Donations for the month of October


We have received a total of "$0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Posts: 3,086
Joined: September 2003
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,297
Posts53,251
Members964
Most Online523
Jan 14th, 2020
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,043
Tom 4,044
chestnutmare 3,086
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,818
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 23
Tom 12
Robin 5
Johan 3
Readin 2
Meta4 1
Recent Posts
NeoCalvinism
by Tom - Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:18 PM
The Nick-name Calvinism
by Tom - Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:44 PM
Natural Theology
by Anthony C. - Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:47 AM
Wilderness Wealth
by NetChaplain - Fri Oct 22, 2021 10:57 AM
Your opinion please
by Johan - Thu Oct 21, 2021 1:03 AM
True of False
by NetChaplain - Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:26 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#29950 Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:47 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 39
Newbie
OP Offline
Newbie
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 39
What is the differents between Hyper-calvinist and calvinist? In want to know the opinion of the forum.
Hyper have something good ? What? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratchchin.gif" alt="" />


-- I was predestined to be an Arminian, but chose instead to be a Calvinist, swallowed the TULIP bulb

knoxandcalvin #29951 Fri Dec 16, 2005 11:47 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
IMO, a hyper-Calvinist is the guy that acts like because God is sovereign and in control that we don't have to do anything as far as sharing the gospel is concerned. He will say, "If God wants them saved, He'll save them! I don't need to share the gospel!"

On the other hand, the Calvinist is the guy who acknowledges the sovereignty of God and and His control over the salvation of people and he shares the gospel anyway knowing that, as Paul said,

Quote
For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. But how can they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe without hearing about Him? And how can they hear without a preacher? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: How welcome are the feet of those who announce the gospel of good things! (Romans 10:13-15 HCSB)

#29952 Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:15 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
Kalled2Preach said:
IMO, a hyper-Calvinist is the guy that acts like because God is sovereign and in control that we don't have to do anything as far as sharing the gospel is concerned. He will say, "If God wants them saved, He'll save them! I don't need to share the gospel!"

On the other hand, the Calvinist is the guy who acknowledges the sovereignty of God and and His control over the salvation of people and he shares the gospel anyway knowing that, as Paul said,

Quote
For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. But how can they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe without hearing about Him? And how can they hear without a preacher? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: How welcome are the feet of those who announce the gospel of good things! (Romans 10:13-15 HCSB)

I think that is a good way to describe them. It seems hyper-Calvinism has a bad habit of comming back like all bad things tend to do.

#29953 Sat Dec 17, 2005 9:35 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 251
Enthusiast
Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 251


K2P: What you state could not be farther from the truth. I have been called a HC before, and the label is thrown around without the people knowing what it actually means.

I know of no HC who denies preaching the Gospel. THe person who says that is not an HC, he is just misinformed and in error. IF you would like to see what an HC is, then read the people who had this label attached to them.

John Gill, John Brine, William Huntington, to name a few. You will see for yourself. I doubt these were actual HC's anyway, but definately went beyond Calvin, which is not a fault.

Typically a HC states thus:

1) Deny duty faith/duty repentance.
2) Look at the imperative commands, and "if" clauses of scripture, as eupemisms.
3)The do not elevate the Sovereignty of God, because that can never be done, but they deny any duty or responsibility of man
4)Deny the 3rd use of the Law according to Luther.


This is a start, so before you find this label appalling, read for yourself what these men actually confessed before reading internet people who throw the word around without knowing what they are saying. A true HC may have errors, but the errors they are accused of in modern days are not true.


There never was a sinner half as big as Christ is as a Savior.
Joe k #29954 Sat Dec 17, 2005 1:05 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,045
Likes: 13
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,045
Likes: 13
Quote
Joe k said:
K2P: What you state could not be farther from the truth. I have been called a HC before, and the label is thrown around without the people knowing what it actually means.
[Linked Image] The lad has some truth to what he said. And how do I come to that conclusion? Well, for one reason, I studied at the seminary of a hyper-Calvinist denomination. So, I guess that means what I know about hyper-Calvinism comes straight from the horses mouth. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

At the risk of being too brief, hyper-Calvinism always posits at least these two points:

1) A total denial of any "Free Offer" of the Gospel. (details to follow)
2) A denial of anything that even hints at what is called, "Common Grace". (admittedly, sometimes with good reason)

The best description and criticism of hyper-Calvinism I know of, thanks to brother fredman here on the Board, was written by Phil Johnson, no mean Calvinist himself, which you can read here: A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism.

In His grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #29955 Sat Dec 17, 2005 2:29 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 251
Enthusiast
Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 251
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Quote
Joe k said:
K2P: What you state could not be farther from the truth. I have been called a HC before, and the label is thrown around without the people knowing what it actually means.
[Linked Image] The lad has some truth to what he said. And how do I come to that conclusion? Well, for one reason, I studied at the seminary of a hyper-Calvinist denomination. So, I guess that means what I know about hyper-Calvinism comes straight from the horses mouth. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

At the risk of being too brief, hyper-Calvinism always posits at least these two points:

1) A total denial of any "Free Offer" of the Gospel. (details to follow)
2) A denial of anything that even hints at what is called, "Common Grace". (admittedly, sometimes with good reason)

The best description and criticism of hyper-Calvinism I know of, thanks to brother fredman here on the Board, was written by Phil Johnson, no mean Calvinist himself, which you can read here: A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism.

In His grace,


Well Pilgrim, I do not know what a HC Seminary is!!!! But again, the 2 points you posit are not true according to the "historical" birth of this term. Phil presents his understanding, which is fine, but again from what I have read, the beginning of this goes way before PJ and what modern day teachers espouse. Again, as you mentioned, the free offer and common grace beliefs of those termed hypers are not erroneous in particular, but are dragged to its unlogical conclusion by some. Here is a list on Wikpedia. Now I believe most of these,with clarification of course. and deny others, so am I hyper?

* that God is the source of sin and of evil
* that previous doctrines set forth are more important than general scriptual themes
* that a sign of election is to be sought prior to repentance
* that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect
* that the number of the elect at any time may be known by men
* that it is wrong to evangelize
* that God does not command everyone to repent
* that there is no common grace, i.e. God cares only for his elect and has nothing but hatred for the non-elect.
* that only Calvinists are Christians


Still perhaps even with semantics, I find the major distinctives are the denial of duty faith/duty repentance as the crux of the matter.

But not all tendancies are wrong. God definately does not offer saving grace to all indiscriminately.

Personally I believe in duty faith/repentance. But I deny a free offer with an expecxtation that all will accept.

More to follow.

As an aside, Brine, Hussey, Huntington, Pink, and Gill have written some of the best words on paper.


So you see, regardless what is taught today, or written is not always concise enough, but just opinions.


There never was a sinner half as big as Christ is as a Savior.
Joe k #29956 Sat Dec 17, 2005 4:55 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,045
Likes: 13
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,045
Likes: 13
Joe k,

You may not be sure what a hyper-Calvinist seminary cemetery is, but I DO. The one I attended flatly denies and focuses most of their attention upon:

1) The "Free Offer" of the Gospel, i.e., that the offer of salvation in Christ is to be indiscriminately to all, without discrimination. The crux of the matter is whether or not there is anyone who is exempt from the promise of salvation upon the prerequisites of repentance and faith. The "offer" is universal. But the aspect of universal "acceptance" is something which all Calvinists reject. Calvinism expects that whoever hears the Gospel must repent and believe. But it does not expect that all who hear will do so, for only those who are called can, i.e., are given the ability. The word may connotes permission, which is an entirely different thing. All men may repentant and believe and are thus commanded to do so in the Gospel.

(b) A subset of #1, That all, without discrimination are to repent and believe upon Christ. They insist that only the elect have warrant to believe upon Christ. Thus of necessity, one must first ascertain if one is an elect before the "right" is given to repentant and believe unto justification.

2) "Common Grace", i.e., that God extends benevolence to all men without discrimination. They categorically deny that God shows any benevolence whatsoever to the reprobate.

The overwhelming majority of Calvinists have rejected all of the above and thus the term "hyper-Calvinist", i.e., one who goes beyond historic Calvinism.

As to whether or not you are a "hyper", you decide. I don't know much of anything about you and therefore it would be silly for me to offer any judgment in your case.

In His grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #29957 Sat Dec 17, 2005 6:44 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 251
Enthusiast
Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 251
Quote
Pilgrim said:
Joe k,

You may not be sure what a hyper-Calvinist <strike>seminary</strike> cemetery is, but I DO. The one I attended flatly denies and focuses most of their attention upon:

1) The "Free Offer" of the Gospel, i.e., that the offer of salvation in Christ is to be indiscriminately to all, without discrimination. The crux of the matter is whether or not there is anyone who is exempt from the promise of salvation upon the prerequisites of repentance and faith. The "offer" is universal. But the aspect of universal "acceptance" is something which all Calvinists reject. Calvinism expects that whoever hears the Gospel must repent and believe. But it does not expect that all who hear will do so, for only those who are called can, i.e., are given the ability. The word may connotes permission, which is an entirely different thing. All men may repentant and believe and are thus commanded to do so in the Gospel.

(b) A subset of #1, That all, without discrimination are to repent and believe upon Christ. They insist that only the elect have warrant to believe upon Christ. Thus of necessity, one must first ascertain if one is an elect before the "right" is given to repentant and believe unto justification.

2) "Common Grace", i.e., that God extends benevolence to all men without discrimination. They categorically deny that God shows any benevolence whatsoever to the reprobate.

The overwhelming majority of Calvinists have rejected all of the above and thus the term "hyper-Calvinist", i.e., one who goes beyond historic Calvinism.

As to whether or not you are a "hyper", you decide. I don't know much of anything about you and therefore it would be silly for me to offer any judgment in your case.

In His grace,

Then Pilgrim, your seminary is wrong in its definition!!!!

Where did you go the PRC seminary in GR Michigan? Look, perhaps we are speakign past each other. I am not proposing the beliefs of some strict baptists who adhere to these consequences, but I get tired of the label when it is not used correctly. Your number one is in regards to duty faith and duty repentance, whch I stated HC's will deny. So we agree there. Benevolence is not denied by true HC's, but saving grace, agape grace per se is denied. Of which I agree with.The scripture of the sun and rain is used to promote some common grace, but it is in serious error, becuase if that were the case then those who receive more sun or more rain would be considered in better shape!!!!.

Again, do you think Gill was a HC? In some areas perhaps.

Read the Goatyard confession. Now it was written under his care, but i have read excerpts of his writings that do promote duty faith/repentance.

I will tell you who the true Hypers are, and that are the hardshellers. Those who say an elect person can live their whole life without coming to faith. Those that do not evangelize. Those who look for evidence of ones election before preaching the Gospel. WHo was the guy who argued with William Gadsby about evangelising? He was a hardsheller.

Like I said, Brine has written some of the best material i have read, as well as twisse.


There never was a sinner half as big as Christ is as a Savior.
Pilgrim #29958 Sat Dec 17, 2005 6:50 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 39
Newbie
OP Offline
Newbie
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 39
So, the gospel do not have to be presented. I do not think so.. Gospel is the source of the conviction. and with out conviction no salvation. Charles , Jonathan. Calvin, knox. Buyan, these names replies that convition from history.


-- I was predestined to be an Arminian, but chose instead to be a Calvinist, swallowed the TULIP bulb

Joe k #29959 Sat Dec 17, 2005 7:36 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,045
Likes: 13
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,045
Likes: 13
Quote
Joe k said:
Then Pilgrim, your seminary is wrong in its definition!!!! . . . Where did you go the PRC seminary in GR Michigan?
The definition of what? BTW, it is hardly my seminary! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" /> Yes, the PRC seminary was one which I studied at. And as much as it has proven to be impossible to do, I would prefer to forget the time I spent there. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Quote
Joe k continues:
Benevolence is not denied by true HC's, but saving grace, agape grace per se is denied. Of which I agree with.The scripture of the sun and rain is used to promote some common grace, but it is in serious error, becuase if that were the case then those who receive more sun or more rain would be considered in better shape!!!!.
Let's understand one thing here. One would be hard-pressed to find any individual and/or group that would attribute the term "hyper-Calvinist" to themselves. Secondly, no true Calvinist would affirm that true grace, i.e., salvific grace pertains to any but the elect. Thirdly, as you would find from reading some of the past discussions here in regard to the topic of "Common Grace", many of us who are within the historic, traditional Calvinistic camp lament over the actual term "Common grace" as it more often than not creates unnecessary confusion; ala "grace". However, that God displays kindness/benevolence, in that He has withheld immediate judgment upon them and also providentially provides for their sustenance in many cases cannot be denied. Since it is within God's sovereign prerogative to give whatever He wills to whomsoever He wills, the lack which some may experience is no argument against the fact that He does, in fact, show kindness to the reprobate as well as the elect.

Quote
Joe k continues:
I will tell you who the true Hypers are, and that are the hardshellers. Those who say an elect person can live their whole life without coming to faith. Those that do not evangelize. Those who look for evidence of ones election before preaching the Gospel. WHo was the guy who argued with William Gadsby about evangelising? He was a hardsheller.
Your definition simply doesn't fit the term, "hyper-Calvinist" because to deny the necessity of one coming to faith in Christ for salvation is not only outside the pale of Calvinism, it is contrary to historic Christianity as a whole. The accepted understanding of "hyper" is that which is "above, beyond, a distortion of" Calvinism. That such people who describe as "hardshellers" are extremist is true. But I cannot consider them to be even loosely Calvinists.

In His grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
knoxandcalvin #29960 Sun Dec 18, 2005 1:30 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,047
Likes: 1
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life
Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,047
Likes: 1
To find out what a Hyper-Calvinist is, I don't think you will get a more accurate picture than reading what CH Spurgeon had to say about the subject.
http://www.spurgeon.org

Happy reading <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />

Tom

Tom #29961 Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:34 AM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
You also should remember that some Hyper-Calvinist's believed that Spurgeon was an arminian.

Pilgrim #29962 Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Well, I am not a 5 point Calvinist anymore, but when I was a staunch 5 pointer I never bought into this as a definition of hyper-calvinism....i.e. I viewed a Calvinist as one who DID deny common grace and DID deny the well-meant offer of the Gospel! See the link
http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_35.html

Clearly hyper-calvinism is not universally defined. My view always was that a hyper-calvinist was one who denied that anybody BUT a 5 point Calvinist could be saved. I.e. who denied that a Lutheran, a 4-point Calvinist, or even an 5-point Arminian could be saved. Case in point...Marc Carpenter (of Outside the Camp fame).

Steve


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #29963 Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:34 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 39
Newbie
OP Offline
Newbie
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 39
http://www.believersweb.org/ccnredirect.cfm?file=calv-no.txt Here is a terrible Web Pages About Hyper- calvinist This Pages is a Joke.


-- I was predestined to be an Arminian, but chose instead to be a Calvinist, swallowed the TULIP bulb

knoxandcalvin #29964 Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:38 PM
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
The link is broken.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 153 guests, and 13 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
atdcross, NetChaplain, winslowlady, Zach, Daverogk
964 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
October
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,294,159 Gospel truth