My objection to 'Calvinist' theology centers around one single point of doctrine: the contention that God must first Regenerate you before you can be Born Again. Every other specifically Calvinist doctrine stems from this one point, which I do not see in Scripture.
Melissa - 11 years ago
I don't think I can answer the above til I know which form of Calvinism we're discussing. The original? A derivation? I have met people from many different theological perspectives who mean something entirely different when they say "Calvinism" so perhaps your fourth choice is most accurate - but not very. I think certain versions of Calvinism fall into almost every one of the categories you mentioned.
If I use the same questions but apply them to "the church" and ask a man on the street, the answers you get are going to be based on his mental version of the church. That could be...well...anything.
As for the original theology of Calvinism, I think it's theologically flawed and fails to keep in mind that God operates differently than we humans do. Its whole logic feels linear, and seems to reject attributes of God it doesn't understand. However, there are things about which I think the Calvinists are AS correct as the Armenians.
In short, doesn't most theology just have a bad rap with folks who disagree with it? Among Calvinists, Armenians have a bad rap. Unfortunately, when hearing theological pools discuss each other I rarely hear anything charitable or openminded about the opposing view.
It's possible I have filed Calvinism away as "bad theology" because I've only heard the stereotypes. In my mind, Calvinism has a little tag tied to its toe that says, "Calvinism purports that God pre-determines everyone's fate and offers no free will choice, and probably contains other ideas that don't match my understanding of the Word. No good."
I've never "studied" Calvinism, and don't really care to study ANY philosophy just so I can understand a box someone else has pre-labeled. Would rather spend my time studying the Word and forming my own understanding of it (and Him).
Why are we so eager to draw conclusions (just another box) and label them and think that we've arrived?
Our culture seems so driven by the need to have the answers. I've come to embrace a life-long exploration that is constantly discovering new landscapes of God and His ways. When I found Him, I found the Answer. But the Answer is only the beginning of the exploration. ;-)
Still... If given enough time, I'd study it all -- the Word AND others' conclusions. I'm enough of an intellectual that I feel the draw to know all the scholarly details. I like hearing different perspectives, helps me refine my thinking. If nothing else, it encourages me to hold my own conclusions lightly. Even when I disagree with other Christians on interpretation, I often admit that they have enough scripture and real-life examples to support why they believe what they do. So why quarrel about it? Discuss, yes. Argue, not so much.
I like the way you're asking the questions and exploring this topic. Thanks for the Calvinist links.
My objection to 'Calvinist' theology centers around one single point of doctrine: the contention that God must first Regenerate you before you can be Born Again. Every other specifically Calvinist doctrine stems from this one point, which I do not see in Scripture.
I don't think I can answer the above til I know which form of Calvinism we're discussing. The original? A derivation? I have met people from many different theological perspectives who mean something entirely different when they say "Calvinism" so perhaps your fourth choice is most accurate - but not very. I think certain versions of Calvinism fall into almost every one of the categories you mentioned.
If I use the same questions but apply them to "the church" and ask a man on the street, the answers you get are going to be based on his mental version of the church. That could be...well...anything.
As for the original theology of Calvinism, I think it's theologically flawed and fails to keep in mind that God operates differently than we humans do. Its whole logic feels linear, and seems to reject attributes of God it doesn't understand. However, there are things about which I think the Calvinists are AS correct as the Armenians.
In short, doesn't most theology just have a bad rap with folks who disagree with it? Among Calvinists, Armenians have a bad rap. Unfortunately, when hearing theological pools discuss each other I rarely hear anything charitable or openminded about the opposing view.
It's possible I have filed Calvinism away as "bad theology" because I've only heard the stereotypes. In my mind, Calvinism has a little tag tied to its toe that says, "Calvinism purports that God pre-determines everyone's fate and offers no free will choice, and probably contains other ideas that don't match my understanding of the Word. No good."
I've never "studied" Calvinism, and don't really care to study ANY philosophy just so I can understand a box someone else has pre-labeled. Would rather spend my time studying the Word and forming my own understanding of it (and Him).
Why are we so eager to draw conclusions (just another box) and label them and think that we've arrived?
Our culture seems so driven by the need to have the answers. I've come to embrace a life-long exploration that is constantly discovering new landscapes of God and His ways. When I found Him, I found the Answer. But the Answer is only the beginning of the exploration. ;-)
Still... If given enough time, I'd study it all -- the Word AND others' conclusions. I'm enough of an intellectual that I feel the draw to know all the scholarly details. I like hearing different perspectives, helps me refine my thinking. If nothing else, it encourages me to hold my own conclusions lightly. Even when I disagree with other Christians on interpretation, I often admit that they have enough scripture and real-life examples to support why they believe what they do. So why quarrel about it? Discuss, yes. Argue, not so much.
I like the way you're asking the questions and exploring this topic. Thanks for the Calvinist links.
Yes, it does get a bad rap often because of those Calvinists who are known more for what they oppose than what they are for.