Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Calvinism


Go to solution Solved by John Young,

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, SureWord said:

I don't recall using that word but I once read some stuff by a Calvinist who taught that God will toss babies into hell. Now I imagine he's a "Hyper" yet, let me tell you, he was the most consistent Calvinist in his beliefs I've ever read. 

Have you ever met a Calvinist who did not believe they were a member of the elect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
3 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Have you ever met a Calvinist who did not believe they were a member of the elect?

ALL who are saved think they are part of the elect, the difference is how they became elected!

4 hours ago, SureWord said:

I don't recall using that word but I once read some stuff by a Calvinist who taught that God will toss babies into hell. Now I imagine he's a "Hyper" yet, let me tell you, he was the most consistent Calvinist in his beliefs I've ever read. 

Think Calvin stated Hell is full of babies, but I choose to see it as God has chosen to elect unto salvation all infants!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
3 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Have you ever met a Calvinist who did not believe they were a member of the elect?

Not sure what you asking? "They" as in babies or "they" as in Calvinists in general?

All I know is if you hold to that false doctrine you end up with babies getting tossed into eternal flames and are supposed to give God thanks for that which that gentleman said we must do.

They only way out of this logical conclusion is to say:

1) Only elect babies die, i.e. God knew in his foreknowledge the babies who would die and predestined them to heaven.

 or

2) Babies who die before the age of accountability were never predestined either way and are not a member of the bride of Christ specifically but a member of the family of God in general (Ephesians 3:14,15).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
43 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

ALL who are saved think they are part of the elect, the difference is how they became elected!

Think Calvin stated Hell is full of babies, but I choose to see it as God has chosen to elect unto salvation all infants!

Honestly, I've never read Calvin's (aka the Protestant Pope) writings himself but I have read some of Loraine Boettner who was a hardcore, 5-Point Tuliper and was as dry, boring and dreadful as can be. I've heard he took Calvin's heresies even farther than Calvin ever imagined (minus the burning at the stake of anyone who disagreed with him).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 11/30/2020 at 3:31 PM, SureWord said:

Not sure what you asking? "They" as in babies or "they" as in Calvinists in general?

All I know is if you hold to that false doctrine you end up with babies getting tossed into eternal flames and are supposed to give God thanks for that which that gentleman said we must do.

They only way out of this logical conclusion is to say:

1) Only elect babies die, i.e. God knew in his foreknowledge the babies who would die and predestined them to heaven.

 or

2) Babies who die before the age of accountability were never predestined either way and are not a member of the bride of Christ specifically but a member of the family of God in general (Ephesians 3:14,15).

Or that the father had chosen them all to be found elected to salvation in Christ, doing for them what could not do for themselves!

On 11/30/2020 at 3:36 PM, SureWord said:

Honestly, I've never read Calvin's (aka the Protestant Pope) writings himself but I have read some of Loraine Boettner who was a hardcore, 5-Point Tuliper and was as dry, boring and dreadful as can be. I've heard he took Calvin's heresies even farther than Calvin ever imagined (minus the burning at the stake of anyone who disagreed with him).

Predestination and Election are biblical, but have to make sure its as jesus and paul tought, not as some such as calvin did! I hold to biblical calvinism....

On 11/30/2020 at 5:53 PM, Jim_Alaska said:

This thread is becoming downright ridiculous, which usually happens when a Calvinist discussion gets going. Those lining up with Calvin always take the argument to the extreme ridiculous.

We Calvinists are not all of the same  though, as some are Hyper, some Charasmatic, some Calvinites, others like me just Calvinist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
9 hours ago, DaChaser said:

Or that the father had chosen them all to be found elected to salvation in Christ, doing for them what could not do for themselves!

Predestination and Election are biblical, but have to make sure its as jesus and paul tought, not as some such as calvin did! I hold to biblical calvinism....

We Calvinists are not all of the same  though, as some are Hyper, some Charasmatic, some Calvinites, others like me just Calvinist!

DaChasing your tail on this one, brother. You are making way more of predestination than what it is.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.- Romans 8:29

Paul is talking about being predestined to conformity to the image of Christ. Remember, context, context, context. The context of the passage is about our bodies being changed from corruption to incorruption as Jesus Christ's body. The "firstborn among many brethren" has to do with a resurrected and glorified body  Nothing about God presdestinating some to heaven and some to hell as Calvin taught. 

God foreknew who would use their freewill to accept his Son as Savior and set it in stone that they would be as Jesus someday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 11/21/2020 at 9:46 AM, Baptistsenior said:

Why do preachers that condemn Calvanism quote Spurgeon so often?  

I've found that when one person uses the word "Calvinism" it rarely means what everyone else thinks it means. There are a lot of different types of Calvinism, some of them hyper-Calvinism, some of them simply "once saved always saved"-ism. You can't assume any one speaker is using your exact definition. You have to feel out what exactly they mean. For my part, I consider myself a 4.5 point Calvinist, because one of the points is often interpreted in a different way than I interpret it. And that presents another problem, even the very points of Calvinism (TULIP) can be interpreted differently, mean two "5-point" Calvinists may disagree a lot, but both still consider themselves staunch Calvinists. I've found some people who denounce Calvinism can be more staunch Calvinists that some who claim they actually are Calvinist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
22 hours ago, Danny Carlton said:

I've found that when one person uses the word "Calvinism" it rarely means what everyone else thinks it means. There are a lot of different types of Calvinism, some of them hyper-Calvinism, some of them simply "once saved always saved"-ism. You can't assume any one speaker is using your exact definition. You have to feel out what exactly they mean. For my part, I consider myself a 4.5 point Calvinist, because one of the points is often interpreted in a different way than I interpret it. And that presents another problem, even the very points of Calvinism (TULIP) can be interpreted differently, mean two "5-point" Calvinists may disagree a lot, but both still consider themselves staunch Calvinists. I've found some people who denounce Calvinism can be more staunch Calvinists that some who claim they actually are Calvinist. 

But don't they all believe that infants are predestinated to go to heaven or hell whether they want to or not?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
2 hours ago, Baptistsenior said:

But don't they all believe that infants are predestinated to go to heaven or hell whether they want to or not?  

The explanation for this is that only predestined babies die. Of course, that's just pulling nonsense out of their hat to bolster their heretical doctrine. 

What's really amazing is how Baptists, particularly IFB, have swallow the TULIP heresy when originally they were persecuted by those who held it. I think in order to fit in with the intellectuals at Christian Universities many IFBers have succumbed to the heresy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
21 hours ago, SureWord said:

The explanation for this is that only predestined babies die. Of course, that's just pulling nonsense out of their hat to bolster their heretical doctrine. 

What's really amazing is how Baptists, particularly IFB, have swallow the TULIP heresy when originally they were persecuted by those who held it. I think in order to fit in with the intellectuals at Christian Universities many IFBers have succumbed to the heresy. 

never knew how they believed on the infant issue till I read  the London Baptist Confession of faith of 1689

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
On 12/7/2020 at 8:10 AM, Baptistsenior said:

But don't they all believe that infants are predestinated to go to heaven or hell whether they want to or not?  

But whether that belief denotes mere Calvinism or hyper-Calvinism is the question and different people have different answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...