Calvinism is Gnosticism

Spurgeon was a double minded man and an inconsistent Calvinist. Here he denies limited atonement what Spurgeon has called the gospel- tulip.
BAM ... Move those Goal Posts.
YOU create a topic to slander Calvinism (let's at least be honest and admit that the OP was not fishing for honest discussion with any Particular Baptists like myself) based on a discussion of PREDESTINATION. As soon as I suggest Charles Spurgeon as a better source than your anonymous "Calvinists are really Gnostics" source and post what Spurgeon said that Calvinists believe about PREDESTINATION ... now you want to IGNORE everything Spurgeon said about PREDESTINATION in your topic on "Predestination and the Gnostic Connection" and argue about Spurgeon and LIMITED ATONEMENT.

"Obvious Troll Is Obvious" as the saying goes; so let's just stick with PREDESTINATION, shall we.

What in the WALL OF TEXT that Spurgeon presented (littered with scripture references and exegesis) smacks of the alleged "Gnosticism"?
I say ... nothing.

QED.
Predestination and the Gnostic Connection stands refuted.
The Particular Baptist Calvinism of Charles Spurgeon has no Gnostic connection in its PREDESTINATION ... just the Biblical connection.
 
BAM ... Move those Goal Posts.
YOU create a topic to slander Calvinism (let's at least be honest and admit that the OP was not fishing for honest discussion with any Particular Baptists like myself) based on a discussion of PREDESTINATION. As soon as I suggest Charles Spurgeon as a better source than your anonymous "Calvinists are really Gnostics" source and post what Spurgeon said that Calvinists believe about PREDESTINATION ... now you want to IGNORE everything Spurgeon said about PREDESTINATION in your topic on "Predestination and the Gnostic Connection" and argue about Spurgeon and LIMITED ATONEMENT.

"Obvious Troll Is Obvious" as the saying goes; so let's just stick with PREDESTINATION, shall we.

What in the WALL OF TEXT that Spurgeon presented (littered with scripture references and exegesis) smacks of the alleged "Gnosticism"?
I say ... nothing.

QED.
Predestination and the Gnostic Connection stands refuted.
The Particular Baptist Calvinism of Charles Spurgeon has no Gnostic connection in its PREDESTINATION ... just the Biblical connection.
No double predestination which is Augustine/Calvin/Spurgeon is pagan and has its roots in gnosticism, not in Scripture.
 
Which the Reformation bought into with their doctrines. Both Luther and Calvin were heavily influenced by Augustine

The errors of the Gnostics were continually rejected by the Early Church, but the Gnostics continued to try to penetrate the Church with their views. The Gnostics even wrote their own gospels, known as the Gnostic Gospels today, where they stole credible names like Mary and Thomas to try to give validity to their teachings.

While many of the attempts of the Gnostics to infiltrate the Church failed, and many of their views are widely rejected today, it seems that their particular view of human nature, free will, and the nature of sin has found wide acceptance in the Church today.

On Free will

Regarding the term “free will,” John Calvin admitted “As to the Fathers, (if their authority weighs with us,) they have the term constantly in their mouths…”[31] He said, “The Greek fathers above others” have taught “the power of the human will”[32] and “they have not been ashamed to make use of a much more arrogant expression calling man ‘free agent or self-manager,’ just as if man had a power to govern himself…”[33] He also said, “The Latin fathers have always retained the word ‘free will’ as if man stood yet upright.”[34] It is a fact that cannot be denied even by those who most ardently oppose the doctrine of free will, that the doctrine of free will and not that of inability was held by all of the Early Church.

Walter Arthur Copinger said, “All the Fathers are unanimous on the freedom of the human will…”[35] Lyman Beecher said, “the free will and natural ability of man were held by the whole church…”[36] And Dr Wiggers said, “All the fathers…agreed with the Pelagians, in attributing freedom of will to man in his present state.”[37] This is a very important point because whenever a person today holds to the belief that all men have the natural ability to obey God or not to obey Him, or that man’s nature still retains the faculty of free will and can choose between these two alternatives and possibilities, he is almost immediately accused of being a heretical “Pelagian” by the Calvinists. This accusation is being unfair to the position of free will since all of the Early Church Fathers held to free will long before Pelagius even existed.

On Original sin

Harry Conn said, “Augustine, after studying the philosophy of Manes, the Persian philosopher, brought into the church from Manichaeism the doctrine of original sin.”[51]

The corruption of our nature, or the loss of our free will, Augustine credited to the original sin of Adam. Augustine said that the “free choice of the will was present in that man who was the first to be formed… But after he sinned by that free will, we who have descended from his progeny have been plunged into necessity.”[52] “By Adam’s transgression, the freedom of’ the human will has been completely lost.”[53] “By the greatness of the first sin, we have lost the freewill to love God.” And finally he said, “by subverting the rectitude in which he was created, he is followed with the punishment of not being able to do right” and “the freedom to abstain from sin has been lost as a punishment of sin.”[54]

Consider the following facts:

  • All of the Early Christians, before Augustine, believed in man’s free will and denied man’s natural inability.
  • The Gnostics in the days of the Early Church believed in man’s natural inability and denied man’s free will.
  • Augustine was a Gnostic for many years, in the Manichaeism sect, and converted to the Church out of Gnosticism.
  • After joining the Church and being appointed a Bishop, Augustine began to deny the free will of man and to affirm the natural inability of man
  • The Church, under Augustine’s influence, began to believe in the natural inability of man, which it never before held to, but which it formerly would refute.

The reason that John Calvin rejected all ancient theologians and dismissed all of their writings on this matter, except for Augustine, is because all ancient theologians affirmed the freedom of the will in their writings, except for Augustine. Gregory Boyd said, “This in part explains why Calvin cannot cite ante-Nicene fathers against his libertarian opponents…. Hence, when Calvin debates Pighuis on the freedom of the will, he cites Augustine abundantly, but no early church fathers are cited.”[80] That is why George Pretyman said, “…the peculiar tenets of Calvinism are in direct opposition to the Doctrines maintained in the primitive Church of Christ…” This we have clearly seen, but he also said, “…there is a great similarity between the Calvinistic system and the earliest [Gnostic] heresies…”[81]

The Reformers sought to return the Church to early Christianity, but actually brought it back to early heresies, because it stopped short at Augustine. The Reformers did not go far back enough. Rather than returning the Church to early Christianity, the Reformation resurrected Augustinian and Gnostic doctrines. The Methodist Quarterly Review said, “At the Reformation Augustinianism received an emphatic re-enforcement among the Protestant Churches.”[82] The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics said, “…it is Augustine who gave us the Reformation. For the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine’s doctrine… the Reformation came, seeing that it was, on its theological side, a revival of Augustinianism…”[83] The Reformation was to a great extent a resurrection or revival of Augustinian theology and a further departure and falling away from Early Christianity.

Gnosticism, Augustinianism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism have much in common. Augustinianism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism teach Gnostic views of human nature and free will but under a different name. It’s the same old Gnosticism in a new wrapper. Other doctrines also seem to have originated in Gnosticism, from Basilianism, Valentianism, Marcionism, and Manichaeism, such as the doctrines of easy believism, individual predestination, constitutional regeneration, a sinful nature or a sinful flesh, eternal security or once saved always saved, and others. But no Gnostic doctrine has spread so widely throughout the Church, with such great acceptance as the doctrine of man’s natural inability to obey God. https://crosstheology.wordpress.com/augustine-gnostic-heretic-and-corruptor-of-the-church/

hope this helps !!!
 
no ad homs since I'm attacking the doctrines not you. there is a difference. you on the other hand have attacked me personally.
I was referring to the "lots you had to say about the Prince of Preachers". Most of your comments were about the MAN (Charles Spurgeon) rather than his IDEAS.

I did not intend to imply that you had engaged in "ad hominem" against me.

"Never insult anyone by accident." - Robert A. Heinlein
 
The Apple doesn't fall far from the Tree !

THERE IS NO QUESTION that Calvin imposed upon the Bible certain erroneous interpretations from his Roman Catholic background. Many leading Calvinists agree that the writings of Augustine were the actual source of most of what is known as Calvinism today. Calvinists David Steele and Curtis Thomas point out that “The basic doctrines of the Calvinistic position had been vigorously defended by Augustine against Pelagius during the fifth century.”1

In his eye-opening book, The Other Side of Calvinism, Laurence M. Vance thoroughly documents that “John Calvin did not originate the doctrines that bear his name....”2 Vance quotes numerous well-known Calvinists to this effect. For example, Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton write, “The system of doctrine which bears the name of John Calvin was in no way originated by him....”3 B. B. Warfield declared, “The system of doctrine taught by Calvin is just the Augustinianism common to the whole body of the Reformers.”4 Thus the debt that the creeds coming out of the Reformation owe to Augustine is also acknowledged. This is not surprising in view of the fact that most of the Reformers had been part of the Roman Catholic Church, of which Augustine was one of the most highly regarded “saints.” John Piper acknowledges that Augustine was the major influence upon both Calvin and Luther, who continued to revere him and his doctrines even after they broke away from Roman Catholicism.5

C. H. Spurgeon admitted that “perhaps Calvin himself derived it [Calvinism] mainly from the writings of Augustine.”6 Alvin L. Baker wrote, “There is hardly a doctrine of Calvin that does not bear the marks of Augustine’s influence.”7 For example, the following from Augustine sounds like an echo reverberating through the writings of Calvin:

Even as he has appointed them to be regenerated...whom he predestinated to everlasting life, as the most merciful bestower of grace, whilst to those whom he has predestinated to eternal death, he is also the most righteous awarder of punishment.8

C. Gregg Singer said, “The main features of Calvin’s theology are found in the writings of St. Augustine to such an extent that many theologians regard Calvinism as a more fully developed form of Augustinianism.”9 Such statements are staggering declarations in view of the undisputed fact that, as Vance points out, the Roman Catholic Church itself has a better claim on Augustine than do the Calvinists.10 Calvin himself said:

Augustine is so wholly with me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fulness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings.11

Augustine and the Use of Force

The fourth century Donatists believed that the church should be a pure communion of true believers who demonstrated the truth of the gospel in their lives. They abhorred the apostasy that had come into the church when Constantine wedded Christianity to paganism in order to unify the empire. Compromising clergy were “evil priests working hand in glove with the kings of the earth, who show that they have no king but Caesar.” To the Donatists, the church was a “small body of saved surrounded by the unregenerate mass.”12 This is, of course, the biblical view.

Augustine, on the other hand, saw the church of his day as a mixture of believers and unbelievers, in which purity and evil should be allowed to exist side by side for the sake of unity. He used the power of the state to compel church attendance (as Calvin also would 1,200 years later): “Whoever was not found within the Church was not asked the reason, but was to be corrected and converted....”13 Calvin followed his mentor Augustine in enforcing church attendance and participation in the sacraments by threats (and worse) against the citizens of Geneva. Augustine “identified the Donatists as heretics...who could be subjected to imperial legislation [and force] in exactly the same way as other criminals and misbelievers, including poisoners and pagans.”14 Frend says of Augustine, “The questing, sensitive youth had become the father of the inquisition.”15

Though he preferred persuasion if possible, Augustine supported military force against those who were rebaptized as believers after conversion to Christ and for other alleged heretics. In his controversy with the Donatists, using a distorted and un-Christian interpretation of Luke:14:23
,16 Augustine declared:

Why therefore should not the Church use force in compelling her lost sons to return?... The Lord Himself said, “Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in....” Wherefore is the power which the Church has received...through the religious character and faith of kings...the instrument by which those who are found in the highways and hedges—that is, in heresies and schisms—are compelled to come in, and let them not find fault with being compelled.17

Sadly, Calvin put into effect in Geneva the very principles of punishment, coercion, and death that Augustine advocated and that the Roman CatholicChurch followed consistently for centuries. Henry H. Milman writes: “Augustinianism was worked up into a still more rigid and uncompromising system by the severe intellect of Calvin.”18 And he justified himself by Augustine’s erroneous interpretation of Luke:14:23

. How could any who today hail Calvin as a great exegete accept such abuse of this passage?

Compel? Isn’t that God’s job through Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace? Compel those for whom Christ didn’t die and whom God has predestined to eternal torment? This verse refutes Calvinism no matter how it is intepreted!hunt

hope this helps !!!
 
I was referring to the "lots you had to say about the Prince of Preachers". Most of your comments were about the MAN (Charles Spurgeon) rather than his IDEAS.

I did not intend to imply that you had engaged in "ad hominem" against me.

"Never insult anyone by accident." - Robert A. Heinlein
No I’m pointing out his many inconsistencies in his teachings.
 
Define "double predestination".
I’ll let Calvin do that for you my friend .

Calvin below:

“We also note that we should consider the creation of the world so that we may realize that everything is subject to God and ruled by his will and that when the world has done what it may, nothing happens other than what God decrees.” Acts: Calvin, The Crossway Classic Commentaries, p.66

“First, the eternal predestination of God, by which before the fall of Adam He decreed what should take place concerning the whole human race and every individual, was fixed and determined.” (Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.121

“When he uses the term permission, he means that the will of God is the supreme and primary cause of everything, because nothing happens without his order of permission.” The Institutes of Christian Religion, Book I, Ch. 16, Sect. 8

“For myself, I take another principle: Whatever things are done wrongly and unjustly by man, these very things are the right and just works of God. This may seem paradoxical at first sight to some....” Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.169

“Indeed, the ungodly pride themselves on being competent to effect their wishes. But the facts show in the end that by them, unconsciously and unwillingly, what was divinely ordained is implemented.” Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.173,

“Does God work in the hearts of men, directing their plans and moving their wills this way and that, so that they do nothing but what He has ordained?” Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.174

“But it is quite frivolous refuge to say that God otiosely permits them, when Scripture shows Him not only willing but the author of them.” Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God page 176

“But the objection is not yet resolved, that if all things are done by the will of God, and men contrive nothing except by His will and ordination, then God is the author of all evils.” Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God, p.179
 
This is better yet

John Calvin confessed that the doctrine of Double Predestination was a horrible and dreadful decree in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. John Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Why would anyone believe such a horrific and dreadful doctrine ?

Again I ask: whence does it happen that Adam's fall irremediably involved so many peoples, together with their infant offspring, in eternal death unless because it so pleased God? Here their tongues, otherwise so loquacious, must become mute. The decree is dreadful indeed, I confess. (latin. "Decretum quidem horribile, fateor."; french. "Je confesse que ce decret nous doit epouvanter.") Yet no one can deny that God foreknew what end man was to have before he created him, and consequently foreknew because he so ordained by his decree. If anyone inveighs against God's foreknowledge at this point, he stumbles rashly and heedlessly. What reason is there to accuse the Heavenly Judge because he was not ignorant of what was to happen? If there is any just or manifest complaint, it applies to predestination. And it ought not to seem absurd for me to say that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his descendants, but also meted it out in accordance with his own decision. For as it pertains to his wisdom to foreknow everything that is to happen, so it pertains to his might to rule and control everything by his hand. And Augustine also skillfully disposes of this question, as of others: "We most wholesomely confess what we most correctly believe, that the God and Lord of all things, who created all things exceedingly good [cf. Gen 1:31], and foreknew that evil things would rise out of good, and also knew that it pertained to his most omnipotent goodness to bring good out of evil things to be . . . , so ordained the life of angels and men that in it he might first of all show what free will could do, and then what the blessing of his grace and the verdict of his justice could do. (Augustine, On Rebuke and Grace X. 27)"

Calvin regarded soteriological predestination as God’s eternal decree, by which he compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition: rather, eternal life is fore-ordained for some, eternal damnation for others. Therefore, as any man has been created to one or the other of these ends, we speak of him as predestined to life or to death. gospelcoilition

" God is said to set apart those whom he adopts into salvation; it will be highly absurd to say that others acquire by chance or by their own effort what election alone confers on a few. Therefore, whom God passes over, he condemns: and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children. " Institutes, III, 23, 1.


hope this helps !!!
 
“We also note that we should consider the creation of the world so that we may realize that everything is subject to God and ruled by his will and that when the world has done what it may, nothing happens other than what God decrees.”
Do you believe that things happen that God has not decreed?
S**t happens that is out of God's control and thwarts the eternal plan of God, forcing the great I AM to change His plans. ... Is THAT what you really believe?

I agree with Calvin in this particular statement, but I worded it "God does not try, God does!" Nothing catches God by surprise and when scripture says "all things" it means "all things" ... man proposes, but God disposes. His plan is the one that happens ... ZERO EXCEPTIONS.

[I would really have preferred a definition of "double predestination". This sort of evasive response really dampens any effort at communication. I cannot agree or disagree with a point that remains undefined.]
 
Do you believe that things happen that God has not decreed?
S**t happens that is out of God's control and thwarts the eternal plan of God, forcing the great I AM to change His plans. ... Is THAT what you really believe?

I agree with Calvin in this particular statement, but I worded it "God does not try, God does!" Nothing catches God by surprise and when scripture says "all things" it means "all things" ... man proposes, but God disposes. His plan is the one that happens ... ZERO EXCEPTIONS.

[I would really have preferred a definition of "double predestination". This sort of evasive response really dampens any effort at communication. I cannot agree or disagree with a point that remains undefined.]
God does not decree / predestined evil , sin or the damnation of people before they were born. Calvinism conflates foreknowledge with predestination.
 
God does not decree / predestined evil , sin or the damnation of people before they were born. The Calvinist conflates foreknowledge with predestination.
How does the quote by Calvin contradict that?

We also note that we should consider the creation of the world so that we may realize that everything is subject to God and ruled by his will and that when the world has done what it may, nothing happens other than what God decrees.” - Calvin
  • Should we consider the creation of the world?
  • Is everything subject to God?
  • Is everything ruled by His will?
  • Does the fact that the word "does what it may" negate any of the above?
  • Does anything happen that God has not "decreed" (determined to happen in His eternal plan)?
What in the quote from Calvin is untrue?
What in the quote from Calvin affirms God "decreed/predestined evil , sin or the damnation of people before they were born"?
What in the quote from Calvin "conflates foreknowledge with predestination"?
 
Are you simply so blinded by your hatred of Calvin that you cannot even read the actual words that he wrote?
("If Calvin wrote it, then it MUST say something EVIL!") :cautious:
 
How does the quote by Calvin contradict that?

We also note that we should consider the creation of the world so that we may realize that everything is subject to God and ruled by his will and that when the world has done what it may, nothing happens other than what God decrees.” - Calvin
  • Should we consider the creation of the world?
  • Is everything subject to God?
  • Is everything ruled by His will?
  • Does the fact that the word "does what it may" negate any of the above?
  • Does anything happen that God has not "decreed" (determined to happen in His eternal plan)?
What in the quote from Calvin is untrue?
What in the quote from Calvin affirms God "decreed/predestined evil , sin or the damnation of people before they were born"?
What in the quote from Calvin "conflates foreknowledge with predestination"?
Sovereignty does not mean nor imply meticulous control. A ruler rules by law and does not control the actions and decisions made by those under his rule.
 
Back
Top Bottom