Anyone have any disagreement to this tulip

[kinda]

So, this thread has got me to look into Calvinism, because I don't really know what it is. It's a part of the Protestant umbrella of the Christian faiths.

Here are the five points of Calvinism, from what I have seen.

The “Five Points of Calvinism” summarize the faith’s basic tenets, although some historians contend that it distorts the nuance of Calvin’s own theological positions.

The Five Points:

"“Total depravity” asserts that as a consequence of the fall of man into sin, every person is enslaved to sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God, but rather to serve their own interests and to reject the rule of God. Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the necessity of their own natures.

“Unconditional election” asserts that God has chosen from eternity those whom he will bring to himself not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people; rather, his choice is unconditionally grounded in his mercy alone. God has chosen from eternity to extend mercy to those he has chosen and to withhold mercy from those not chosen. Those chosen receive salvation through Christ alone. Those not chosen receive the just wrath that is warranted for their sins against God.

“Limited atonement” asserts that Jesus’s substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus’s death. Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in its value or power, but rather that the atonement is limited in the sense that it is intended for some and not all. All Calvinists would affirm that the blood of Christ was sufficient to pay for every single human being IF it were God’s intention to save every single human being.

“Irresistible grace” asserts that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. This means that when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual certainly will be saved. The doctrine holds that this purposeful influence of God’s Holy Spirit cannot be resisted.

“Perseverance of the saints” asserts that since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end."

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/a...m is a major branch,in the salvation of souls.

O.k., so let's hear why people don't agree. Please don' post a video, but explain why you don't agree. I want to hear both sides.

I admit these are the first time I have read these 5 pillars of faith from Calvin, so I don't want to comment on it. So let's hear your views?

I would like to hear why you disagree, not that it's just doctrines of devils. Give me some reasons, and not just name calling. Thanks

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

So, this thread has got me to look into Calvinism, because I don't really know what it is. It's a part of the Protestant umbrella of the Christian faiths.

Here are the five points of Calvinism, from what I have seen.

The “Five Points of Calvinism” summarize the faith’s basic tenets, although some historians contend that it distorts the nuance of Calvin’s own theological positions.

The Five Points:

"“Total depravity” asserts that as a consequence of the fall of man into sin, every person is enslaved to sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God, but rather to serve their own interests and to reject the rule of God. Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the necessity of their own natures.

“Unconditional election” asserts that God has chosen from eternity those whom he will bring to himself not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people; rather, his choice is unconditionally grounded in his mercy alone. God has chosen from eternity to extend mercy to those he has chosen and to withhold mercy from those not chosen. Those chosen receive salvation through Christ alone. Those not chosen receive the just wrath that is warranted for their sins against God.

“Limited atonement” asserts that Jesus’s substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus’s death. Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in its value or power, but rather that the atonement is limited in the sense that it is intended for some and not all. All Calvinists would affirm that the blood of Christ was sufficient to pay for every single human being IF it were God’s intention to save every single human being.

“Irresistible grace” asserts that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. This means that when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual certainly will be saved. The doctrine holds that this purposeful influence of God’s Holy Spirit cannot be resisted.

“Perseverance of the saints” asserts that since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end."

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-herkimer-westerncivilization/chapter/calvinism/#:~:text=Calvinism is a major branch,in the salvation of souls.

O.k., so let's hear why people don't agree. Please don' post a video, but explain why you don't agree. I want to hear both sides.

I admit these are the first time I have read these 5 pillars of faith from Calvin, so I don't want to comment on it. So let's hear your views?

I would like to hear why you disagree, not that it's just doctrines of devils. Give me some reasons, and not just name calling. Thanks

Because of the way people behave with this doctrine.

And because totally depravity doesn't exist

And because God decided who to save not some doctrine

And because limited atonement doest exist.

And because of the abuse I've had of members holding to this doctrine

And because the father takes care of the fallen.

And because God loves his children in a fallen state

And because Jesus died for anyone who is willing to turn from there sins.

And because people in a fallen state can still hear God

And because people are holding the tulip doctrine above the God

And because people are acting like there God.with this doctrine

And because Adam and eve where once saved and God wanted to save them again

And because I've had hundred of insults of Calvinist

And because with this doctrine a Calvinist has said no one has been saved in 6000 years

And because a Calvinist has said to me Jesus hasn't spoken to anyone in 2000 years.

And because Calvinists are calling people devils who don't agree with this doctrine.

And because God chose us to be holy and blameless before the fall in him as that is the only time man has blameless. Man has never been blameless after the fall in him.





And because God didn't decide who to save until after the fall as man was saved before the fall.

And because nobody knows who created this doctrine

And because this doctrine depraves the depraved

And because this doctrine has hurt a lot of people.

And because calvinism teaches hyper grace

And because Calvinism encourages fatalism

 

[kinda]

Before you hate John Calvin and his teachings, here is a video, that gives a history of his life.

He was a reformer when the Catholic Church was in power. If you have any idea how dangerous this is, then you can at least respect the man for his bravery.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Before you hate John Calvin and his teachings, here is a video, that gives a history of his life.

He was a reformer when the Catholic Church was in power. If you have any idea how dangerous this is, then you can at least respect the man for his bravery.

Well I spoke to God about the tulip doctrine and he told me it depraves the depraved.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Before you hate John Calvin and his teachings, here is a video, that gives a history of his life.

He was a reformer when the Catholic Church was in power. If you have any idea how dangerous this is, then you can at least respect the man for his bravery.

well you need to know John Calvin said not to question God's authority, and told people to only be concerned in his good intentions.

So I highly doubt he wrote a 100 page doctrine on how to deprave the depraved called tulip

 

[kinda]

Because of the way people behave with this doctrine.

And because totally depravity doesn't exist

And because God decided who to save not some doctrine

And because limited atonement doest exist.

And because of the abuse I've had of members holding to this doctrine

And because the father takes care of the fallen.

And because God loves his children in a fallen state

And because Jesus died for anyone who is willing to turn from there sins.

And because people in a fallen state can still hear God

And because people are holding the tulip doctrine above the God

And because people are acting like there God.with this doctrine

And because Adam and eve where once saved and God wanted to save them again

And because I've had hundred of insults of Calvinist

And because with this doctrine a Calvinist has said no one has been saved in 6000 years

And because a Calvinist has said to me Jesus hasn't spoken to anyone in 2000 years.

And because Calvinists are calling people devils who don't agree with this doctrine.

And because God chose us to be holy and blameless before the fall in him as that is the only time man has blameless. Man has never been blameless after the fall in him.





And because God didn't decide who to save until after the fall as man was saved before the fall.

And because nobody knows who created this doctrine

And because this doctrine depraves the depraved

And because this doctrine has hurt a lot of people.

And because calvinism teaches hyper grace

And because Calvinism encourages fatalism

Is there any way, you can organize your thoughts better? I'm having a hard time relating your points to T.U.L.i.P. ,or the five pillars of Calvin's disruptive faith.

Also, a little bit of explanation of your points also. For instance, you said, "And because totally depravity doesn't exist". So, why doesn't total depravity exist?

I get that you have been hurt by people from the Calvin Church, but that's hardly a reason for some, to be persuaded, to disregard a church. How many people have the Catholic Church hurt/injured/killed/persecuted/molested/etc, and people still go attend with record numbers? (not catholic by the way, just making a point) I know a family member that was totally turned off by the Baptist Church, because what one of the members said, to him. She said (a Baptist), according a family member, that only people that goto Baptist Churches are saved. Not all Baptist Churches are the same, but another point was being made here.

I did listen to a couple videos, that gave reasons on why Calvin is wrong, but it was like strawman arguments. Like setting up logical statements, than concluding that since they didn't like the conclusion, it must not be true. I don't see how that is logical. If the conclusion is true and you don't like the conclusion, maybe it's still true?!?!

I feel like Calvin has been picked on at Christian Chat, and probably some really informed people, have left due to the intolerance of people who disagree with his teachings.

Just remember Peter denied Christ three times and Jesus welcomed him back, and did a great work for the faith.

I will admit his TULIP teachings are radical and can definitely come off as flamboyant, but to be honest, I don't see any major flaws in them, if you view them in a logical perspective.

For instance...

"“Limited atonement” asserts that Jesus’s substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus’s death. Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in its value or power, but rather that the atonement is limited in the sense that it is intended for some and not all. All Calvinists would affirm that the blood of Christ was sufficient to pay for every single human being IF it were God’s intention to save every single human being."

I don't see one thing wrong with this Limited Atonement paragraph. Whether it's true or not, it will be hard to prove wrong or right in a tangible way. It's just someone's perspective and it appears to be accurate, but it sort of rubs people the wrong way, because they might feel, that it doesn't give hope, to those who aren't saved presently. Maybe boxes them out or something?? I'm guessing on why this is offensive to some, I really don't see anything majorly wrong. There maybe some assumptions, but isn't that what faith is?

I know this may push someone's buttons, but trying to having a discussion on a someone who is highly controversial. What do you expect? Just remember, I didn't create the thread. lol

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Is there any way, you can organize your thoughts better? I'm having a hard time relating your points to T.U.L.i.P. ,or the five pillars of Calvin's disruptive faith.

Also, a little bit of explanation of your points also. For instance, you said, "And because totally depravity doesn't exist". So, why doesn't total depravity exist?

I get that you have been hurt by people from the Calvin Church, but that's hardly a reason for some, to be persuaded, to disregard a church. How many people have the Catholic Church hurt/injured/killed/persecuted/molested/etc, and people still go attend with record numbers? (not catholic by the way, just making a point) I know a family member that was totally turned off by the Baptist Church, because what one of the members said, to him. She said (a Baptist), according a family member, that only people that goto Baptist Churches are saved. Not all Baptist Churches are the same, but another point was being made here.

I did listen to a couple videos, that gave reasons on why Calvin is wrong, but it was like strawman arguments. Like setting up logical statements, than concluding that since they didn't like the conclusion, it must not be true. I don't see how that is logical. If the conclusion is true and you don't like the conclusion, maybe it's still true?!?!

I feel like Calvin has been picked on at Christian Chat, and probably some really informed people, have left due to the intolerance of people who disagree with his teachings.

Just remember Peter denied Christ three times and Jesus welcomed him back, and did a great work for the faith.

I will admit his TULIP teachings are radical and can definitely come off as flamboyant, but to be honest, I don't see any major flaws in them, if you view them in a logical perspective.

For instance...

"“Limited atonement” asserts that Jesus’s substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus’s death. Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in its value or power, but rather that the atonement is limited in the sense that it is intended for some and not all. All Calvinists would affirm that the blood of Christ was sufficient to pay for every single human being IF it were God’s intention to save every single human being."

I don't see one thing wrong with this Limited Atonement paragraph. Whether it's true or not, it will be hard to prove wrong or right in a tangible way. It's just someone's perspective and it appears to be accurate, but it sort of rubs people the wrong way, because they might feel, that it doesn't give hope, to those who aren't saved presently. Maybe boxes them out or something?? I'm guessing on why this is offensive to some, I really don't see anything majorly wrong. There maybe some assumptions, but isn't that what faith is?

I know this may push someone's buttons, but trying to having a discussion on a someone who is highly controversial. What do you expect? Just remember, I didn't create the thread. lol

firstly friend lets establish who wrote the tulip doctrine first, as of this moment I don't think John Calvin wrote it.

Second I don't know who John Calvin is do you.

Thirdly I'm not going to speak ill of a dead person.

So with that said you've just had 20 good reason why I feal picked on and you've decided to not show me any care.

So I think we know where we stand.

So Ill leave discussing it with you until you've got more knowledge

 

[kinda]

firstly friend lets establish who wrote the tulip doctrine first, as of this moment I don't think John Calvin wrote it.

Second I don't know who John Calvin is do you.

Thirdly I'm not going to speak ill of a dead person.

So with that said you've just had 20 good reason why I feal picked on and you've decided to not show me any care.

So I think we know where we stand.

So Ill leave discussing it with you until you've got more knowledge

You didn't acknowledge all the millions of victims of the Catholic Church, so let's not go there with missing sympathy card...Please?

You seem hurt by last post, it was never my attention, I'm just fascinated in learning I suppose.

I just want to point out, that the faith will always be focused on Christ. Salvation arguments is not something, I really like getting into. It's a touchy subject, I get it.

I want to thank you for at least entertaining me in learning about something I didn't know much about.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

You didn't acknowledge all the millions of victims of the Catholic Church, so let's not go there with missing sympathy card...Please?

You seem hurt by last post, it was never my attention, I'm just fascinated in learning I suppose.

I just want to point out, that the faith will always be focused on Christ. Salvation arguments is not something, I really like getting into. It's a touchy subject, I get it.

I want to thank you for at least entertaining me in learning about something I didn't know much about.

i ain't interested in the catholic church

So who wrote the tulip doctrine.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

You didn't acknowledge all the millions of victims of the Catholic Church, so let's not go there with missing sympathy card...Please?

You seem hurt by last post, it was never my attention, I'm just fascinated in learning I suppose.

I just want to point out, that the faith will always be focused on Christ. Salvation arguments is not something, I really like getting into. It's a touchy subject, I get it.

I want to thank you for at least entertaining me in learning about something I didn't know much about.

if you think I'm upset your mistaken

I'm big enough and strong enough to recover quite quickly and remember why God loves me.

And I'm quick enough to seek God and wait for him to renew my heart to forgive anything.

So the twenty things I told you I had been upset over was over a period of two weeks after discovering the tulip doctrine.

But Everyday I overcame every new upset for 2 weeks through seeking the lord

So now I have forgiven them and now I'm willing to over see them.

Besides I told you about my upset before you mentioned your upset.

Yesterday was the biggest shock. But I'm over that now to.

So once again who wrote the tulip doctrine.

 

[kinda]

i ain't interested in the catholic church

So who wrote the tulip doctrine.

I'm not playing this game. I think I made some solid points.

Fox Book of Martyrs is a must read. Catholic Church has done Christians wrong for to long. I know it's a little off topic, but if we are talking about naughty church doctrines, can't think of one that is worse.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

I'm not playing this game. I think I made some solid points.

Fox Book of Martyrs is a must read. Catholic Church has done Christians wrong for to long. I know it's a little off topic, but if we are talking about naughty church doctrines, can't think of one that is worse.

playing a game is for children.

Your not a child

So it's a simple question.

Who wrote the tulip doctrine.

When you answer with a real conviction which I doubt, in the meantime I won't be be speaking about logical fallacies of whether John Calvin is being picked on.

Because as of this moment I don't think John Calvin wrote the tulip on what God has said to me.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

I'm not playing this game. I think I made some solid points.

Fox Book of Martyrs is a must read. Catholic Church has done Christians wrong for to long. I know it's a little off topic, but if we are talking about naughty church doctrines, can't think of one that is worse.

oh ive just notice your reasoning for going on about catholics so many times

So I'll be blunt.


Have I passed your test on whether you where hoping I was a catholic.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Heres a nice song from the thunder 😊

 

[Dino246]

Sharing my heart on this matter

people calvinism depraves the depraved,

I never realised until 2 weeks weeks I've been getting abused by this the whole 12 months I've been here and that I'm the one who's been bashed by Calvinism and this tulip doctrine that I never knew it existed.

Or Calvinists where doing this




you may not have not noticed but I'm being deliberately targeted by Calvinists, who with there doctrine of total depravity have decided that I don't serve God so now there stripping me of God as they do all other people


So I've now re wrote my will again that I will take to my death bed.

Some of you may never of understood so here it is again



Heres a letter to my will, that i will leave in my will, which still shows God as all knowing.

And the question I will leave in my will is

Why Did God make it law that man shall not live alone.

The other thing I will state in my will is that Calvinism will say this is not true, because they say it doesn't line up with an ism, isms are bad thing.

Then in my will, will be this question.

Can you see how this proves calvinism wrong.

friends it will hopefully sink in soon 😊

But here's the reason

Right up to the ending of genesis 3

God had created man not outside of time.

In other words he chose not to know what man would do next before they did something, before the fall of man, because they where living in innocence in his garden, which can be shown in many ways in genesis 3 also.


Well this proves calvinism wrong

but here the other thing,

God first created man with no suitable helper.

After he saw the animals where not suitable helpers for Adam he then made it a law that man should not live alone without a suitable helper and gave him a wife. ❤️


because man was first created not outside of time before the fall , God never knew man would not find the animals suitable helpers, so he the made it law that man shall not live alone by giving him a suitable helper

This is why he hates divorce to.

He hates divorce so much he considers that man living alone is not Good.

But after the fall particular genesis 3 God put man outside of times so he could know what you where going to do before you do it.

Why well to help you in a fallen state, which means you are never truly totally depraved, as God honours marriage in life and death.



One scripture says, when you pray God's knows what you need before you ask him.

Well he never knew that before the fall, because God realised man did not have a suitable helper at first.

If you turn to bible you will read God found that the animals where not suitable helpers for Adam.

So he gave man a helper (a wife) and it made it law that man shall not live alone.

To further sanction this God made it law that marriage must be honoured and told us in no uncertain terms that he hates divorce.

So in death God the father is still with you untill he hands you to the son.


Oh one last note

God is still all knowing.

Because hes God and he cares about you in a fallen state, he has made you live outside of time, so that he knows what you will do before you do it.

As God says this

When you pray God knows what you need before you know it.

Well this was after the fall he said this.

Because before th fall in the garden of innocent ie eden, he never knew that then animals would be a suitable helper untill it was tried.

Then when he knew God then said it's not good that man shall live alone so he made it a law that man shall not live alone and have man a wife.


One last note

God is still all knowing

God is still all knowing


God is still all knowing

God is still all knowing.

Oh lastly one more thing God is still all knowing 😊



Thanks for wanting to understand people

When you study a subject but refuse to learn anything other than what you believed beforehand, you have wasted your time. You have been corrected several times on several points in this post, but you persist in stating and obviously also believing what is not true and which contradicts Scripture. You clearly are not interested in learning, but rather in making ridiculous statements and seeing how many people you can string along. That's called trolling.

 

[kinda]

When you study a subject but refuse to learn anything other than what you believed beforehand, you have wasted your time. You have been corrected several times on several points in this post, but you persist in stating and obviously also believing what is not true and which contradicts Scripture. You clearly are not interested in learning, but rather in making ridiculous statements and seeing how many people you can string along. That's called trolling.

There are also multiple threads on Calvin in the Bible Study Forum, not sure why this wasn't just added to a thread already started, or a new thread being created there.

It's hard to tell what people's motives are, without talking to them face to face, even then it's difficult sometimes. He does seem to be bouncing around from different talking point to talking point, without any real discussion or meaningful interaction.

I see the Conspiracy Forum for topics that are really outside the mainstream, Jean Calvin was one of the founding church fathers of the Protestant Faith. In any event, it will be interesting learn about the early reformers, and to learn from them. Martin Luther seems to be the most popular of the reformers, or was there someone else more profound?

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

There are also multiple threads on Calvin in the Bible Study Forum, not sure why this wasn't just added to a thread already started, or a new thread being created there.

It's hard to tell what people's motives are, without talking to them face to face, even then it's difficult sometimes. He does seem to be bouncing around from different talking point to talking point, without any real discussion or meaningful interaction.

I see the Conspiracy Forum for topics that are really outside the mainstream, Jean Calvin was one of the founding church fathers of the Protestant Faith. In any event, it will be interesting learn about the early reformers, and to learn from them. Martin Luther seems to be the most popular of the reformers, or was there someone else more profound?

yes he may have been but did he write the tulip doctrine

Obviously this is why I've put this thread in the conspiracy department

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

I don't thinks it wise to believe the tulip doctrine because you feal sorry for John Calvin.

I mean should I believe everything people say out of sympathy

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

When you study a subject but refuse to learn anything other than what you believed beforehand, you have wasted your time. You have been corrected several times on several points in this post, but you persist in stating and obviously also believing what is not true and which contradicts Scripture. You clearly are not interested in learning, but rather in making ridiculous statements and seeing how many people you can string along. That's called trolling.

evidently this is also a depraving comment

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

When you study a subject but refuse to learn anything other than what you believed beforehand, you have wasted your time. You have been corrected several times on several points in this post, but you persist in stating and obviously also believing what is not true and which contradicts Scripture. You clearly are not interested in learning, but rather in making ridiculous statements and seeing how many people you can string along. That's called trolling.

evidently you say I'm not willing to learn.

But yet in order to learn what your being asked to believe, you need to know what your being asked to believe in is true.

So now show me proof who wrote the tulip doctrine.