Calvinistic dispensationalists claming not to be Calvinist?

[anime4christ]

http://withchrist.org/MJS/armcalpaul.htm

I want to know what you guys think of this article. The two errors I see id that it misrepresents Calvinism to an extent that it only considers Covenant Theology Calvinists to be Calvinist and they fail to elaborate on what their view on grace, atonement, and election are; they give an extremely vague description. At the same time, they claim to be dispensationalists and fail to elaborate on that as well.

[John81]

This seems similar to something I read yesterday as I was doing some searches. The author seems to have his mind made up and a particular point he wants to make from the beginning. Therefore he takes what fits his views and puts it together to bolster his position while leaving out other factors.

The similar article I read the author began wanting to refute both Arminianism and Calvinism claiming neither were biblical and he had the biblical response. He was very particular in what he cited and left out a great deal so that his conclusions were drastically flawed.

I've found it difficult to find OBjective evaluations of this. What is most common is someone with an ax to grind but who is unwilling or incapable of tackling the full complexity of the topic.

[anime4christ]

Yeah, you have to keep in mind that while the majority of Calvinists also believe in Covenant Theology, it's not necessarily a part of Calvinism. Not to mention they have a horrible misrepresentation of what Covenant Theology is anyway. Also, many Arminians are dispensationalists, so dispensationalism doesn't automatically save them (or tie them to) Arminianism.

[Invicta]

I think the word is "Yes"

However, I believe in Particular Redemption. I am not a Calvinist, Calvin was a paedo Baptist which I am not. I do not believe in Covenant theology, and although it has been explained to me. I don't understand it. I am not a dispensationalist.

[anime4christ]

Well, if you believe in Particular Redemption, people will already classify you as a Calvinist, as they do me. Personally, I lean most towards New Covenant Theology, but I don't fit into any of the three systems perfectly. I'm also pre-millennial although most CT and NCT people are a-millennial.

[heartstrings]

Well, if you believe in Particular Redemption, people will already classify you as a Calvinist, as they do me. Personally, I lean most towards New Covenant Theology, but I don't fit into any of the three systems perfectly. I'm also pre-millennial although most CT and NCT people are a-millennial.

I see that alot...people who teach and hold to calvinsitic doctrine and then claim they are not calvinist? Why is that? And Calvinistic dispensationalist? What's that? What happened to just being a Christian...a Bible believer?
If you believe in "particular redemption", that's essentially the same as "limited atonement". It's a different label but the meaning is the same; that Jesus didn't didn't die for everyone. And if you believe that, then the rest of the first 4 points tie together. So yeah, if you beleive that one, I would say you're "calvinist" or if you prefer "reformed"... However you choose to label it, it's false doctrine. I can't understand it....people who hold to Arminian doctrine(losing salvation etc) and those who hold to "reformed" "calvinistic" doctrines of grace" doctrine(whatever label) can't let go of their false doctrine. I'm thankful to God that I was saved in a church that teaches sound doctrine. But **notice**...to you folks you still hold to these false doctrines, God wants you to know the truth as well.......Jesus died for everybody, Jesus loves the WORLD, God gave His only son for WHOSOEVER WILL. It is His divine will for EVERYONE to be saved. It is AGANST His will for ANYONE to go to Hell. 2 Peter 3:9. Do you know Him?

Limited atonement (or definite atonement or particular redemption) is a doctrine in Christian theology which is particularly associated with Calvinism and is one of the five points of Calvinism. The doctrine states that Jesus Christ's substitutionary atonement on the cross is limited in scope to those who are predestined unto salvation and its primary benefits are not given to all of humanity but rather just believers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement_(limited_view)

[anime4christ]

heartstrings, there are a lot of labels out there and I don't really like them myself, but whichever position you take on various Biblical issues, there is a label associated with that. I believe that I am a Christian and a Bible believer as well, but you would disagree with me on what is Biblical, and my positions can roughly be summed up as a Pre-Millennial New Covenant Reformed Baptist whether I like those labels or not. The same can be said about you; from what I gathered talking to you, you can be labeled as a Dispensationalist Arminian (without the possibility of apostasy) and an IFB. I don't like labels as much as you do, but they do exist, and just because there is a label for something, doesn't automatically make it Biblical or non-Biblical.

[John81]

Unfortunately labels are necessary, Equally unfortunate is that lables become distorted, lose their meaning, are added to and otherwise become so vague that different lables become necessary even though some try to hold to the old label as others try to create new ones.

Well said that most Christians (other than those who claim parts of the Bible are not for today for whatever reason) believe they are Bible believing Christians. For those truly trying to follow the Bible, whether they be Calvinist, Arminian, Baptist, Reformed Baptist, etc., even though they each hold to differences in some areas, each believes they have the right view of Scripture and therefore are Bible believing Christians.

So, again, we have a label, "Bible believing Christian" which can mean many different things depending upon who is using the label.

[anime4christ]

John

[JerryNumbers]

I see that alot...people who teach and hold to calvinsitic doctrine and then claim they are not calvinist? Why is that? And Calvinistic dispensationalist? What's that? What happened to just being a Christian...a Bible believer?
If you believe in "particular redemption", that's essentially the same as "limited atonement". It's a different label but the meaning is the same; that Jesus didn't didn't die for everyone. And if you believe that, then the rest of the first 4 points tie together. So yeah, if you beleive that one, I would say you're "calvinist" or if you prefer "reformed"... However you choose to label it, it's false doctrine. I can't understand it....people who hold to Arminian doctrine(losing salvation etc) and those who hold to "reformed" "calvinistic" doctrines of grace" doctrine(whatever label) can't let go of their false doctrine. I'm thankful to God that I was saved in a church that teaches sound doctrine. But **notice**...to you folks you still hold to these false doctrines, God wants you to know the truth as well.......Jesus died for everybody, Jesus loves the WORLD, God gave His only son for WHOSOEVER WILL. It is His divine will for EVERYONE to be saved. It is AGANST His will for ANYONE to go to Hell. 2 Peter 3:9. Do you know Him?

http://en.wikipedia....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement_(limited_view)

Yes, its kind of strange, people saying they're not Calvinist, yet they believe Christ died only for a select few while all others are doomed to hell at the moment of their birth.

I think they believe the other terminology sound more biblical than being called Calvinist. Either way, its false teachings, for the Bible is clear to those who have been born again and have the Holy Spirit dwelling within them, God wants all men to be saved, but yet He forces no man to be saved. That is Christ is at the door knocking, yet He will not come in uninvited.

By their definition all saved people are mere rOBots, and do not chose God, cannot reject God, they have no choice.

[anime4christ]

Jerry#s, about rOBots and God's sovereignty, you can check out my article here: http://lyosha.me/posts/12

I doubt you will like it or agree with it, but we do not believe saved people are rOBots at all; rather we believe the opposite.

Also, the only "Christians" which believe that atonement is completely unlimited are universalists. All true Christians, whether Arminian or Calvinist, believe that atonement is ultimately limited, as those who go to hell will not have their sins atoned for in the end.

Edited June 11, 2010 by anime4christ

[heartstrings]

Anime.......
I am not Arminian in any shape form or fashion; Arminius was as much a false teacher as Calvin was and the fundamental Bible doctrines existed long before Calvin or Arminius were even born.

As far as "limited atonement" goes; there are no limits to Christ's atonement. NONE. Christ atoned for every sin and every sinner...His blood sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary was sufficient for every single one. But it's up to each individual to accept that atonement by faith because Christ made it available to whosoever will.

Edited June 11, 2010 by heartstrings

[JerryNumbers]

Jerry#s, about rOBots and God's sovereignty, you can check out my article here: http://lyosha.me/posts/12

I doubt you will like it or agree with it, but we do not believe saved people are rOBots at all; rather we believe the opposite.

Also, the only "Christians" which believe that atonement is completely unlimited are universalists. All true Christians, whether Arminian or Calvinist, believe that atonement is ultimately limited, as those who go to hell will not have their sins atoned for in the end.

I do not need an article written by anyone. I've got God's Word written in that old book called the 'Holy Bible.' Its the inspired Word of God, absent of lies, containing only the truth.


If God offers the elect so much grace that they cannot turn it down, them they have no choice, for God has made the choice for them, so yes, if it were true they would be rOBots. By the way, its so clear in the Bible, Christ knocks at the door, yet He will not enter uninvited. Yet Calvinist doctrine does not teach that, it teaches irresistible grace for those it calls the chosen which is not what God teaches us within the pages of the Bible. Way to many are giving mans writen word to much authority, when God's written Word is the only authority.

Re 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Whosoever will, its so easy to understand, yet so many cannot understand it.

Re 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.


Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


Its plain, whosoever, yet this Gospel truth seems to be hidden from so many.

2Co 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

[anime4christ]

Anime.......
I am not Arminian in any shape form or fashion; Arminius was as much a false teacher as Calvin was and the fundamental Bible doctrines existed long before Calvin or Arminius were even born.

As far as "limited atonement" goes; there are no limits to Christ's atonement. NONE. Christ atoned for every sin and every sinner...His blood sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary was sufficient for every single one. But it's up to each individual to accept that atonement by faith because Christ made it available to whosoever will.

But you already told me earlier that you disagree with only one point of Arminianism, the one Arminius himself was unsure of: the possibility of apostasy. How does that make you not fit the Arminian label, whether or not you actually studied Arminius' teachings? So far, I haven't studied Calvin's teachings, but my view of soteriology fits his, and you call me Calvinist. That's a double standard. Pretty much, you are saying "I am not Arminian even though I agree with 4 out of 5 points, but you are a Calvinist regardless."

About atonement, are you telling me that there will be fully forgiven sinners in hell because they refused to believe even though that was atoned for? That makes absolutely no sense. The Bible says that people will be judged according to their works. How can they be judged according to works which were forgiven them and atoned for?

[anime4christ]

I do not need an article written by anyone. I've got God's Word written in that old book called the 'Holy Bible.' Its the inspired Word of God, absent of lies, containing only the truth.

Oy! First of all, that is rather harsh. You just called me unbiblical and a liar. Second, are you telling me that nothing any person ever said has influenced your interpretation of the Scriptures? I find that impossible to believe. I've seen you post articles by people before. How is it different when I post one that I wrote? (Did you even read it? I would like to see a valid challenge against it if you can present one.) Once again, a double standard.

Why, oh why must you have such a double standard when dealing with this issue? It does not make me respect your position any more, but rather makes me think you are not secure in it. I would love to be proven wrong on that though. The only way you can do that is if you discuss it calmly and civilly; not with throwing accusations at me.