Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Study the Word, Calvin, or Aminian??? | John 6:65 | childoftheking | 35258 | ||
Thank you Joe for the welcome and your reply. Interesting choice of verse too by the way :) So from what you say here, and by your profile name, I gather that you're a follower of Calvin? An ism is a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school. From http://www.xenos.org/classes/principles/cpu1w6.htm#a4 Calvinism: This term is actually a misnomer. Calvin did not emphasize predestination in his Institutes (only 4 chapters). Calvin warned against delving too deeply into this subject (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, section 1). However, it became the controlling principle in Reformed Theology, expressed by the Synod of Dort in 1618-1619. I respect your views and thank you again for your reply. Peace and Joy in the Lord bgg |
||||||
2 | Study the Word, Calvin, or Aminian??? | John 6:65 | Reformer Joe | 35395 | ||
Well, I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I just happen to agree with much of Calvin's theology (not that it originated with Calvin, because the Reformed understanding has much deeper roots than the Protestant Reformation, at least as fasr back as Augustine). It is interesting to note that in some languages, our very faith itself is an "ism." For example, in Spanish the word for "Christianity" is "cristianismo." So I guess that not all ism's are bad ism's after all! I would think that four entire chapters in a work (even a multi-volume work such as the Institures) would constitute a thorough treatment of the doctrine. Also, that is somewhat misleading, since his understanding of election undergirds a great deal of the rest of his theology, even if he doesn't explicitly state it outright. As an aside, it seems that many think that every Reformed sermon is just a re-hashing of the 5 points of Calvinism. Rest assured that we do indeed talk about other things on Sunday mornings, despite the fact that our understanding of God's character and operation in the world undergirds a great deal of our preaching. However, having been a part of several churches in my life, some of which have leaned in one direction and some in another, I can tell you that in my experience I have never heard the preaching from the Arminian-leaning camp that I am blessed with in Reformed circles. It is so refreshing to be sitting under God-centered preaching, where the majesty, grandeur, ominpotence, love, and sovereignty of God are so stressed. When we talk about humanity (whether regenerate or unregenerate) it is always in reference to God, rather than talking about God in reference to man. The Lord is the absolute centerpiece of Reformed preaching, and that is a far cry from the man-centered approaches telling "what Jesus can do for you" or "how Jesus will help your marriage" (when in certain cirsumstances the opposite is true) or sermons which downplay obedience to Christ or make Jesus out to be a cosmic therapist who exists to make you a "happy, well-adjusted, self-actualized person" (whatever that means). The fact that we exist for God's glory rather than Him existing for our happiness is one of the most profoundly missed truths in our self-centered age, and you are far less likely to come away with a man-centered religion in a church that holds closely to the theology of the Reformation as stated in its historic creeds. As I stated in another post, the Canons of Dort do provide us with the codified form of the so-called "five points" as a response to what were perceived as five errors being made by the Dutch Remonstrants in the early 17th century. However, this document by no means goes beyond Calvin's theology; and even if it could be shown that they did, the bottom line is whether the points in the Canons correspond to the teaching of Scripture. --Joe! |
||||||