Why so much against Calvinism?

[Marilyn C]

Actually, I have never discussed Calvinism before, (this forum) so it`s helping me to look more into what I believe.

One thing I have noticed is that there is a huge misunderstanding of God`s purposes through Christ, especially with the Body of Christ.

`...just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the pleasure of His will.` (Eph. 1: 3 & 4)

`And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. ` (Rom. 8: 28 & 29)

I would say that Calvinist think that because it says `predestined` that then God chose these people and not others. (Is that correct what Calvinists believe?)

However, a careful reading of those scriptures keeping in mind God`s overall purpose through Christ for Israel and the nations as well, we realise that when God planned that His Son should have a Body of believers, adopted as sons, then it is those who come into Christ`s Body that are predestined to be like Him, to be conformed to His image.

That was not possible before Christ ascended and was made Head of the Body.

I will also say that Calvinists do not have a good understanding of God`s character and His purposes through Christ.

@ Carbon. You may have missed my post back a few pages. Any comments?

 

[Marilyn C]

I haven't read all the thread no. But so far I have seen Calvinist presenting arguments----that is, whatever the starting point being discussed, the assertion is supported and defended with reasoned logic and biblical support. Unless of course the other side merely states an opinion with no meat to it at all---so no discussion.

In what I have seen so far, that is about all the free will side has offered.

I have replied but it was jumped over. WHY?

 

[Arial]

I have not read all, either.

But in a former forum (that closed down) there was a constant back and forth ... all biblically supported... for both Arminianism and Calvinism.
I wish I had access to that one that I could transfer it here.

That forum debate is the reason I am on the fence.... BTW... we need a fence smiley or a teeter totter gif....

I think I'll open a thread titled Arminianism vs Calvinism. To see if the two I know from that other forum will come post. They are here, members...
but in truth... As wonderful as these forums are.. even I get sidetracked in looking for specific ones....

I will trust if there is already one it will be noted at the bottom..... ?

From my own personal experience in debates with Arminianists over Calvinism I find them mostly giving proof texts without any exegesis of them. And when a Reformed exegesis is given that shows, that sure, their proof text on the surface sounds like it is saying what they claim on the surface, it contradicts this, and this, and this. Then clear scriptures, surrounding context, chapter context, historical context, context within the Bible teaching as a whole etc. they ignore what is said and simply begin repeating themselves. More often than not they begin my grossly misstating the Calvinist teaching, and even when corrected, continue to argue from their fallacy. There are people who can write very convincing affirmations of Arminianism that can confuse the best of us. But if you look closely through the lens of critical thinking you will find all the sleights of hand.

I am firmly convinced it is because that position cannot be defended soundly and biblically simply because it is not true. And I think the reason we find that many Calvinist are adept at defending their position is because it is such a hard teaching, utterly alien from what most of the churches teach. So they want to be sure. Truth becomes what is most important. They study, and study, and study the teachings laying them alongside the scriptures again and again, daily even. In the process they become very familiar with the whole Bible and the whole Bible put together as the unit that it is. We learn to think, which sadly is becoming a lost art.

At least that has been my experience and I see evidence of it on this forum in others.

 

[Arial]

I have replied but it was jumped over. WHY?

Post #? Sometimes I only have time to read posts directed to me and may have missed it.

 

[Marilyn C]

Post #? Sometimes I only have time to read posts directed to me and may have missed it.

I understand, especially as I`m in a different time zone than most here. The post is #170 on page 9. It was posted to Carbon but any can answer, thank you.

 

[Josheb]

@ Carbon. You may have missed my post back a few pages. Any comments?

FYI, If a space is not typed between the "at" symbol (@) and the poster's name, then the poster will get notification they've been mentioned, and it will be easier for them to locate the inquiry.

@Marilyn C, not @ Marilyn C

 

[Arial]

I was in conversation with Carbon, you, Ladodgers6, ReverendRV, and Josheb as I asked to be a Moderator........................ [edited by mod]

This is completely off topic. A series of personal accusations and judgements aimed at me. For what purpose? Not qualities expected or wanted in a mod. You were being interviewed and did not hold up well.






Moderator note: The rules of CCCF require posters to bring disputes about moderation to moderators in private. Furthermore, the "private" in "Private Messaging" is designed to keep those exchanges private, limited to the participants. Bringing that content into the public forum is inappropriate and demonstrates a violation several of this forum's rules. Arial has asked the mods to assess this interaction so as to maintain an objective application of the forum's tou. The rule-violating content has been deleted and the poster notified of the rule(s) being violated).

 

[JIM]

From my own personal experience in debates with Arminianists over Calvinism I find them mostly giving proof texts without any exegesis of them. And when a Reformed exegesis is given that shows, that sure, their proof text on the surface sounds like it is saying what they claim on the surface, it contradicts this, and this, and this. Then clear scriptures, surrounding context, chapter context, historical context, context within the Bible teaching as a whole etc. they ignore what is said and simply begin repeating themselves. More often than not they begin my grossly misstating the Calvinist teaching, and even when corrected, continue to argue from their fallacy. There are people who can write very convincing affirmations of Arminianism that can confuse the best of us. But if you look closely through the lens of critical thinking you will find all the sleights of hand.

I am firmly convinced it is because that position cannot be defended soundly and biblically simply because it is not true. And I think the reason we find that many Calvinist are adept at defending their position is because it is such a hard teaching, utterly alien from what most of the churches teach. So they want to be sure. Truth becomes what is most important. They study, and study, and study the teachings laying them alongside the scriptures again and again, daily even. In the process they become very familiar with the whole Bible and the whole Bible put together as the unit that it is. We learn to think, which sadly is becoming a lost art.

At least that has been my experience and I see evidence of it on this forum in others.

With all due respect I find what you experience in a discussion with the Arminianists to be precisely what I experience in a discussion with Calvinists.

 

[Arial]

With all due respect I find what you experience in a discussion with the Arminianists to be precisely what I experience in a discussion with Calvinists.

That is because you refuse to listen to what they say and respond to it with a viable support for your position. So there is that.

 

[Arial]

Josheb attacked me in several responses and when I asked several times to bring his proof of my wrongdoing he failed and continued to falsely accuse me and you sat back and read every comment and did nothing.
You did NOTHING!
That is not the behavior of true Biblical Christianity.

Pretty sure by now everyone on the forum is glad you are not a mod.

 

[jeremiah1five]

With all due respect I find what you experience in a discussion with the Arminianists to be precisely what I experience in a discussion with Calvinists.

I asked you to share your experience of being born again but you ignore me? Why is that?
Do you not have anything to say? Did Christ or did He not save you?

 

[JIM]

That is because you refuse to listen to what they say and respond to it with a viable support for your position. So there is that.

Another accusation that goes both ways.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Another accusation that goes both ways.

Some Christians, or so-called Christians do that.
It's garbage and reflects on their character.
Or lack of one.

 

[JIM]

I asked you to share your experience of being born again but you ignore me? Why is that?
Do you not have anything to say? Did Christ or did He not save you?

Is anyone ever born again and not saved?

 

[Rella]

With all due respect I find what you experience in a discussion with the Arminianists to be precisely what I experience in a discussion with Calvinists.

There is a thread now for you to expound on your beliefs.

Loading…

christcentered.community.forum

That should be an easy debate, but as yet... no takers.

 

[Arial]

There is a thread now for you to expound on your beliefs.

Loading…

christcentered.community.forum

That should be an easy debate, but as yet... no takers.

When I get through my alerts I will go there.

 

[JIM]

There is a thread now for you to expound on your beliefs.

Loading…

christcentered.community.forum

That should be an easy debate, but as yet... no takers.

I disagree that it is an easy debate. It is really the discussion of soteriology, the entire scope of the doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ. There are entire books that deal with that subject. Much, if not most, of the letters in the NT from Romans on directly concern soteriology.

 

[Arial]

Another accusation that goes both ways.

Not really. The first statement is supported by the post originally given on the subject. This one is supported by nothing. It is simply a like for like retaliation.

 

[Rella]

I disagree that it is an easy debate. It is really the discussion of soteriology, the entire scope of the doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ. There are entire books that deal with that subject. Much, if not most, of the letters in the NT from Romans on directly concern soteriology.

But I know where you stand.... and you have not really explained your beliefs.

A discussion of

soteriology, the entire scope of the doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ

would be great.

As things stand now, I can assure you it is not just I who might wonder where and how the differences are and where in the Holy Book you support your thoughts..

I still see positives on your side as well as Red's

If I can, others should.

I remain definitely in the non-Calvin side of things.... But there are religions for as far back as one can study that
are in his camp. WHY. What do they see... and why do you not?

Now would be perfect to get it all out....

I the meantime think I'll bug the preterists for a while....

 

[JIM]

Not really. The first statement is supported by the post originally given on the subject. This one is supported by nothing. It is simply a like for like retaliation.

Post #1 of this topic?