# Who defines Calvinism?



## JM (Apr 21, 2011)

One cannot help but notice that more than a few Amyraldians and (extremely) low Calvinists call anyone that may have a stronger belief in the doctrines of grace "hypers." Who gets to define the term? I've noticed folks like Clifford, Cook, Byrne, Lumpkin, etc. seem to ignore the historic Reformed confessions and claim their Baxterian view is "classic Calvinism."

Thoughts?


----------



## torstar (Apr 21, 2011)

"Calvinism" is about as hackle raising to the Truly Reformed as "religious" is to Evangelicals.

Mostly.


----------



## JM (Apr 21, 2011)

It does seem to be a Baptist issue.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Apr 21, 2011)

As Inigo Montoya famously said in The Princess Bride, " You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means."


----------



## Curt (Apr 21, 2011)

JM said:


> Who gets to define the term



Not me.


----------



## jwithnell (Apr 21, 2011)

Me?

I don't use the term much -- Calvin provided a solid foundation for many who came after him, and I believe "Reformed" captures that pretty well. When people are unfamiliar with the term, I explain it as "historic Presbyterianism." Sorry Baptist brethren!


----------



## JM (Apr 21, 2011)

You're a Hyper Covenantalist!


----------



## VictorBravo (Apr 21, 2011)

Joshua said:


> I do. Objectively. Comprehensively. Finally.


 
Wait a minute, Josh. I thought we agreed that was my job!


----------



## JM (Apr 21, 2011)

Are you saying Josh is a VictorBravo-ite?


----------



## KMK (Apr 21, 2011)

The Holy Spirit defines Calvinism with the Word of God.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Apr 21, 2011)

The Holy Spirit reveals the truth. The Synod of Dort in refuting the Remonstats defined true doctrine in relation to very poor soteriology.


----------



## Apologist4Him (Apr 27, 2011)

This may be a bit overly simple answer, but the Scriptures define Calvinism, and Calvinism serves as a systematic framework to interpret all of Scripture. The Scripture proofs in support of Calvinism are so numerous it is mind boggling how so many of our brothers and sisters in Christ come to different conclusions, but there are many reasons why that is.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (Apr 27, 2011)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> The Holy Spirit reveals the truth. The Synod of Dort in refuting the Remonstats defined true doctrine in relation to very poor soteriology.


 
I agree with this.

In todays terminology dealing simply with soteriology a calvinist must be someone who holds to all 5 points. If someone holds to less than that he isn't a calvinist.

If we were going to go with what John Calvin himself actually believed and taught in the Institutes one would have to be a full presbyterian, amillennial, sacramental, and covenantal person to be a true calvinist. That's why I usually say I'm calvinistic as I hold to the 5 points of dort within the umbrella of the LBCF and do not embrace many things that calvin himself believed.


----------



## Apologist4Him (Apr 27, 2011)

Osage Bluestem said:


> In todays terminology dealing simply with soteriology a calvinist must be someone who holds to all 5 points. If someone holds to less than that he isn't a calvinist.



I agree. The doctrines of grace and the five soloa's of the reformation, in my mind, clearly represent the heart of what we call Calvinism. 



Osage Bluestem said:


> If we were going to go with what John Calvin himself actually believed and taught in the Institutes one would have to be a full presbyterian, amillennial, sacramental, and covenantal person to be a true calvinist.



Good point and I agree with defining Calvinism in the broader sense as per Synod of Dort as it seems to be the major divide between camps. Though where people disagree is on what is considered major and what is considered minor or primary and secondary in theology. For example, the meaning and method of baptism.


----------

