A debate with a Calvinist

[Os2Hugh]

Hello my friends The Peace of Christ be with you.

While on a message board that entailed news and politics I came across a few Calvinist types who said that God wills that certain people go to hell from when they were made. I know this double predestination is heresy and when I quoted a number of texts that support the actual truth of a loving God who desires all to come to salvation. They accused me of “proof texting out of context”. The idea of a TULIP Calvinist saying I was proof texting, annoyed me quite a bit, because I know that is in FACT what Sola Scriptura adherents cherry pick the bible all the time.

Then after I told him that the bible isn’t a self translating book and that he was interpreting scripture in a Calvinist Tradition, he got really hot. (I know the word tradition is like showing Dracula a crucifix) Then this mocking quote came

“My interpretation is far more valid than yours, because rather than use a single verse, which is proof texting, I read the verse in context of what the author is saying. And I refuse to be lectured by an adherent to a church that claims to be the sole infallible interpreter, and has defined exactly 5 verses in 2k years. Most over the Marian heresy.”

At this point I knew it was pointless to continue. What kind of God do these folks believe in?? He seems like a monster not a loving creator??

Any suggestions to stump Calvinists or to rather humble them in their haughty arrogance??

Hugh

 

[Lovinglight]

Part 1

Catholics believe in single predestination (St. Augustine) not double predestination (Calvin).

Which is to say God know what we are going to do and wills it (permissive will), however He does not force us to do it, we are truly free. God creates beings that can sin because being able to sin means one is able to freely and meritoriously choose. Existence like freedom is an intrinsic good which makes it possible to do good, be happy, and praise God.

God did not create sinful beings, He created beings that are free to love. Freedom in tge Catholic context does not mean the ability to choose evil but the ability, without constraint or interference to choose good. However, the ability to choose Good without constraint necessarily entails the binary alternative, which is fake freedom (aka slavery or sin).

Mary is in fact a special case (preveniant grace). The grace given to her was fitting for the mother of the Incarnate God. But Mary, like Adam and Eve simply had complete freedom in that binary option: yes/no. God knows Mary will not sin because He is outside of time, but inside time Mary is completely free, just as Eve was.

God creates us because He Loves. He loves the Son and the Son loves the Father and their mutual love is the Spirit. Because He loves He creates, creature that are free like He is, but to be free like He is means the ability to choose to be in His likeness or not. Upon giving Eve life He knew she would fall, and yet love kept her in being, because love, being, and goodness are all synonymous–transcendentals which decribe the perfect nature of God. To take Eve out of existence for using her freedom poorly would be unloving, and to know that she would use ot poorly is to give her existence.

So you might ask why God didn’t preserve us all from personal effects of sin. The reason is simple. The effects of sin are the consequence of ill-spent freedom. To negate these effects is to negate freedom itself.

The word prevenient means simply to come before. Certainly there is a grace that comes before baptism. However, Mary’s prevenient grace is akin to the Sanctifying grace of Baptism.

Its not that God can not work in us until baptism, rather He can not work within us until we give Him permission to. In fact, changing people’s wills without permission is contrary to freedom. Grace is constantly offered to man, like Revelation, but like Revelation freedom requires that it have no impact on man unless we consent to it. Just as man can ignore revelation in all its forms–even down to creation–a man must be free to take up grace or ignore it.

God can not work on our will without our permission… this limitation is not a limit on his omnipotence but a self-limitation.

Prevenient grace, as present only in our Lady, gives her the ability to choose, still freely, yes or no. In contrast the rest of us are incapable to choose yes until baptism. The only difference between Baptism and Prevenient grace is timing.

***Timing and (not to oversimplify things), because the timing of prevenient grace precedes conception, Mary never suffered from the effects of sin in the soul–
concupiscience.

 

[Lovinglight]

Part 2

Our will can mean an individual desire, but it can also mean our freedom our ability to choose, to desire, to cooperate.

God’s will (a particular choice) is that we are free… God’s power is unlimited except insofar as He himself limits it. Our freedom is one such self-imposed limitation. By limiting Himself He makes space for us. Keep that in mind…

We “give” God our will, first by telling Him what we want, what we think will make us happy. He knows this content already, but in giving him our particular desire we also open ourselves to relationship with Him. By giving our will/prayers/desires we also give Him our will (not an individual desire) but the capacity to choose, our freedom. Now all of creation is created by His Word and so “all of creation proclaims the glory of God”. God is constantly speaking His Word to us through creation, scriptures, the Church, but part of that Freedom which God wills, that space for us, is that humans can choose to ignore God’s will. We can desire things that are not God’s will… these desires lead to actions which can be harmful (aka sinful) or simply wastes of time, distractions.

When the pagan prays they pray “my will be done” and offer bribes to the gods who are not all powerful. They are powerful and being imperfect they can change their mind. Pagan prayer is therefore about finding a God strong enough and pliable enough to do our will.

In contrast the Christisn prays “thy will be done”. By praying we come to an all powerful God who does not change. In doing so ww bring him our will, our desires which because of freedom may or may not comform to His will. We give Him particular desires, but also our freedom, our ability to desire, so that our will which is free can be conformed to the divine will. In praying we are giving God permission to change our free will so that His will that we be free remains intact.

God knows our will. Rather in telling God our desire we give him permission to work on our desires, to mold them. We say this explicitly when we pray… “thy will be done”. Freedom is created and given by God, and He does not take it away. Demons possess, God calls. So long as we do not give Him our will, God who knows it, and understands the countless ways it is disordered, WILL NOT apply His grace to our will. As the Fathers of the Church often said: God will not save us without us.

Prevenient grace is the Holy Spirit as is all sanctifying grace.

God does not take into account what we ask for… because God does not desire to give us what we want as if our desires will make us happy. He desires to give us, and to help us want, what will actually make us happy.

Christian prayer is like a rhetorical question. God asks us what do you want… we respond… but the response is merely an occasion for us to open our hearts to God who desires to show us what our truest self wants.

Because of God’s gift of free will God can not show us, he can not help us transform our will to His, without that permission.

 

[Lovinglight]

Part 3

Of course God takes into account what we have asked… that He desires the Spirit to come is clear in scripture. So why pray for it? Well because the Holy Spirit will not come, and in a sense can not come upon us, until we invite Him in.

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him.

Example
I want X. If I a relational creature fixates on wanting X, I don’t share that desire with someone outside myself, my desire will never change. If X + 1 is objectively better than X, but all I think is–X, X, X…-- I am going to be invincible in thinking X is what I want. I may even convince myself that it is the only thing that could ever make me truly happy. And if I don’t get it, because God desired something objectively better I am going to experience God’s will as a form of suffering.

In contrast, by bringing my desire for X to the Christian God, who is perfect and all powerful, in the Christian mode of prayer, “thy will be done”, I acknowledge right off the back that while I may want X, X may not be what the GOOD GOD wants for me nor what is objectively best for me. And while depending on how fixated or detatched I am from X, not getting X may still be painful, by virtue of submitting both that particular desire and my will (writ large) to God I will experience the suffering of not X much less acutely… and be open to and looking for the possibility of Y as a greater good that comes from the suffering of not X.

God’s will is unchanging. What changes is our will… we ask God for X and perhaps God shows us that X + 1 or even Y is better. Prayer makes it possible, easier or perhaps even enjoyable to cooperate with God’s will.

Prayer is an intense conversation…

We pray because it is what one does when one loves another person.

We pray because God gave us freedom and we are weak. This means a) God does not impose himself on us more than holding in creation the created order and subjecting us to that natural order (aka the law of nature and natural war). By prayer we explicitly give God permission to work in our life and b) permission to strenghten us to use our freedom well!

We pray, like Jesus, telling God our desires so that he can respond (prayer is a conversation, a two way street). We pray not so God can know our will but so that giving it to Him He can help us know His Divine Will.

 

[Lovinglight]

Part 4

On hell and the epicureum paradox:

If God is omniscient and we are not who are we to judge Him. The presumption is that we have the ability to understand his timeless, limitless, motives with our limited, chronological, intellects.

If God exists, He must be perfection, and as Anselm points out if you think of god and could imagine something better you are in fact not thinking of God.

That said, aside from the logical fallicy of a imperfect creature judging the perfect creator, the problem of evil ultimately comes down to these simple facts:

1. freedom is better than slavery
2. freedom always involves risk
3. used poorly freedom causes evil
4. evil, though not willed by God, provides opportunities for free creatures to grow in virtue–to become freer

therefore even God’s permissive will–which allow evil (and us the evil doers) to exist–results in good.

A world without the possibility of evil would be a world without freedom. And since Augustine identifies free will as the “image of God”… a world absent the possibility of evil would be a world absent us.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:%2F%2Fen.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FEpicurus&ved=0ahUKEwj-gu3yh7vXAhVIsFQKHQLpAGkQFggoMAI&usg=AOvVaw0fh4PDlMHTGcunV_Dwlzaz

~All credit on these 4 posts goes to an anonymous priest in Rome (he didnt have his name listed) from my deleted fb i copied a year ago from a similar question~

Hope it helped.

 

[MT1926]

I have found the only way to deal with Calvinists is to ask them questions on their position. You will never be able to prove the Catholic Church’s position to the them. I would not try to…

Any suggestions to stump Calvinists or to rather humble them in their haughty arrogance??

Just ask them to where is…

God wills that certain people go to hell from when they were made.

in the Bible?

They will most certainly “proof text out of context” at which point you could kindly ask “OK but how does this view line up this…?” Which will most likely be something contradictory stated on the same page of the Bible or the chapter before or after their Bible verse.

It’s not your job to convert the Calvinist. Your job is to plant seeds. Let the Holy Spirit do the rest.

If you want to learn more about the Calvinist view listen to “Called to Communion” on EWTN. Dr. Anders is a convert from Calvinist to Catholic.

God Bless

 

[Vonsalza]

Hello my friends The Peace of Christ be with you.

While on a message board that entailed news and politics I came across a few Calvinist types who said that God wills that certain people go to hell from when they were made…

Any suggestions to stump Calvinists or to rather humble them in their haughty arrogance??

Hugh

I used to be a Calvinist, so I was on the other guy’s side quite a few times in my youth.

First, establish with the guy that “critiquing Calvinism” and “evidencing Catholicism” are two separate activities. If his Calvinism is true, then it must stand on it’s own merit AND NOT ON THE PERCEIVED FAULTS OF OTHER RELIGIOUS VIEWS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CATHOLICISM.

That part is super-duper important. Calvinism doesn’t get to be true because Catholicism is false and vice-versa.

Once that is established, you run down the list;
Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints

Total depravity is something that they must continually retreat on when confronted with real life examples. An Indian Hindu man or woman dying for their family displays a virtue that is accomplished by someone who isn’t even remotely Christian. They may very well be partially depraved (as all humans are sinful), but TOTALLY depraved? Per Calvin? No - flatly refuted.

Unconditional election is roughed by the several examples in scripture that shows us that we must choose the righteous life. This is intimately related to Perseverance of the Saints, which is readily critiqued by scriptures that discuss the need to persevere and avoid “falling away”.

Limited atonement ends up being true in the end, but the blood of Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient for the cleansing of all humanity. He did not die for JUST the elect and we have ample scripture to show that.

Irresistible grace simply enjoys no real scriptural support whatsoever and exists primarily to make the rest of the system “work”. The closest I’ve seen when I was a Calvinist was God’s hardening of pharaoh’s heart, which is most definitely NOT the same thing. The context wasn’t remotely salvific and they do some pretty incredible “Presbyterian gymnastics” (context-stretching) to try and make it count.

All this is just a start. There’re plenty of good, Catholic authors that have addressed Calvinism from a Catholic view. Read a few and get comfortable with your arguments and re-engage! You probably won’t convert a guy that has hardened and insulated himself, but someone a little more “on-the-fence” may come your way.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Since there are some former Calvinists here, could one of them address what benefits Calvinists get out of a belief system that seems pretty harsh and unkind and also totally out of man’s control? I’ve been wondering since we studied Calvinism in high school why anyone would want to follow it. I must be missing some thing attractive about it?

 

[Vonsalza]

Since there are some former Calvinists here, could one of them address what benefits Calvinists get out of a belief system that seems pretty harsh and unkind and also totally out of man’s control? I’ve been wondering since we studied Calvinism in high school why anyone would want to follow it. I must be missing some thing attractive about it?

God is totally 100% in control. So much so that he cannot be defied.
This minimizes spiritual uncertainty, which people tend to dislike.

That and it’s a very tight system. Fanciful scriptural interpretations notwithstanding, it has very few (if any) loose ends or open-ended questions (read: doubt creators).

As a last addition: It’s considered by some to be the ultimate theological expression of western legalism. Man can effectively understand and systematize both God and creation with Calvinism.

 

[Gorgias]

Any suggestions to stump Calvinists or to rather humble them in their haughty arrogance??

Smile and tell them that you’re praying for their conversion of heart.

 

[exnihilo]

At this point I knew it was pointless to continue. What kind of God do these folks believe in?? He seems like a monster not a loving creator??

This is a great question. In my opinion it is like the God of Islam. Both try so hard to make God all powerful that they make God into a monster. In Islam God is capricious. He is not bound to logic or to His own word. There is no promise of God you can count on in Islam. This is because they wish God to be above anything. They want Him to be all powerful, to a fault.

The Catholic conception of God is that He is Justice. So while he could do anything he doesn’t do unjust things because He is just. He can’t lie not because of some lack of power but because He won’t because he is Truth. In Catholicism God’s omnipotence is, in a sense, limited by His goodness.

This isn’t true in Islam or Calvanism. So in Calvanism God creates some to be saved and some for Hell. This is ultimately because they want to maintain God’s power. It is God alone who saves, not man in any way. They don’t want to see the creature as doing anything to contribute to his destination. Because of this disposition to make God all powerful, to a fault, they end up with a monster God.

For me it is summed up in H. L. Mencken’s defintion of Puritanism (a form of Calvinism). He says it is,

The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Any suggestions to stump Calvinists or to rather humble them in their haughty arrogance??

Yeah, most Catholics don’t realize it, but if you know what to say, you can bring any Calvinist you want to their knees with a few great questions. Calvinism is 100% Pelagian, works-based, with zero Scriptural support, and that’s not an exaggeration. If you know what to say, you’ll have them hating the Bible and running away from the most innocent of questions.

Check out Luke 22:41 “And Jesus withdrew from them about a stone’s throw, and knelt down and prayed, saying, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.”

Here Jesus says that He has a will, and we can be sure Jesus had free will. This means free will is a real thing for humans, and it in no way interferes with God’s sovereignty nor does predestination exclude free will. Calvinists get all tangled in knots over this verse because it undermines everything they believe in. John Calvin even went so far as to say Jesus sinned here by going against God the Father’s Will. Calvinists cannot explain how Jesus could say this. They will typically say “Jesus wasn’t a fallen human,” which completely misses the point: Jesus had free will as a human. Period. And if the issue is about being unfallen, then that means Adam and Eve started off with free will as well.

For more simple yet devastating Biblical arguments, check out http://catholicnick.blogspot.com/

 

[MichaelP3]

not my will, but yours, be done.”

Here Jesus says that He has a will, and we can be sure Jesus had free will. This means free will is a real thing for humans, and it in no way interferes with God’s sovereignty nor does predestination exclude free will. Calvinists get all tangled in knots over this verse because it undermines everything they believe in. John Calvin even went so far as to say Jesus sinned here by going against God the Father’s Will. Calvinists cannot explain how Jesus could say this. They will typically say “Jesus wasn’t a fallen human,” which completely misses the point: Jesus had free will as a human. Period. And if the issue is about being unfallen, then that means Adam and Eve started off with free will as well.

Hi there.

Now I won’t proclaim myself a Calvinist but I don’t understand your argument?

You start of with by using Jesus as an example. Well the very essence of the Calvinist thought is that people " are a slave to sin". So that immediately excludes Jesus in any format whatsoever. That’s rather a verse a Mormon would use?

And Adam and Eve? Again. Calvinist thought would say they were created with free will and then the fall and then the “slave to sin”. Again not sure what the argument is?

Interestingly I would like to know where Calvin said Jesus sinned as he pretty much believed the Trinity as you and I.

And how is it Palagian? Please help me out there? It’s probably the most NON-PALAGIAN one out there?

Regards

 

[Catholic_Dude]

A fun verse I just remembered: “But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.” (1 Cor 11:32)

Paul is saying that in order to avoid being damned ‘along with the world’, God has to discipline Christians along their journey so as to keep them on the right track. That hardly makes sense in the Protestant/Calvinist view wherein a person is eternally secure the moment they believed. Their salvation is by no means based upon the “Imputed Righteousness of Christ,” since Paul is clear that they can still appear as sinful before God and require disciplining to get them to correct their lives.

 

[MichaelP3]

Yeah, most Catholics don’t realize it, but if you know what to say, you can bring any Calvinist you want to their knees with a few great questions.

I’d like to see you against James White. Maybe he will have a real challange this time!

 

[Catholic_Dude]

MichaelP3
Now I won’t proclaim myself a Calvinist but I don’t understand your argument? You start of with by using Jesus as an example. Well the very essence of the Calvinist thought is that people " are a slave to sin". So that immediately excludes Jesus in any format whatsoever. That’s rather a verse a Mormon would use? And Adam and Eve? Again. Calvinist thought would say they were created with free will and then the fall and then the “slave to sin”. Again not sure what the argument is?

Calvinists say that free will is a myth. They say free will by its very nature is incompatible with God’s sovereignty and predestination. The simple fact that Jesus had free will (as well as Adam and Eve) pretty much contradicts that claim. The correct conclusion is that predestination, sovereignty, and free will all are compatible, even if we cannot fully see how from our perspective.

Good questions. Here are my answers.

Interestingly I would like to know whete Calvin said Jesus sinned as he pretty much believed the Trinity as you and I.

Calvin says in his Commentary on the Gospels (HERE):
“There would be no absurdity in supposing that Christ, agreeably to the custom of the godly, leaving out of view the divine purpose, committed to the bosom of the Father his desire which troubled him. For believers, in pouring out their prayers, do not always ascend to the contemplation of the secrets of God, or deliberately inquire what is possible to be done, but are sometimes carried away hastily by the earnestness of their wishes. Thus Moses prays that he may be blotted out of the book of life, (Exodus 32:33 thus Paul wished to be made an anathema, 201 (Romans 9:3.) This, therefore, was not a premeditated prayer of Christ; but the strength and violence of grief suddenly drew this word from his mouth, to which he immediately added a correction. The same vehemence of desire took away from him the immediate recollection of the heavenly decree, so that he did not at that moment reflect, that it was on this condition, 202 that he was sent to be the Redeemer of mankind; as distressing anxiety often brings darkness over our eyes, so that we do not at once remember the whole state of the matter.”

In other words, Calvin says Jesus forgot why He was sent and turned his prayer of “take this cup from me” into a more or less selfish request, made without reflection, and that He quickly retracted his prayer (despite the fact the Gospels say Jesus prayed this three times total!).

 

[Catholic_Dude]

And how is it Palagian? Please help me out there? It’s probably the most NON-PALAGIAN one out there?

In the Protestant mind, works alone are what save. Not faith, not grace. In the Protestant mind, Adam was to be saved by living a life of perfect obedience (i.e. works alone), but since he fell into sin and so did we, man was no longer able to live a life of perfect obedience. The Protestant “solution” is that Jesus came in order to live a life of perfect obedience in our place and impute this to us, such that when we stand before God, He sees us as if we lived a life of flawless good works, and on this basis God “justifies” us. In other words, works alone save us, the Protestants are just sneaky by saying Jesus did those works for us. This is why Protestants always ask you, “How do you know you’re GOOD ENOUGH to get into heaven?” because they believe perfect lifetime of works is what gets us into Heaven, and they’re expecting you to try and claim you’re good enough so that they can turn around and say you’re not perfect enough and need Jesus to be perfect for you. This is the essence of Pelagianism, because Pelagius held to this exact same view.

This Protestant view is completely unbliblical and contrary to the Pauline Biblical Catholic view of salvation by grace alone through faith alone. Protestants, especially Calvinists, hold that if man cooperates with grace, then this somehow robs God of his glory. But the alternative is that man has to live a life of perfect obedience without cooperating with grace, which is precisely the thesis of Pelagius. Without grace accompanying man, when Adam sinned he couldn’t “fall from grace” in the Protestant view, only in the Catholic view. Pelagius concluded that since man couldn’t fall from grace, then man didn’t fall at all, while the Protestants went in the opposite direction and said since man couldn’t fall from grace then man’s nature must have gone rotten. The Augustinian Pauline Biblical Catholic view is that man from the very beginning was elevated by grace to a super-natural state, with the Holy Spirit indwelling in them, such that any obedience Adam did would in fact be cooperating with grace. John 1 even says that Jesus was “full of grace and truth” such that Jesus’s life was a constant cooperating with grace as well. Pelagians and Protestants cannot explain this because their view of human nature is wrong. They (Pelagians/Protestants) hold that man fell from a natural state to a less-than-natural state, while Catholics/Paul/Bible/Augustine hold that man fell from an elevated state of communion with the Trinity down to a merely natural state. It was as if Adam was wearing a cloak of power and was stripped naked. This is precisely how Adam was originally immortal, not that he couldn’t die by nature, since he was a mere creature and would have died naturally, but he was shielded by grace, and when he sinned he lost that shield and immediately became subject to the forces of decay and death.

 

[Os2Hugh]

Thank you. That is my goal to convince folks on the message boards that aren’t “Dug in” that just because the guy is quoting verses and insulting me doesn’t mean he is correct. I want other people to be able to see the Catholic position in it’s strongest light. I am sometimes affraid that I might actually not be debating well enough.

 

[steve-b]

And how is it Palagian? Please help me out there? It’s probably the most NON-PALAGIAN one out there?

An interesting take.

I have to say however, I personally never heard a Protestant say, salvation is by works. Where I run into Calvinist thought, is in their idea of universal salvation.

 

[Os2Hugh]

I still find it interesting how doggedly our protestant brothers but especially Calvinist cannot see that there understanding of scripture is based on viewing it through a Calvinist lens. This understandi would be the Calvinist tradition, would it not?