Ah, gentle Berean -
I encourage you to examine the Scriptures and see which of any of Calvin’s main theological points is wrong. To dismiss it as some doctrine just coughed up in the middle ages is not fair. It is a system of theology, granted, but no one has ever claimed it is new revelation.
It is distilled as “the five points” for convenience, so don’t let the rigidity of the description bother you. We have other names for doctrines: “dispensationalism.” “Scofieldism” “charismatic” “health and wealth gospel” “covenant theology” “anabaptist” “reformed” “trinitarian” etc. Each of these is shorthand for an interpretation of scripture.
I don’t hold to all of the above. My point is, examine “Calvinism” like a good Berean, and tell us what points contradict Scripture.
A good Calvinist is always 100% Sola Scriptura. We do not believe we need John Calvin to show us the way of salvation. We believe the way of salvation has been available to mankind since the Fall. We acknowledge Calvin as a good theologian who outlined biblical doctrine in a solid, comprehensible way. We do not view him as infallible, nor as any type of savior, just a good pastor.
Several points
Observe the apostles’ life after conversion and enlightenment.
Observe John Calvin’s life after Institutes.
I think there are many more scriptures about God not wanting that any should perish, and loving even the Gentiles, etc than there are the odd point to be pulled together to form Pre-determinism.
I spent 5 years proving to myself searching the scriptures about the nature of the Godhead (commonly called the Trinity), even though I grew up in a Church that believe in the Trinity. I have (and do) attend a “Reformed” church, although I do not serve as an elder, precisely because there is a statement of “belief” required that goes beyond what is provable by scripture.
I also looked at one time at attending a “bible” church, but they wanted me to sign a statement that I agreed that the age of miracles and divine intervention by God was over....I asked them if they talked to God about this, and did he tell them this directly (Boy was that an ironic statement!).
I have examined closely Calvanism, and hold that God’s sacrifice in Christ was sufficient for the whole world, not just the elect. However, mankind will not have (accept) this, and so, the only sin unto death is not accepting the Lord Jesus Christ as our personal savior.
For God so loved the world, he gave His only begotten... (now the world is one rotten place after the fall, He gave His Son for us WHILE we were yet rotten unrepentant sinners). For this is the power of the resurrection - bringing the DEAD back to life - everlasting life...If the elect were already “alive” spiritually, why would the cross be needed?
For The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Yes, he made us like a potter makes the clay, but he, just like the potter knows just what each of us can stand, and exactly where our flaws and strengths are. No man could stand in the face of God if God decided his fate. God is all powerful.
If God’s chosen were Israel, why then were the Gentiles grafted in? Were they not predetermined to be the chosen? Why were not they all saved? God can (as Paul said) just as easily graft us out. Clearly, God allows man some will in man to exist, because if it did not, then what is the explanation for Israel’s truculence?
There is no such thing as a "good" Calvinist. Aren't all Calvinists 'depraved'?
We do not believe we need John Calvin to show us the way of salvation.
You'd never know it by listening to most Calvinists.
We believe the way of salvation has been available to mankind since the Fall.
What happened to double predestination? Is salvation available to all mankind?
We acknowledge Calvin as a good theologian who outlined biblical doctrine in a solid, comprehensible way.
This is a fair statement, but doesn't mean his doctrine is always correct.
We do not view him as infallible...
You'd never know it in reading most of the comments by FR Calvinists.
... nor as any type of savior, just a good pastor.
You don't know if he was a good pastor. We do know he was arrogant, and that is hardly a quality of a good pastor.