions, most of which we "know not what we do." Or the good choices lead us to do good beyond our highest dreams or plans or abilities.

 

[Nick]

My apologies for not reading all of the thread, but It's been here a while and I thought I might contribute.

I guesss you could call me a bit of a Calvinist - I believe in predestination and free will. I think Louis and Vic have put it any better than I could have done. Many here are definately confusing Calvinism with Hyper Calvinism. That's sad. It reminds me of the Westboro Baptist Church - "God hates fags" etc. They call themselves Christians and they have extreme views. Now us that are actually Bible-believing Christians would disagree with them and say they are not Christians and are extremists. The same could be said with Calvinism and Hyper Calvinism. There are some things Calvinism I believe has got right, and others not so much.

I am only 17 (almost 18 in a few weeks) and far greater minds in this thread have admitted that we cannot possibly wrestle with these huge ideas of scripture and understand it all, and I admit that now. I don't call myself a Calvinist, more of an Anglican, but does it matter? From my experience with studying the Bible, I have formed a hybrid view (probably like Louis) and some Calivnist theology is part of it, but there are many other parts. This just seems the most logical approach and conclusion to me, but I would not be surprised if everyone in this thread is wrong about predestination / election. How can we possibly conclude on the workings of God?

BTW, to the OP, I think the conclusion of Darwinism to Calvinism is both an unfair, illogical and ignorant conclusion. I am sorry, but that's the way I'm putting it. I mean no disrespect, but when I was thinking of my response to your post, Biblereader, that's exactly what I thought.

 

[Nick]

calvinist do witness

Of course calvinists wittness. How can one repent if they have not heard the Word? We are the tools that God uses to accomplish His plans. God hardens peoples' hearts and softens others, for reasons we cannot comprehend, but he doesn't force it on people when to accept His offer of True Life. But if He wills it - it will happen.

 

[Nick]

From the Wikipedia article on Calvinism (I thought this was useful):

Calvinism in its present form has multiple main tributaries. This makes the name "Calvinism" somewhat misleading if taken to imply that present doctrines of "Calvinist churches" or all Calvinist movements teach every major feature of classical Calvinism. Others are often credited with as much of a final formative influence on what is now called "Calvinism" as is Calvin himself.

BTW Biblereader and Watchman F - I am honoured to call you brothers. :amen


---

For any interested, I have been raised up in the Anglican Diocese of Sydney, this article will give you an idea of the background of where I come from, generally. It's the same link as in my signature.