Posted on 12/16/2004 1:23:28 PM PST by Gamecock
The U.S. Government is based on the concept that all men are totally depraved?
All men are created equally bad?
Guilty until proven guilty?
I knew I shoulda stayed awake in Government class...
A.J., since so many people may be unfamiliar with anthropological doctrine, would you please explain what you mean? I believe that our form of government can only exist when the populace has a Christian worldview. Is that what you mean?
Based on the article, it appear that a number of GRPL members would be properly considered hyper-Calvinists:
Conclusion: who is a Hyper-Calvinist?
In summary, a Hyper-Calvinist would be one who holds any of the following points due to their logical extensions. (Those points with asterisks are those who are slowly leading themselves into Hyper-Calvinism.)
1.
*That God elect or damns without considering men as fallen creatures.
2.
That the mind of man, due to the fall, is utterly destroyed.
3.
That fallen men have no duty to believe in the Gospel by faith.
4.
That men must have a subjective theological knowledge of regeneration before they can believe the Gospel.
5.
That the Gospel should not be universally tendered or offered to all men, everywhere.
6.
That the Gospel should not be offered to men except they are regenerate.
7.
That God does not have a general love for all men in His indiscriminate providence.
8.
That Limited Atonement must be believed in order to hear the Gospel, and be saved and converted.
9.
*That God cannot desire things He has not decreed, or decree things He has not desired.
Luther was a man of his times. He did not have the time to reform all that needed to be done. Witness his confused view of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper.
Protestants will always appreciate Luther for the way he was used by God, but thankfully the Reformation did not end in 1546.
You apparently have insight that I do not have.
Nature arms each man with some faculty which enables him to do easily some feat impossible to any other. - Emerson
Signed,
One who used to claim that very thing.
Or does it sound like an Arminian criticizing Calvinists -- again?
Gibberish.
This is not what Calvinists believe.
And you know it.
1. *That God elect or damns without considering men as fallen creatures.
What does this mean? I honestly don't know what this means.
2. That the mind of man, due to the fall, is utterly destroyed.
I'm one of the least "hyper" calvinists on this board, but, depnending on what this means, I might believe this. Does this mean that mans' mind is so twisted that there is no vestigal remnants of God's imprint within them? Absolutely not, Ecclesiastes clearly states that God has set eternity in the hearts of men. But does this mean that man's mind is so warped and twisted that he can't begin to comprehend the Gospel without God's intervention? That's the essence of Calvinism.
3. That fallen men have no duty to believe in the Gospel by faith.
That's just plain silly. Anyone who believes this goes beyond hypercalvinist to rank heretic.
4. That men must have a subjective theological knowledge of regeneration before they can believe the Gospel.
> Bull. Neo-gnosticism.
5. That the Gospel should not be universally tendered or offered to all men, everywhere.
Deny this, your'e a heretic.
6. That the Gospel should not be offered to men except they are regenerate.
> Heresy.
7. That God does not have a general love for all men in His indiscriminate providence.
Sounds like textbook hypercalvinist. I know I got in a debate on this board with a guy who said there is no such thing as common grace; that's a flat out lie. God endures the non-elect, sending them his blessings in the interim.
8. That Limited Atonement must be believed in order to hear the Gospel, and be saved and converted.
Once agaim, neo-gnosticism.
Isn't that the exact antithesis of what Calvinists and the Bible teach? "God commands all men everywhere to repent."
I would agree with your statement. Read the entire article and I think you will see that many of the GRPL fall into the hyper=calvinist camp.
Is there such a thing as hypercalvinism? Absolutely. Are they present on the Religion Forum? Sure, theres one or two that I'm aware of.
Is the GRPL hypercalvinist? I don't think you ever demonstrated that anyone in the GRPL held any of those seven points.
Now are there GRPL members "nore calvinist" than I? Sure, several of them. I still affirm all the historical 5 points of the Synod of Dort. But our intranicene disagreements are not to the point that I'd say, "X, you're a heretic." But hypercalvinism is as much a heresy as the open knowledge thing Calvinists are all up and bothered about.
(rev inserting pinky into mouth like Austin Powers Dr. Evil)
rrriiiiiiigggghhhht
Scotty don't
I'm not saying there aren't Calvinists who hold some strange ideas. I liken these people to some Arminians who would say you're saved by the works you perform. Most of us, both Calvinists and Arminians, would distance ourselves from these people and their extreme views.
It is true that some Calvinists have label these Calvinist extremists as hyper-Calvinists. But I find the term "hyper-Calvinist" misleading because its not clearly defined. Some Arminians believe that anyone who believes in the 5 points of the TULIP is a hyper-Calvinist while Calvinists will have other definitions.
Since this term cannot be defined I don't agree with it just as I wouldn't label an Arminian who believes you must work for your salvation as a "hyper-Arminian". Many of the Arminians on this site would be the first to denounce such heritical doctrine; yet this is one of the errors that is held by extreme Arminian churches such as the Free-Will Baptists.
It is to the Calvinist's credit that some wish to point out incorrect extremist doctrine within the Reformed churches. They use the term "hyper-Calvinist". I would not. I've never known an Arminian church to point out doctrinal errors from other Arminian churches.
I think 7, 8,and 9 would apply to many in the GRPL. I would not put you in that category. I don't see how anyone could honestly claim you are a hyper-Calvinist.
Find one.
LOL
Many people who attend more Arminian churches have likely never even heard the term Arminianism.
Many of them have been banned, but IN MY OPINION, Rn Momof7 and Dr.E would fit in that category.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.