The Hypers

[Carbon]

In this thread, I am going to post both Hyper-Arminianism and Hyper-Calvinism.
Which one you think is worse and why?

Many people, before they even know what Calvinism is all about, just assume it's Hyper-Calvinism mainly because that's what they are told by others who do not understand.

But check them out and see what you think.

Do you agree or disagree with these definitions given? If not, why not?

 

[Carbon]

Hyper-Arminianism is a term sometimes used to describe a more extreme or radical form of Arminianism, often characterized by an emphasis on human free will and the ability to resist or even reject God's grace. It can be seen as a reaction to Calvinism, sometimes pushing Arminian principles to their logical extreme.

Here's a more detailed explanation:

Core Concepts:

• Arminianism:
  .Opens in new tab
  Arminianism, in contrast to Calvinism, emphasizes human free will and the ability to choose or reject God's offer of salvation. It posits that God's grace is offered to all and that individuals must freely accept or reject it.
  
  
• Hyper-Arminianism:
  .Opens in new tab
  This term is used to describe a more radical version of Arminianism that may go further in emphasizing human autonomy in salvation.
  
  
• Key Differences with Calvinism:
  .Opens in new tab
  While Calvinism emphasizes God's sovereignty and predestination, Hyper-Arminianism often downplays these aspects, highlighting the individual's role in determining their salvation.
  

Characteristics of Hyper-Arminianism:

• Strong Emphasis on Free Will:
  .Opens in new tab
  Hyper-Arminians often stress the idea that humans have absolute freedom to choose or reject God's grace, sometimes to the point where God's actions are seen as reactive rather than proactive.
  
  
• Conditional Election:
  .Opens in new tab
  Instead of God choosing who will be saved, Hyper-Arminians might believe that God elects those who, in their free will, choose to believe.
  
  
• Possible Loss of Salvation:
  .Opens in new tab
  Some Hyper-Arminian views include the possibility of losing salvation after it has been initially received, due to the emphasis on continued human choice.
  
  
• Potential for Superficial Evangelism:
  .Opens in new tab
  A critique of Hyper-Arminianism is that its emphasis on human decision can lead to a focus on superficial conversions and evangelistic methods that are more about numbers than genuine transformation.
  

Examples of Hyper-Arminian Views:

• Open Theism: Some open theists, who believe that God does not know the future with certainty, are considered to hold a Hyper-Arminian perspective, as they emphasize the openness of the future and the influence of human choices on God's actions.
  

In Essence: Hyper-Arminianism, while not a universally accepted term, is used to describe a perspective that takes Arminian principles to an extreme, often at the expense of highlighting God's sovereignty and the role of divine grace in salvation.

 

[Carbon]

Hyper-Calvinism is a term used to describe a theological position that emphasizes God's sovereignty to an extreme degree, often at the expense of human responsibility and the universality of the gospel offer. It's a specific interpretation of Calvinism that برخی critics argue distorts traditional Calvinistic beliefs.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
Core Tenets of Hyper-Calvinism:

• Strong Emphasis on God's Sovereignty:
  Hyper-Calvinism prioritizes God's absolute sovereignty in salvation, often to the point of minimizing human agency and responsibility.
  
  
• Denial of the Gospel Offer:
  Some forms of Hyper-Calvinism deny that the gospel is a genuine offer to all who hear it. They might argue that the gospel is only meant for the elect, and therefore, it's inappropriate to universally call on all to repent and believe.
  
  
• • Withholding Assurance:
    Some Hyper-Calvinists may hesitate to offer assurance of salvation to professing Christians, believing that some might not be among the elect.
    
  • Limited View of God's Love:
    Hyper-Calvinism can lead to a limited view of God's love, suggesting that God's saving love is only for the elect, not for all.
    

Key Differences from Traditional Calvinism:

• • Human Responsibility:
    .Opens in new tab
    Traditional Calvinism acknowledges the depravity of man but also emphasizes human responsibility in responding to the gospel. Hyper-Calvinism tends to minimize or deny this responsibility.
    
  • Universality of the Gospel Offer:
    .Opens in new tab
    Calvinism, while affirming God's sovereignty in election, still emphasizes the call to repentance and faith for all who hear the gospel. Hyper-Calvinism may restrict the offer of salvation to the elect.
    

Examples of Hyper-Calvinist viewpoints:

• • A belief that preaching the gospel to all is ineffective because God has already chosen who will be saved.
    
  • A reluctance to invite all to believe in Christ, due to a concern that some might not be among the elect.
    
  • A view that God's love is limited to the elect, and not extended to those who are not chosen for salvation.
    

In essence, Hyper-Calvinism is a theological perspective that, while rooted in Calvinistic thought, takes certain aspects of Calvinism to an extreme, potentially leading to a diminished view of God's love, human responsibility, and the scope of the gospel message.

 

[Carbon]

Hyper-Arminianism:
This term is used to describe a more radical version of Arminianism that may go further in emphasizing human autonomy in salvation.

I wonder at what point does it become semi-pelagian. Which I believe is heresy.

Any religion that compromises the Christian doctrines of original sin and the necessity of divine grace for salvation is heresey as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Hazelelponi]

...

 

[Carbon]

I don't believe the things on the hyper list. Generally speaking. But there's one in my ear. I haven't known. not for sure about things.

Sorry, I'm not following. One of my slow days, I think. Sorry.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Sorry, I'm not following. One of my slow days, I think. Sorry.

I don't know what hyper Calvinist is versus normal Calvinist. That's all.

 

[Carbon]

I don't know what hyper Calvinist is versus normal Calvinist. That's all.

Oh okay.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I have known many Arminians and most if not all believe the hyper-Arminian position from talking with them.

@Carbon, you are correct when you stated:

Many people, before they even know what Calvinism is all about, just assume it's Hyper-Calvinism mainly because that's what they are told by others who do not understand.

This has been my experience with Arminians, that label me a Hyper-Calvinist.

They will go to their grave saying how they understand the 5 points and they are doctrines of demons, etc.

@Carbon said:

Which one you think is worse and why?

In my opinion it would be Hyper-Arminianism.

My reasoning is that these people are sovereign over God, though they may not consciously believe that.

This is what being blinded by pride looks like and could actually be self-deception and not true regeneration.

On the other hand Hyper-Calvinism

• Denial of the Gospel Offer:
  Some forms of Hyper-Calvinism deny that the gospel is a genuine offer to all who hear it. They might argue that the gospel is only meant for the elect, and therefore, it's inappropriate to universally call on all to repent and believe.
  
  
• • Withholding Assurance:
    Some Hyper-Calvinists may hesitate to offer assurance of salvation to professing Christians, believing that some might not be among the elect.
  • Limited View of God's Love:
    Hyper-Calvinism can lead to a limited view of God's love, suggesting that God's saving love is only for the elect, not for all.

Withholding assurance can be dangerous to a point.

I have heard Pastors teach we should never give assurance to a new convert, because you really do not know if they are regenerated.

Many Calvinist believe that God loves only the elect.

I am on the fence because there are Bible verses that suggest both.

The rich young man comes to mind in Mark, particularly....

Mark 10:21 And looking at him, Jesus loved him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

And we know the rich man was not regenerate.

I cannot wrap my mind around God's love, especially when I am doing a self-exam.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[fastfredy0]

Examples of Hyper-Calvinist viewpoints:

• • 1) A belief that preaching the gospel to all is ineffective because God has already chosen who will be saved.
  • 2) A reluctance to invite all to believe in Christ, due to a concern that some might not be among the elect.
  • 3) A view that God's love is limited to the elect, and not extended to those who are not chosen for salvation.

1) I can see the Hyper_Calvinist's point. Preaching the gospel by men is not the "first cause" of salvation in men, but it can be the "second cause". God is the "first cause" of the salvation of all men and God is free to chose any "second cause". My guess is this statement is a better representation of their view.
2) I can't speak to that. That's the rumor I've heard.
3) Depends on your definition of love. Agape love is volition to favor. God's love is far, far greater for the elect than the unelect. If
one depends love as God's causing a person to eventually be renewed in His image, then the Hyper-Calvinist viewpoint is correct.
Habakkuk 1:13b You cannot look on wickedness with favor [love]
Colossians 3:14 Love is a bond of unity .... This unity is spoken of in the Upper Room Discourse with words like you in me and
me in you. This "bond of unity" which is an attribute of love applies to the elect only
Do the following verses portray God as loving the unelect?
Psalm 5:5 The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers.
Daniel 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame
and everlasting contempt.
John 3:36 He that believeth [the elect] on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son [the unelect]
shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
To some degree God does love everyone. Matt. 5:45 "the rain falls on the just and the unjust". Having rain fall is a favorable thing and thus an indication of love, though it be limited.

 

[Carbon]

This has been my experience with Arminians, that label me a Hyper-Calvinist.

They will go to their grave saying how they understand the 5 points and they are doctrines of demons, etc.

Yes, sadly. Many won’t even genuinely listen when we try to explain

My reasoning is that these people are sovereign over God, though they may not consciously believe that.

Yea I believe you’re right.

This is what being blinded by pride looks like and could actually be self-deception and not true regeneration.

I suppose you’re right. Could be

On the other hand Hyper-Calvinism


Withholding assurance can be dangerous to a point.

I have heard Pastors teach we should never give assurance to a new convert, because you really do not know if they are regenerated.

Sadly this pastor takes it into his own hands. I believe if people confess Christ, we should treat them like a believer.

Many Calvinist believe that God loves only the elect.

I am on the fence because there are Bible verses that suggest both.

The rich young man comes to mind in Mark, particularly....

Mark 10:21 And looking at him, Jesus loved him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

And we know the rich man was not regenerate.

I cannot wrap my mind around God's love, especially when I am doing a self-exam.

Well I believe scripture does teach God does hate the reprobate

 

[Carbon]

1) I can see the Hyper_Calvinist's point. Preaching the gospel by men is not the "first cause" of salvation in men, but it can be the "second cause". God is the "first cause" of the salvation of all men and God is free to chose any "second cause". My guess is this statement is a better representation of their view.
2) I can't speak to that. That's the rumor I've heard.
3) Depends on your definition of love. Agape love is volition to favor. God's love is far, far greater for the elect than the unelect. If
one depends love as God's causing a person to eventually be renewed in His image, then the Hyper-Calvinist viewpoint is correct.
Habakkuk 1:13b You cannot look on wickedness with favor [love]
Colossians 3:14 Love is a bond of unity .... This unity is spoken of in the Upper Room Discourse with words like you in me and
me in you. This "bond of unity" which is an attribute of love applies to the elect only
Do the following verses portray God as loving the unelect?
Psalm 5:5 The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers.
Daniel 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame
and everlasting contempt.
John 3:36 He that believeth [the elect] on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son [the unelect]
shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
To some degree God does love everyone. Matt. 5:45 "the rain falls on the just and the unjust". Having rain fall is a favorable thing and thus an indication of love, though it be limited.

Great points!

 

[David Lamb]

I don't know what hyper Calvinist is versus normal Calvinist. That's all.

I understand hyper-Calvinism to over-emphasise God's sovereignty to such at extent as to take away human responsibility, which sometimes results in not emphasizing the need to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. I have also heard hyper-Calvinists say that is presumptuous to say that you have assurance of eternal life/salvation. (I remember once on holiday going to a hyper-Calvinist church by mistake, and the preacher said almost exactly that about assurance!) As Carbon has said, many non-Calvinists seem to view hyper-Calvinist beliefs as "normal" Calvinism.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

Yes, sadly. Many won’t even genuinely listen when we try to explain

Yea I believe you’re right.

I suppose you’re right. Could be

Sadly this pastor takes it into his own hands. I believe if people confess Christ, we should treat them like a believer.

Well I believe scripture does teach God does hate the reprobate

Scripture does teach the He does hate the reprobate.

Like I said, I am on the fence on this.

 

[Hazelelponi]

I understand hyper-Calvinism to over-emphasise God's sovereignty to such at extent as to take away human responsibility, which sometimes results in not emphasizing the need to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved. I have also heard hyper-Calvinists say that is presumptuous to say that you have assurance of eternal life/salvation. (I remember once on holiday going to a hyper-Calvinist church by mistake, and the preacher said almost exactly that about assurance!) As Carbon has said, many non-Calvinists seem to view hyper-Calvinist beliefs as "normal" Calvinism.

I know someone with whom I differ theologically to a degree which shows in a couple areas like myself wanting to share my faith with others. It often gives me pause as I listen to theim out of love love. I would consider hyper Calvinism to be more slightly neurotic about absolutely everything, as opposed to heresy but I don't suppose I know or can really say. Things can collapse at times, at the least in speech though. I do that too sometimes, but it's not as intentional perhaps, or not as informed sometimes.

My consideration of God has the same level of sovereignty though, I just feel more freedom under it I think, for things like freely sharing the Gospel especially, but for me it's because my God is just that sovereign I can let go enough to trust Him. It's not in our control and honestly? That's a good thing!

I don't think assurance of salvation should be denied. Scripture teaches assurance coupled with human responsibility. God can enable both, certainly, for His people. I think it's just a matter of consistently teaching both. There's a healthy back and forth we can learn to balance.

At any rate, we learn new things every day. I do think I understand something better about hyper Calvinism, I think as a side by side comparison, Arminians are worse as it's too man centered.

 

[David Lamb]

I know someone with whom I differ theologically to a degree which shows in a couple areas like myself wanting to share my faith with others. It often gives me pause as I listen to theim out of love love. I would consider hyper Calvinism to be more slightly neurotic about absolutely everything, as opposed to heresy but I don't suppose I know or can really say. Things can collapse at times, at the least in speech though. I do that too sometimes, but it's not as intentional perhaps, or not as informed sometimes.

My consideration of God has the same level of sovereignty though, I just feel more freedom under it I think, for things like freely sharing the Gospel especially, but for me it's because my God is just that sovereign I can let go enough to trust Him. It's not in our control and honestly? That's a good thing!

I don't think assurance of salvation should be denied. Scripture teaches assurance coupled with human responsibility. God can enable both, certainly, for His people. I think it's just a matter of consistently teaching both. There's a healthy back and forth we can learn to balance.

At any rate, we learn new things every day. I do think I understand something better about hyper Calvinism, I think as a side by side comparison, Arminians are worse as it's too man centered.

Thank you for that!

 

[ElectedbyHim]

Can someone explain what we do with this verse....

Mark 10:21 And looking at him, Jesus loved him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Was this just the humanity of Christ that loved this reprobate?

 

[fastfredy0]

I have heard Pastors teach we should never give assurance to a new convert, because you really do not know if they are regenerated.

I am sympathetic to those Pastors, how shall I phrase this, that do not stress the doctrines of assurance to a new convert. We do have the parable of the seed falling on rocky ground or in the thorns to consider. Also, one of the main aspects of assurance is obedience and it's a little early to test that.

Brings up an interesting practical question. I have grand kids 4, 6 and 7. The 6 and 7 year olds profess Christ to the point that we believe they are saved. The seven year mentioned a possible desire to be baptized and her parents asked what I thought. We all came to the conclusion that we were "on the fence", but since this is a YES/NO question I think we agreed to wait till she was older. So, to some degree we did not give her assurance.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I am sympathetic to those Pastors, how shall I phrase this, that do not stress the doctrines of assurance to a new convert. We do have the parable of the seed falling on rocky ground or in the thorns to consider. Also, one of the main aspects of assurance is obedience and it's a little early to test that.

Brings up an interesting practical question. I have grand kids 4, 6 and 7. The 6 and 7 year olds profess Christ to the point that we believe they are saved. The seven year mentioned a possible desire to be baptized and her parents asked what I thought. We all came to the conclusion that we were "on the fence", but since this is a YES/NO question I think we agreed to wait till she was older. So, to some degree we did not give her assurance.

I am sympathetic to those Pastors, how shall I phrase this, that do not stress the doctrines of assurance to a new convert. We do have the parable of the seed falling on rocky ground or in the thorns to consider. Also, one of the main aspects of assurance is obedience and it's a little early to test that.

We are like-minded on this.

 

[Fred]

Can someone explain what we do with this verse....

Mark 10:21 And looking at him, Jesus loved him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Was this just the humanity of Christ that loved this reprobate?

John Calvin:
But God is sometimes said to love those whom he does not approve or justify; for, since the preservation of the human race is agreeable to Him — which consists in justice, uprightness, moderation, prudence, fidelity, and temperance — he is said to love the political virtues; not that they are meritorious of salvation or of grace, but that they have reference to an end of which he approves. In this sense, under various points of view, God loved Aristides and Fabricius, and also hated them; for, in so far as he had bestowed on them outward righteousness, and that for the general advantage, he loved his own work in them; but as their heart was impure, the outward semblance of righteousness was of no avail for obtaining righteousness. For we know that by faith alone hearts are purified, and that the Spirit of uprightness is given to the members of Christ alone. Thus the question is answered, How was it possible that Christ should love a man who was proud and a hypocrite, while nothing is more hateful to God than these two vices? For it is not inconsistent, that the good seed, which God has implanted in some natures, shall be loved by Him, and yet that He should reject their persons and works on account of corruption.

Mark 10 - Calvin's Commentary on the Bible - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Mark 10, Calvin's Commentary on the Bible, John Calvin's Commentaries offer Christians profound insights by blending careful analysis of original texts with historical context.

www.studylight.org