Faith discussions: improve your walk with the Lord, build up your prayer life, grow in your faith, love others in your church, and other general faith type discussions.

Five point non Calvinist

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Five point non Calvinist

    I have come to the conclusion the the five points summarized by the acronym TULIP are true. Because of this I have often referred to myself as a Calvinist. However I now think that this label may not be accurate.

    I read Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion a long time ago and I have forgotten a lot of what I read there but there are two things I do remember. Calvin believed in infant baptism and he rejected the futurist eschatology which includes a literal Millenium. I disagree with his teaching on these subjects so I feel it is inappropriate to claim to be a Calvinist even though I agree with his teachings on predestination. We need a new name for those who believe in TULIP but disagree with Calvin's teaching on other subjects.
    Clyde Herrin's Blog

  • #2
    I agree completely. I believe in TULIP, but not the Calvinist baptism or the eschatology. I am not a true Calvinist, then. I am a premillennialist (pretribulation rapture, post tribulation 1000 year reign of Christ) credo-Baptist (believer's baptism) believer.
    Comment>

    • #3
      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      I have come to the conclusion the the five points summarized by the acronym TULIP are true. Because of this I have often referred to myself as a Calvinist. However I now think that this label may not be accurate.

      I read Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion a long time ago and I have forgotten a lot of what I read there but there are two things I do remember. Calvin believed in infant baptism and he rejected the futurist eschatology which includes a literal Millenium. I disagree with his teaching on these subjects so I feel it is inappropriate to claim to be a Calvinist even though I agree with his teachings on predestination. We need a new name for those who believe in TULIP but disagree with Calvin's teaching on other subjects.
      If you believe in the Five Points of Calvinism then you're a Calvinist. If you do not hold to Covenant Theology and reject other Doctrines such as Cessationalism, Amillennialism etc, then you are simply not Reformed but are still a Calvinist.

      Personally, your approach parallels my past experience too Theo. I approached Reformed Theology with many misunderstandings concerning Covenant/Household/Infant Baptism and hadn't yet made up my mind concerning Eschatology. I will say that Reformed Theology is most logically consistent.

      You may wish to read this thread here concerning Particular Baptist: Christian Denominations

      What does it mean to be Reformed?

      A summary of Reformed theology, or what it means to be Reformed, may be seen in the following:
      • It means to affirm the great "Solas" of the Reformation. (the Five Solas)
      • It means to affirm and promote a profoundly high view of the sovereignty of God.
      • It means to affirm the doctrines of grace. . . to see God as the author of salvation from beginning to end. (Calvinism)
      • It means to be creedal. . . to affirm the great creeds of the historic, orthodox church. (See e.g. the Nicene Creed)
      • It means to be confessional. . . to affirm one or more of the great confessions of the historic orthodox church. (see e.g. the Westminster Confession)
      • It means to be covenantal. . . to affirm the great covenants of Scripture and see those covenants as the means by which God interacts with and accomplishes His purposes in His creation, with mankind. (see Covenant Theology)
      • It means to take seriously the Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20. . . to affirm the primacy of mission and understand that mission.
      • It means to have a distinctly Christian worldview that permeates all of life.



      God bless,
      William
      Comment>

      • #4
        But if Calvin believed in infant baptism and amillennialism, I am not truly a Calvinist. There will usually some things one agrees on with regard to founding scholars and some things we disagree on, which is what makes labels so cumbersome and causes misunderstandings. Some believe the church hierarchy should supersede personal learning from the Holy Spirit and the personal learning from the Bible. Others like myself, believe the Bible teaches that our personal relationship with God through the Holy Spirit allows us to accurately learn the teachings of Scripture. Reformed believes in the former. So I am not totally Reformed or totally Calvinist. I learn what I learn from the Bible by the teachings of the Holy Spirit. We are to reason among ourselves the doctrines of Scripture, but the Spirit has the final say, which all should agree with. Since all believers have the same Spirit as (presumably) the founding fathers of Reformed and some other denominations, we should believe in the same things, being taught by the self-same Spirit. Personal interpretation by anyone whether a scholar or not is what gums up the works. Pride gets in the way of correction, but I digress.
        Comment>

        • #5
          Originally posted by Stratcat View Post
          But if Calvin believed in infant baptism and amillennialism, I am not truly a Calvinist. There will usually some things one agrees on with regard to founding scholars and some things we disagree on, which is what makes labels so cumbersome and causes misunderstandings. Some believe the church hierarchy should supersede personal learning from the Holy Spirit and the personal learning from the Bible. Others like myself, believe the Bible teaches that our personal relationship with God through the Holy Spirit allows us to accurately learn the teachings of Scripture. Reformed believes in the former. So I am not totally Reformed or totally Calvinist. I learn what I learn from the Bible by the teachings of the Holy Spirit. We are to reason among ourselves the doctrines of Scripture, but the Spirit has the final say, which all should agree with. Since all believers have the same Spirit as (presumably) the founding fathers of Reformed and some other denominations, we should believe in the same things, being taught by the self-same Spirit. Personal interpretation by anyone whether a scholar or not is what gums up the works. Pride gets in the way of correction, but I digress.
          G'day Strat

          "But if" simply is not an accurate statement. Amillennialism (though the general belief was most prevalent before being so revised) was developed after Calvin. For that matter the Five points of Calvinism wasn't developed until after Calvin by the council of Dort. The Basis of Calvinism is not John Calvin, but rather Scripture. John Calvin is considered the "king" of exegesis which led to the development of various doctrines (why he considered an early Reformer), namely Calvinism as well as Presbyterianism.

          Also you seem to be confusing Calvinism with Reformed which is only superficially the same or partially complete.

          God bless,
          William
          Comment>
          Working...
          X
          Articles - News - SiteMap