quote:

---

Originally posted by mmmonroe

Most Christ followers that I know who are even the least bit theologically literate lean strongly in the direction of the Calvinist viewpoint (both in terms of their soteriology and their views on the providence debate). Most of them describe themselves as "five point Calvinists," "four point Calvinists" or (my personal favorite) "4.5 point Calvinists" (although no one has ever done a very good job of explaining to me how and why they have adopted the .5 approach). So, not to be outdone I have declared myself a "one point Calvinist."

The "one point" that I hold to is the "P" of the (in)famous TULIP acrostic - Perseverance of the Saints - although I probably hold more to its cousin (the commonly referred to "once save always saved" view) that, strictly speaking, differs from the doctrine of perseverance. However, I hold to this view of once saved always saved more by default (with my Southern Baptist upbringing) than as a result of intense theological study. That said, I am familiar with passages in Hebrews and 1 John that command us to continue in the faith as well as passages in John, Romans and Philippians (among others) that speak of being speak to the fact that believers will continue (or persevere). But like I said, I have not fully reconciled my views on this point.

I am curious as to whether there are many other "one point Calvinists" - and if so how did you arrive at that position. In addition, I recognize that many Calvinists (and possibly even non-Calvinists) would argue that this is an inconsistent and/or unsupportable position to hold (particularly in light of my rejection of the other tenets of Calvinism). I would be interested to hear their reasoning as to why?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mmmonroe

Most Christ followers that I know who are even the least bit theologically literate lean strongly in the direction of the Calvinist viewpoint (both in terms of their soteriology and their views on the providence debate). Most of them describe themselves as "five point Calvinists," "four point Calvinists" or (my personal favorite) "4.5 point Calvinists" (although no one has ever done a very good job of explaining to me how and why they have adopted the .5 approach). So, not to be outdone I have declared myself a "one point Calvinist."

The "one point" that I hold to is the "P" of the (in)famous TULIP acrostic - Perseverance of the Saints - although I probably hold more to its cousin (the commonly referred to "once save always saved" view) that, strictly speaking, differs from the doctrine of perseverance. However, I hold to this view of once saved always saved more by default (with my Southern Baptist upbringing) than as a result of intense theological study. That said, I am familiar with passages in Hebrews and 1 John that command us to continue in the faith as well as passages in John, Romans and Philippians (among others) that speak of being speak to the fact that believers will continue (or persevere). But like I said, I have not fully reconciled my views on this point.

---

• Plantinga writes: Perhaps we might leave this section with a firm grasp of the Canon's teaching about the proper attitude for approaching these sensitive doc­trines. On the one hand, if we indulge the "rash presumption" that we are elect-while chattering idly about the damned in hell-we may be pretty sure that salvation has not yet come to our house. Casual assurance and light banter about these matters are canonically forbidden. On the other hand, we are not to fear God as if He were an enemy whom no humble seeking could find and no ardent desire placate. He is "a mer­ciful God [who] has promised that He will not quench the smoking flax, nor break the bruised reed" (Art. 16).



• Plantinga writes: The God of grace seeks not to squelch, or crush, or quench, or break the tender frames and little lights of devout believers who struggle and doubt. He knows our frame; He remembers that we are dust. That is why He has elected to come to us in Christ. Let all who wait for a season of richer grace spend some time following the Christ through passion and suffer­ing and doubt. Let them see to what lengths a lov­ing God will go in the profound work of rescuing His erring children.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PotOnWheel



Here's something from Rev. Cornelius Plantinga, Jr., Ph.D.,
President and Professor of Systematic Theology, Calvin Theological Seminary

• Plantinga writes: Perhaps we might leave this section with a firm grasp of the Canon's teaching about the proper attitude for approaching these sensitive doc­trines. On the one hand, if we indulge the "rash presumption" that we are elect-while chattering idly about the damned in hell-we may be pretty sure that salvation has not yet come to our house. Casual assurance and light banter about these matters are canonically forbidden. On the other hand, we are not to fear God as if He were an enemy whom no humble seeking could find and no ardent desire placate. He is "a mer­ciful God [who] has promised that He will not quench the smoking flax, nor break the bruised reed" (Art. 16).



• Plantinga writes: The God of grace seeks not to squelch, or crush, or quench, or break the tender frames and little lights of devout believers who struggle and doubt. He knows our frame; He remembers that we are dust. That is why He has elected to come to us in Christ. Let all who wait for a season of richer grace spend some time following the Christ through passion and suffer­ing and doubt. Let them see to what lengths a lov­ing God will go in the profound work of rescuing His erring children.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by albert

PoW: Planginga points out that the Canons of Dort were a pastoral tool ... Like I said, its a PASTORAL document. Its about trying to help the saint in the pew navigate towards maturity in Christ. Its NOT about saying tha the other guy isn't saved. Both scripture and the Canons warn against that!

Albert: If that's so, why were some in the Arminian party put to death, others imprisoned for life, others exiled, all excluded from employment and prevented from holding any office? Was this an expression of pastoral care?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by albert

From an internet encyclopaedia:

The decision of the Synod was the doom of the very highly respected and influential statesman Johan van Oldenbarnevelt, who had been the protector of the Arminian Remonstrants. For the crime of general perturbation in the state of the nation, both in Church and State (treason), he was beheaded in May of 1619. He is considered, also by the Calvinists, to be one of the greatest men in the history of the Netherlands. Also lost to the nation as a consequence of the Arminian defeat, was the phenomenal jurist Hugo Grotius (Huig De Groot), who argued for the Remonstrants at the Synod of Dort. Grotius was given a life sentence in prison, but escaped with the help of his wife.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PotOnWheel

What I responded to in posting the quotes from Plantinga on the pastoral character and motive in the actual writing of the Canon of Dort is this, where mmmonroe wrote: "although I probably hold more to its cousin (the commonly referred to 'once save always saved' view"). I think, having read Plantinga's comments, that to adopt a "once saved always saved" possition to onesself IS VERY UN-CALVINIST. The Reformed funerals I've been to confirm this, and the preaching I've heard. To a fault, the actually downplay their assurance. Too much, I think. They do not presume. Nor presume in the negative about others. God is sovereign! (And it is THAT phrase, rather than the word t-u-l-i-p that I've heard among the Reformed these last fifteen years in church!)

TRUTH!

---