Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Calvinism V Armenism

calinism V Arminism

  • Calvinism

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    4

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
It depends on how you define Calvinism, Angelic 1. I believe in the Sovereignty of God as do Calvinists from what I understand, but I do not believe in some other aspects of it. God bless.
 
I agree with Shana on this...

What exactly are you defining as "Calvinist"?

Are we talking TULIP here and does everyone have a clear understanding of what that is?

Does everyone have a clear understanding of Arminianism?

There are only two things that John Calvin and James Harmens disagreed on, and those two boiled down to one central doctrine with two opposing ideas of how it worked.

If you don't know what i mean the you should probably ask before you vote...I have found many Arminians hiding in Calvinist's skins and vice versa completely unbeknownst to themselves.

Check this out: http://gbgm-umc.org/UMHistory/Wesley/arminian.stm

God Bless
 
Why does it matter who agrees with Calvin or anyone? As Paul said, they are but servants of lGod ike any born again Christian. He also said that is what causes divsion among believers when one says "I follow Paul", and another, "I follow Apollos." Again Christ is whom we are to follow and if we all believed his words, then we would all be in unity. So let's put our focus on Christ and not look to other men as having the truth.
 
I believe that we do need to define what is meant by Calvinism or those teachings associated with it and the teachings associated with Arminianism to get a clearer understanding of what is being asked. I don't see myself as a Calvinist or an Arminianism but I do agree with a few teachings associated with Calvinism from what I understand of it. We may all follow Christ but may not have the same understanding of some of His teachings. May God guide us in the study of His word. God bless.
 
Calviinism - 5 points that derive from pagan and Gnostic teachings of the first & second centuries, always opposed by the early Church and the Apostles; A collection of fabricated doctrines of men, based on bad hermeneutics, and on Eisegesis of scripture; an unbiblical view of God's plan of salvation for mankind based on the rejection of the biblical "free will of man".

Yes, this is "my" definition, and I know much could be said against Arminian views from the opinion of Calvinists. But that of the first line cannot! I love my Calvinist and Baptist friends. But I do not like their doctrines! After 20+ years of searching the scriptures on this subject, I have concluded that without a doubt that Calvinism cannot be proven scricturally, grammatically from Greek, or historically. From this research I have written my first book "Faith Without Works" based on Scripture, and am about to finish my second book, "The Early Church verses Calvinism", which shows how the early Church was against all five points from the very beginning and how they opposed all of them in the teaching of the gnostics (with hundreds of quotes showing this). Then for Greek Grammer and Syntax I highly recommend Malcolm Lavender's books which show that Calvinism cannot be supported using the Greek language and that God truly does love the whole world and died for "all".
The main barrier that I see between Calvinism and Arminianism is the "Free Will" of man. If man does have free will, then Calvinism cannot stand. Scripture very clearly teaches Free will, which can only be denied by those who refuse to accept other than their presuppositions of truth.
The Calvinist/Arminian debate is an endless argument that gets nowhere. I have engaged in so many, I do not care to do so again. But I would urge any seeker of truth to check out parts of my books online @ http://WWW.Eternal-Truth.org and to look into Malcolm Lavenders writings at http://WWW.Crisispub.com
 
NEITHER.

However, while all five points of "five-point Calvinism" are wrong, and while Armininianism also has its errors, Armninianism does far less violence to the spirit of the Scriptures.
 
Just a couple of questions-How can man have complete free will if God works all things according to the counsel of His will? I believe in the Sovereignty of God meaning that God's will is the only sovereign and free will, but I don't believe that individuals are elected or predestined to be eternally lost. If man has complete free will, how is it that we are all cast as sinners from our birth? Can any of us prevent ourselves from being born into this state? Can someone who is in bondage free themselves from this bondage? Isn't one who is lost said to be in bondage, enslaved, blinded and deceived? Can someone who is lost please God even if he or she wanted to or would he or she even want to please God if the mind is carnal and at enmity with God, due to being in bondage, blinded, and deceived? God bless.
 
Shana said:
I believe in the Sovereignty of God meaning that God's will is the only sovereign and free will, but I don't believe that individuals are elected or predestined to be eternally lost.

If people aren't elected or predestined to be eternally lost, then how do they get there apart from free will?
 
Of course you know that I don't believe that they get there by choice ( in an eternal lost state) or are predestined to be in an eternal lost state, Free, but the discussion will not go in this direction. :biggrin We are all born to be sinners, with no choice of our own, right? We are unable to prevent this even if we wanted to. Can someone free himself or herself from this bondage or enslavement to sin by his or her own free will? God bless.
 
Consider the source.

Pastor Lyndon said:
Calviinism - 5 points that derive from pagan and Gnostic teachings of the first & second centuries, always opposed by the early Church and the Apostles; A collection of fabricated doctrines of men, based on bad hermeneutics, and on Eisegesis of scripture; an unbiblical view of God's plan of salvation for mankind based on the rejection of the biblical "free will of man".

Yes, this is "my" definition, and I know much could be said against Arminian views from the opinion of Calvinists. But that of the first line cannot! I love my Calvinist and Baptist friends. But I do not like their doctrines! After 20+ years of searching the scriptures on this subject, I have concluded that without a doubt that Calvinism cannot be proven scricturally, grammatically from Greek, or historically. From this research I have written my first book "Faith Without Works" based on Scripture, and am about to finish my second book, "The Early Church verses Calvinism", which shows how the early Church was against all five points from the very beginning and how they opposed all of them in the teaching of the gnostics (with hundreds of quotes showing this). Then for Greek Grammer and Syntax I highly recommend Malcolm Lavender's books which show that Calvinism cannot be supported using the Greek language and that God truly does love the whole world and died for "all".
The main barrier that I see between Calvinism and Arminianism is the "Free Will" of man. If man does have free will, then Calvinism cannot stand. Scripture very clearly teaches Free will, which can only be denied by those who refuse to accept other than their presuppositions of truth.
The Calvinist/Arminian debate is an endless argument that gets nowhere. I have engaged in so many, I do not care to do so again. But I would urge any seeker of truth to check out parts of my books online @ http://WWW.Eternal-Truth.org and to look into Malcolm Lavenders writings at http://WWW.Crisispub.com

I reviewed your site and Mr. Lavender's as well. I found both to be architypal straw man sites that leave the uninformed or misinformed barking at beliefs that Calvinists do not teach in the first place. Mr. Lavender is well known for being a supporter of Dave Hunt author of "What love is this?". Unfortunately I have difficulty in regard to the offerings of an author who has lost the indorsement of his own publisher, Multnomah, for the "unwillingness to acknowledge plain historical and theological errors presented in his book. A large number of booksellers also boycotted Hunt's divisive book having been surprised by his stubborn unwillingness to acknowledge impropriety. Specifically many claim the book engaged in historical revisionism with regard to the teachings of well-known five-point Calvinist preacher C.H. Spurgeon. It further made consistently inaccurate incriminations about Calvinist beliefs in order to skew the evidence to his favor." Above statements borrowed with permission.

Anyone who would like more info on these two gentlemen may find it here: http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/a ... ender.html
and here:
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/a ... nder2.html

I do not fully endorse every part of either system of theology, as I believe both are men's attempt to put into words and thought that which cannot. However accusing one side or the other on the basis of these
men's opinion or research, and I use the term very loosely, would be almost inexcusable.
 
Angelic if you say one or the other ism in the presence of some people it becomes a feeding frenzy. Never say one of these 2 isms or the other side will get mad armenian or calvinist.

I'm a calvinist and believe in predestination, but I don't think the arguement makes any difference. The differences between these 2 isms isn't a matter of salvation so I don't bother anymore. We will find out in Jesus comes back for sure but until then I think we have much better things to do like loving and serving widows and orphans or evangelizing.

Imagine the energy and fervor for defending our theology if it were put into evangelism or service. :biggrin
 
I agree with much of what you have said, Knarfks. I do believe that sometimes it might make a difference. I know that I have heard some folk say that they cannot believe in a God who would predestine individuals for eternal hell, without any opportunity for salvation, and others for salvation, whatever they understand this to be. if this is what is taught in Calvinism. There are too many contradictions. So as far as reaching out to some folk, it may make a difference. What do you think? God bless.
 
It is harder to reach out to people when we are publically arguing among ourselves. The contradictions have to do with the theological systems, not Christ. The two isms have different ideas, but at the center the truth of God's love and Christ's redeeming power is there in both.

It does make it difficult to reach out to people on 2 different levels. First off it shows divisions among the church, which of course I don't think it really does. My best friend and I disagree on this subject, but I still love him as a friend and I still look up to him a strong Christian as does he look to me a strong Christian.

The second difficulty is in the theologies themselves. I have met people who disagree with calvinism for the same reasons, "how can a loving God send people to hell" questions and the such. I have also heard "how can a person who is evil and dead in their sin accept and choose God who is completely holy". Both of these questions makes it difficult in reaching people. Just answer with scripture and the Holy Spirit. God will guide you to what they need to know. Theology does not = Christianity. There is a place and time for it, but for a person to love and accept Christ I could care less if they are armenian or calvinist at that point.

There will always be road blocks in reaching people, but there are none large enough that God can't work through.
 
It is harder to reach out to people when we are publically arguing among ourselves.
I agree that it may be hard for some, but for others, the discussions may help them in their own search for truth. They may be exposed to something in the discussions which God may use. I believe that we can discuss our differences on certain issues or subjects and still show the love of Christ by the way that we treat one another. Sometimes this can be very difficult to do when people are passionate on certain issues, but even the challenge can help show us the areas we may need to work on as well as help someone else.

The contradictions have to do with the theological systems, not Christ. The two isms have different ideas, but at the center the truth of God's love and Christ's redeeming power is there in both.
We probably differ in this respect as far as how we understand God's love. I cannot reconcile eternal hell for those who have no opportunity for salvation with God who is described as agape love, and as far as reaching out to others, this view (if this is what is presented in Calvinism) is a major stumbling block to many and rightly so in that the contradiction in what we understand as agape love and this perspective cannot be reconciled, if God is just.
I have also heard "how can a person who is evil and dead in their sin accept and choose God who is completely holy".
I have never heard this. Which perspective is this coming from? I do believe that God can overcome any stumbling block and this is one reason why I believe that He can use discussions like these to this end, especially if done in the right spirit.


Thanks for your feedback and God bless.
 
JCharlesScott,

I reviewed your site and Mr. Lavender's as well. I found both to be architypal straw man sites that leave the uninformed or misinformed barking at beliefs that Calvinists do not teach in the first place. Mr. Lavender is well known for being a supporter of Dave Hunt author of "What love is this?". Unfortunately I have difficulty in regard to the offerings of an author who has lost the indorsement of his own publisher, Multnomah, for the "unwillingness to acknowledge plain historical and theological errors presented in his book. A large number of booksellers also boycotted Hunt's divisive book having been surprised by his stubborn unwillingness to acknowledge impropriety. Specifically many claim the book engaged in historical revisionism with regard to the teachings of well-known five-point Calvinist preacher C.H. Spurgeon. It further made consistently inaccurate incriminations about Calvinist beliefs in order to skew the evidence to his favor." Above statements borrowed with permission.

I know Malcolm Lavender personally and have sat with him many hours in discussing these matters and his beliefs. I do not know where you get that he is a supporter of Hunt's writings, but I know Malcolm to be very against his beliefs and his use of Greek language. Hunt is a supporter of the views that Malcolm has set out to dispute in his writings. If there is any agreement with Hunt, it could not be on much having to do with eternal salvation.
I find it very interesting that anyone would call either of our sites "architypal straw man sites". Of course, anyone who will refuse to let go of their precious Calvinistic/pagan/gnostic/baptist (whichever fits) beliefs will naturally consider any evidence against them as such, without even considering the evidence. What amazes me is that such evidence can be ignored by anyone!
It is clear to me that you have not really read thru much on either site in order to get a clear view of eithers arguments. The most clear and perfect evidence could be revealed on these sites and people like you will never accept any of it because you are controlled by presuppositions of doctrine. Previosly taught beliefs are so engrained into the minds of people that they cannot see any differently. This is depracity, but not total. Their is still hope, if one will really hunger for truth and be willing to forsake presuppositions and all fear of what others will think. The amount of evidence is incredible!
I have another study I am working on concerning the Levitical sacrifice as it is a shadow of the Atonement of Christ, and what exactly the sacrifice of Christ did in light of OT teachings. This will reveal Christs death as a provision for sin and not a payment ( which means repentance is always necessary for forgiveness); and that sins were carried away - NOT taken to hell! They were cast as far as east is from the west. This shows the common Calvinist/baptist idea of payment (which supports OSAS) a false teaching.
A good understand of the Passover also reveals much of the same and more. The sacrifice of Christ has been made something that cannot be drawn from OT teaching and understanding of sacrifices. If Christ is to be the sacrificial Lamb of God, then it should line up with an OT understanding of sacrifices and offerings. Calvinism and baptist beliefs on salvation do not fit! Although Christ became the one time sacrifice for sin; the idea of how sacrifical offerings took place still applies. To change it is to make a different "man made" atonement.
 
Back
Top