Converting to Calvinism

[Anonymous No.15366642]

Calvinist /lit/ and reading chart?
I want to follow the initiatic path using Calvinism and its understanding of Christ. What are the traditional and most purely Calvinist Church?

[Anonymous No.15366665]

just flip a coin tbhdesu, you are either saved or damned

[Anonymous No.15366717]

>>15366642
>not believing in drinking blood
Never gonna make it

[Anonymous No.15366765]

>>15366642
>Calvinist /lit/ and reading chart?
Calvin's Institutes naturally.
I prefer 17th century English Puritan and Scottish Presbyterian works. Read the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms and that will give you a good understanding of Reformed theology so you can begin reading other works. Thomas Watson is a good Puritan to begin with, his Body of Practical Divinity is easy to read, devotional, and will build on what you've learned from Westminster Shorter Catechism.

>What are the traditional and most purely Calvinist Church?
Any of the confessional Presbyterian churches like Orthodox Presbyterian Church or the Reformed Presbyterian Church. If you want something more continental the Dutch Reformed churches are faithful as well.

[Anonymous No.15366801]

Can someone explain to me the difference between the different types of Protestant? I don't mean Lutheran vs Presbyterian. I mean
>Evangelical
>Nondemoninational
>Confessional
>Mainline

Are there basically two forms of each church? A liberal mainline and an evangelical? Or are there conservative confessional ones?

I'm interested in Lutheranism. What is the traditional conservative version of it. I know it's not ELCA

[Anonymous No.15366843]

>>15366765
>Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Their website actually has some interesting and useful resources like Confessions and Catechisms if you spend some time looking around.

https://opc.org/confessions.html

[Anonymous No.15366857]

>>15366801
LCMS and WELS are the two largest conservative Lutheran denominations.

[Anonymous No.15366881]

>>15366642
Protties fuckoff and peddle your ideology on your containment board on 8ch

[Anonymous No.15366891]

>>15366642
>Calvinist /lit
Justification By Faith and Institutes of the Christian Religion

[Anonymous No.15366902]

>>15366881
LOL seething cathocuck has arrived. they got the catholic critique thread taken down earlier by mass reporting it. they even rallied on that other chan and have a thread there about making sure no more anti-catholic threads were made on /lit/.

that's how btfo they were.

[Anonymous No.15366916]

>>15366881
Keep coping you disgusting kid raping papist

[Anonymous No.15366922]

>>15366801

[Anonymous No.15366935]

You can get free Reformed ebooks here.
https://www.monergism.com/

[Anonymous No.15366955]

>>15366922
The other thing about the tradcath crowd I don't get is it isn't like the Catholic church hasn't had its fair share of liberalizing reforms. If you want an unaltered church, go Orthodox.

[Anonymous No.15366969]

>>15366955
I don't think any of the Catholic posters here are tradcath. They also seem like straightforward neoconservative catholics to me. In fact, I've only seen them disparage trads themselves.

Orthodox has more than its fair share of problems anyway. The image they portray as an ancient unchanged church is hilarious far from the truth. They have tons of issues with ultra liberal hierarchy, leftist reforms, etc.

Ultimately both Catholic and Orthodox suffer from the same problems, and both are desperate for worldly power over all else.

[Anonymous No.15366989]

>>15366801
>>Evangelical
Evangelicalism is trans-denominational.
>>Nondemoninational
Basically another word for Baptists.
>>Confessional
Holds to some Reformed confessional documents like the Westminster Standards of the Three Forms of Unity.
>>Mainline
The old Protestant churches that have abandoned their confessions and Scripture in favor of becoming men pleasers.

[Anonymous No.15367034]

>>15366642
For a basic introduction, Americans should read R.L. Dabney and Euros should read Abraham Kuyper. The Institutes themselves aren't difficult either, just really big, it's all apportioned very well though so you can always pick something that sounds intriguing.

[Anonymous No.15367040]

>>15366642
>Calvinism
>traditional

[Anonymous No.15367051]

>>15366989
Why did all the mainlines go this route? Why didn't even one of them go traditional instead? That seems odd to me. Then again, as we can see, even the Catholics went that way around the same time frame.

I just find it weird that not a single denomination could withstand the 60s.

[Anonymous No.15367057]

>>15366989
So are there any conservative churches that are confessional and not evangelical?

[Anonymous No.15367062]

>>15366969
>is hilarious far from the truth
how? we still have the same theology and teaching as the pre-schism Church. if the existence of liberals and other heretics would refute anything, then no church would be the true church.

[Anonymous No.15367063]

>>15366922
Based Machen.

https://reformed.org/books/chr_and_lib/

[Anonymous No.15367080]

>>15367062
Contraception.

[Anonymous No.15367090]

>>15367080
>Contraception
contraception isn't dogmatic teaching and is discouraged, but concessions are made for the weak. just like with multiple marriages.

[Anonymous No.15367100]

>>15367090
thus we have the problem with orthodoxy. most shit is like this. no firm rulings one way or the other, but the teachings do change. you're no better than the catholics by getting off on technicalities. they've tied themselves in knots with their infallibility bullshit, but you're just completely wishy washy on every account. you can be as liberal as you want and still call yourself unchanged because you haven't made a single decision about anything in the past millennium.

[Anonymous No.15367132]

>>15367051
>Why did all the mainlines go this route? Why didn't even one of them go traditional instead?
It all unfolded during the early 20th century. A time when we were just beginning to be "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" imo as Paul wrote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist%E2%80%93Modernist_controversy
>>15367057
Its probably better to say that people are Evangelical, not denominations. Evangelicals can be found in every denomination.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism

[Anonymous No.15367136]

>>15367132
Pic related

[Anonymous No.15367154]

@15367100
>thus we have the problem with orthodoxy.
that it isn't autistic pharisiatic catholicism where a single technical mistake could invalidate a mass? we follow the principle of economy and leniency instead of blind legalism, which is completely traditional and seen in the pre-schism Church (even in Acts) in the allowance of remarrying after a first marriage.
>no firm rulings one way or the other
you can get excommunicated by your bishop for teaching heresy. there are councils proclaiming dogmas universally recognized by the entirety of the church.
>you can be as liberal as you want and still call yourself unchanged
you can't be a heretic and call yourself unchanged. there being false teachers calling themselves orthodox doesn't make their teaching traditional. we follow tradition, even a majority of bishops proclaiming heresy in unison wouldn't refute the church (which already happened historically in the Arian crisis).

[Anonymous No.15367165]

>>15367154
it's time for you to fuck off now, orthodox thread shitter

[Anonymous No.15367169]

>>15367100
>you haven't made a single decision about anything in the past millennium.
Calvinism was officially anathematized in 1638 by a council in Constantinople and in 1672 by a council in Jerusalem. That you hold to such obvious refuted lies merely to keep your untraditional bastardized faith is telling.

[Anonymous No.15367211]

>>15366935
>monergism
leads to a false Christology, failing to account for Christ's actual human will, thus denying his full humanity which he shares with us.
This video explains it pretty well - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R26DoiyBzc
I suggest every Reformed here to watch it.

[Anonymous No.15367222]

>>15367169
So you're saying that they just decided to not weigh in on literally any contemporary moral/social issue just for fun? Wow what a compelling argument. Catholicism DID weigh in on everything. Their sin is that once they did, they decided to change their minds and become liberal anyway while claiming that they didn't change their minds and that they are infallible.

Interestingly, whether legalistic or wishy washy, you reach the same place: equivocation, uncertainty, irrelevance. Catholics and Orthodox can functionally live the same way in regard to things like divorce and contraception. It doesn't matter whether there are official rulings or leniency or whatever. It all amounts to the same thing.

[Anonymous No.15367239]

>>15367169
They anathematized the Gospel?
Yikes.

[Anonymous No.15367316]

@15367222
>decided to not weigh in on literally any contemporary moral/social issue just for fun
Where are you getting this stupidity from? In my church our priest does address destructive social issues all the time, same with his bishop and the entire hierarchy. Do you want all the bishops to gather and hold councils for every single issue that arises on a weekly basis? You seem to be operating on a catholic-influenced view of how the Church works in society. Protestantism literally is just a reaction to Catholicism and does not exist apart from it, inheriting all of the previous mistaken theological baggage and somehow making it even worse.
>equivocation, uncertainty, irrelevance
>It doesn't matter whether there are official rulings or leniency or whatever. It all amounts to the same thing.
Nice equivocation.

[Anonymous No.15367337]

>>15367239
calvinism is an innovation though. nowhere in the gospel is it taught, nowhere do the church fathers or apostles subscribe to it.

https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxbridge/orthodoxys-official-response-to-calvinism-the-confession-of-dositheus-1673/
https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxbridge/plucking-the-tulip-1-an-orthodox-critique-of-the-reformed-doctrine-of-predestination/

[Anonymous No.15367361]

>>15366902
im not a catholic dumb fuck i just hate protestants because they are below atheists in terms of how absolutely retarded and selfish they are

[Anonymous No.15367379]

>>15367361
You hate people? That isn't very charitable.

[Anonymous No.15367382]

And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men? For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not mere men?

What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one. I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth. Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.

1 Corinthians 3:1-9 NASB

[Anonymous No.15367388]

>>15366922
I literally can't tell the difference

[Anonymous No.15367393]

>>15367316
>The Church should say contraception is bad and then everyone change to good and that's fine

[Anonymous No.15367397]

I miss R.C. Sproul.

[Anonymous No.15367417]

>>15367393
It is always seen as bad and people are called to stay away from it, but the Church recognizes the weakness of men and allows it in a limited capacity. If you don't like that the Church can rightfully do this even in such important matters, you're being a legalistic pharisee and denying tradition.

>An example in the New Testament of the application of lenient economy, or "economy according to leniency", is found in Acts chapter 15, where the Apostles decided to limit the number and degree of Jewish observances that would be required of Gentile converts. An example in the New Testament of the application of strict economy, or "economy according to exactness (or, strictness, preciseness) [akribeia]", may be seen in Acts 16:3, when (according to one interpretation[7]) St. Paul set aside the usual rule to circumcise Timothy, whose father was a Gentile, to placate certain Jewish Christians. In both instances, economy was exercised to facilitate the salvation of some of the parties involved.

>In Orthodox Church history, examples and instances of economy abound. Since ancient times, converts to the Church who were coming from certain heretical groups were not required to be baptized, even though the normal path of entrance to the Church was through baptism. Thus the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, decided that under specific conditions, the application of economy (i.e. according to leniency) would be the norm in this matter. But since the usual rule is baptism, such leniency can easily be, and sometimes has been, suspended (usually in periods when the heretical groups in question were actively opposing the Church). In these cases, the Church returned to her customary usual rule of "exactness," not applying economy (or not applying economy according to lenience). In calling for the reception of converts into Orthodoxy through means other than baptism in certain cases, the Ecumenical Councils made no determination regarding the existence of sacraments outside of Orthodoxy, but only addressed the situation of the convert to Orthodoxy.

[Anonymous No.15367430]

>>15366642
Debunked by Eriugena

[Anonymous No.15367431]

Guys, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod seems right for me. But I'm not a creationist. That's a sticking point for me. For Protestants, do you have to literally be a creationist or a lesbian clergy loving nutjob?

Isn't there some in between?

[Anonymous No.15367433]

>>15367431
>seems right for me
Are you looking for truth or for something that appeals to you?
>I'm not a creationist
What are you then?

[Anonymous No.15367468]

What is this denomination called? Why do Americans do this?

[Anonymous No.15367479]

>>15367468
Looks like a Roman Catholic mass in South America

[Anonymous No.15367490]

>>15367468
Generally they're called non-denominational churches and they're fucking AIDS. Perfectly designed to avoid any sense of community or commitment on the part of the church goers.

[Anonymous No.15367492]

>>15366922
and what happened before this? the church didn't exist for 1500 years?

[Anonymous No.15367498]

>>15366665
>66665
>just flip a coin
was this anon saved or damned?

[Anonymous No.15367504]

>>15367468
A lot of these "mega churches" are part of the prosperity gospel, which is very very heretical and should be avoided at all costs.

[Anonymous No.15367514]

>>15367492
It's covering the history of Protestantism you fucking moron Catholic, that's why it starts with the Reformation.

[Anonymous No.15367515]

>>15367433
I don't get what this means. I know what's correct and I'm looking for the church that represents that. I won't be shamed for considering my options. That's the kind of thing Catholics do when you dare to question something about the gay religion. It's not my fault just about every denomination is AIDS, is it?

[Anonymous No.15367521]

>>15366642
>Calvinist reading chart
Don't think that exists yet but we should make one, there are a good number of contemporary books that really ought to be gathered up and arranged (possible with a timeline) in parallel with classic texts by Calvin and Luther etc.

[Anonymous No.15367535]

>>15367515
You should consider the Local Churches. They believe in a lot of the things that define Calvinism (predestination, total depravity, etc) but are more nuanced and less abrasive about it.

[Anonymous No.15367556]

>>15367521
>Beeke
I'm convinced he is the kindest person alive bros. I just want to sit down and talk with him about Providence and Assurance and stuff.

[Anonymous No.15367908]

>>15366642
>initiatic path

[Anonymous No.15368735]

>>15366642
Why would you convert if you know nothing about it? Maybe i'm assuming, but like surely you would read it, then decide if you want to follow?

[Anonymous No.15369318]

>>15366955
>it isn't like the Catholic church hasn't had its fair share of liberalizing reforms
true
>If you want an unaltered church, go Orthodox
You're a retard.

[Anonymous No.15369326]

Self-taught, biblical fundamentalist internet Christianity is the most radically Calvinist thing ever.

[Anonymous No.15369403]

Why do Christian's love to make God out to be as sadistic as possible? The more traditional forms of Christianity it seems like everyone has a boner for hellfire

[Anonymous No.15369532]

>>15367468
I'm not even joking. Holy shit look at how far they are.

[Anonymous No.15369549]

>>15369403
Lmao no.
Did you read about hell in orthodoxy?
http://saintandrewgoc.org/home/2015/4/17/paradise-and-hell-according-to-the-orthodox-church

[Anonymous No.15369654]

>>15369326
This. I self-identify as an internet-Christian first and foremost.

[Anonymous No.15369664]

>>15366642
I hope you like homosexuals senpai

[Anonymous No.15369885]

>>15367468
>all those obese people

[Anonymous No.15370631]

>>15367556
Beeke has an awesome personal library built up, with some extremely rare first editions of old theological texts.

[Anonymous No.15370741]

>>15367556
>>15370631
Found a better picture of the collection.

[Anonymous No.15370861]

>>15367132
>tfw people don't realize that Higher Criticism did more to harm Christianity than science or Reason ever did

[Anonymous No.15371386]

>>15370741
There probably isn't a single extant Puritan work that he hasn't read. I see he has the old 2 volume Works of Traill. Banner of Truth is finally reprinting that for the first time in nearly 50 years.

[Anonymous No.15371415]

>>15367479
lol, you wish wasp pig. only protties televangelist do "mass" like this.

[Anonymous No.15371544]

The Reformation destroyed christianity and the west desu

[Anonymous No.15371773]

>>15371415
You haven't seen South American Roman Catholicism then.

[Anonymous No.15371777]

>>15371544
and that was a good thing

[Anonymous No.15372006]

>>15369318
Cope

[Anonymous No.15374046]

>>15367521
I'm a fan of Michael Horton's books and The White Horse Inn talk show.

[Anonymous No.15374728]

>>15370741
Seminary libraries are maximum comfy.

[Anonymous No.15375266]

DAMNIT I JUST WANT AN ANSWER TO MY QUESTION:
I'm trying to find a denomination that doesn't have any obtuse/retarded beliefs. Is there a primer on such a topic? Specifically, the denomination I'm looking for has:
>no female clergy
>no gay marriage
>no liberal politics
But also:
>no creationism
>no israel worship

It seems like every denomination is either column A or column B but nothing with both.

[Anonymous No.15375306]

>>15375266
Just create your own denomination like every other prot.

[Anonymous No.15375360]

>>15375266
Just be TradCath bro

[Anonymous No.15375454]

>>15375360
TradCath is still Cath which is still liberal politics and low key Israel worship. Also trads tend to be creationist.

>>15375306
Eat ass

[Anonymous No.15375464]

>>15375454
>Also trads tend to be creationist.
One of the few good things about them.

[Anonymous No.15375665]

>>15375266
>>no creationism
Just take the redpill already.

[Anonymous No.15376656]

>>15375266
>doesn't have any obtuse/retarded beliefs
start with one that rejects sola scriptura then.

[Anonymous No.15376740]

Never seen a good list, but I have collected some names in a text file a long time ago. I got the recommendations mainly from what modern day Reformed writers recommend.
Definitely not a complete list, and some of these writers aren't exactly Calvinist, but closer to Armenianism.
Also, the list begins with the reformation, though obviously there's a lot of relevant literature before that, and I would heartily recommend a number of Catholic and Orthodox writers to any Christian.

Reformation: Luther, Calvin, Book of Common Prayer, Foxe's Book of Martyrs
17th Century: John Owen, Bunyan, Richard Baxter, William Gurnall, Stephen Charnock, Westminster Confession, Westminster Catechism, 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith
18th Century: Jonathan Edwards, Whitefield, Wesley, Isaac Watts, Arthur Bennett (Valley of Visions), John Gill, David Brainerd, Joseph Bellamy
19th Century: Spurgeon, JC Ryle, Charles Hodge, BB Warfield, Dwight L. Moody, Edward Payson, Archibald Alexander, William Jay, Ichabod Spencer, EM Bounds, Oswald Chambers, Horatius Bonar, Charles Finney
20th Century: A.W. Tozer, A.W. Pink, RC Sproul, John MacArthur, John Piper, Paul Washer, Martin Lloyd-Jones, Boettner, Abraham Kuyper, James White, John Murray, etc. That list goes on quite a bit longer, but I don't even recognize some names, and I'm not sure what others have actually written.

Also, I apparently didn't include not specifically Reformed authors like Kierkegaard or Karl Barth.

In addition, some books on specific topics:
History: SM Houghton, Leonard Verduin, Biographies by Iain Murray & John Piper
On the Puritans: DW Saxton (God's BattlePlan for the Mind), Beeke (Puritan Theology), [Works by Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Robert Martin, JI Packer, Leland Rycken]
Systematic Theology: Wayne Grudem, Louis Bergkhoff, JL Dagg, Stephen Charnock, Robert Reymond, John Gill, James Montgomery Boice, James P. Boice

As you can see, the list also lacks fiction, I think Bunyan is the only one on that list. You could obviously include all sorts of stuff from John Milton to metaphysical poets like George Herbert & John Donne.

I would just recommend you always keep an open-mind. Don't approach literature or devotionals looking for theological positions you disagree on, or that aren't exactly orthodox.

[Anonymous No.15378123]

>>15367040
This.

If you want traditional, kids, look into the early church fathers.

[Anonymous No.15378133]

>>15367136
What are the next steps after Atheism?

[Anonymous No.15378163]

>>15367211
>>monergism
>leads to a false Christology, failing to account for Christ's actual human will, thus denying his full humanity which he shares with us

That's an interesting connection I hadn't thought of. The video is good; thanks.

[Anonymous No.15378165]

>>15366922
Literally can't tell the difference

[Anonymous No.15378178]

>>15366902
>LOL seething cathocuck has arrived. they got the catholic critique thread taken down earlier by mass reporting it. they even rallied on that other chan and have a thread there about making sure no more anti-catholic threads were made on /lit/.
>that's how btfo they were.

That's unfortunate if true.

Those threads, if they go on long enough, have a tendency to inspire detailed comments from very knowledgeable Catholics who don't ordinarily bother to engage in careful analysis/discussion of Catholic issues.

If the thread you're alluding to is the thread I'm thinking of, it had several such posts towards the end of the thread.

[Anonymous No.15378185]

>>15367468
Although we can't know for certain, the church meeting described in Acts 15 probably looked much like this.