/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

he was certainly no Arminius

I think calling him Jean Cauvin gives him a little class. He could be the next Guenon.. who knows.

>>768522

Don't listen to them, if you have a Calvinist discord please link me.

Calvin is the only one that unifies all of the Gospel knowledge into something that makes perfect sense. Parable of the tares + parable of the sower only make sense under Calvinism.

>>768522

Excellent beard.

>>768765

It should already make sense by saving our souls. That is enough. Even the simplest man can be sufficiently blessed. And Jesus told us ourselves that unless "we become as little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven". Nor is intellect or this sort of digging part of the process at all. It is spiritual. It is revelation of the Word and Spirit, with no part other than our own spiritual quickening. "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I'm of the belief that there is predestination however.. don't get me wrong. But it's a great mystery of God on how he works with our will. And we shouldn't focus on it. It's not edifying and has nothing to do with where our focus should be (namely, the Gospel or conducting the affairs of his church. Perhaps Calvin deserves more attention for his thoughts on these things, rather than the rest. I'm not a Protestant, but I do not like so much "noise" and innovation in the church, like he did. We should all become a little more stripped and primitive).

But where he was primitive on church government, he was not on theology. Like (scholastic) Catholics, Calvinists have a bad habit of simply not accepting Mystery (because Calvin WAS a scholastic at heart) and they mistake the Christian endeavor as partly being an intellectual endeavor.

It's all vanity. Know nothing except Christ crucified. And may we all have our intellects and egos crushed, when we ask "why" and "how" too many times. And then may we respond as Job did: "Behold, I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I will lay mine hand upon my mouth."

I've always wondered, why do Prots anglicize this Frenchman's name? Is it just that Dutch and Anglos are embarassed to admit they follow a Frenchman?

>>768830

Moving post/10 tbqhwufam

>>769026

People of every language refer to him by a transliterated variant of his name. The Italians call him Giovanni Calvino, the Spaniards Juan. Transliteration of names was the standard back then.

>>768830

Ok, correct me if I'm wrong but is your overall point of contention about Calvinism is that it's too definitive and is a scholastic attempt at understanding the sovereignty of God? If so then I would reply that can Calvinism does not in fact give you a good and clear way to view predestination and God's sovereignty. You can be a Calvinist yet also believe in some form of free will. When Calvinist, like myself, say there is no free will what we mean is that there is no will that is free from influence and can be truly called free. We are all subject to our culture, bias and nature and the Bible talks about the helpless state of our flesh in Ezekiel 37:1-6

<The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3 He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?”

I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.”

4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath[a] enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’”

I don't think there's a better way to describe the current human state and when the Calvinists are talking about predestination what we are really asking is who acts first? We believe it is God then we respond.

>>769121

The council of Jerusalem was a mistake

intelligent, nihilistic and with a wicked sense of humor

>>769067

I'm Romanian and we call him Jean Calvin. It would be weird if we called him Ioan or something.

>>768522

A heretic tbqh famalam.

>>769372

And what makes you say he's a nihilist?

>>769121

You tried

>>769442

it's a meme, pal

don't worry about it

>>768830

This was a very interesting comment, and actually I think a very interesting and completely valid critique. I second the other poster, very moving. Thank you for posting this.

What's even the point of Church and to gather as a community as a calvanist?

I don't see the point, if it's sola scriptura then there is no point in anything but it's exclusivity.

I used to be a Calvinist… but it as a whole it falls short of so much of what life under God ought to be.

>>771225

Your question stems from a very foundational misunderstanding of Calvinism and the purpose of church.

>>771253

No, I know Calvinism very well. And I have a strong understanding of the Church.

>>771225

>I used to be a Calvinist

Which denomination?

>>771308

Conservative Presbyterian.

I used to argue for it before the veil was lifted from me.

>>768765

FAKE & GAY

>>771396

Have you read Calvin's institutes?

I'm fairly certain he has a section on the role of the church.

>>771434

My point is the dogmatic docterine doesn't require one to attend Church if we're to simply go off of Calvins 5 points.

I have not studied Calvin as I no longer agree with him upon the basics.

>>771471

>I used to be a Calvinist

>I have not studied Calvin

Huh…

>>768522

Sick beard.

>>781984

In all fairness, there's some debate over whether Calvin could be called a "Calvinist".

The two don't necessarily intersect.

>>781989

I was under the impression that people refrained from calling themselves Calvinists before reading at least the important bits of the Institutes, even if they belong to a reformed church. I also don't understand how Calvin could be considered anything but a Calvinist.

>>782005

There's some level of discrepancy between the various Reformed churches and Calvin himself (for example, Calvin held to double predestination, that is God actively elects some to salvation and actively condemns some to damnation unconditionally; most Reformed churches don't hold to that, professing something known as "compatibilism")

In fact, there isn't a single, binding confession to unite the various Reformed churches. The most common ones are the Three Forms of "Unity" (The Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dort), and the Westminster Standards and Catechism, but there are scores of others.

Personally, the whole tight, intellectualism of Reformed theology appealed to me, but I couldn't square it away with certain parts of Scripture and Church history.

>>768522

He's wrong. He's imbalanced in his read of the scriptures. Choice is everywhere. See Rev 22:17 eg

>>782008

>actively condemns some to damnation unconditionally; most Reformed churches don't hold to that, professing something known as "compatibilism"

I don't think you even know what the terms you're using mean.