What type of Calvinist am I?

[fastfredy0]

What Type of Calvinist Am I?
Your Result: Reformed Baptist

86%
You hold to the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith, which is basically the Walmart version of the Westminster Confession of Faith. You claim that Presbyterians have bad Covenant Theology, even though yours makes no sense. You'd be better off as a Dispensationalist. [HEY, that wasn’t nice!]

Na, na .... beat you by 2% which means I sit 2 rows closer to the Lord at meetings.

 

[atpollard]

View attachment 551

Na, na .... beat you by 2% which means I sit 2 rows closer to the Lord at meetings.

You and I are in different sections of the Celestial Choir. You are HIGH CALVINIST and I am REFORMED BAPTIST.

(You are WCF to my 1689 COF) … Quit sprinklin’ ‘dem babies!

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

You and I are in different sections of the Celestial Choir. You are HIGH CALVINIST and I am REFORMED BAPTIST.

(You are WCF to my 1689 COF) … Quit sprinklin’ ‘dem babies!

If the 1689 LBCF wasn't the Walmart version of the WCF, you would know that one is supposed to apply the seal of the covenant to the children of believing parents.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

Yes, of course, man is "dead in his sins." But, if dead, how [then] can he revive himself and exercise free will? The man who is spiritually dead retains his senses. He can hear, speak, make decisions, issue judgments, and either reject or accept the gospel message. And that is because he has free choice, as Jesus said in John 7:17. Being spiritually dead is not like being biologically dead. When biologically dead, the body reserves no senses. When spiritually dead, the body and spirit possess all of them.

The following is a brilliant explanation articulated by the late Mitch Cervinka, a staunch Calvinist:

Another argument commonly raised in support of free will is that God cannot hold man responsible to do what is right if the man has no ability to do what is right. This argument likewise confuses free will with free agency. It is generally true that in order to be responsible a man must have the physical ability and mental capacity to do what is right. Calvinism fully confesses that fallen men have the physical strength to keep God's commandments and the mental capacity to understand what God's commands require of them. In fact, this is the very reason why unregenerate men often react so violently against God's word—they do understand what it says, and they don't like it!

The problem with fallen man is not in his physical abilities, nor in his mental capacity to understand. Rather, man's problem lies in the desires of his heart—he loves sin and hates righteousness—and this is what makes him guilty for his sins. He could obey God's law if he desired to do so. He could trust in Christ if he had any love for God. Man is guilty for the simple reason that, in his sinful rebellion, he refuses to do that which he has the full mental and physical ability to do. His problem is a moral and spiritual problem: he is a sinner at heart, who has no desire for God or godliness.
​

Calvinists claim that the sinner is like a corpse: He can do nothing.

False. Calvinists universally agree there is one thing that all sinners can do—they always and only sin. That's not nothing, sir, that's a very condemnable something.

 

[Agra Man]

Being a calvanist doesnt matter we are untied in cHrist that is it no other name declares who we are is it not so obvious the tactics of the enemy t]o divide confuse and conquor?

You honestly think that Jesus cares about what denomination you stand in? ask yourself what was the purpose of all of this? do you re

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

I don't believe in Total Depravity. That's because it's clear that every person is born with a conscience. I see no getting around that.

Can you explain the supposed connection between total depravity and human conscience? There is no obvious contradiction, inconsistency, or even tension between affirming the doctrine of total depravity and that every person is born with a conscience.

In fact, the charge represented in your comment is so common that Frank Beck, in his small book The Five Points of Calvinism (1974), specifically addressed it before explaining the doctrine of total depravity:

Lest we be misunderstood or misrepresented, it is important that we state, first of all, what we do not mean by total depravity.

First, we do not mean that man does not have a conscience. After Adam sinned he hid himself from Jehovah God (Gen. 3:8). Adam would not have done this had he not had a guilty conscience. Likewise, though totally depraved, the accusers of the adulterous woman were "convicted by their own conscience" as Christ wrote on the ground and challenged the sinless one to cast the first stone (John 8:9).
​

I believe the Belgic Confessions says it [i.e., men are incapable of doing anything good].

The Belgic Confession belongs to the Three Forms of Unity, the confessional standards of my church. So, I feel qualified and well-suited to take the bait. Would you care to defend this claim of yours with me?

 

[Buff Scott Jr.]

I hope you realize that many here (including myself) would be refuting much of what you are espousing but they don't because it's OFF TOPIC...or at least by now you have made it quite clear what type of Calvinist you are.

prism:

"Off topic"? That's odd. The topic of this thread addresses Calvinism. Or are you possibly devising an excuse for not answering? Just cutious.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

The topic of this thread addresses Calvinism.

The topic of the thread is not Calvinism in itself, but rather the kind of Calvinist you are.

And you know that, so stop being slippery. It's obvious and doesn't make you look good.

 

[fastfredy0]

(You are WCF to my 1689 COF) … Quit sprinklin’ ‘dem babies!

Molinism brings possibilities to young Pollard...

 

[Red Baker]

“Born Again”​

Nowhere in scripture is there any indication that “born again” is employed the way Calvinists use the expression. It is not a question of whether a man’s heart is opened or “quickened”—or is made aware of his need for salvation—prior to faith and repentance. We agree that, indeed, his heart is opened. But how? Through the message of salvation (Rom. 10:17). “Born again” is never used in conjunction with the opening of a man’s heart prior to believing and repenting—never once. “Born again” or “born from above” is used in only two portions of the new covenant scriptures. They are John 3:1-7 and 1 Peter 1:23.​

I'm sorry if I got somewhat off course, it is not easy to stay on the subject, when so many other things are brought. By posting what I'm going to post, it will show all to what degree of a Calvinism I hold to~more so than any way I know of.

Nowhere in scripture is there any indication that “born again” is employed the way Calvinists use the expression. It is not a question of whether a man’s heart is opened or “quickened”—or is made aware of his need for salvation—prior to faith and repentance.

Lay aside the phrase "Calvinist/Calvinism" and let us see what the scriptures teach, and then use your label if you must, but I'm 100% convinced you will say the Calvinist is the person that believes in free justification apart from all works of the law, or works, man has an active part in, even if he is not perfect in his understanding to the degree we would like to see, the man who exalts Jesus Christ's faith and obedience as the only means of justification~ that man/woman is very close to preaching the same gospel that Paul and the other apostles preached.

Buff, the new birth is a resurrection; it is a new creation within a person; it is by God alone as the only active person bringing forth this birth by his mighty power, the same power that resurrected Jesus Christ from the dead.

The new birth is not by the will of man~or, by us praying, preaching, laboring to get sinners born again, it is impossible for the will of man to play a part in this new birth~impossible, since John clearly said not of the will of man. Nothing short of God's Almighty power is require to bring forth this birth.

It is not flesh, or the individual's person sinful flesh which includes his will which are in bondage to sin and the devil himself which flesh is at enmity against God, etc.

I will provide scriptures later, but most of them have been already given, trying to save time/space.

Through the message of salvation (Rom. 10:17).

Sir, this is how faith IS INCREASE, not put out there to see who can or cannot have faith. Before one can have faith one must be resurrected from his spiritual dead state by the same power that resurrected Jesus Christ from the dead.
Ephesians 1:19-20~"And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,"

What's so hard about these two scriptures? Nothing really, it just hard to accept them for some since it proves that only the mighty power of God can resurrect sinners who are dead spiriutally speaking toward him, truth, righteousness, etc.

“Born again” is never used in conjunction with the opening of a man’s heart prior to believing and repenting—never once. “Born again” or “born from above” is used in only two portions of the new covenant scriptures. They are John 3:1-7 and 1 Peter 1:23.

Sir, if one must first be resurrected, then that should tell you regeneration must precede faith, repenting, baptism, etc.

Let us consider the two scriptures you provided pretty sure you have no clue as to their true biblical meaning.

1st Peter 1:23-25~"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you."

Most have no clue what Peter is saying in these three verses especially so in v23 which we shall focus on.

I'm a high Calvinist and make no apologies for being so~if, one needs put a label on what a person believes, if so, then fine. Call me a high Calvinist. Being so, I know that the written word of God has no place in a person being born of God, yet Peter clearly said this:

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God

What sense must I put on those words to make them flow with all scriptures? I know 100% that the written God of God was not the active means of me being born of God, so should I change my doctrine to be more like your teaching, or is there a biblical sense we must applied to keep the scriptures flowing together to teach us one truth revealed in the scriptures?

Nehemiah 8:8~"So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading."

Let us do as Ezra of old did~read in the word of God distinctly and then give those scriptures their proper sense so that we can caused the people to understand God's hidden truths.

The true sense of 1st Peter 1:23 is this: The word of God gives testimony, witness, on how we are born of God ( John 3 coming in the next post ) So, we are born again ACCORDING OT THE witness, testimony of God recorded for us in the holy scriptures. Consider: 1st Corinthians 2"1~"And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God." God has chosen to reveal truth to us THROUGH HIS testimony which is the word of God, and one of those many truth is how a person is born again~accroding to God testimony/witness. Again:
1st John 5:6-10~"This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son."

The word of God is nothing more that God's testimony, witness of truths, we look to no other source than the scriptures and those scriptures reveal to us that being born again is a work of almighty power nothing short of the same power that resurrected Jesus Christ.

Yes, we are born again by the word of God, or according to God's testimony/witness, which we believe over man's corrupt teachings.

The written word of God had absolutely no part of one being born of God from sin and condemnation. The word of God is our source of information concerning these blessed truths!

 

[Musician]

You honestly think that Jesus cares about what denomination you stand in? ask yourself what was the purpose of all of this? do you re

I always wonder why there's so many different belief systems within Christianity. What leads some to be so absolute to the Scripture, and others take it figuratively.

 

[Red Baker]

“Born Again”​

They are John 3:1-7​

John 3:1-8~"There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."

Buff, why did you leave off verse 8? That one scripture declares how one is born of God, a very critical scripture when addressing the new birth by the Spirit of God. Again, my degree of Calvinism will show itself in writing this post. I stand firm on this truth concerning the discourse between Christ and Nicodemus~the very purpose of having John 3:1-8 in the scriptures, is to reveal a truth you you and others reject, and it is this: Faith is the evidence of being already born of God! Faith is not the means of the new birth. Please carefully hear me out.

There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him

Nicodemus coming to Jesus at night should not slow us down since the scriptures do not reveal to us as to why he did so, we can only surmise and that is not the method of teaching truth.

What I want you and others to see is this: Consider Nicodemus' child like faith....."We KNOW that thou art a teacher come from God"~that confession is as strong of a confession as anyone on this forum, or in 99% churches!

Based on his confession Jesus spoke the following words to him:

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God

The flow of the context will drive our understand of the truth if we will only allow it to happen.

Jesus was revealing TO ALL who ever reads this discourse that no one can make such a confession and NOT be born again. Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God, PERIOD. Yet, Nicodemus DID SEE, and his confession said that he did, and his later life proved that he did. What was lacking was his understanding of the new birth~poor Nicodemus was very shadow in his understand of spiritual truth, even though a master in Israel.

Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

Jesus used the phrase "born again" by the very fact of Nicodemus' question back to him. The new birth is a second birth, a creation of a new man within God's elect. That man has the power to believe, to see, and understand over time.

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Water in this verse is our fleshly birth into this world..... our first birth. Jesus would have never mention water if Nicodemus had not mentioned reinterring into his mother's womb, and verse five water is never mention again. This should not be hard to see if we stay with the context and not follow some Campbellite preacher on a rabbit trail that leads into another gospel.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

That which is born of flesh (our first birth) is flesh...sinful, wicked and at enmity against God, is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be, said Paul in Romans 8.

That which is born of the Spirit of God is spirit~when we are born of God the new man created within us is created after the very image of Jesus Christ, and with this new man we live by the faith of Jesus Christ, a gift he secured for us~ given freely without any work on our part, since we were unable to give~we were without strength ( spiritual) to do the will of God perfectly, and truly had no desire to do so, our affections and love was toward sin. All we have we have it on the behalf of Jesus Christ.

I may come back and address how this new birth takes place,

 

[atpollard]

If the 1689 LBCF wasn't the Walmart version of the WCF, you would know that one is supposed to apply the seal of the covenant to the children of believing parents.

Just like we saw John the Baptist doing in the Wilderness … all those people were lining up at the Jordan to get their babies sprinkled for the Messiah!

[You closet papists, keep your WCF “traditions”.]

 

[atpollard]

Molinism brings possibilities to young Pollard...

I am not keen on the ideas behind Molinism, but there is more TRUTH to that picture than you may realize.

My maternal Italian-American non-practicing Catholic grandparents demanded that their grandchild be baptized (like any good Catholic), while my “Easter and Christmas“ Methodist paternal grandparents were adamant that their grandchild would be raised Protestant and NOT Catholic. To preserve peace in his life, my atheist father had me baptized as an infant in a Lutheran Church.

Since I grew up in an atheist household, learning that “religion is the opiate of the masses”, and believing that there was no objective morality (Nihilism), … and since I set my enemies on fire … I think it safe to say that I was NOT within the New Covenant Community.

However, I think that God HAD chosen to set his mark on me and used people that were clueless of what they were doing to accomplish that will. A Lutheran prologue foreshadowing what God yet intended to do. It was just before I had the opportunity to join names like Kaczinski and McVeigh that God came to claim ownership of the life that He had reserved as an infant.

So there is incredible irony in that picture for me … and THAT is the type of Calvinist that I am. {Edit by Mod}

 

[Red Baker]

THAT is the type of Calvinist that I am. (@ Red Baker)

Pray to tell me what you meant by this.

 

[Red Baker]

Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."

So is every one that is born of the Spirit~The new birth is one and the same for all conceived through Adam's posterity.

The new birth is like the wind so the Saviour said~It bloweth where it listeth, or pleaseth. There may be two in the womb, one predestinate to be born of God, the other a vessel of wrath~this before that could do any good, or evil OF THEIR OWN.

The wind doesn't ask if it can blow it does so because it has the power to do so.

thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth

With the wind we can the effects and hear the sound at times, but what we do not know is when it starts and when it leaves~just like the new birth~God comes and regenerates and then leaves that person~we do not know when he does this, but we can see the effects that he has come and gone.

The new birth is 100% conceal from us and others, yet the evidence can be seen quickly, or as soon as the opportunity arises to show it. The thief on the cross is a perfect example of this, one minute he railed on Christ, and out of nowhere he rebuked the other malefactor and even asked the Lord to remember him~and Christ assured him that that very day he would be with him in Paradise.

The new birth can take place in our mother's womb, like John The Baptist, or just before death like the thief on the cross. We can be dead asleep, working, making love as far as that goes, since all things are naked and open unto the eyes of God, He doesn't need us to be a certain frame of mind, the new birth will put you there!

In the new birth, God is the only active person working, we are being worked on by God creating a new man within us. God does not need you, me, or anyone else to get a person born OF GOD, that's work alone. He uses us to take he message of gospel to show his children what he has done for them. The gospel only manifest light it does not bring spiritual life. Read 2nd Timothy 1:9-10~the gospel brings to light life, it can't bring life.

Enough for now~RB

 

[atpollard]

Pray to tell me what you meant by this.

Your polemic attacks the “logic” of what cannot be in what Calvinism claims.
I am a Calvinist because the reality of my conversion rendered Arminianism an impossible explanation. Thus your “theoretical” arguments fail the test of empirical reality. I love Wesleyan theology, it is what I was taught by wonderful, godly men for a decade after my conversion. I could simply NEVER reconcile it with the reality of my experience and derived 4 truths from scripture contrary to the Free Will view of salvation based on my PERSONAL and EMPIRICAL salvation experience [I was not seeking God, God literally sought me].

1. People are no darn good
2. God does not ask, God just does.
3. God finishes what God starts.
4. God chooses the people that He chooses for inexplicable reasons (but is is definitely not because we deserve it).

I later discovered that those 4 BIBLICAL/EMPIRICAL truths had counterparts in something called “Calvinism”

1. Total Depravity
2. Irresistible Grace
3. Preservation of the Saints
4. Unconditional Election

(It had never entered my mind to ask who Jesus had died for … He died for me and that was good enough for me. The rest seemed like His business rather than mine.)

So your refutation fails the most basic scientific test for any hypothesis … does it fit the available data? The answer is “No.”

 

[Red Baker]

Your polemic attacks the “logic” of what cannot be in what Calvinism claims. I am a Calvinist because the reality of my conversion rendered Arminianism an impossible explanation.

You do not make a lot of sense, no pun intended~ but before i can address this you need to give examples of what I have said using scriptures to support what you are saying, then we can talk.

I am a Calvinist because the reality of my conversion rendered Arminianism an impossible explanation.

I'm a Christian...disciple of Jesus Christ, my doctrine concerning Soteriology have people calling me a Calvinist~a label that I'm not ashamed of, yet I do want folks to know that my allegiance is not to a man, though a godly man, yet it is to Christ alone. I believe what I believe because I see it in the word of God as God's truth~and can defend it with scriptures.

So give me some examples of why you said what you did~until you do, there's no point of trying to defend what I have said, if the person who bring the accusation can not provide proof from the scriptures, it would be a fruitless labor. Beside, I will war with flesh and blood, that would be a carnal, God displeasing battle.

 

[David1701]

If the 1689 LBCF wasn't the Walmart version of the WCF, you would know that one is supposed to apply the seal of the covenant to the children of believing parents.

The New Covenant only contains believers.

 

[fastfredy0]

However, I think that God HAD chosen to set his mark on me and used people that were clueless of what they were doing to accomplish that will. A Lutheran prologue foreshadowing what God yet intended to do. It was just before I had the opportunity to join names like Kaczinski and McVeigh that God came to claim ownership of the life that He had reserved as an infant.

Ah, I love how your life's story ends or maybe I should say "begins" as you are spiritually alive now.
Aside: I don't believe sprinkling babies ... but I still beat you by 2% (giggle)