The "stumbling block" of Calvinism

[subllibrm]

How many Mega Million lottery tickets does a calvinist buy in a life time. Just the one.  8)

I'm rather certain.... (pun intended) that its largely the wrong one...

I don't play the lottery, with my luck I'd win.

 

[prophet]

If it wasn't a stumbling block, it would just be called "Christianity", with no need to pay homage to some political leader/religious figure.

With that brilliant soteriological argument, the matter should be settled forever and ever...Amen!

I am of Paul, I am of Apollos.... Yup, no one has ever had to use this line of reasoning before

:

The Doctrines of Grace were espoused by Jesus, Paul and countless others before and after Calvin countered the five points of Armenius. Calvin has nothing to do with my/our soteriology! : and I'll raise you a  :

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

I know you have been a lite contributor of late, weighing in with quips instead of principles, so in light of that, I hesitate to try to engage you.
But...are you really saying that my analogy has no legs to stand on?  With anyone?

 

[subllibrm]

FWIW I do not believe in cowinkydinks either.  8)

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

How many Mega Million lottery tickets does a calvinist buy in a life time. Just the one.  8)

Calvinists buy lottery tickets whenever God predetermines they'll buy lottery tickets, and one of them will win if/when God predetermines it will win. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

Like I've said, "Calvinism" is now shorthand for a doctrine.  I didn't get my views from Calvin, so I find it unfortunate that it has that moniker.  But at this point it's out of my hands.  It's the way most people understand what you mean. 

Except for CU, maybe.  He still thinks "Calvinism" means "I follow Calvin and all his teachings". 

 

[praise_yeshua]

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

Like I've said, "Calvinism" is now shorthand for a doctrine.  I didn't get my views from Calvin, so I find it unfortunate that it has that moniker.  But at this point it's out of my hands.  It's the way most people understand what you mean. 

Except for CU, maybe.  He still thinks "Calvinism" means "I follow Calvin and all his teachings".

You don't know what Calvin said. I never claimed you did. I posted Calvin's own words and you refuse to deal with them. I have consistently said that none of you are consistent in belief.

If you don't like the Calvinist handle, don't use it. If you plan not it use it, then I must insist you stop using the doctrine.

 

[Recovering IFB]

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

Like I've said, "Calvinism" is now shorthand for a doctrine.  I didn't get my views from Calvin, so I find it unfortunate that it has that moniker.  But at this point it's out of my hands.  It's the way most people understand what you mean. 

Except for CU, maybe.  He still thinks "Calvinism" means "I follow Calvin and all his teachings".

You don't know what Calvin said. I never claimed you did. I posted Calvin's own words and you refuse to deal with them. I have consistently said that none of you are consistent in belief.

If you don't like the Calvinist handle, don't use it. If you plan not it use it, then I must insist you stop using the doctrine.

I actually use the term Monergism.
And there you go, having no understanding of the position telling others they have no understanding of the position, demanding them to abandon it. BTW, do you see other "Calvinist" starting multiple threads attacking Free Will?
You're basically acting like a child.

 

[praise_yeshua]

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

Like I've said, "Calvinism" is now shorthand for a doctrine.  I didn't get my views from Calvin, so I find it unfortunate that it has that moniker.  But at this point it's out of my hands.  It's the way most people understand what you mean. 

Except for CU, maybe.  He still thinks "Calvinism" means "I follow Calvin and all his teachings".

You don't know what Calvin said. I never claimed you did. I posted Calvin's own words and you refuse to deal with them. I have consistently said that none of you are consistent in belief.

If you don't like the Calvinist handle, don't use it. If you plan not it use it, then I must insist you stop using the doctrine.

I actually use the term Monergism.
And there you go, having no understanding of the position telling others they have no understanding of the position, demanding them to abandon it. BTW, do you see other "Calvinist" starting multiple threads attacking Free Will?
You're basically acting like a child.

Does Monergism agree with what Calvin said concerning his own conversion?

Do you support ANYTHING else from TULIP? Monergism doesn't even begin to fully describe what YOU call the "Doctrines of Grace". You can't pin you guys down for nothing. When you have nothing to say.... you just attack the messenger. They did it to Jesus. They did to Paul...... it happens all the time.

I've challenged you on your silly beliefs. I started two threads and both topic are different. IF... you can't handle it... don't get involved. I'm not the one acting like a child.

Do you have any unanswered questions?

 

[Recovering IFB]

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

Like I've said, "Calvinism" is now shorthand for a doctrine.  I didn't get my views from Calvin, so I find it unfortunate that it has that moniker.  But at this point it's out of my hands.  It's the way most people understand what you mean. 

Except for CU, maybe.  He still thinks "Calvinism" means "I follow Calvin and all his teachings".

You don't know what Calvin said. I never claimed you did. I posted Calvin's own words and you refuse to deal with them. I have consistently said that none of you are consistent in belief.

If you don't like the Calvinist handle, don't use it. If you plan not it use it, then I must insist you stop using the doctrine.

I actually use the term Monergism.
And there you go, having no understanding of the position telling others they have no understanding of the position, demanding them to abandon it. BTW, do you see other "Calvinist" starting multiple threads attacking Free Will?
You're basically acting like a child.

Does Monergism agree with what Calvin said concerning his own conversion?

Do you support ANYTHING else from TULIP? Monergism doesn't even begin to fully describe what YOU call the "Doctrines of Grace". You can't pin you guys down for nothing. When you have nothing to say.... you just attack the messenger. They did it to Jesus. They did to Paul...... it happens all the time.

I've challenged you on your silly beliefs. I started two threads and both topic are different. IF... you can't handle it... don't get involved. I'm not the one acting like a child.

Do you have any unanswered questions?

Monergism and "Calvinism is basically the same concept. And Monergsim or reformed theology focuses on more than the tulip, which I agree with every party of the tulip, on a side note, I had the hardest rimecoming to grips with limited attonement.  I have no problem with Calvin saying he was subdued. He was brought under control of the Holy Spirit, that's not coercion. We are not forced as you put it. God changes us, I have you verses, you failed to reply. And yes, you act childish on this thread at times.

 

[praise_yeshua]

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

Like I've said, "Calvinism" is now shorthand for a doctrine.  I didn't get my views from Calvin, so I find it unfortunate that it has that moniker.  But at this point it's out of my hands.  It's the way most people understand what you mean. 

Except for CU, maybe.  He still thinks "Calvinism" means "I follow Calvin and all his teachings".

You don't know what Calvin said. I never claimed you did. I posted Calvin's own words and you refuse to deal with them. I have consistently said that none of you are consistent in belief.

If you don't like the Calvinist handle, don't use it. If you plan not it use it, then I must insist you stop using the doctrine.

I actually use the term Monergism.
And there you go, having no understanding of the position telling others they have no understanding of the position, demanding them to abandon it. BTW, do you see other "Calvinist" starting multiple threads attacking Free Will?
You're basically acting like a child.

Does Monergism agree with what Calvin said concerning his own conversion?

Do you support ANYTHING else from TULIP? Monergism doesn't even begin to fully describe what YOU call the "Doctrines of Grace". You can't pin you guys down for nothing. When you have nothing to say.... you just attack the messenger. They did it to Jesus. They did to Paul...... it happens all the time.

I've challenged you on your silly beliefs. I started two threads and both topic are different. IF... you can't handle it... don't get involved. I'm not the one acting like a child.

Do you have any unanswered questions?

Monergism and "Calvinism is basically the same concept. And Monergsim or reformed theology focuses on more than the tulip, which I agree with every party of the tulip, on a side note, I had the hardest rimecoming to grips with limited attonement.  I have no problem with Calvin saying he was subdued. He was brought under control of the Holy Spirit, that's not coercion. We are not forced as you put it. God changes us, I have you verses, you failed to reply. And yes, you act childish on this thread at times.

Monergism is in opposition to Synergism and deals with the Holy Spirit's work in regeneration. It really only fails under the "T" in TULIP.

The fact you EXPAND beyond this is very telling of your understanding of TULIP.

I have no problem with Calvin saying he was subdued. He was brought under control of the Holy Spirit, that's not coercion

Explain the difference between "subdue" and "coerce". In fact, do a little study on the Latin roots of the English words "subdue" and "coerce". Each of the words imply "force". Its impossible to see the words any differently.

Please tell me just "how" you can remove "force" from "subdue"?

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

If it wasn't a stumbling block, it would just be called "Christianity", with no need to pay homage to some political leader/religious figure.

With that brilliant soteriological argument, the matter should be settled forever and ever...Amen!

I am of Paul, I am of Apollos.... Yup, no one has ever had to use this line of reasoning before

:

The Doctrines of Grace were espoused by Jesus, Paul and countless others before and after Calvin countered the five points of Armenius. Calvin has nothing to do with my/our soteriology! : and I'll raise you a  :

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

I know you have been a lite contributor of late, weighing in with quips instead of principles, so in light of that, I hesitate to try to engage you.
But...are you really saying that my analogy has no legs to stand on?  With anyone?

Admittedly, I'm not as intelligent as many here think themselves to be, so sometimes I feel intellectually inferior.  :

The doctrines of grace were of course taught throughout Scripture and were believed and written about by the early church fathers. Augustine defended them well before Calvin in his conflict over Pelagianism.

The term Calvinism was first used, I believe, by Lutherans as a derisive term.
But because of Calvin's concise and thorough defense and presentation, Calvinism became and remains, in most circles, as a synonym for the Doctrines of the grace of God, specifically in salvation.

I don't see much room for debate....Doctrines of Grace VS Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism

 

[praise_yeshua]

If it wasn't a stumbling block, it would just be called "Christianity", with no need to pay homage to some political leader/religious figure.

With that brilliant soteriological argument, the matter should be settled forever and ever...Amen!

I am of Paul, I am of Apollos.... Yup, no one has ever had to use this line of reasoning before

:

The Doctrines of Grace were espoused by Jesus, Paul and countless others before and after Calvin countered the five points of Armenius. Calvin has nothing to do with my/our soteriology! : and I'll raise you a  :

How does your post address the fact that Calvinism is called "Calvinism", and many people claim to be "Calvinist"?

I know you have been a lite contributor of late, weighing in with quips instead of principles, so in light of that, I hesitate to try to engage you.
But...are you really saying that my analogy has no legs to stand on?  With anyone?

Admittedly, I'm not as intelligent as many here think themselves to be, so sometimes I feel intellectually inferior.  :

The doctrines of grace were of course taught throughout Scripture and were believed and written about by the early church fathers. Augustine defended them well before Calvin in his conflict over Pelagianism.

The term Calvinism was first used, I believe, by Lutherans as a derisive term.
But because of Calvin's concise and thorough defense and presentation, Calvinism became and remains, in most circles, as a synonym for the Doctrines of the grace of God, specifically in salvation.

I don't see much room for debate....Doctrines of Grace VS Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism

I hope you realize that Augustine lived several hundred years removed from the time of the apostles. You're make a very silly argument. The ignorance of these so called "doctrines of grace" wasn't taught in the early church. You have no history before Augustine. NONE. Even Augustine believed differently than Calvin and "Calvin's followers".

Your union of these "doctrines" into some cohesive undivided teaching that has stood the test of time.... is down right nonsensical.

 

[Ransom]

I hope you realize that Augustine lived several hundred years removed from the time of the apostles.

Says the guy who lives several hundred years later than either the apostles or Augustine, and therefore just shot his own argument in the foot.

*Blam!* "Ow!"

 

[praise_yeshua]

I hope you realize that Augustine lived several hundred years removed from the time of the apostles.

Says the guy who lives several hundred years later than either the apostles or Augustine, and therefore just shot his own argument in the foot.

*Blam!* "Ow!"

What are you talking about. I'm not the one making the argument for the consistence for these... supposed....."doctrine of grace"? Why are selectively quoting what I wrote?

Its rather obvious that no one immediately following the teachings of the apostles.... taught what Augustine taught?

 

[Recovering IFB]

Here's what I found

tr.v. sub·dued, sub·du·ing, sub·dues
1. To subjugate (a region or people, for example) by military force.
2.
a. To bring under control by physical force, persuasion, or other means; overcome: subdued the wild horse; subdued the rebellion in the party ranks.
b. To make less intense or prominent; reduce or tone down: I was unable to subdue my excitement about the upcoming holiday.
3. To bring (land) under cultivation: Farmers subdued the arid lands of Australia.
[Middle English subduen, alteration (influenced by Latin subdere, to subject) of Old French suduire, to seduce, from Latin subdūcere, to withdraw (probably influenced by Latin sēdūcere, to seduce) : sub-, away; see dūcere in Indo-European roots.]
I don't see how you see that Calvin was forced. All along we have showed you that in the Scriptures that God changes our hearts. It could be by persuasion or for us because we are sinners in the heart. We would not choose God remember nobody seeks after God.

 

[Ransom]

What are you talking about.

It doesn't surprise me that it went over your head.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Here's what I found

tr.v. sub·dued, sub·du·ing, sub·dues
1. To subjugate (a region or people, for example) by military force.
2.
a. To bring under control by physical force, persuasion, or other means; overcome: subdued the wild horse; subdued the rebellion in the party ranks.
b. To make less intense or prominent; reduce or tone down: I was unable to subdue my excitement about the upcoming holiday.
3. To bring (land) under cultivation: Farmers subdued the arid lands of Australia.
[Middle English subduen, alteration (influenced by Latin subdere, to subject) of Old French suduire, to seduce, from Latin subdūcere, to withdraw (probably influenced by Latin sēdūcere, to seduce) : sub-, away; see dūcere in Indo-European roots.]
I don't see how you see that Calvin was forced. All along we have showed you that in the Scriptures that God changes our hearts. It could be by persuasion or for us because we are sinners in the heart. We would not choose God remember nobody seeks after God.

Where did you get this?

Did you notice that little word "force" in your definition?

 

[praise_yeshua]

What are you talking about.

It doesn't surprise me that it went over your head.

It didn't.

"My reflects are to fast. I would catch it."

Drax - Nothing Goes Over My Head

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

What are you talking about.

It doesn't surprise me that it went over your head.

It didn't.

"My reflects are to fast. I would catch it."

Drax - Nothing Goes Over My Head

If your reflects are fast, it would bounce off of you. 

 

[Recovering IFB]

Here's what I found

tr.v. sub·dued, sub·du·ing, sub·dues
1. To subjugate (a region or people, for example) by military force.
2.
a. To bring under control by physical force, persuasion, or other means; overcome: subdued the wild horse; subdued the rebellion in the party ranks.
b. To make less intense or prominent; reduce or tone down: I was unable to subdue my excitement about the upcoming holiday.
3. To bring (land) under cultivation: Farmers subdued the arid lands of Australia.
[Middle English subduen, alteration (influenced by Latin subdere, to subject) of Old French suduire, to seduce, from Latin subdūcere, to withdraw (probably influenced by Latin sēdūcere, to seduce) : sub-, away; see dūcere in Indo-European roots.]
I don't see how you see that Calvin was forced. All along we have showed you that in the Scriptures that God changes our hearts. It could be by persuasion or for us because we are sinners in the heart. We would not choose God remember nobody seeks after God.

Where did you get this?

Did you notice that little word "force" in your definition?

Yes, I also noticed there was the word persuasion is there also were you able to see that?