₦airaland Forum

Calvinism (also called the Reformed tradition, Reformed Christianity or the Reformed faith) is a major branch of Protestantism that follows the theological tradition and forms of Christian practice of John Calvin and other Reformation-era theologians.

Calvinists broke with the Roman Catholic Church but differed with Lutherans on the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, theories of worship, and the use of God's law for believers, among other things.[1][2] Calvinism can be a misleading term because the religious tradition it denotes is and has always been diverse, with a wide range of influences rather than a single founder. The movement was first called Calvinism by Lutherans who opposed it, and many within the tradition would prefer to use the word Reformed.[3][4] Since the Arminian controversy, the Reformed — as a branch of Protestantism distinguished from Lutheranism — are divided into Arminians and Calvinists.[a][5][6] Reformed churches may exercise several forms of ecclesiastical polity. Most are presbyterian or congregationalist, but some are episcopalian.

While the Reformed theological tradition addresses all of the traditional topics of Christian theology, the word Calvinism is sometimes used to refer to particular Calvinist views on soteriology and predestination, which are summarized in part by the Five Points of Calvinism. Some have also argued that Calvinism as a whole stresses the sovereignty or rule of God in all things—in salvation, but also in all of life.

Early influential Reformed theologians include John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Martin Bucer, Heinrich Bullinger, Peter Martyr Vermigli, Theodore Beza, and John Knox. In the twentieth century Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck, B. B. Warfield, Karl Barth, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Cornelius Van Til and Gordon Clark were influential, while contemporary Reformed theologians include J. I. Packer, R. C. Sproul, Timothy J. Keller, Alister McGrath, John Piper, John MacArthur, and Michael Horton.

The biggest Reformed association is the World Communion of Reformed Churches with more than 80 million members in 211 member denominations around the world.[7][8] There are more conservative Reformed federations like the World Reformed Fellowship and the International Conference of Reformed Churches, as well as independent churches.

Ubenedictus:
many people are misinformed about Catholicism, the teaching I explained is simple Catholicism, it is not a compromise between anything. That is how Catholics have always taught on the scope of the atonement. Luther adapted the teaching, arminian teach the same.

Calvin got it wrong Jesus said "This is my body" and all Christians for 1500yrs before Calvin have never doubted that he meant exactly what he said. Calvin invented his own new doctrine.

Ubenedictus:
it is a bit arrogant to claim that reformer before Calvin were "Calvinist".

Most of the reformers were Calvinistic in their thinking and teaching. This applies to reformers before , during and after Calvin. The Puritans , for example, were Calvinistic.
Do Arminian proponents know how Arminianism came about?
Do they know their origin?

Ubenedictus:
Calvin agrees with a few other reformers but that doesn't make them Calvinist. Luther had a mind of his own, his line of arguements were different and to call him "calvinist" is funny.

Ubenedictus:
that view if properly understood is actually catholic and is the same with the arminians.

That human will cannot desire on it own or do good on it own is the very basics of our need for salvation.

Human will is not "free" strictly speaking, we fell in adam so without grace the human will is encouraged to sin and can not do "good", with grace human will is encourage to virtue and can do good, that was the point Luther made above.

That passage properly understood is exactly taught by both catholics and arminian. Infact it is a dogma in catholicism, that is d 1st canon of d council of trent on justification.

That quote is not even an issue to arminian, lutherans or Catholics.

The one that causes disagreement is irresistable grace, lutherans reject that teaching, arminians reject it too, catholics too, but Calvin teaches it. That is the strong issue.

An2elect2:
The radical difference between Arminianism and
Calvinism is that the system of the former revolves
around the creature, whereas the system of the
latter has the Creator for the center of its orbit. The
Arminian allots to man the first place, the Calvinist
gives God that position of honor. Thus the Arminian
begins his discussion of salvation with justification,
for the sinner must believe before he can be forgiven;
further back he will not go, for he is unwilling that
man should be made nothing of. But the instructed
Calvinist begins with election, descends to
regeneration, and then shows that being born again
(by the sovereign act of God, in which the creature
has no part) the sinner is made capable of savingly
believing the Gospel.
Saved from the pleasure or love of sin. What
multitudes of people strongly resent being told that
they delighted in evil! They would indignantly ask if
we suppose them to be moral perverts? No indeed—a
person may be thoroughly chaste and yet delight in
evil. It may be that some of our own readers
repudiate the charge that they have ever taken
pleasure in sin, and would claim, on the contrary, that
from earliest recollections they have detested
wickedness in all its forms. Nor would we dare to call
into question their sincerity; instead, we point out that
it only affords another exemplification of the solemn
fact, that "the heart is deceitful above all things" (Jer.
17:9). But this is a matter that is not open to
argument—the plain teaching of God's Word deciding
the point once and for all, and beyond its verdict
there is no appeal.

AW Pink A Fourfold Salvation

... I shall here end this book, ready though I am to pursue the matter further, if need be; but I think that abundant satisfaction has here been afforded for the godly man who is willing to yield to truth without stubborn resistance. For if we believe it to be true that God foreknows and foreordains all things; that He cannot be deceived or obstructed in His foreknowledge and predestination; and that nothing happens but at His will (which reason itself is compelled to grant); then, on reason's own testimony, there can be no "free-will" in man, or angel, or in any creature. So, if we believe that Satan is the prince of this world, ever ensnaring and opposing the kingdom of Christ with all his strength, and that he does not let his prisoners go unless he is driven out by the power of the Divine Spirit, it is again apparent that there can be no "free-will". So, if we believe that original sin has ruined us to such an extent that even in the godly, who are led by the Spirit, it causes abundance of trouble by striving against good, it is clear that in a man who lacks the Spirit nothing is justify that can turn itself to good, but only to evil. Again, if the Jews, who followed after righteousness with all their powers, fell into unrighteousness instead, while the Gentiles, who followed after unrighteousness, attained to an un-hoped-for righteousness, by God's free gift, it is equally apparent from their very works and experience that man without grace can will nothing but evil. And, finally, if we believe that Christ redeemed men by His blood, we are forced to confess that all of man was lost; otherwise, we make Christ either wholly superfluous, or else the redeemer of the least valuable part of man only; which is blasphemy, and sacrilege.

Ubenedictus:
there are several passages that says Jesus died for all, theses passages are interpreted by lutherans to mean that the scope of the atonement is universal, i.e Christ death on the cross produced infinite merit capable off saving all men for all times! His atonement is for all because it is satisfactory and powerful enough to save all.

The scriptures also say he died for many and by this lutherans understand that is death is effective only for "many". This is because not all will accept the gift of grace and so only the predestine will make full use of the universal atonement of Jesus.

Lutherans also do not belive in irresistable grace. Thus lutherans believe that grace can be resisted.

Ubenedictus:
luther believe in sola fide but he also believed in sacraments as a means of salvation, he disagreed with calvin on regeneration. For lutherans saved by faith and saved in baptism are complimentary. If you doubt me read up on the ausburg confession.

Luther's predestination and Calvins predestination are a mile apart.

On atonement luther and lutherans are more in agreement with catholics in teaching that objectively Jesus died for all and subjectively he died for many. That is totally different from Calvin who believe Jesus died for the elect alone!

Lastly I didn't bring up transubstantiation in my post, you are the person bringing that up and to be straight with you, while luthers teaching on the subject is faulty, he was much better than Calvin. Calvin seriously goofed when it came to the eucharist. It was funny that d guy who was screaming sola scriptura refused to believe Jesus who said "take, eat, this is my body", "take, drink, this is my blood", "do this in my memory".

ABDULADINO:
Hahaha..Prof "They" is an error too.Are you in such a hurry to respond?

Ubenedictus:
not really, Luther believed in the sacraments as means of salvation,

Ubenedictus:
luther believe in sola fide but he also believed in sacraments as a means of salvation, he disagreed with calvin on regeneration. For lutherans saved by faith and saved in baptism are complimentary. If you doubt me read up on the ausburg confession.

Luther's predestination and Calvins predestination are a mile apart.

On atonement luther and lutherans are more in agreement with catholics in teaching that objectively Jesus died for all and subjectively he died for many. That is totally different from Calvin who believe Jesus died for the elect alone!

Lastly I didn't bring up transubstantiation in my post, you are the person bringing that up and to be straight with you, while luthers teaching on the subject is faulty, he was much better than Calvin. Calvin seriously goofed when it came to the eucharist. It was funny that d guy who was screaming sola scriptura refused to believe Jesus who said "take, eat, this is my body", "take, drink, this is my blood", "do this in my memory".

Ubenedictus:
not really, Luther believed in the sacraments as means of salvation, he believe justification and regeneration is happen durin baptism (dat is also d teachin of cathollic and orthodox), luther believed in Unlimited atonement, he said that god does not predestine to hell, all those appoint agree with catholic.

vooks:
This is all I have been saying all along. You choose to believe in Christ, you are Elect. It is not that you are Elect so you choose to believe in Christ.

Anybody turning to Christ is Elect. Calvinism has it in reverse. God chooses those who will believe in Him. Perish the rest

vooks:
Some amateur theoreticians need to brush up their understanding of ELECTION and PREDESTINATION. By God's grace I will share on these two later in the day

trustman:
A true understanding of grace should elicit a great appreciation of God, and awe and reverence for Him. Not the opposite. 

Also, the issue in a true understanding of grace is God's integrity, not ours. 

God gave Christ as a sin-offering to the world. 
Is there going to be a time when God will say something like  'I'm tired of mankind. I'm withdrawing my gift'?

If God did so much for the man when he was 'dead' will He do any less for the believer in Christ?

Our focus therefore should be on God's viewpoint. Grace is ALL about what God did. Man only responds to it and contributes nothing to it. 

Can man 'unrespond' to his initial response to salvation and then become 'unsaved'?

Some pertinent questions:
1. When a person becomes 'born again' does anything happen to him to change his spiritual status?
2. Is that change in status 'real' ?
3. If real, is that change temporary or permanent ?
4. When a Christian sins does his initial spiritual status change? If yes, to what? Can he be restored?
5. Can a person be saved more than once? So if anything can make a believer 'unsaved' (since it is the unsaved that will end up in hell) doesn't he have to be 'saved' again to be right with God?
6. What is the equation of salvation - faith alone in Christ alone or faith in Christ plus some additional things ( living a sin-free life or not renouncing Christ)? In other words does man add to Christ's work to make it complete or effectual?

If man can do anything to add to God's work in saving him then salvation is not a GIFT of grace; it is not 'unearned' or 'unmerited favour' and not dependent on the bounty and free heartedness of God. If man can do anything to add to or complete his salvation then it's not a FAVOUR! It's payment (at least in part) for the 'work' he did. He earned it in part. Therefore the glory belongs to both God and himself. But that would be blasphemous. 

Adding man's work to the process of salvation is irreconcilable with the truth of the Word of God. That is why the scripture emphatically declares that:
"For BY GRACE you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the GIFT of God, NOT A RESULT OF WORKS, so that no one may boast". Ephesians 2:8&9

"he saved us, NOT BECAUSE OF WORKS done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy" Titus 2:5a

"who saved us and called us to a holy calling, NOT BECAUSE OF OUR WORKS but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began," 2 Timothy 1:9

Salvation is by faith ALONE in Christ ALONE. Man's 'works' (however they are classified) play no part in it from start to finish. 
Acts 13:39 "Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses."

ABDULADINO:
Hahahaha..The guy nailed his coffin without knowing it. I wonder how folks read their bibles.

trustman:
I agree with you.
I trust it's concise enough for Vooks.

ABDULADINO:
You dey mind vooks...he is here just to win an arguement even if he is incorrect. I have stopped taking his posts seriously.

vooks:
Very brainy of you.
James says if anyone lacks 'a person', they should ask for 'a person' from the Father

James 1:5 (KJV)
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

trustman:
Election occurs (from our point of view as humans) at regeneration. From God's side it was a sovereign decision He made in eternity past ("before the foundation of the world".

Election is God specifically setting apart for honor those who choose to believe in Christ.

vooks:
If God freely offers a gift (salvation) to ALL men but denies most the ability (faith) to receive this gift, the offer is not genuine, and it was never available for all.

25 ¶ At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

6 ¶ I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.
8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.
9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me ; for they are thine.

The doctrine of perseverance which is derived from the idea of individual election, is incompatible with a belief in availability of salvation for ALL

malvisguy212:
5solas ask "were does the bible scripture teaches Predestination" and I provide the answer. I agree with your explanation because it was through christ we are called the children of God.

Romans 8:29-30, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the IMAGE of his SON, that he might be the firstborn AMONG
MANY BRETHREN. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

Predestination or fore-ordination is what God did before the world began,
as He determined to save man from sin through the sacrifice of His own Son. Those who answer His call through the gospel experience the blessings of that plan now in Christ Jesus.(Romans 2:3,11)

malvisguy212:
God pre-determined, not the IDENTITY of the saved,but the CHARACTER of the saved.

drjellyjoe:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+6%3A44%2C+John+6%3A37%2C+John+6%3A64-65%2C+John+15%3A16%2C+Matthew+22%3A14%2C+Ephesians+1%3A4-6%2C+Romans+8%3A27-30%2C+2+Thessalonians+2%3A13%2C+2+Timothy+1%3A9%2C+1+Peter+1%3A2%2C+Acts+13%3A48%2C+Romans+11%3A17%2C+Romans+9%3A11%2C+John+10%3A26-28%2C+John+6%3A37-40%2C+John+17%3A9-11%2C+&version=AKJV

Here is some scripture that supports the "Calvinism" position.

Ubenedictus:
I believe both have their errors but I'll pick lutherianism over mr Calvinism and i'll pick arminianism over both Calvinism and lutherianism.

malvisguy212:
God pre-determined, not the IDENTITY of the saved,but the CHARACTER of the saved.

1 Corinthians 2:7, "But WE speak the
WISDOM of God in a mystery,
even the hidden WISDOM, which
GOD ORDAINED BEFORE THE WORLD
UNTO OUR GLORY :"
You see, God pre-determined the character (wisdom) in this verse and not the identity.

Scholar8200:
Which?

OLAADEGBU:
Church history outline

https://carm.org/church-history-outline

Dolypson04:
When we pass, we proudly claim the glory but when things do not come the way we wanted it, we shift the blame.
I asked a colleague about her result just the week, she told me it was fine. I asked for a particular course we all dreaded and she proudly said " I had A in it". I requested for another course and she replied; " They gave me 32 (F). In my subconscious state, I asked, "Who gave you"?.
The statement is very common in our secondary and tertiary institutions. By the way, why do we always "HAVE" A while they always "GIVE" us F?

Evina:
A wise man once told me that when I find myself around single women, especially when I find them attractive or interesting, I should mention my wife and family early in the conversation. I have found this advice to be very useful on many occasions.

Fellow husbands, I have found the above advice and the other tips at the bottom to be essential in keeping my marriage healthy and strong. I want my marriage to be strong and healthy, and so should you! In fact, it’s one of the biggest responsibilities in your marriage.
So let’s dig deeper into this subject. Where are some common places that you might run into this scenario? For many of you, it could easily happen at work. You could be starting a new job and find yourself around a lot of nice, new women. When this happens, you have to make the choice to embrace their attention or extinguish it in a friendly way by mentioning your beautiful wife and family.

For some of you, you have been working around the same women for some time. You might have chosen many times to engage in flirty conversation or to go out with co-workers after work. If this is you and your wife is at home waiting for you, then it’s time to step back and assess your position as the husband and leader. Take the necessary steps to make your relationship with your wife the most important one again and don’t forget it. Lead, gentlemen, lead!
Even though those were only a couple of quick examples, I know there are a few of you out there who need to step up your role as a husband. Those examples don’t apply to you? Then consider who you know and talk to at your gym, the grocery store, the local hangout or wherever. These “simple” places could produce difficult relationships that will harm your relationship and love with your wife. Man up and do what needs to be done for your marriage!

Now that I have your attention, here are five things every married man should do around single women:

1. Keep your ring on. There are very few exceptions for when that ring needs to be off, like when operating heavy machinery, swimming in shark-infested waters and the like. If you are about to enter a situation that makes you look at your ring and consider if you need it on or not, leave! Run! Get away from there! Seriously, get out of that situation; your vows, marriage, children and more depend on those important decisions. (Read Luke 16:10.)

2. Hang up pictures of your wife at work. A married man in this position would be wise to pick out a couple of great and fun photos of him and his wife and keep them displayed at his office or place of work. Pick a time that was fun for two reasons: It will remind you why you love her so much, and it will make for a great conversation tool when others, especially women, ask about it. Update the image as needed to keep the people around you knowing your relationship is continuing to grow. Get that picture up this week and extinguish those flames. (Read Psalm 119:37.)

3. Keep eye contact simple and short. Don’t read this the wrong way; I’m not saying to be rude. I’m saying to be careful where your eyes travel and how long they travel when you are in the presence of an attractive single woman. You know that once you engage in the first serious look, you have signed the dotted line for more eye trouble. (Read more about that “first look” here.) Keep it short, keep it decisive, and move on. Get back to that image posted at your desk. Go! (Read Matthew 5:28.)

4. Keep conversation general and professional. If you work around single women, there is no question that conversation will come up. It’s up to you on how you decide to speak with her. You can choose to keep it short and general, you can choose to keep it professional, or you can choose to keep it off of those and allow it go places it shouldn't. Be polite but very intentional in your conversations. If needed, again, always be ready to bring up something about your wife or family. Pull the pin, aim, and extinguish. Safety first. (Read Romans 6:13.)

5. Talk about your wife and family often. Did I mention anything about talking about your wife in conversation yet? I believe I did, but this last point brings the idea to a firm home. The single women you engage with each day, if you have to, should be no match to your wife and family. Your family should be your first priority wherever you are and with whomever you encounter each day. Yes, each and every day. Keep it short, keep it simple, and mention your beautiful wife. Now pat yourself on the back and keep it up. (Read Ephesians 5:25-33.)

Important note: No matter what you have done with your current relationships with single women, these steps can and should be started at anytime. Your wife’s feelings are and will always be more important than the woman you need to take these steps with. Get on it!

I challenge you to take these bold steps for you, your marriage and your family. Again, it’s your responsibility to lead!

List one of your own tips below, and let’s help out our fellow husbands.

Source: www.mydominioncity.com. By Israel Ndukwe Unya

trustman:
I had given examples of display of grace from the Bible. The typical example being:
- The Good Samaritan Lk. 10:30-35


The emphasis in grace is on the giver. 
Grace as favour means an act of kindness. 

The Good Samaritan did not expect the man he helped to pay him back in some way for the favour he did him.
The man helped in the story cannot reverse the grace extended to him. 
The favour done was not dependent on the goodness of the man or the ability of the man to repay the favour in future. 
The only motive of the Good Samaritan was from himself - his free heartedness, not on any external consideration. 

God's grace is TOTALLY dependent on Him - the Giver rather than the receiver. God's grace is totally based on His integrity.

ABDULADINO:
Me sef dey wait.