Calvinism is a Cult
- Thread starter CoreIssue
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I have seen the same thing happen to you as well. I do believe Mormonism is a cult BUT!!! I do NOT believe that makes you a cultist. What matters is what YOU believe, not what your denomination does. For all I know, you do not agree with the views that I believe are heresy, you simply attend a church that does. I pray that perhaps one of these days you will come over to the dark side ;), but I am never going to name call a specific person based on what their denomination believes. Thank you so much for the kind words, patience, and tolerance.
As I've said earlier, I don't find the word "cult" to be anything but destructive mud slinging-- usually done by people who can't be bothered to get their facts straight about what a person or group *actually* believes. I've ben subjugated to this treatment personally far too much, and seen it done far too much to other people I care about (whom include Calvinists, Catholics, non-demonational folks, etc).
I do thank you for your kind words and demeanor as well.
Though the probability of me becoming a Calvinist is isn't even zero, it's negative. When I say I PASSIONATELY disagree with Calvinism, I am using a huge understatement. But this conversation has helped me understand your logic better, and I thank you for that.
And I thank you for the same. As for the less than 0% chance thing....God has done more with less ;)
Yeah, I'll pass on that idea. Again, I have MAJOR problems with Calvism and it's portrayal of God.
The problem with Calvinism is that it takes away human responsibility.
Because God chooses us for either heaven or for hell against our will (and within Calvinistic belief one must cut out of their Bibles such verses as Romans 10:9-13 which teach us that we can do something in order to obtain the salvation that the Lord has provided), therefore I am not responsible for it if the Lord puts me in hell; He chose me for that destination and therefore I cannot choose any other path than the one that is headed to that destination. Therefore I am not responsible for the fact that I have walked the path to hell; because God chose that path for me and put me on it and offered me no other recourse so that I might be able to instead walk the path towards heaven: He set me on the path to hell by His sovereign choice and there is nothing that I can do to change that.
So then, when faced with the message of the gospel, and the response is required of me, to either receive or reject Christ, I will say that the choice does not belong to me and therefore I cannot and will not make a choice; because I am either predesitnated to heaven or to hell and there is nothing that I can do about the choice that the Lord has made concerning this. If I call on the name of the Lord I will not be saved if I was not first chosen by the Lord from before the foundations of the world, contrary to what scripture teaches in Romans 10:9-13.
Therefore Calvinism effectively puts a stop to people being saved through the method that God has prescribed in Romans 10:9-13. Because it is not calling on the name of the Lord that will save, the sinner will respond, Why call on the name of the Lord? It is up to God whether I will go to heaven or not, therefore I have an advantage over God: if He puts me in hell, I can accuse Him of being an unjust Monster; therefore if God wants to keep a good conscience He had better put me and everyone else in heaven. This leads to the heresy of Universalism.
It has been said in defense of the Lord that He does not send anyone to hell; rather they send themselves by rejecting what He has done for them: however this is not true in Calvinism; and yet it is the only viable answer to the common objection, How can a loving God send people to hell?
Calvinism therefore, also gives people a reason to reject faith in Christ, because this reasonable objection is not adequately answered in their minds, if they are talking with Calvinists on the issue.
And also, why is evangelism needed if everyone is predestinated by God's predetermined choice in the matter and calling on the name of the Lord means nothing? There is no real reason why we should go and attempt to persuade men to call on the name of the Lord, because even if they do it does not procure salvation or guarantee it, and within Calvinism it is also quite taught (by implication) that if someone does not call on the name of the Lord they may still be saved; and this is heretical and against the very real truth of John 1:12, Revelation 3:20, and Revelation 22:17.
Calvinism deters people from making the decision to receive Christ; and in this it is indeed cultic in nature; it is a teaching that keeps people from doing what it takes to receive salvation and is therefore very dangerous to the souls of those who believe in it.
Because God chooses us for either heaven or for hell against our will (and within Calvinistic belief one must cut out of their Bibles such verses as Romans 10:9-13 which teach us that we can do something in order to obtain the salvation that the Lord has provided), therefore I am not responsible for it if the Lord puts me in hell; He chose me for that destination and therefore I cannot choose any other path than the one that is headed to that destination. Therefore I am not responsible for the fact that I have walked the path to hell; because God chose that path for me and put me on it and offered me no other recourse so that I might be able to instead walk the path towards heaven: He set me on the path to hell by His sovereign choice and there is nothing that I can do to change that.
So then, when faced with the message of the gospel, and the response is required of me, to either receive or reject Christ, I will say that the choice does not belong to me and therefore I cannot and will not make a choice; because I am either predesitnated to heaven or to hell and there is nothing that I can do about the choice that the Lord has made concerning this. If I call on the name of the Lord I will not be saved if I was not first chosen by the Lord from before the foundations of the world, contrary to what scripture teaches in Romans 10:9-13.
Therefore Calvinism effectively puts a stop to people being saved through the method that God has prescribed in Romans 10:9-13. Because it is not calling on the name of the Lord that will save, the sinner will respond, Why call on the name of the Lord? It is up to God whether I will go to heaven or not, therefore I have an advantage over God: if He puts me in hell, I can accuse Him of being an unjust Monster; therefore if God wants to keep a good conscience He had better put me and everyone else in heaven. This leads to the heresy of Universalism.
It has been said in defense of the Lord that He does not send anyone to hell; rather they send themselves by rejecting what He has done for them: however this is not true in Calvinism; and yet it is the only viable answer to the common objection, How can a loving God send people to hell?
Calvinism therefore, also gives people a reason to reject faith in Christ, because this reasonable objection is not adequately answered in their minds, if they are talking with Calvinists on the issue.
And also, why is evangelism needed if everyone is predestinated by God's predetermined choice in the matter and calling on the name of the Lord means nothing? There is no real reason why we should go and attempt to persuade men to call on the name of the Lord, because even if they do it does not procure salvation or guarantee it, and within Calvinism it is also quite taught (by implication) that if someone does not call on the name of the Lord they may still be saved; and this is heretical and against the very real truth of John 1:12, Revelation 3:20, and Revelation 22:17.
Calvinism deters people from making the decision to receive Christ; and in this it is indeed cultic in nature; it is a teaching that keeps people from doing what it takes to receive salvation and is therefore very dangerous to the souls of those who believe in it.
Anthony D'Arienzo
Well-Known Member
You did not answer what you were asked. The out of context verses had nothing to do with post 144
Anthony D'Arienzo
Well-Known Member
There is nothing truthful in this post at all.
If you do not understand the teaching you should just ask.
To make up stories like you are doing is shameful.
All men are fully responsible before God.
Every verse in the Bible stands on its own as a bastion of truth; and sometimes, taking it out of context is not necessarily the wrong thing to do.
Consider how Matthew took Hosea 11:1 out of its original context in Matthew 2:15, saying that the son being spoken of is Jesus rather than what the context in Hosea says it is, that His "son" refers to Israel.
And consider how in the immediate context, 2 Corinthians 9:6 refers to financial sowing and reaping; but that there is a real application to sowing the word if you compare that verse to Luke 8:11.
Every verse stands on its own as Bible truth, and added insight can be gained by comparing scripture with scripture.
1Co 2:13, Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
I verily do understand the teaching of Calvinism as well as its implications; and I think that you have not considered its implications.
So, keep studying, keep reading on what is the teaching of Calvinism, and consider whether what I have said is indeed implied by what is taught.
I have contended with Calvinists for a short period of time now; and if it is not the teaching of Calvinism (what I posted above in post #287(Calvinism is a Cult)), then they have misrepresented its teaching to me; however there is a strong probability that they have portrayed its teachings accurately and that you are ignorant of what is really taught by Calvinism.
Last edited:
Anthony D'Arienzo
Well-Known Member
Mt 2:15 is speaking of Jesus 100%.
It is not speaking of Israel.
It is speaking of Jesus as the New Exodus.
In the first Exodus national Israel was spoken of as The Covenant Son.ex4:22....they failed.
Jesus as the true Servant of the Lord does not fail.
Anthony D'Arienzo
Well-Known Member
No...you are 100% Wrong on this. It is easily proven.
If you ask sincere questions several men on here will torch the strawman you have been shown, and replace it with truth.
Yes, Matthew, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, quoted Hosea 11:1 out of its original context in Matthew 2:15; applying it to Jesus rather than to Israel as Hosea 11:1 does.
Last edited:
So then, I am humanly responsible and there is something that I can do to enter heaven? If I call on the name of the Lord, I shall be saved?
That would indicate that I have a choice in the matter; and in Calvinism that takes the choice out of the hands of the Lord.
Because in Calvinism, God predetermines those who go to heaven and this is not according to foreknowledge of whether the person will receive or reject Christ.
And this means that God chooses whether a person goes to heaven or hell.
I think that you have not studied Calvinism long enough to even understand its implications.
You should try looking at it from the perspective of one who may not be predestined to heaven; in fact, try looking at it from the perspective of one who is not predestinated to heaven and is therefore by proxy predestinated to hell.
This is no strawman, this has to do with what people contending for Calvinism have actually told me.
If it really is a strawman, then you or other men can torch it even without me asking any "sincere questions."
Last edited:
Anthony D'Arienzo
Well-Known Member
You have a wrong view of biblical foreknowledge to start with
GOD has already chosen every elect person.
All men were condemned by Adams fall.
GOD saves a multitude in Christ, enabling them to come savingly to Jesus.
You might not have spoken to biblical Calvinists before. We will correct that for you now.
You will soon discover that we have studied the teaching long enough to answer anything you have for us.
You can start with Limited Atonement.
Does that not teach that Christ did not die for everyone, but only for a select few?
If He did not die for you, then does that not mean that if you call on the name of the Lord, you will not be saved; because He didn't die for you?
Even if you have an answer for this, I would contend that a lot of confusion could be avoided by not teaching the source of the confusion in the first place.
My view of foreknowledge is the biblical one; that God chose us before the foundation of the world according to His foreknowledge of whether we would receive or reject Christ.
However, in Calvinism, it is by a predetermined choice of God; and foreknowledge of whether we receive or reject Christ has nothing to do with it.
One Calvinist proponent continually asserts that we do not have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand; but that rather we have access by grace into faith; that we are saved by faith through grace. This is the reverse order of what scripture teaches.
They also assert that a person cannot have faith in Jesus unless they are saved first.
This would indicate that calling on the name of the Lord is not what saved them, but rather they were saved first and then they called on the name of the Lord. But if salvation comes first, why even call on the name of the Lord for salvation? You're already saved; so there is no need to call on His name.
In my version of this (what I believe to be accurate according to Romans 10:10), calling on the name of the Lord is unto salvation; but righteousness must come first through faith. A person may have righteousness (believing that God rose Jesus from the dead) but not have salvation. For confession is made unto salvation (are you looking at the verses?).
I do believe that the same heat that melts the butter, also hardens the clay. If you remove from the analogy the concept of the fact that these are inanimate objects, and look to what the clay and butter represent, you can see that the clay might indeed choose to harden and the butter may indeed choose to melt. However the butter melts because it is butter and the clay hardens because it is clay.
So then, if I am butter, I will respond with faith (a softened heart) when I am faced with the gospel. Calling on the name of the Lord, and/or confessing with the mouth the Lord Jesus, is the only sure response of a saving faith. It becomes saving faith the moment the confession begins to be made, or the moment the person prays to receive Christ (John 1:12, Matthew 7:7-8); which is to call on His name.
Scriptures:
Rom 10:9, That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10, For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Jhn 1:12, But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Mat 7:7, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
Mat 7:8, For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
Does that not teach that Christ did not die for everyone, but only for a select few?
If He did not die for you, then does that not mean that if you call on the name of the Lord, you will not be saved; because He didn't die for you?
Even if you have an answer for this, I would contend that a lot of confusion could be avoided by not teaching the source of the confusion in the first place.
My view of foreknowledge is the biblical one; that God chose us before the foundation of the world according to His foreknowledge of whether we would receive or reject Christ.
However, in Calvinism, it is by a predetermined choice of God; and foreknowledge of whether we receive or reject Christ has nothing to do with it.
One Calvinist proponent continually asserts that we do not have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand; but that rather we have access by grace into faith; that we are saved by faith through grace. This is the reverse order of what scripture teaches.
They also assert that a person cannot have faith in Jesus unless they are saved first.
This would indicate that calling on the name of the Lord is not what saved them, but rather they were saved first and then they called on the name of the Lord. But if salvation comes first, why even call on the name of the Lord for salvation? You're already saved; so there is no need to call on His name.
In my version of this (what I believe to be accurate according to Romans 10:10), calling on the name of the Lord is unto salvation; but righteousness must come first through faith. A person may have righteousness (believing that God rose Jesus from the dead) but not have salvation. For confession is made unto salvation (are you looking at the verses?).
I do believe that the same heat that melts the butter, also hardens the clay. If you remove from the analogy the concept of the fact that these are inanimate objects, and look to what the clay and butter represent, you can see that the clay might indeed choose to harden and the butter may indeed choose to melt. However the butter melts because it is butter and the clay hardens because it is clay.
So then, if I am butter, I will respond with faith (a softened heart) when I am faced with the gospel. Calling on the name of the Lord, and/or confessing with the mouth the Lord Jesus, is the only sure response of a saving faith. It becomes saving faith the moment the confession begins to be made, or the moment the person prays to receive Christ (John 1:12, Matthew 7:7-8); which is to call on His name.
Scriptures:
Rom 10:9, That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10, For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Jhn 1:12, But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Mat 7:7, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
Mat 7:8, For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
Last edited:
Then there is Unconditional Election.
Does this not teach that we are elected to salvation based on the predetermined choice of God beforehand, and nothing else? That our calling on the name of the Lord does not have anything to do with it? If we called on the name of the Lord to be saved, then does that not mean that the Lord placed our calling on His name as a condition for election?
If some are elected unconditionally to salvation, and also, Limited Atonement is a reality (not Universalism) then some will also go to hell because God did not choose them for salvation. Not choosing them for salvation is in essence choosing that they not be saved, is it not? If not, why not?
Does this not teach that we are elected to salvation based on the predetermined choice of God beforehand, and nothing else? That our calling on the name of the Lord does not have anything to do with it? If we called on the name of the Lord to be saved, then does that not mean that the Lord placed our calling on His name as a condition for election?
If some are elected unconditionally to salvation, and also, Limited Atonement is a reality (not Universalism) then some will also go to hell because God did not choose them for salvation. Not choosing them for salvation is in essence choosing that they not be saved, is it not? If not, why not?
SovereignGrace
Certified Flunky
Says he knows Calvinism and then quickly stated “The problem with Calvinism is that it takes away human responsibility.” WRONG! Men are responsible for their sins, whether they hear the gospel or not.
Then he stated “Calvinism deters people from making the decision to receive Christ;” WRONG! The problem is you have a false view of fallen mankind. The unregenerate lost are not going around looking for a way into God’s kingdom, neither does God place His palm on lost ppl’s foreheads, keeping them from coming to Him. He is the One who seeks, He is the One who finds, He is the One who quickens and saves.
Please learn Calvinism before you post saying you do. You obviously don’t.
I have learned Calvinism by talking to its proponents and seeing it from the perspective of looking at it from the outside...which you have obviously never done.
It is kind of like what happens here with @Jane_Doe22: we all know what Mormonism teaches, and yet she expects us to take her word for it that Mormonism doesn't teach what we think (even know) it does, because "you have gotten your information from the wrong sources."
Just another proof that Calvinism is a cult.
Those who promote it, when you call it out for its flaws, respond by saying, "That is a straw man...Calvinism does not really teach that."
But in another situation, when they are not defending it from your observations, they will preach the very thing that they say it does not teach...this is pure blindness and I do not know how to reach them except to pray for them. Maybe Irresistible Grace will get a hold of them or something.
Similar threads
- Locked
