# What then is Calvin? What is Arminius?



## Jeremy (May 14, 2005)

As much as my conscience will let me, I call myself a Calvinist. Now don't take that the wrong way, I hold fast to the doctrine taught by John Calvin. But I want to open up a can of worms by saying that Calvin didn't discover anything that wasn't sitting under the noses of everyone who had a Bible before that.

So why all the hype about Calvin? Why the argument? Didn't Paul ask the same question to the Corinthians who were taking pride in a particular leader?

'For when one says, ''I follow Paul,'' and another, ''I follow Apollos,'' are you not being merely human? What then is Apollos? What is Paul?' -I Corinthians 3:4-5 

Calvin was a great man of God. But let's take what we can and follow Jesus.

Amen?


----------



## Arch2k (May 14, 2005)

I think that most "Calvinists" would generally agree with what you are saying. It is important that we not make to much about the teaching of men, and Calvin would be the first to admit this.

That being said, the problem still remains that the term "Christian" in this day and age means everything from Jehovah's Witnesses to true Christians, to Arminianism, to Catholicism to just being a citizen of the United States (because we are a "Christian" nation). This has become very dangerous and the term now needs much qualification. I think this is why most people refer to themselves not only as Christian, but more distinctly (in today's culture) Presbyterian, Baptist, Calvinist etc.

We must be careful to take 1 Corinthians 3:4-5 very seriously, but at the same time be clear in our terms as to what we believe, and what the Bible teaches!


----------



## Arch2k (May 14, 2005)

It's also interesting to note that Paul tells us to imitate himself and others (as they imitate Christ).



> Phi 3:17 *Be fellow-imitators of me*, brothers, and consider those walking this way, even as you have us for a pattern.





> Tit 2:6 the younger men in the same way exhort to be discreet;
> Tit 2:7 holding forth yourself *as a pattern of good works * about all things in doctrine, in purity, sensibleness, incorruption,





> 1Co 4:15 For if you should have myriads of teachers in Christ, yet not many fathers; for I fathered you in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
> 1Co 4:16 *Because of this, I urge you, be imitators of me.*





> 1Th 1:6 *And you became imitators of us* and of the Lord, welcoming the Word in much affliction with joy of the Holy Spirit.



And here of course, is the ultimate principle laid out:



> 1Co 11:1 *Be imitators of me, as I am also of Christ. *


----------



## turmeric (May 15, 2005)

Let's call it Monergism vs. Synergism and that way we can maybe get around people's hot buttons and get the Gospel proclaimed. I really feel the "evangelical' world is under-evangelized!


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (May 15, 2005)

We're not identifying ourselves with Calvin, but the teachings from Scripture he helped many focus on. Really, it is more Augustinianism than Calvinism, to give more proper credit


----------



## default (May 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by turmeric_
> Let's call it Monergism vs. Synergism and that way we can maybe get around people's hot buttons and get the Gospel proclaimed. I really feel the "evangelical' world is under-evangelized!





When people ask my "denomination" I simply state "Christian." To say otherwise is to cause division. And when you say "calvinism" they AUTOMATICALLY assume HYPER, which automatically turns a deaf ear on the hearer. I've learned that we can engage in a deep conversation even with the Arminiasts of the world. We are to love the brothren. My best friend, who've I NO doubt is a Christian, is Arminian, but that doesn't mean she doesn't love God. I've not witnessed a more faithful servant than she. Mother of 6, wife, yet she loves Christ more!


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (May 15, 2005)

The only problem with the term "Christian" today is that it, more often than not, describes an Americanized form of baptized humanism and not the actual Church of Jesus Christ.


----------



## Craig (May 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by turmeric_
> Let's call it Monergism vs. Synergism and that way we can maybe get around people's hot buttons and get the Gospel proclaimed. I really feel the "evangelical' world is under-evangelized!


Then you'll have to define monergism and synergism...you're right back where you started 

Unfortunately, I speak tongue in cheek, but it's going to be true more often than not.


----------



## Arch2k (May 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> The only problem with the term "Christian" today is that it, more often than not, describes an Americanized form of baptized humanism and not the actual Church of Jesus Christ.


----------



## Jeremy (May 16, 2005)

Wow!! Thanks guys. I thought I was going to get blasted!

What about this idea:

Let's call ourselves what we are...Christians (Acts 11:26, I Peter 4:16)...and let the Word of God define what 'Christian' means.

When I look at D.M. Lloyd Jones' writings, he spent a good deal of time defining true Christianity from the Bible. This is brilliant!! What a way to expose people for who they are. This is really the only loving thing to do. Do we want people to hold on to false, damning assurances? 

Why let the world have another excuse for rejecting the Lord when we divide ourselves over a particular teacher. Why not just teach Calvin's doctrine and call it what it is...the truth. 

America needs to go back to that old fundamental statement...'The Bible says...'

Amen?

[Edited on 5-17-2005 by Jeremy]


----------

