|
Author
|
Topic: Is Calvinism a form of Gnostic Christianity?
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
Message 37 of 405 (742847)
11-25-2014 9:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 7 by Faith
04-11-2006 12:22 PM
|
|
Calvinism As A Belief Statement
Faith writes: But also, if your focus is on the Fall, why are you targeting Calvinism? The Fall was part of Christian theology from the earliest days. Luther certainly affirmed it. So did the Roman church. This is as good of a thread as any to resurrect and discuss Calvinism.
jar,in another thread writes: Remember it's mostly Calvinists that are fallen, the rest of us Christians understand there is no Fall in the Biblical stories. Most churches that I have attended(Non-Denominational,Assemblies of God,Free Methodist,and Nazarene) all talked at least briefly about Original Sin. The thing I don't agree with Calvinists about is the whole predestination thing.I believe that God chose everyone and that it is our decision to choose Him back. Of course, some would argue that such a God is weak and insecure...for even needing us to choose Him or caring that we do.
jar,again from another thread writes: Tell me, why would Jesus death and resurrection make anything Jesus is alleged to have said have any worth? I shall have to do some reading before I answer this. Lets focus on Calvinism. What,if anything, is good about Calvinist beliefs? Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by Faith, posted 04-11-2006 12:22 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 38 by Faith, posted 11-25-2014 9:20 AM | | Phat has replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 39 of 405 (742942)
11-25-2014 3:48 PM
|
Reply to: Message 38 by Faith
11-25-2014 9:20 AM
|
|
Re: Calvinism As A Belief Statement
OK lets go over the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism together.
gotquestions.org writes: Both systems can be summarized with five points. Calvinism holds to the total depravity of man while Arminianism holds to partial depravity. Total depravity states that every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin; therefore, human beings are unable to come to God on their own accord. Partial depravity states that every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin, but not to the extent that human beings are unable to place faith in God of their own accord. Note - classical Arminianism rejects "partial depravity" and holds a view very close to Calvinistic "total depravity." Personally, I believe that humans are born in need. Original Sin means Original Need to me. Need of a relationship with GOD and with others. Sometime I think life is a giant test. Needs and inequalities exist. Humans will be judged by how they respond to the challenges. Trusting in Jesus may be a necessary response for some, though I cannot see how those who do not trust in Jesus yet try their best at good works for good works sake and no other reason would be destined for hell. Personally, I believe that Jesus desires a relationship...with everyone.
Calvinism includes the belief that God’s grace is irresistible, while Arminianism says that an individual can resist the grace of God. Irresistible grace argues that when God calls a person to salvation, that person will inevitably come to salvation. Resistible grace states that God calls all to salvation, but that many people resist and reject this call. I agree that many reject and resist Grace. I find myself in a war with it, even. Critics say that I loathe myself and need to find peace in my soul. Perhaps they have a point...though I want to help others. I want younger people in particular to have a better life than I had. My lingering question is this: What defines a better life?
Calvinism holds to perseverance of the saints while Arminianism holds to conditional salvation. Perseverance of the saints refers to the concept that a person who is elected by God will persevere in faith and will not permanently deny Christ or turn away from Him. Conditional salvation is the view that a believer in Christ can, of his/her own free will, turn away from Christ and thereby lose salvation. Personally, I don't believe that God will ever let me go, though I fear that the tests and challenges will only get harder. The reason is that I believe my character is being honed and formed. Lots of pain and emotion in this process! Overall, I feel wiser each day, but at the same time as prone to sin and stupidity as I ever was. Its on me to resist it. God wont simply carry me over each minefield I encounter.
Calvinism sees the atonement as limited, while Arminianism sees it as unlimited. This is the most controversial of the five points. Limited atonement is the belief that Jesus only died for the elect. Unlimited atonement is the belief that Jesus died for all, but that His death is not effectual until a person receives Him by faith. I believe in unlimited atonement. In order for this to be true, and in order for free will to be preserved, some folk should thus be left alone even if they don't believe. Attempting to convince them to convert only makes them resist it more. Keep in mind that my beliefs are always growing. (Dare I say evolving?) I believe that Jesus died for all, that He lives today, and that He desires communion with whosoever responds. As for the rest? Who am I to judge them... That too is on Jesus.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 38 by Faith, posted 11-25-2014 9:20 AM | | Faith has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 44 by herebedragons, posted 11-25-2014 9:17 PM | | Phat has seen this message but not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 77 of 405 (743185)
11-27-2014 10:11 PM
|
|
|
Relationship vs Legalism
It is my opinion that many of the same people who see the Bible as limited to human expression, motive, and intention are the same people who, when asked, find the idea of a relationship with God as impossible. Moreover, despite the fact that they argue the impossibility of such a belief..nevermind a desire for one....they will attempt to portray believers as either dishonest, delusional, and/or living in an adult fantasy. Don't let it get to you. Take all criticism with love...
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 79 by jar, posted 11-27-2014 10:17 PM | | Phat has replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 80 of 405 (743189)
11-27-2014 10:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 79 by jar
11-27-2014 10:17 PM
|
|
Re: Relationship vs Legalism
phat writes: It is my opinion that many of the same people who see the Bible as limited to human expression, motive, and intention are the same people who, when asked, find the idea of a relationship with God as impossible. jar writes: ...or do they ask how some determines there is a relationship with God? All right. They ask for evidence. Since it is impossible to find evidence for the supernatural, it is thus impossible to believe 100% with no doubts, if one is honest. Thus, you take the position that it matters not what one believes but what one does. In your belief, the relationship is factually unprovable and thus it is not important.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 79 by jar, posted 11-27-2014 10:17 PM | | jar has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
Re: Calvinism As A Belief Statement
Dr.Adequate writes: I myself, as you know, don't think that God exists. I believe that God, on the other hand, knows that you exist and is not inclined to destroy or imprison you simply for refusing to believe n Him. In this I agree with jar.(one of the few things I actually agree with jar about!  )
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 78 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2014 10:11 PM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 203 of 405 (743533)
12-02-2014 4:41 AM
|
Reply to: Message 201 by NoNukes
12-02-2014 2:43 AM
|
|
Gnock Gnock? Who's There?
NoNukes writes: If you stick to worshiping Jesus rather than Lebron James or Calvin or Luther you'll stop being disappointed in your heroes. Excellent quote!  I believe that all wisdom comes from God, but I also believe that we learn from each other. John Calvin lived in a vastly different era than we do, and his experiences and perceptions were quite different from our own, including the wisdom that he learned from his contemporaries.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 201 by NoNukes, posted 12-02-2014 2:43 AM | | NoNukes has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
Like A Puppet On A String?
Cat Sci writes: Calvin himself says that God directly ordained sinful inclinations. But Calvin does not call this a sin on God' part and he actually says that it is not a sin. You, Faith, are the one who is saying that God directly ordaining sinful inclinations would be a sin on God' part. That is a rejection of Calvinism, which says the opposite of what you say. Some say God allowed for the possibility of evil but that humans chose to actualize it. Sinful inclinations would be defined as the possibility of evil, whereas the actualization is up to us.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 241 of 405 (744286)
12-09-2014 3:16 PM
|
Reply to: Message 239 by Faith
12-07-2014 12:52 AM
|
|
Human Experience formed through Communion
Faith writes: Psychologically we can't place our own experience within God's sovereignty I would argue that we have to place our own experience within Gods sovereignty or else we may find ourselves with a GOD who is unknowable. Faith, do you think that humanity can now build upon and perhaps improve our concepts of faith/belief beyond what Calvin did, or would you argue that Calvin was such a great intellect that we are unable to improve upon what he taught?
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
One of the major purposes of debate is to help you hone your arguments. Yours are pretty bad. They can use all the honing they can get.~Ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 239 by Faith, posted 12-07-2014 12:52 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 291 of 405 (744676)
12-14-2014 2:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 289 by PaulK
12-14-2014 12:39 PM
|
|
Just A Thought
Scripture writes: And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. This has me thinking! Allow me if i may.... jar always asserts that Jesus was but human while alive on earth. Yet the Nicene Creed states two relevant things in regard to this: Jesus was quote:
the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (ons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father
And yet Jesus quote:
came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man
Notice how the Lord was grieved that He had made man on the earth... and yet regarding His Son...(who also was made man) quote:
a voice from heaven said, This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.
Just a thought. Carry on. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 289 by PaulK, posted 12-14-2014 12:39 PM | | PaulK has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 340 of 405 (744968)
12-17-2014 11:37 AM
|
Reply to: Message 339 by jar
12-17-2014 11:18 AM
|
|
Re: Jacob and Esau
sounds as if the author was justifying partiality and preference---yet other scripture says that God is no respecter of persons...I will comment more as I read the context
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 339 by jar, posted 12-17-2014 11:18 AM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 341 by jar, posted 12-17-2014 12:20 PM | | Phat has replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 342 of 405 (745001)
12-17-2014 8:24 PM
|
Reply to: Message 341 by jar
12-17-2014 12:20 PM
|
|
Re: Jacob and Esau
It has been my observation that you think everyone knows or is capable of knowing, feeling, believing or experiencing God. I do not believe this--not to sound arrogant, elitist, or special--just a personal belief that I have, based on observation. I realize that many unbelievers are more moral.Morality and doing right to not require awareness of God. Few and far between are those who are believers and who are walking "in the Spirit". Such people do exist, in my experience though I myself cannot claim to be one of them. Pertaining to the topic, I agree that A God who foreknows damnation is evil. I believe that in communion with God, our actions literally write us into the future. Edited by Phat, : spelling
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 341 by jar, posted 12-17-2014 12:20 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 343 by jar, posted 12-17-2014 8:33 PM | | Phat has replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 345 of 405 (745017)
12-18-2014 5:34 AM
|
Reply to: Message 343 by jar
12-17-2014 8:33 PM
|
|
Re: Jacob and Esau
I made a mistake!  What I wanted to say is:
quote:
It has been my understanding that you believe that no one knows or is capable of knowing, feeling, believing or experiencing God.
You then say that jar writes: It ain't all about God. I maintain that it is about humanity in communion with God. I realize that you have quote:
No idea what that means or how communion with God might be possible.
This is why some of your critics suggest that your particular belief is more of a philosophy. I have explained my belief--that through Jesus the mediator Communion is possible.
quote:
...the God character is just incidental to explaining regional politics and tribal affiliations.
and thats the sad yet true reality. Humans are not interested in communion with God. Humans are simply interested in building their own little kingdom in the universe. You say it isn't all about God. I say it isn't all about us. Calvin would probably say that it is all about God and that humans are simply acting out the parts foreknown about us. I would disagree. God does not foreknow who is gonna be evil, only because we become the decisions that we make...by His Divine Grace. Our actions in the present determine the course of the future.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 343 by jar, posted 12-17-2014 8:33 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 350 by jar, posted 12-18-2014 8:35 AM | | Phat has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 347 of 405 (745019)
12-18-2014 5:43 AM
|
Reply to: Message 346 by AZPaul3
12-18-2014 5:36 AM
|
|
Re: Jacob and Esau
AZPaul3 writes: But it is (supposedly) your god that determined what sin is. And, as I understand it, your god determined that all of us, even the most innocent and helpless, are corrupt sinners just by virtue of being born? Our (supposed) sins were predetermined by your god and forced upon us all through no action of will of our own. All because some slick-talking snake spun the head of some ditzy broad? Something your god knowingly caused to happen to begin with? So "God is not the author of sin? Really? I believe that God created the possibility of evil. Satan actualized this possibility and humanity took a wrong turn---yet I agree that this was foreknown. God had a plan even before the transgression happened. By becoming fully human, Gods message to us was that there is a way out of the actualization of evil. The way out is the actualization of God in humanity...made possible by the mediator (Jesus Christ)
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 346 by AZPaul3, posted 12-18-2014 5:36 AM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 348 by AZPaul3, posted 12-18-2014 5:45 AM | | Phat has seen this message but not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 370 of 405 (745130)
12-19-2014 2:29 AM
|
Reply to: Message 352 by PaulK
12-18-2014 2:13 PM
|
|
Re: Thinking about Predestination and Sovereignty
If God has deliberately arranged for everything that happened before our birth, if there is no possibility that we could go against it then God bears the primary responsibility. It does not matter how God arranges it - even if God merely employs subtle and indirect manipulation, the fact of the inescapable nature of the manipulation is sufficient. Would God be responsible if He only foreknew what we ended up doing? If we become (and became) the decisions that we make, how is God responsible simply by foreknowing? To argue that we could not have possibly done anything else than what we did does not absolve us of the responsibility for the many choices we made in life. People get upset that they can never decide to do anything without God foreknowing it---thus they are trapped. I say get over it. If you end up thinking God to be evil and a God to be opposed, you likely will do just that---and again it will be your free decision---even if God foreknew what you would end up doing.
Saying, "I don't know," is the same as saying, "Maybe."~ZombieRingo
It's easy to see the speck in somebody else's ideas - unless it's blocked by the beam in your own.~Ringo If a savage stops believing in his wooden god, it does not mean that there is no God only that God is not wooden. (Leo Tolstoy)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 352 by PaulK, posted 12-18-2014 2:13 PM | | PaulK has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 371 by PaulK, posted 12-19-2014 2:46 AM | | Phat has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 372 by NoNukes, posted 12-19-2014 3:39 AM | | Phat has not replied |
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 383 of 405 (825089)
12-07-2017 8:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 104 by Faith
11-29-2014 10:17 AM
|
|
Is God represented fairly in scripture?
Here is a snippet of a debate between Dr.Adequate and Faith on the subject of Calvinism. Faith defends her position better here than she has recently.
Dr.Adequate writes: I found so many quotations in the Institutes in so short a space of time that I stopped looking and threw away half of what I'd found. Here's Calvin on how whimsical God's decisions are, and why. * At last, he concludes that God hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth (Rom. ix. 18). You see how he refers both to the mere pleasure of God. We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just that it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will. When God is said to visit in mercy or harden whom he will, men are reminded that they are not to seek for any cause beyond his will. * The sum is, that God by gratuitous adoption forms those whom he wishes to have for sons; but that the intrinsic cause is in himself, because he is contented with his secret pleasure. * Paul clearly declares that it is only when the salvation of a remnant is ascribed to gratuitous election, we arrive at the knowledge that God saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure. * It is plainly owing to the mere pleasure of God that salvation is spontaneously offered to some, while others have no access to it. * God has always been at liberty to bestow his grace on whom he would. Not to ask in what respect the posterity of Abraham excelled others, if it be not in a worth, the cause of which has no existence out of God, let them tell why men are better than oxen or asses. * It is certainly easy to prove that the commencement of good is only with God, and that none but the elect have a will inclined to good. But the cause of election must be sought out of man; and hence it follows that a right will is derived not from man himself, but from the same good pleasure by which we were chosen before the creation of the world. * In man good will precedes many gifts from God; but among these gifts is this good will itself. (August. Enchiridion ad Laurent. cap. 32). Whence it follows, that nothing is left for the will to arrogate as its own. This Paul has expressly stated. For, after saying, It is God which worketh in you both to will and to do, he immediately adds, of his good pleasure (Phil. ii. 13); indicating by this expression, that the blessing is gratuitous.
Faith writes: The error in your reasoning is that you impose your own limited thinking on what the sovereignty of God would look like -- if you were God basically. You are unable to take into account all the other attributes of God, His love, goodness, kindness, mercy, longsuffering / patience etc. etc. etc. You more or less think of him as a human being rather than as the omnipotent omniscient Creator who is everywhere at once and "in whom we live and move and have our being." Yes, God IS all the causes in a sense. Everything we do is IN Him, OF Him, and yet we have motives of our own at the same time, even follow "laws" of our own. God CAN'T be arbitrary or whimsical. Everything He does follows law, in a sense He IS Law Himself. Some have said that. The moral law operates inexorably without a moment's ceasing because there is a sense in which it is God Himself. According to your view we should all FEEL like automatons if Calvin's understanding of God is correct. That's the problem with discussing Calvinism, at some point we all get tied up in knots trying to imagine ourselves as predetermined while at the same time we're perfectly aware that in our personal experience we could do whatever we feel like doing at any given moment. Get up from the computer and even I in my little apartment have dozens of options available to me. God is just a lot bigger and more complex than we can imagine. All Calvin is doing is emphasizing the few points in scripture that make it clear that nothing at all ever happens without God. He elaborates it and you get all offended about the idea but that's because you don't have a big enough idea of God.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~" If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 104 by Faith, posted 11-29-2014 10:17 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2