Calvinist Kitchen...stirring the pot
- Thread starter GraceAndTruth
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
It's quite amazing how quickly the conversation moves without me! (And that's okay - just the nature of these public forums.)
I welcome the deep discussions, and I look forward to them. I believe when done in a spirit of love and understanding (not that we have to agree in the end), they can be mutually edifying. I appreciate the encouragement to stay, and I hope my spirit of congeniality always comes through in what I write.
I couldn’t agree more with you – we need to read each and every part of scripture and interpret each part in light of its context. I’ll mention two things here to push back one what you’re saying here – in a friendly way. (Pushback is a term I’ll probably use often, it only means to challenge or question – not fight or argue.)
First, when you say, “I just go by what the Word says: no less and no more…”, this in itself is a doctrinal statement – well, more of a creed if you will. Is it man-made? Sure – not in a bad way, though – it’s a statement made by you, and you are part of mankind. Doctrinal statements and creeds (I recognize that I’m bringing up the subject of creeds here, and that creeds may not have been mention previous to this post in this thread), are an organized presentation of what men and women before us have put together as they studied the scriptures themselves. As you study the scriptures, you’ll come up with your own doctrinal statements. For example, “Salvation through faith alone” is a doctrinal statement.
Second, and I hope this doesn’t open a whole can of worms, so I’ll not say what I believe regarding the rapture, but do you hold to the teaching that Christ will rapture the church from the earth prior to a time of great tribulation? Did you know that the word “rapture” never occurs in the Bible, nor is it ever explicitly taught in the Bible to occur? It’s assumed – whether right or wrong – because of the perceived absence of the church after a certain point in Revelation.
My point isn’t to say whether or not this doctrine is right or wrong, but rather to present a possible doctrine that you may agree with that may find its place in the category that you place the 5 Solas in.
Also, what are our pastors doing on Sunday mornings except sharing with us what they’ve come away from the Scriptures with? It’s doctrine, Lord willing, sound doctrine, but doctrine none-the-less.
You mention that we won’t find the 5 Solas mentioned anywhere in Scripture. Do you mean that we won’t find them as an explicit list in the Scriptures, or that they have no support in the Scriptures? I want to make sure I’m answering your response adequately, and not making a false assumption on what is meant.
Any cry of a creed or doctrinal statement without fully understanding what is meant by it, and without living out what is taught by it certainly can and does lead to lukewarmness and passivity. I agree with you on this point.
At the same time, we shouldn’t toss the baby out with the bathwater. There are many who know what is meant by “Faith Alone”, and hold to that truth without hypocrisy. Should they be discouraged from holding that as one of their doctrinal statements? Should we leave off with using “Faith Alone” because some got it wrong – and discourage the proper use of it by others who hold to its truth?
The question has been asked a few times, why not leave off with the title “Calvinist”. Truthfully, I’d prefer not to have to say that I’m Calvinist, but when the term Calvin is, from my perspective, misrepresented and disparaged, I feel it necessary to speak up as one who identifies with that system of theology.
I’ve included the quotes from your post, not to pick what you said apart, but to show where various parts of my response is addressing what you said. I’m not sure if that’s standard practice on CC, but I know it can be perceived as nit-picky. My intent is sincere.
Also, I appreciate your thoughtful interaction here! Thank you. I hope we can continue to dialogue together on these matters. If I’ve omitted anything in my response that you wanted me to address, please let me know. I’ll be glad to revisit and respond to anything I might have missed.
God’s blessings on you, friend.
I welcome the deep discussions, and I look forward to them. I believe when done in a spirit of love and understanding (not that we have to agree in the end), they can be mutually edifying. I appreciate the encouragement to stay, and I hope my spirit of congeniality always comes through in what I write.
I couldn’t agree more with you – we need to read each and every part of scripture and interpret each part in light of its context. I’ll mention two things here to push back one what you’re saying here – in a friendly way. (Pushback is a term I’ll probably use often, it only means to challenge or question – not fight or argue.)
First, when you say, “I just go by what the Word says: no less and no more…”, this in itself is a doctrinal statement – well, more of a creed if you will. Is it man-made? Sure – not in a bad way, though – it’s a statement made by you, and you are part of mankind. Doctrinal statements and creeds (I recognize that I’m bringing up the subject of creeds here, and that creeds may not have been mention previous to this post in this thread), are an organized presentation of what men and women before us have put together as they studied the scriptures themselves. As you study the scriptures, you’ll come up with your own doctrinal statements. For example, “Salvation through faith alone” is a doctrinal statement.
Second, and I hope this doesn’t open a whole can of worms, so I’ll not say what I believe regarding the rapture, but do you hold to the teaching that Christ will rapture the church from the earth prior to a time of great tribulation? Did you know that the word “rapture” never occurs in the Bible, nor is it ever explicitly taught in the Bible to occur? It’s assumed – whether right or wrong – because of the perceived absence of the church after a certain point in Revelation.
My point isn’t to say whether or not this doctrine is right or wrong, but rather to present a possible doctrine that you may agree with that may find its place in the category that you place the 5 Solas in.
Also, what are our pastors doing on Sunday mornings except sharing with us what they’ve come away from the Scriptures with? It’s doctrine, Lord willing, sound doctrine, but doctrine none-the-less.
You mention that we won’t find the 5 Solas mentioned anywhere in Scripture. Do you mean that we won’t find them as an explicit list in the Scriptures, or that they have no support in the Scriptures? I want to make sure I’m answering your response adequately, and not making a false assumption on what is meant.
Any cry of a creed or doctrinal statement without fully understanding what is meant by it, and without living out what is taught by it certainly can and does lead to lukewarmness and passivity. I agree with you on this point.
At the same time, we shouldn’t toss the baby out with the bathwater. There are many who know what is meant by “Faith Alone”, and hold to that truth without hypocrisy. Should they be discouraged from holding that as one of their doctrinal statements? Should we leave off with using “Faith Alone” because some got it wrong – and discourage the proper use of it by others who hold to its truth?
The question has been asked a few times, why not leave off with the title “Calvinist”. Truthfully, I’d prefer not to have to say that I’m Calvinist, but when the term Calvin is, from my perspective, misrepresented and disparaged, I feel it necessary to speak up as one who identifies with that system of theology.
I’ve included the quotes from your post, not to pick what you said apart, but to show where various parts of my response is addressing what you said. I’m not sure if that’s standard practice on CC, but I know it can be perceived as nit-picky. My intent is sincere.
Also, I appreciate your thoughtful interaction here! Thank you. I hope we can continue to dialogue together on these matters. If I’ve omitted anything in my response that you wanted me to address, please let me know. I’ll be glad to revisit and respond to anything I might have missed.
God’s blessings on you, friend.
-
1
- Show all
If you start with the Scriptures then you may be close to right. Your explanations of Calvinism are often very close to what I believe. (Though I would say they mostly are giving only one side of the equation - though a completely true part)
Where most people get misled by Calvinism is by starting with the doctrinal statement of the TULIP. If you take those points to their logical human conclusion you get the "force robot" and "fatalism' mentality.
Where most people get misled by Calvinism is by starting with the doctrinal statement of the TULIP. If you take those points to their logical human conclusion you get the "force robot" and "fatalism' mentality.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
One may get that mentality, but it would be based on unfamiliarity. The biggest problem is talking past the one showing the beliefs and inserting straw man arguments and baseless assumptions. Thanks my brother for your compliment on my explanations, that you hear me out is both gracious and mature, and much appreciated. 
-
1
- Show all
Winner winner chicken dinner.
I feel you are warming up....awaiting a joke any minute now,.haaaaa,xxx
-
1
- Show all
- Status