What is a Calvinist?

[awretchsavedbygrace]

Yes, you've read correctly. What is a Calvinist? The previous threads have critiqued the so called " new calvinism" stating that it is no calvinism at all. Therefore, the question arose, what exactly does one need to believe inorder to be historically called a Calvinist. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

 

[historyb]

Very good question. In order to be Calvinist must one be RPW/EP and all the other things? Are is it enough to accept TULIP? How high view of things must Calvinist have?

 

[Prufrock]

This is the type of question that quickly and easily results in a lot of toes feeling like they're being stepped on. Thus, a quick, and hopefully fairly agreeable answer:

The term can be used either improperly or properly.

I. Improperly and commonly it is used in a minimal sense to refer to 5 specific aspects or elements of a soteriological schema. Specifically, the "Calvinist" or Reformed correction at Dort of 5 improper teachings propagated by the Remonstrants.

II. Properly but rarely, it is a (perhaps unfortunate) synonym for "Reformed," which involves a comprehensive system of doctrine, as well as a piety and practice. I say "perhaps unforunate," as it is not to Calvin as the head of an interpretive school that we look, but rather a large group of teachers, including at the head (among others) Calvin, Bullinger, Zwingli, Bucer, Melanchthon, Musculus and Vermigli, as well as their theological descendants. The improper sense of the term arose when the Reformed or "Calvinists" corrected 5 teachings of the Remonstrants; and thus those 5 Points are the Calvinist position on those issues. In the broad and proper sense, however, if you want to know what it means, one simply has to read our Confessions and catechisms. That is Calvinism.

 

[Reformed Rush]

Yes, you've read correctly. What is a Calvinist? The previous threads have critiqued the so called " new calvinism" stating that it is no calvinism at all. Therefore, the question arose, what exactly does one need to believe inorder to be historically called a Calvinist. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

To back up a bit, a "Calvinist" is a regenerated Christian; a member of Christ's spiritual body (church); Reformed according to confession of faith; historically Protestant; living anti-thetic to the world, in the world.

Here is a succinct article on the subject that will be helpful to you:

THE REFORMED FAITH

J&R

 

[Philip]

I personally avoid the term because it puts too much emphasis on Calvin and turns it away from other reformers like Luther, Bucer, Zwingli, Cranmer, and others who have contributed to the Reformed tradition.

 

[awretchsavedbygrace]

This is the type of question that quickly and easily results in a lot of toes feeling like they're being stepped on.

I agree. But we will never all agree on all issues. Forexample historically, Calvinist hold to padeobaptism. Not all Calvinist do? Some, as my self am, a CredoBaptist (Lets not dervive from the topic and make this a Baptism thread). Can I, regardless of my baptism position be historically known as a Calvinist? I guess some will say yes and some will say no.

 

[Whitefield]

I borrow and paraphrase from somewhere else (not sure where):

I'm not sure how to define a Calvinist, but I sure know one when I meet one.

 

[awretchsavedbygrace]

I borrow and paraphrase from somewhere else (not sure where):

I'm not sure how to define a Calvinist, but I sure know one when I meet one.

so true.

 

[steven-nemes]

If you believe in the five points, I would consider you a Calvinist.

 

[Curt]

I usually use the terms Reformed or Historic. I use the word Calvinist when I want to shock someone, like the UU (lady) "pastor" who once asked me about my theology and was aghast when I said, casually, "Oh I'm a Calvinist."

 

[toddpedlar]

Yes, you've read correctly. What is a Calvinist? The previous threads have critiqued the so called " new calvinism" stating that it is no calvinism at all. Therefore, the question arose, what exactly does one need to believe inorder to be historically called a Calvinist. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

To back up a bit, a "Calvinist" is a regenerated Christian;

If you intend by this remark to indicate that those who are not "Calvinists" are not regenerate, you'll need to do more than simply assert such a ridiculous proposition. I hope, therefore, that I've misunderstood you, and that all you meant by that first phrase was to list the first qualification to name someone a Calvinist (along with the others in the list).

 

[Reformed Rush]

Yes, you've read correctly. What is a Calvinist? The previous threads have critiqued the so called " new calvinism" stating that it is no calvinism at all. Therefore, the question arose, what exactly does one need to believe inorder to be historically called a Calvinist. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

To back up a bit, a "Calvinist" is a regenerated Christian;

If you intend by this remark to indicate that those who are not "Calvinists" are not regenerate, you'll need to do more than simply assert such a ridiculous proposition. I hope, therefore, that I've misunderstood you, and that all you meant by that first phrase was to list the first qualification to name someone a Calvinist (along with the others in the list).

You have indeed misunderstood us, Sir, and yes, your second statement was the intent of our message.



J&R

 

[toddpedlar]

To back up a bit, a "Calvinist" is a regenerated Christian;

If you intend by this remark to indicate that those who are not "Calvinists" are not regenerate, you'll need to do more than simply assert such a ridiculous proposition. I hope, therefore, that I've misunderstood you, and that all you meant by that first phrase was to list the first qualification to name someone a Calvinist (along with the others in the list).

You have indeed misunderstood us, Sir, and yes, your second statement was the intent of our message.



J&R

My mistake - my ears are burning from another conversation with someone who argues exactly that... so perhaps that's why I misread your statement. Please accept my apologies.

 

[Reformed Rush]

If you intend by this remark to indicate that those who are not "Calvinists" are not regenerate, you'll need to do more than simply assert such a ridiculous proposition. I hope, therefore, that I've misunderstood you, and that all you meant by that first phrase was to list the first qualification to name someone a Calvinist (along with the others in the list).

You have indeed misunderstood us, Sir, and yes, your second statement was the intent of our message.



J&R

My mistake - my ears are burning from another conversation with someone who argues exactly that... so perhaps that's why I misread your statement. Please accept my apologies.

We understand. No problem.

J&R

 

[Berean]

Forgive me, Jim and Ronda, but your sharing of an account and the use of "we" is almost like hearing the royal 'we' when you respond. I guess I'm used to individuals.

The majestic plural (pluralis maiestatis in Latin) is the use of a plural pronoun to refer to a single person holding a high office, such as a monarch, bishop, pope, or university rector. It is also called the Royal pronoun, the Royal 'we' or the Victorian 'we'. The more general word for the use of "we" to refer to oneself is nosism, from the Latin nos.

 

[Scott1]

Calvinism is a system of doctrine that came from systematic study of all of Scripture, much of that after Mr. Calvin and refined after him that is mostly completely expressed in the Westminster Standards.