Why Do Calvinists Think They Have Superior Theology?

ALAYMAN said:
"Young man, sit down! You are an enthusiast. When God pleases to convert the heathen, he'll do it without consulting you or me."

Maybe your form of Calvinism and understanding of sovereignty just isn’t “ultimate” enough after all.😎
Click to expand...
Hyper-Calvinism is just as unbiblical as semi-Pelagianism. Which is why when John Ryland said that to the Calvinist William Carey, the latter was led to write a tract titled An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians, to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens--arguing, basically, that since the command to baptize in the Great Commission was still in effect, so was the command to make disciples.
 
Ransom said:
Hyper-Calvinism is just as unbiblical as semi-Pelagianism. Which is why when John Ryland said that to the Calvinist William Carey, the latter was led to write a tract titled An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians, to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens--arguing, basically, that since the command to baptize in the Great Commission was still in effect, so was the command to make disciples.
Click to expand...
... and it is often used as a derogative term to stifle conversation.

John Gill was accused of being a Hyper Calvinist... YET, in his days, his ministry was the largest, fastest growing ministry.
 
FSSL said:
... and it is often used as a derogative term to stifle conversation.

John Gill was accused of being a Hyper Calvinist... YET, in his days, his ministry was the largest, fastest growing ministry.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm sure "semi-pelegian" gets tossed in there once in awhile in the same vein too ;) But since I'm the one that brought that term into the conversation let me assure you that it wasn't meant in any way to distract or distort the discussion, but rather to accomplish exactly what I claimed in using the term, to show that there is a faction of folk who ascribe to the camp of strong sovereignty tenets as you do that differs in their definition of "ultimate" than you. I actually wasn't trying to stifle the conversation, cast aspersions, or mock anybody's beliefs, but asking for clarity on the mode of reasoning that helps you make your definition of sovereignty Biblically superior to the hyper's definition.
 
Ransom said:
Hyper-Calvinism is just as unbiblical as semi-Pelagianism. Which is why when John Ryland said that to the Calvinist William Carey, the latter was led to write a tract titled An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians, to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens--arguing, basically, that since the command to baptize in the Great Commission was still in effect, so was the command to make disciples.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I think I have a question based on your answer, but am going to read that pamphlet first before completely formulating it. Until then, presuming on what I think you're saying, what does "still in effect" mean in regards to the means of salvation?
 
ALAYMAN said:
Could be due to the circles you spawned in ;), and it could be because many definitions (like there are regarding "sovereign" 😁) allow for chameleon-like denial of identification.
Click to expand...
I've never seen people stumble over the meaning of the word "Sovereign." I have seen plenty stumble over the implications and significance of the term. They accidentally prove that they know the meaning by suggesting that God will limit his Sovereignty to give man an ability to use his own "free will."
 
FSSL said:
I've never seen people stumble over the meaning of the word "Sovereign." I have seen plenty stumble over the implications and significance of the term. They accidentally prove that they know the meaning by suggesting that God will limit his Sovereignty to give man an ability to use his own "free will."
Click to expand...
Did you scan the link embedded in my last post? It most certainly depicted hypers who stumbled over the nature of what constitutes the proper scope of sovereignty (an in-house debate amongst your own camp).
 
I did go through the link, but I wasn't sure what you were wanting me to look at. It was filled with all kinds of stuff. I will revisit it with your post in mind.

After I finish using AI to assist me in writing some blog articles on insulation equipment :D
 
FSSL said:
I did go through the link, but I wasn't sure what you were wanting me to look at. It was filled with all kinds of stuff. I will revisit it with your post in mind.

After I finish using AI to assist me in writing some blog articles on insulation equipment :D
Click to expand...

They were claiming martyrdom and circling the wagons over being called hypers due to their denial of the (fellow) Calvinist claim of the universal love for the world, even the non-elect. Their defense of their claims would no doubt deal with the extent of their view of God's sovereignty in who He rightfully loves (the elect, not the non-elect).
 
... uggh... getting distracted :D

Some thoughts before I jump in... is it even possible to have too full or high of a view of God's Sovereignty?
 
FSSL said:
... uggh... getting distracted :D

Some thoughts before I jump in... is it even possible to have too full or high of a view of God's Sovereignty?
Click to expand...

Great question! That is PRECISELY what I think serves as the catalyst for and at the heart of the unbiblical errors of hyperCalvinism. 😊 I also think that is the essence of part of the rationale behind what separates us in how the definition that Calvinists understand sovereignty from the "semi-pelegian" (lol) understanding.
 
FSSL said:
I have never met a Hyper Calvinist, however, I have met many semi-pelagians :D
Click to expand...
Sorry to Jen Psaki (circle back 😆) you, but are you suggesting that by the statement above that you think that most folk you are referring to as semi-pelegian (like those on the FFF that don't subscribe to Calvinism), you think those folk believe that salvation is driven by the lost individual making the first move towards God?
 
FSSL said:
"Free will" is not found in the Bible.
God does not depend on man's choice.

Its a funny thing. I bet you believe in eternal security and believe God will not let you go... however, when it comes to salvation, you believe it depends on you.

God does as He wills. THAT is Bible.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what I believe. You may own the site, but you're wrong on so many levels it's pathetic. That's a shame. We all know that God does what he wills...nobody is disputing that. Many things aren't found in the Bible by name, but, the principles are there. Maybe you should learn how to stop putting your opinions above what is real.
 
FSSL said:
He isn't dependent on man.
Click to expand...
Nobody says he is.
FSSL said:
If He was, man's hostility would NEVER choose to submit to Him. Which is why I dont need a stronger passage than Colossians.
Click to expand...
Neither do those who hold to free will.
FSSL said:
That is what I am thankful for His effectual calling. I am thankful He removed the hostility. He made me, a dead man, alive and I obeyed and submitted to Him and received His salvation through the faith He gave.

THAT is orthodoxy... NOT the belief that God relinquished some of His Sovereignty.
Click to expand...
None of us believes that God relinquished any of his Sovereignty....again, your opinion is added as fact...UGH...what arrogance.
FSSL said:
I don't understand why gospel-believers think they had a "free will"
Click to expand...
Because we are made in the image and likeness of God...That means we have free will.
FSSL said:
that was not hostile and miraculously removed by Gods gift of faith.
Click to expand...
That can be held by either position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top