Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Calvinist?

and Hobbist............................ yes.

Mere randomness says I.

Perhaps our own member Calvin will opine.

Paul is supposedly the author of Romans. I avoid Paul, he subverted Jesus' teaching. Like most perjurers he mixes his falsity in with enough truth to make it seem plausible. As to Calvin, he too believed in killing people who dared disagree. Check out the fate of Dr. Michael Servetus.

Not necessarily telling or definitive. As in nature, from some very well understood and supposedly sound roots we have seen grow some very uncharacteristic offshoots.

I am surprised to hear anyone say that about the apostle Paul.

You'll get that sometimes. I believe Paul's books are valuable for a better understanding of the Gospels.

Without Paul, the New Testament would be much shorter.

Interesting thought. Catholicism is the root stock, the 36,000 Protestant denominations are the offshoots (including Calvinism).

I have read a few sermons out this book. One of my keepers.

If youre going to read something, read something good.

Hell with that john greasham old man soap opera BS.

Pass. It’s hunting season.

That's your perspective. Mine is Protestantism goes back to Christianity before Constantine and the Catholic church. Catholicism began with Constantine and both materially deviated from the faith by creating an institution not founded in Christ, but in the Pope. Jesus wanted no institutions and hierarchies, but personal relationships between Him and the believer.

Catholicism goes back to before the crucifixion (as in "Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means ‘rock’), and upon this rock I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it.") In fact that's the big complaint by Protestants. Sola scriptura. The Church considers the traditions of the time Jesus walked the earth and early practices of the apostles. There were sects with weird ideas but you know that was bound to happen.

Nope the council of Trent signaled Roman Catholicism's rejection of the Gospel in favor of its own entrenched interests and traditions over against the Bible and the holy catholic (little-c) faith.

Protestants didn’t leave Rome; Rome left Protestants.




Historic expressions of Protestantism embrace tradition just not as equal to Scripture. Keep in mind the historical context of Luther & Calvin’s “Sola Scriptura”; the militant individualism of post-enlightenment Evangelicalism wasn’t anywhere near their frame of reference.

More generally related to the OP remember that what we think of as the five points of Calvinism aren’t. They’re technically the 5 COUNTER points made by Calvinists against the Remonstrants in the Dutch churches who were Arminians. Calvinism is much broader than those 5 points, but the Synod of Dort is where they were hammered out.

**Where exactly does the Bible say anything about a man speaking infallibly?

Not now but in the MIddle ages, it was a death sentence for a layman to be caught with a Bible.
In the European wars between Catholics and Protestants, it was all about power. The leaders on neither side were Christians. Just look at what they did. Their actions were in contrast to everything the Bible teaches. If it wasn't for God preserving his word, and that wasn't through the church leaderships, Christianity would have been destroyed by both sides.

I disagree, but that's ok.


The short answer is Matthew 16:19

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

If interesting in thought - good - but I had not thought of or at all intended that Roman Catholicism be seen or conjured as any such root stock. Protestant denominations are not offshoots from, nor were they nurtured by, Roman Catholicism.

if push came to shove i'm kinda sure i could deal w/3 Point Calvinism if not 5 Point Calvinism.

but, who knows? and does it really matter?

Calvinism is not for everyone.

Calvin's Institutes should be read by every serious scriptural Christian. One of the top 10 most impactful books in the history of the world.

Even my good friend John Wesley quoted him directly concerning imputed righteousness.

Nonetheless....

I was predestined to be an Arminian.

I used to lean heavily in the direction of Calvin. He leaned strongly on Augustine. An argument made against Calvin is that he followed Augustine in applying Neo-Platonic reasoning to the idea of predestination. In doing so he introduced error.

Luther stands in contrast by working hard to accept scriptural tension as they are presented. His argument was that he would not use reason to explain away tensions but let them stand. Calvin tended to apply reason run to conclusions that were a bit questionable. If God is God it may be better to let tensions stand and not try to explain those tensions in a way that satisfies the human mind.