Calvinism
-
-
First Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/04/2002
Location: USA
What is Calvinism? What "denominations" follow Calvin? Is it the same today as it was when Calvin was around?
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by AbidingNHim
What is Calvinism? What "denominations" follow Calvin? Is it the same today as it was when Calvin was around?
Hmmm... smells like a trick question to me......... 
But seriously, I have at least a couple of Baptist friends who say they are Calvinist, but I do not believe they ascribe to all of Calvin's doctrine literally.
My limited understanding is that one is labeled Calvinist if one believes in the "five points" (TULIP = total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, perseverance of the saints). I've also heard folks refer to themselves as "2-point Calvinists" if they believe just two of the five points, and so on.
The folks closest to me who ascribe to TULIP do not call themselves Calvinists -- they just say that they follow Reformed Theology.
Here's a link to one of my favorites entitled "What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism" by John Piper. www.desiringgod.org/library/topics/doctrines_grace/tulip.html
Blessings,
Diana
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10254 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
Most Baptists have their roots in Calvinism, as well as most varieties of other North American Protestants.
While they are not Calvinistic in name, they take much of their theology from them. Most Baptists are not aware of their development from Calvisnim. Presbyterians, though, are familiar with their Calvisitic roots. They may subscribe to TULIP, but it may be different shades of meaning from John Calvin's intentions.
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
I find that many Baptists bristle (to put it mildly) at the concept of predestination ("unconditional election")... and that they define Calvinism as "believing in predestination".
Those who most adamantly profess Calvinism, however, say you have to look at the whole picture -- not just one or two points.
Funny... I'm told the same thing about Catholicism... [x:)]
Blessings,
Diana
-
-
- Adminreputation
- 10254 Posts
Member since 07/25/2001
Location: USA
I actually don't know many who adamantly profess Calvinism. What groups claim true Calvinism?
"Look on the bright side, if this is the best they've got around here, in six months we'll be running this planet." (Planet of the Apes)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/08/2003
Location: USA
I don't know many either... and not really in groups. Among my friends it's considered a nonessential belief that's generally not discussed or criticized either way. But I'm aware that this is a subject that can (and does) divide churches.
In my own (Southern Baptist) church, we're about 25% Reformed and 75% Arminian (though no one claims the Arminian label)... But our new pastor is Reformed, so it may swing the other way before long!
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/04/2002
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by MadeAs1
Hmmm... smells like a trick question to me.........
no, I'm just having a discussion with a friend who is Presbyterian and we've had some intense converstations on "Predetermination", and I wondered what people thought? Do current day Presbyterians follow exactly what Calvin taught, or has the doctrines changed over the centuries, as many of the Christian sects have grow and changed and splintered and new doctrines evolve.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
While Calvin is arguably the most influential of all Protestant theologians, I'm in agreement that there are very few groups who hold to Calvinism in the strictest sense. As has been mentioned, many Baptist and Presbetyrians are 2 significant denominations founded upon Calvinism. The 'orthodox reformed' traditions would follow it much more strictly.
The groups I have seen in my area are usually 'Grace Fellowship' or some other group with 'Grace' in the title. The ones who were heavy into 5-point Calvinism tend to isolate from other groups.
Here is a Catholic response to the T.U.L.I..P.
A Tiptoe Through TULIP by James Akin
This is a very thoughtful and fair article that discusses the points in which Catholics could agree with Calvinists on.
quote:
A Tiptoe Through TULIP
by James Akin
Predestination means many things to many people. All Christian churches believe in some form of predestination, because the Bible uses the term [1], but what predestination is and how it works are in dispute.
In Protestant circles there are two major camps when it comes to predestination: Calvinism and Arminianism [2]. Calvinism is common in Presbyterian, Reformed, and a few Baptist churches. Arminianism is common in Methodist, Pentecostal, and most Baptist churches [3].
Even though Calvinists are a minority among Protestants today, their view has had enormous influence, especially in this country. This is partly because the Puritans and the Baptists who helped found America were Calvinists, but it is also because Calvinism traditionally has been found among the more intellectual Protestants, giving it a special influence.
Calvinists claim God predestines people by choosing which individuals will accept his offer of salvation. These people are known as "the elect" [4]. They are not saved against their will. It is because God has chosen them that they will desire to come to him in the first place. Those who are not among the elect, "the reprobate," will not desire to come to God, will not do so, and thus will not be saved [5].
Arminians claim God predestines people by pronouncing (but not deciding) who will accept salvation. He makes this pronouncement using his foreknowledge, which enables him to see what people will do in the future. He sees who will choose to accept his offer of salvation. The people who God knows will repent are those he regards as his "elect" or "chosen" people.
The debate between Calvinists and Arminians is often fierce. These groups frequently accuse each other of teaching a false gospel, at least on a theoretical level, although on a practical level there is little difference between the two since bonow about these subjects: First, Catholics are often attacked by Calvinists who misunderstand the Catholic position on these issues. Second, Catholics often misunderstand the teaching of their own Church on predestination. Third, in recent years there has been a large number of Calvinists who have become Catholics  . By understanding Calvinism better, Catholics can help more Calvinists make the jump.
Total depravity
Despite its name, the doctrine of total depravity does not mean men are always and only sinful. Calvinists do not think we are as sinful as we possibly could be. They claim our free will has been injured by original sin to the point that, unless God gives us special grace, we cannot free ourselves from sin and choose to serve God in love. We might choose to serve him out of fear, but not out of unselfish love [9].
What would a Catholic think of this teaching? While he would not use the term "total depravity" to describe the doctrine [10], he would actually agree with it. The accepted Catholic teaching is that, because of the fall of Adam, man cannot do anything out of s
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 03/11/2004
I'm Reformed, self-consciously desirous of understanding the tradition. I often 'prove' my point by telling people my 4th kid's name is Calvin and the 5th is Augustine. *grin*
the tradition is alive in a few smaller orthodox Reformed denominations:
CRC, OPC, PCA, EPC. Drawing on the resources of seminaries like Westminster, RTS, Covenant.
I've seen people at church with copies of Calvin' _Institutes of the Christian Religion_ either borrowing or returning the books (2 vol). I myself have been through the set twice, and believe it to be one of the most valuable books in my library.
TULIP is actually a shame to have happened. It is in fact, a response to j.Arminus and it not really organic to the systematic theology, but rather are several points that just happen to come up alot.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 09/04/2002
Location: USA
quote:
I've seen people at church with copies of Calvin' _Institutes of the Christian Religion_ either borrowing or returning the books (2 vol). I myself have been through the set twice, and believe it to be one of the most valuable books in my library.
so you use this as an additional resource other than the Bible alone? I thought that Protestants all believe in "Sola Scritpura"; doesn't this defy that very doctrine? Just curious?
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 03/11/2004
"Sola Scriptura"
means Scripture has ultimate authority.
in fact most orthodox Reformed are strongly creedal.
from: http://www.swrb.com/newslett/actualnls/DI_ch2.htm
quote:
By a creed, or confession of faith, I mean an exhibition, in human language, of those great doctrines which are believed by the framers of it to be taught in the holy scriptures; and which are drawn out in regular order, for the purpose of ascertaining how far those who wish to unite in church fellowship are really agreed in the fundamental principles of Christianity. Creeds and confessions do not claim to be in themselves laws of Christ's house, or legislative enactments, by which any set of opinions are constituted truths, and which require, on that account, to be received as truths among the members of his family. They only profess to be summaries, extracted from the scriptures, of a few of those great gospel doctrines which are taught by Christ himself; and which those who make the summary in each particular case concur in deeming important, and agree to make the test of their religious union. They have no idea that, in forming this summary, they make anything truth that was not truth before; or that they thereby contract an obligation to believe what they were not bound by the authority of Christ to believe before. But they simply consider it as a list of the leading truths which the Bible teaches, which, of course, all men ought to believe, because the Bible does teach them; and which a certain portion of the visible church catholic agree in considering as a formula, by means of which they may know and understand one another.
on sola scriptura there is an interesting essay at:
http://www.carm.org/catholic/biblesufficient.htm
actually addressed to RCC.
the five solas dont mean alone=by themselves.
but rather alone as in a level of authoritativeness.
my favorite example of sola fide is:
an eye alone is the organ of sight.
but an eye alone on a table can not see.
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 10/20/2003
quote:
Originally posted by rmwilliamsjr
on sola scriptura there is an interesting essay at:
http://www.carm.org/catholic/biblesufficient.htm
actually addressed to RCC.
the five solas dont mean alone=by themselves.
but rather alone as in a level of authoritativeness.
my favorite example of sola fide is:
an eye alone is the organ of sight.
but an eye alone on a table can not see.
Hi, rmwilliams, welcome to the Forum.
I've been to the C.A.R.M. website. Interesting that they put the Catholic Church in the Religious movements section, along with JW's and Mormons amd Raelians, etc. Wouldn't different Protestant groups such as Southern Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Nazarenes, etc, be defined as separate religious movements within the context of "spiritual systems" of the world?
I like the disclaimer in the Roman Catholicism section "If you are a Roman Catholic, please understand that this site is not meant to offend you in any way" when it does exactly that.
I also find it odd that the websites author - Matthew Slick went to a Presbyterian and Reformed Seminary, attends a Baptist church but is "non-denominational at heart".
Mark
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/19/2004
Location: USA
quote:
Originally posted by AbidingNHim
What is Calvinism? What "denominations" follow Calvin? Is it the same today as it was when Calvin was around?
1. I.
CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
I read the Athanasian Creed before Calvin, and in it the following words: "The right faith is,that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is both God and man.
God from the substance of the Father,begotten before the ages, and Man from the substance of [the mother],born in the ages.... Who, although He be God and Man,is yet not two but one Christ.One,not by conversion of the Divinity into flesh,but by the assumption of humanity into God:One altogether,not by confusion of substance,but by unity of Person.For as the rational soul and the flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ."
After I had read these words before Calvin,and, at the same time, before fifty priests his followers,I asked Calvin whether he had receded from these teachings in the Creed,which yet is acknowledged and received by the whole Christian world. Calvin said that he saw he had fully receded.
I asked why he had done so.He answered,that he had paid no attention to those words,and that now when he did pay attention,he saw that he had receded from them and had written according to his own thought.
(3) I asked what he thought now.He answered,that if the Creed is true,and if it is universally acknowledged as the true doctrine concerning the Trinity,and concerning the Divinity of Christ,he had clearly erred.
I asked whether he wished to acknowledge that the Divine and the Human,or God and Man in Christ is one Person,as soul and flesh are one man,according to the words in the Creed.
He answered, that he wished to do so,but that he could not,because he had confirmed himself differently. I asked whether he believed Christ to be one Person or two. He answered,one,if hypostatic union makes one,but that he had believed that the Son of God was another,and was with the Father.Jesus Christ was separated from Him,because He was in heaven.
I asked whether there were thus two Christs.He answered,that there were,and that therein he had receded from the Creed. I asked about the hypostatic union,from whom it was.
He answered, that it was from God the Father, and that this was the idea he had had I asked about the soul of Christ,what it was,whether it was not the Divine itself,since it is said in Luke,that it was from the Holy Spirit and the Power of the Most High.
He answered that he had seen this in Luke,but that he had tacitly believed within himself that it was from Joseph. I asked whether Christ as to His Human is not the Son of God,as is openly said in Luke 1[:35],and also when He was baptized,Matt.[3:17].
Moreover,also by John [John 1:34],and also when He was transfigured [Matt.17:5)(Mark 9:7)(Luke 9:35], and in many passages elsewhere.
He answered that when he had mentioned and thought of the Son of God, he had not meant Christ Jesus as to His Human.When I said that he understood what is contrary to Scripture,he answered that he sees that it is so,but that he had not thought that it was contrary to Scripture.
I wished him to renounce it,but he was conscious of his thought while in the world,and he said,that,on that account he could not. At last he confessed that he had thought Christ was the son of Joseph,but that he had not dared to write this.
I asked Calvin whether,on the basis of these words,he had admitted or thought of three Gods,although he had talked and was still talking about one God. He replied that he had thought of three like-minded Gods.
I asked how he could reconcile what he thought and said,and make them one,when it was permissible to confess each person as God in
-
-
New Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 03/11/2004
I am new to this forum, but not to online discussions.
it is customary to offer a link when quoting from a webpage in other forums. i have no reason to suspect that it is otherwise here. so as a matter of completeness i offer the following gained from a moment of googling--->
the previous message is part of a book:
quote---->
Welcome to the HEAVENLY DOCTRINES on the web. Written by Emanuel Swedenborg in the eighteenth century, these books contain the "Spirit of Truth" spoken of by Jesus when He said,
located at:
http://www.theheavenlydoctrines.org/
consider the source and the relative incoherence of the previous message as indicators of its worthiness. as a matter of textual analysis, it is not certain, but it appears to be a recounting of a vision with the author, luther, calvin, and numerous (at least 50) others in some heavenly place. i'd offer that such visions tell more about the author -Swedenborg then they do about the visionaries-calvin for instance.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 05/10/2002
Location: USA
Yes, it is customary to provide links or cite sources whenever quoting. And I agree about you assessment of Swedenborgianism. Thanks for representing the Reformed tradition - perhaps this will help us to understand it better.
|
|
Subscribe by Email
RSS