Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christforums

.... an orthodox (true and correct when contrasted with Liberal theology) Protestant forum whose members espouse the Apostolic doctrines in the Biblical theologies set forth by Augustine, Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin and John Knox etc. We do not "argue" with nor do we solicit the membership of people who espouse secular or cultic ideologies. We believe that our conversations are to be faith building and posts that advance heretical or apostate thinking will be immediately deleted and the poster permanently banned from the forum. This is a Christian Protestant community for people to explore the traditional theologies of Classical Protestantism.

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
William

Hyper-Calvinism

Recommended Posts

Most Calvinists reject as deplorable the following hyper-Calvinistic and destructive beliefs:

  1. - that God is the author of sin and of evil
  2. - that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect
  3. - that the number of the elect at any time may be known by men
  4. - that it is wrong to evangelize
  5. - that assurance of election must be sought prior to repentance and faith
  6. - that men who have once sincerely professed belief are saved regardless of what they later do
  7. - that God has chosen some races of men and has rejected others
  8. - that the children of unbelievers dying in infancy are certainly damned
  9. - that God does not command everyone to repent
  10. - that the sacraments are not means of grace, but obstacles to salvation by faith alone.
  11. - that the true church is only invisible, and salvation is not connected with the visible church
  12. - that the Scriptures are intended to be interpreted by individuals only and not by the church.
  13. - that no government is to be obeyed which does not acknowledge that Jesus is the Lord, or that Biblical Law is its source of authority
  14. - that the grace of God does not work for the betterment of all men
  15. - that saving faith is equivalent to belief in the doctrine of predestination
  16. - that only Calvinists are Christians (Neo-gnostic Calvinism)

Arminianism and Hyper-Calvinism were both among the historical errors battled by Charles Spurgeon, who was himself a 5-point Calvinist. He vigilantly fought these twin errors on both sides of the spectrum. One of Hyper-Calvinism's main errors is to declare that, because of God's sovereignty, we should not evangelize the lost. Spurgeon rejected such nonsense as do the large majority of people who would call themselves Calvinists today (such as R.C. Sproul, John Piper, John MacArthur, Alistair Begg and many others) We believe the doctrine of election should be declared strongly because the Bible does and because man's affections are enslaved to sin. He cannot save himself but needs the effectual working of the Holy Spirit if he is to have ears to hear when we preach the gospel. The preacher casts forth the seed of the gospel (the command to believe) indiscriminately but the Holy Spirit germinates the Word (so to speak) in the hearts of those he intends to save; i.e. those given to the Son by the Father in the eternal covenant made before time (John 6:37, 39, Eph 1, 4). Many Christian missionaries whom most would consider heroes held to the five point of Calvinism: William Carrey (he was opposed by a Hyper-Calvinist), Jonathan Edwards & David Brainard (missionaries to native Americans) just to name 3.

 

 

Source: https://www.monergism.com/topics/hyper-calvinism

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, those are all beliefs I disagree with as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William; I might be wrong but wasn't # 8 a subject of discussion recently. At least I thought some felt exactly as is stated in # 8. Perhaps I misunderstood. I have never thought a infant who died would go anywhere but to heaven. Dis I get the posts all wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
William; I might be wrong but wasn't # 8 a subject of discussion recently. At least I thought some felt exactly as is stated in # 8. Perhaps I misunderstood. I have never thought a infant who died would go anywhere but to heaven. Dis I get the posts all wrong?

"that the children of unbelievers dying in infancy are certainly damned"

 

I think the point is that the Elect are saved by God's grace, and an Elect infant that cannot demonstrate faith is not damned for lack of willful ability or on part of the parent's sin of unbelief. The parents unbelief does not determine the unconditional decree of God from before the foundation of the world.

 

B.B. Warfield:

“Their destiny is determined irrespective of their choice, by an unconditional decree of God, suspended for its execution on no act of their own; and their salvation is wrought by an unconditional application of the grace of Christ to their souls, through the immediate and irresistible operation of the Holy Spirit prior to and apart from any action of their own proper wills . . . And if death in infancy does depend on God’s providence, it is assuredly God in His providence who selects this vast multitude to be made participants of His unconditional salvation . . . This is but to say that they are unconditionally predestinated to salvation from the foundation of the world” (Two Studies on the History of Doctrine, 230).

 

If you would like to understand my position: https://www.christforums.org/forum/christian-community/apologetics-and-theology/60673-the-hope-of-salvation-for-infants-who-die-without-baptism

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Willian, that is a huge amount of material! I will copy it and read it. It may well take me a full day, but I will do in within the next month, I hope. thank you so much. When someone askes you a question you have tha answers, boy do you ever!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh Willian, that is a huge amount of material! I will copy it and read it. It may well take me a full day, but I will do in within the next month, I hope. thank you so much. When someone askes you a question you have tha answers, boy do you ever!

My position is post number 2 in that thread. I snip the belief of the Latin fathers. And I express what I think on the subject.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why there shouldn't be coffee at church, hyper Calvinist. Lol.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is why there shouldn't be coffee at church, hyper Calvinist. Lol.

Love your lightheartedness brother!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hyper Calvinism is not really Calvinism

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Election rather than being a discouragement to evangelism is rather an incentive. God has told us that he does have a people so we are assured and know that our labor in the Lord is not in vain

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that the sacraments are not means of grace,

This is the only belief on the list that I agree with. Faith is the only means of grace; the sacraments are the means by which we show that we have received grace.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William .. questions for you ... I read the article you gave a link to... "The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without baptism" ... It had the following two statements. Do you believe each statement is true or false? (I'm not a 'baby baptism' proponent, but I got the impression from yours posts that your believed 'baby baptism' was not salvific.)

 

1) On the other hand, Baptism is administered to infants, who are free from personal sins, not only in order to free them from original sin, but also to insert them into the communion of salvation which is the Church, by means of communion in the death and resurrection of Christ sin.

 

2)The infant who dies with Baptism is saved by the grace of Christ and through the intercession of the Church, even without his or her cooperation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
William .. questions for you ... I read the article you gave a link to... "The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without baptism" ... It had the following two statements. Do you believe each statement is true or false? (I'm not a 'baby baptism' proponent, but I got the impression from yours posts that your believed 'baby baptism' was not salvific.)

 

1) On the other hand, Baptism is administered to infants, who are free from personal sins, not only in order to free them from original sin, but also to insert them into the communion of salvation which is the Church, by means of communion in the death and resurrection of Christ sin.

 

2)The infant who dies with Baptism is saved by the grace of Christ and through the intercession of the Church, even without his or her cooperation.

I'll add a question about baptism -- isn't baptism meant to be the outward action in front of people -- to show the decision that has already been made in the person's heart?

 

So -- I'm asking the same question as 'FastfredyO'

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I'm 3 1/2 points of 16 towards being hyper-calvinist by the definition posted. (With 2 points needing clarification)

 

Caveat: The definition of hyper-calvinism is fluid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
William .. questions for you ... I read the article you gave a link to... "The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without baptism" ... It had the following two statements. Do you believe each statement is true or false? (I'm not a 'baby baptism' proponent, but I got the impression from yours posts that your believed 'baby baptism' was not salvific.)

 

1) On the other hand, Baptism is administered to infants, who are free from personal sins, not only in order to free them from original sin, but also to insert them into the communion of salvation which is the Church, by means of communion in the death and resurrection of Christ sin.

 

2)The infant who dies with Baptism is saved by the grace of Christ and through the intercession of the Church, even without his or her cooperation.

 

Augustine, Catholics, and Lutherans believe in Baptismal Regeneration, whereas I adhere to Covenant Theology and paedo/covenant/household baptism. I agree with them that Regeneration is necessary for salvation, but I do not believe regeneration is guaranteed from water baptism. Why, because I believe this also falls in the providence of God, and that the Holy Spirit is not a servant of the Church, though I agree that Baptism is an act of Grace. And I also believe that baptism even amongst children is an initiation into the body of Christ. Children are to be baptized and treated as the body of Christ. But please note, just because you read of Augustine or see Catholics and Lutherans baptizing infants, doesn't mean "Reformed" Presbyterian reasons are the same.

 

Now what I am not saying is that Baptism and Regeneration cannot happen simultaneously. What I stated was that I do not believe God's Grace (Regeneration) is so annexed to water baptism that regeneration cannot occur without it or that water baptism guarantees regeneration. However, as a Covenant believer, I see baptism as a sign, seal, and mark of the NT Covenant which as the OT Covenant had extends to infants and children.

 

The point of reference I used of the Latin Fathers that I agree is that 1) Original Sin alone is condemnable to hell and 2) regeneration is necessary. And while I consider neglecting baptism by both parent(s) or of their children a sin, I believe that Grace can be conveyed apart from neglecting it.

 

Lastly, lets pick this up in a Baptism thread if you want to continue on this subject. I'll be happy to define my belief in paedo/covenant/household baptism.

 

God bless,

William

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
William .. questions for you ... I read the article you gave a link to... "The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without baptism" ... It had the following two statements. Do you believe each statement is true or false? (I'm not a 'baby baptism' proponent, but I got the impression from yours posts that your believed 'baby baptism' was not salvific.)

 

1) On the other hand, Baptism is administered to infants, who are free from personal sins, not only in order to free them from original sin, but also to insert them into the communion of salvation which is the Church, by means of communion in the death and resurrection of Christ sin.

 

2)The infant who dies with Baptism is saved by the grace of Christ and through the intercession of the Church, even without his or her cooperation.

Surely you are pointing to man rather than God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems to me to be getting off of center. William I believe you spent a lengthily post on this subject. Or am I wrong?

 

As a Baptist we do not believe in Baptismal regeneration. A Baptist (I should say SBC) is when a person is called by the Holy Spirit and the accept that Jesus Died for their sins, and they confess their sins and repent, The Holy Spirit seals that person as a deposit, assuring that soul they are saved. The person should become baptized as an open confession of an inward change. I personally believe if a person fails to follow up their new life in Christ, they do have ample reason to doubt their salvation.

 

I know that is a big difference between Covenant Theology, and I completely respect your and others who hold this view, IMO this is a secondary issue, our joy and love comes from the fellowship we share in Jesus Christ. I always remain in fellowship with you my deal brother. Besides at my age and health issues I most likely will stand before Jesus Christ sooner and He can streghten me out on all these things. God richly Bless.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but I do not believe regeneration is guaranteed from water baptism

Ah, I thought that was your position. Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I am new to the concept of infant baptism. I think I have a better idea of the concept now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but I do not believe regeneration is guaranteed from water baptism

Ah, I thought that was your position. Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I am new to the concept of infant baptism. I think I have a better idea of the concept now.

It sounded like it was his position. Scripture teaches immersion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but I do not believe regeneration is guaranteed from water baptism

Ah, I thought that was your position. Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I am new to the concept of infant baptism. I think I have a better idea of the concept now.

@Sue D. The mode of baptism was not even a question here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I thought that was your position. Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I am new to the concept of infant baptism. I think I have a better idea of the concept now.

 

That is called "baptismal regeneration" and it differs from covenant/household baptism.

 

The main difference from those that believe in baptismal regeneration and not is an interpretation of John 3:5,

  • "Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

Adherents of Baptismal regeneration see "spirit and water" linked to the Holy Spirit and Water baptism. Many interpreters understand "water" in John 3:5 as the water of baptism, but such a reference, before Christian baptism was instituted, would have been meaningless to Nicodemus. Others find a reference to John's baptism, but Jesus nowhere makes John's baptism a requirement for salvation.

  • John 3:10 Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?

Nicodemus as a teacher of Israel should have known these things which were consistent with the OT. Reformed believe that the statement is an allusion to OT passages in which the terms "water" and "Spirit" are linked to express the pouring out of God's Spirit in the end times, and the purification and new life that flow from His arrival - Isaiah 32:15; 44:3, Ezekiel 36:25-27.

 

Whenever spirit and water are linked it refers to divine activity rather than man's. For example, in Ezekiel 36:25-27 which reads,

  • 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

Please read the above verse and note what is done by man rather than by the divine act of God (zero). In other words how many times does God refer to Himself as "I will" and also His Spirit and what His Spirit causes?

 

Furthermore such Scriptures as John 3:8 state,

  • The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

I think this verse suggests regeneration is an act of God rather than the Spirit being subservient to the will of the Church.

 

God bless,

William

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most Calvinists reject as deplorable the following hyper-Calvinistic and destructive beliefs:
  1. - that God is the author of sin and of evil
  2. - that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect
  3. - that the number of the elect at any time may be known by men
  4. - that it is wrong to evangelize
  5. - that assurance of election must be sought prior to repentance and faith
  6. - that men who have once sincerely professed belief are saved regardless of what they later do
  7. - that God has chosen some races of men and has rejected others
  8. - that the children of unbelievers dying in infancy are certainly damned
  9. - that God does not command everyone to repent
  10. - that the sacraments are not means of grace, but obstacles to salvation by faith alone.
  11. - that the true church is only invisible, and salvation is not connected with the visible church
  12. - that the Scriptures are intended to be interpreted by individuals only and not by the church.
  13. - that no government is to be obeyed which does not acknowledge that Jesus is the Lord, or that Biblical Law is its source of authority
  14. - that the grace of God does not work for the betterment of all men
  15. - that saving faith is equivalent to belief in the doctrine of predestination
  16. - that only Calvinists are Christians (Neo-gnostic Calvinism)

Arminianism and Hyper-Calvinism were both among the historical errors battled by Charles Spurgeon, who was himself a 5-point Calvinist. He vigilantly fought these twin errors on both sides of the spectrum. One of Hyper-Calvinism's main errors is to declare that, because of God's sovereignty, we should not evangelize the lost. Spurgeon rejected such nonsense as do the large majority of people who would call themselves Calvinists today (such as R.C. Sproul, John Piper, John MacArthur, Alistair Begg and many others) We believe the doctrine of election should be declared strongly because the Bible does and because man's affections are enslaved to sin. He cannot save himself but needs the effectual working of the Holy Spirit if he is to have ears to hear when we preach the gospel. The preacher casts forth the seed of the gospel (the command to believe) indiscriminately but the Holy Spirit germinates the Word (so to speak) in the hearts of those he intends to save; i.e. those given to the Son by the Father in the eternal covenant made before time (John 6:37, 39, Eph 1, 4). Many Christian missionaries whom most would consider heroes held to the five point of Calvinism: William Carrey (he was opposed by a Hyper-Calvinist), Jonathan Edwards & David Brainard (missionaries to native Americans) just to name 3.

 

 

Source: https://www.monergism.com/topics/hyper-calvinism

 

i with you that most of that is wrong.

 

10 is true! The sacraments (the Lords Supper and believers baptism) are not means of grace, but outward obedience to inward realities.

 

#8 The bible does not teach that infants are saved by "innocence or whatever. If they are then they lose salvatio and have to be saved all over again and that is definitely unbiblical!

 

#6 is true. If one is saved, their entire sin debt is removed- even the ones they have yet to commit!

 

#1 is dicey. NOthing in the Universe happens unless God allows it! Because God could have prevented evil from ever occurring- He is in a sense author. as It says in Isaiah that he created good and evil for their purposes.

 

#2 Depends on what you mean by will. If by will you mean that unsaved men in the flesh can of their own choice choose God- no they cannot. Scripture makes this absolutely clear- those in the flesh CANNOT please God. Repentance pleases God so how can a man in the flesh do that which God says He cannot???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 is true! The sacraments (the Lords Supper and believers baptism) are not means of grace, but outward obedience to inward realities.

 

What you stated was the definition of a sign, which corresponds between two different realities, and you never mentioned the "seal" or "mark" of baptism, and you further state that baptism is not a means of grace which rejects the sign's, seal's, and mark's covenant of grace. Therefore, in essence, what you conveyed to me is that you reject covenant theology. But I do agree with your statement, as I hear many people convey credo baptism's reality as the outward obedience of man, and points to man's decisions according to the theological position of synergism rather than monergism (from above), although, I believe the Protestant and Reformed positions emphasize monergism. Reformed do not contend against what credo baptist suggest as what should be required of adult converts, in essence we can be seen aligning superficially to credo baptism. That is, adults are required to profess faith to be communicable members within the body of Christ, whereas the children's baptism is an outward display of a life long endeavor set before them in the New Covenant, the sign, seal, and mark are very much theirs' too. Until they make a profession of faith, though they are considered members of the Church and body of Christ, children are incommunicable members and not seated at the Lord's table.

 

You should really "talk" to both Protestants and Reformed members and learn about Covenant/Household baptism rather than reject it on the basis of your presuppositions and just because you observe infants being baptized, because our reasoning varies. In other words, because you see infants being baptized does not mean we baptize for the same reasons, just as they do not baptize adults for the same reasons as Baptists. I wholly believed in the past in the Baptist view of baptism (credo), however, the nature of truth can be seen from varying perspectives, and sometimes one must leave one perspective and move to another to see the truth more clearly. In other words, there are varying Scriptures which are very blurry through the lens of credo baptist, but through the lens of Covenant theology are made crystal clear.

 

Even the great Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon once said in a sermon:

 

Other means, however, are made use of to bless men’s souls. For instance, the two ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. They are both made a rich means of grace. But let me ask you, is there any thing in baptism that can possibly bless any body? Can immersion in water have the slightest tendency to be blessed to the soul? And then with regard to the eating of bread and the drinking of wine at the Lord’s Supper, can it by any means be conceived by any rational man that there is any thing in the mere piece of bread that we eat, or in the wine that we drink? And yet, doubtless, the grace of God does go with both ordinances for the confirming of the faith of those who receive them, and even for the conversion of those who look upon the ceremony. There must be something, then, beyond the outward ceremony; there must, in fact, be the Spirit of God, witnessing through the water, witnessing through the wine, witnessing through the bread, or otherwise none of these things could be means of grace to our souls. They could not edify; they could not help us to commune with Christ; they could not tend to the conviction of sinners, or to the establishment of saints. There must, then, from these facts, be a higher, unseen, mysterious influence — the influence of the divine Spirit of God.

 

For the Reformed paedobaptist, baptism is a sign, seal, and mark of covenant membership regardless of whether the child is regenerated (the seal is the promise made by God), but for a Baptist, they suggest that new covenant membership requires regeneration. Therefore, Baptist, like Hyper-Calvinist reject point number 11 in the OP which states: "that the true church is only invisible (made up of only the elect), and salvation is not connected with the visible church (made up of Elect and the Non-Elect)".

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to copy/ paste the whole text from the Large ( Lutheran) Catechism detailing the finer points of the sacrament of Holy Baptism, but I will provide links to those texts.. I'll go ahead and add some things from the Augsburg Confession and its Apology dealing with the topic as well:http://www.bookofconcord.org/lc-6-baptism.php , http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article9, http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_7_baptism.php,http://www.bookofconcord.org/smalcald.php#baptism.

 

Holy Baptism is, in the Lutheran view, the vehicle through which we are inducted into the life of faith. In fact, we say that God does the baptism Himself, using the minister to administer baptism to a new Christian. For a Christian to live a life of repentance, he or she must walk in his or her baptism, bringing to mind that the Old Adam has been drowned and the Holy Spirit is making new movements in the heart of the believer, in whom the entire Holy Trinity lives by grace given through faith. Of course we still sin and slight God's Law many more ways than we can even conceive ( which is why we have Absolution, both corporate and private, that we can be reassured that in Christ all our sins are forgiven).

 

Not being a Calvinist myself ( but deeply respecting the Calvinist- and the Pietist http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Pietism - point of view), of course I will disagree on many of those 10 points that @William mentioned above about hyper- Calvinism, which seems almost a caricature of those views originally espoused by Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin and John Knox. A lesson from my own denomination might well serve as a warning to those who would be so true to the spirit of Calvinism, they unknowingly distort what Calvinism was originally about. Shortly after Luther's death, Phillip Melanchthon emerged as the leader of the nascent Lutheran churches. Events in his life led him to compromise a lot of Lutheran principles in the face of popery and he was so impressed by what John Calvin wrote that he started to include certain non- Lutheran ethics into Lutheran doctrine. His followers, the Philippists, went to loggerheads against the Gnesio- Lutherans who, under a fellow named Flacius, caricatured a lot of what Luther taught in an effort to remain true to Confessional Lutheranism. Jacob Andreae and Martin Chemnitz arose as a nucleus of a third group that wrote out the Formula of Concord and assembled the Book of Concord as we know it today.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not going to copy/ paste the whole text from the Large ( Lutheran) Catechism detailing the finer points of the sacrament of Holy Baptism, but I will provide links to those texts.. I'll go ahead and add some things from the Augsburg Confession and its Apology dealing with the topic as well:http://www.bookofconcord.org/lc-6-baptism.php , http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article9, http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_7_baptism.php,http://www.bookofconcord.org/smalcald.php#baptism.

 

Holy Baptism is, in the Lutheran view, the vehicle through which we are inducted into the life of faith. In fact, we say that God does the baptism Himself, using the minister to administer baptism to a new Christian. For a Christian to live a life of repentance, he or she must walk in his or her baptism, bringing to mind that the Old Adam has been drowned and the Holy Spirit is making new movements in the heart of the believer, in whom the entire Holy Trinity lives by grace given through faith. Of course we still sin and slight God's Law many more ways than we can even conceive ( which is why we have Absolution, both corporate and private, that we can be reassured that in Christ all our sins are forgiven).

 

Not being a Calvinist myself ( but deeply respecting the Calvinist- and the Pietist http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Pietism - point of view), of course I will disagree on many of those 10 points that @William mentioned above about hyper- Calvinism, which seems almost a caricature of those views originally espoused by Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin and John Knox. A lesson from my own denomination might well serve as a warning to those who would be so true to the spirit of Calvinism, they unknowingly distort what Calvinism was originally about. Shortly after Luther's death, Phillip Melanchthon emerged as the leader of the nascent Lutheran churches. Events in his life led him to compromise a lot of Lutheran principles in the face of popery and he was so impressed by what John Calvin wrote that he started to include certain non- Lutheran ethics into Lutheran doctrine. His followers, the Philippists, went to loggerheads against the Gnesio- Lutherans who, under a fellow named Flacius, caricatured a lot of what Luther taught in an effort to remain true to Confessional Lutheranism. Jacob Andreae and Martin Chemnitz arose as a nucleus of a third group that wrote out the Formula of Concord and assembled the Book of Concord as we know it today.

Love your historical view, brother. And I can most certainly express a beauty in Lutheran baptism, which I would say I align closer to than others.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
Articles - News - Registration Terms