/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

It's possible to believe, or at least claim to, all kinds of contradictory things. The issue in deciding what is considered Calvinist or not is what Biblical authority is there to make such a determination, where does the term itself even come from, and so forth. If there is no Biblical basis for something, you will just have neverending arguments going both ways for deciding who is in the group or not, who has the right to decide that, etc.

Many people describe themselves as non calvinists and also in their own words affirm 3 or 4 points. Most protestants are 3 points.

It's really a matter of nuance.

RC Sproul argued that if you really believe total inability the rest necessarily follow.

I'm not a calvinist by the way.

>>835146

I understand that, I should have clarified that I was asking from the Reformed/Calvinist perspective

>>835147

That's interesting I did not know that.

>>835147

>RC Sproul argued that if you really believe total inability the rest necessarily follow.

>I'm not a calvinist by the way.

You mean Total Depravity? I respect Dr. Sproul, but I don't agree with him. John Wesley departed on this very point (in fact, it's probably the main thing that separates Calvinists and Methodists). Wesley affirmed Total Depravity, but he didn't teach that the other points of Calvinism followed exactly afterwards. He taught what's now known as "preventing grace" (or, prevenient grace). That is, that God still gives grace to "totally depraved" humans, to enable them towards some sliver of good will. If God did not prevent this, it'd be Hell on Earth 24/7. It's why you can see even the unsaved feed the poor from time to time, or some other small act of kindness. And it's this very will that can be enlightened enough to eventually to turn to Christ and be saved. Wesley wasn't saying that this grace upon our wills was a "saving grace" in and of itself, but that God teaches all men, and those of us who gravitate towards it more and more become ever more aware of Christ, whereby we eventually do ultimately embrace a real saving grace (while those who aren't saved are the ones who willingly defied that preventing grace and stepped further and further from it). This is what prevented Wesley from ever embracing other Calvinist points like "unconditional election". In his theology, everyone has a fair shot, and everyone's free will is still taken into account.

"all the ‘drawings’ of ‘the Father’, the desires after God, which, if we yield to them, increase more and more; all that ‘light’ wherewith the Son of God ‘enlighteneth everyone that cometh into the world’, showing every man ‘to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with his God; all the convictions which his Spirit from time to time works in every child of man. Although it is true, the generality of men stifle them as soon as possible, and after a while forget, or at least deny, that they ever had them at all (“The Scripture Way of Salvation,” I.2).

>>835151

Yes total depravity

I would prefer the term inability for my own perspective

Here's the video lecture

>>835149

https://invidio.us/RvUpyxnqAow

>>835152

Fair enough. It still makes sense. I was just unsure if that was what you meant.

>>835152

I think invidious is down for all videos

>>835154

Maybe it could be region blocking. That issue popped up in another thread.

Can someone explain or point some text about "irresistible grace"?

>>835144

Calvin himself said that all five points stand or fall together. Reject one and you have to reject the rest in order to remain consistent. People who describe themselves as "4 point Calvinists" are (usually) called Amyraldians, and no they aren't really Calvinists. They are the reason some of us have to specify "5 point Calvinist" though, because Amyraldians try to claim that they are Calvinists when they really aren't.

Rejection of Limited Atonement requires reinterpreting the other 4 doctrines in such a way that you arrive at something that most people would (colloquially) recognize as a form of Arminianism. (Free Will, general atonement, etc.)

>>835195

Arminianism is rejection of eternal security of the believer.

That does not follow from simply believing 1 John 2:2.