Are there any Calvinists on this forum?

[migurl]

I get it now!!! Calvinists believe that God supports abortion!!! He creates wonderful human beings with souls, and then, instead of holding them to His heart and doing all that He can to bring them home to Him, he just calls for the suction tube or lethal dose of saline…or better yet, since eternal damnation is terribly painful, I guess He’d just go ahead, get them almost “born” and then stop them before they get to where they are going and jab a pair of scissors in the base of their skulls!!1 Wow, here I thought God was kind, loving, forgiving and desired all of His creations to be with Him in paradise. Thanks all for clearing that up for me.

 

[norwester]

Is this Catholicism? I have learned a lot.

 

[sandusky]

migurl:

I get it now!!! Calvinists believe that God supports abortion!!! He creates wonderful human beings with souls, and then, instead of holding them to His heart and doing all that He can to bring them home to Him, he just calls for the suction tube or lethal dose of saline…or better yet, since eternal damnation is terribly painful, I guess He’d just go ahead, get them almost “born” and then stop them before they get to where they are going and jab a pair of scissors in the base of their skulls!!1 Wow, here I thought God was kind, loving, forgiving and desired all of His creations to be with Him in paradise. Thanks all for clearing that up for me.

Do you really believe this?

I will chalk this up to you having a bad day.

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

I agree. A revert is a Catholic that has left the church, and then repented of his unfaithfulness and returned to the true faith. Most reverts become heretics, not atheists, when they leave the church. When they are apart from the church, reverts mostly either join Protestant sects, or drift around for a while as lukewarm unchurched dissenters that confess a do-your-own-thing mixture of Christian doctrine and heresy.

From what sin is the Catholic Revert repenting?

 

[sandusky]

Catholic Dude:

I have had the same question, here is my example I have been asking Calvinists:

I see Calvinism like this, lets say man is a ball and God is a hand, the goal is to get the ball to the other end of the field (heaven)…the ball cant move at all and resides in the mud (sin)…in that mud it can only sink (total depravity), if it wants, the hand can enact a force on that ball via the hand throwing it (grace), that ball cant resist that force and goes freely with it in the same direction (irresistable grace), this can go on forever because that force is so powerful (God’s grace is able to keep a person going all the way to heaven)…yet somehow that ball doesnt stay moving in that direction and gravity (temptation to sin) overcomes it and it starts to fall downward, if it hits the ground (in sin) it is lifeless and dead unless the hand picks it up again.
How did gravity overcome the powerful force?

I don’t agree with your analogy. Let me give you one you an analogy that I think a Calvinist will agree with.

Since you are using a ball and field analogy, I’ll do the same.

Here is my analogy of Biblical salvation:

A baseball field, a rainy day; the pitcher, The Father, with rain-soaked and muddy baseballs at His feet, is on the mound. The Son is behind the plate; the Holy Spirit, is in the air.

The Father selects a ball (Rom 8:29-30; Eph 1:4-5). He gathers the dirty ball into His mitt, winds up, and throws. The ball begins it travels on an erratic path; at the predetermined time, the Holy Spirit enters the ball, cleans it off (Titus 3:5), and through His will keeps the ball’s trajectory true, guiding it into The Son’s mitt (Phil 1:6).

Along the way, the ball encounters various obstacles, such as an off-center headwind, particles of dirt and dust, and other such things. Regardless of the obstacles, the ball reaches its predestined destination, because it is under the protective and guiding influence of the three players

The Father elects, (Rom 8:29-30)
The Son effects, (1 Pet 3:18)
The Spirit applies, (Titus 3:50
The sinner believes with the faith God gave him (Eph 2:8ff)

Ask the Calvinist if that is accurate.

 

[deb1]

This might be a stupid question but…Do Calvinist not believe in invincible ignorance? That is the belief that if a person, through no fault of their own, never hears of Jesus then that person won’t automatically go to hell. Forgive me if I haven’t stated the belief well, I am still in RCIA.

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

From what sin is the Catholic Revert repenting?

Sins (plural) not sin.

Reverts are people that once quit practicing Catholicism, which means they quit going to the Sacrament of Reconcilliation. Typically, when the revert desires reconcilliation with Christ’s church, he goes to the Sacrament of Reconcilliation and repents of moral sins (e.g. practicing artificial contraception) and he repents of heresies wrought by the private interpretation of scriptures.

What sins do “elect” Calvinists repent of?If we say, “We are without sin,” we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we acknowledge our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from every wrongdoing. If we say, “We have not sinned,” we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
1John 1:8-9

 

[Matt16_18]

deb1:

This might be a stupid question but…Do Calvinist not believe in invincible ignorance? That is the belief that if a person, through no fault of their own, never hears of Jesus then that person won’t automatically go to hell.

The Calvinists that I know believe that all non-Christians are going to hell, and that most Christians are really “false believers” that are going to hell also.

According to Calvinists, the “elect” is a very tiny portion of humanity. God creates most people for eternal damnation in the fires of hell, which is some unexplained way, supposedly brings glory to God.

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

Sins (plural) not sin.

Reverts are people that once quit practicing Catholicism…

Is that the sin of apostasy?

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

Is that the sin of apostasy?

No. Apostasy is not the same thing as heresy, incredulity, or schism. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2089

Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.

"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;

apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;

schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

 

[Philthy]

Hi Sandusky! :tiphat:

Did you inadvertantly miss my post 186? I know you ar greatly outnumbered here, but if you get the chance I would appreciate hearing your thoughts…

Thanks,

Phil

 

[migurl]

sandusky:

Do you really believe this?

I will chalk this up to you having a bad day.

I can’t think of any other way to explain why anyone would believe in a God who creates souls for the purpose of suffering eternity in hell! I mean, what is the point? Can you answer that? I mean, if God gives us free will and we choose to sin and then we made the choices that got us sent to hell, but if God just decides that “hey, this soul is going to hell” then we are no different than the aborted child who has no choice in the matter. Come on, would you have sex, and purposly concieve a child just to abort it? I’d hope not. Most people wouldn’t do that so why would God do it? If you had two kids, would you raise one as best you could and another to lie and do other horrible things just to make the first look like a saint? I’d really hope not.

 

[sandusky]

Migurl:

I can’t think of any other way to explain why anyone would believe in a God who creates souls for the purpose of suffering eternity in hell! I mean, what is the point? Can you answer that? I mean, if God gives us free will and we choose to sin and then we made the choices that got us sent to hell, but if God just decides that “hey, this soul is going to hell” then we are no different than the aborted child who has no choice in the matter.

I have dealt with that earlier in this thread.

Romans 9:17-23
17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.”
18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”
20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,

Migurl, read v23, there is the answer to WHY God does this.

Matt16_18 says that it is the Calvinist who says that somehow God gets glory through sending people to hell.

Here we see that it is, in fact, Paul who says that God is making His glory known to the ones He determined beforehand to save.

The answer in v23 is not my opinion, it is what God has revealed.

I am giving THE answer from Scripture, and not my opinion

 

[sandusky]

Deb1:

This might be a stupid question but…Do Calvinist not believe in invincible ignorance? That is the belief that if a person, through no fault of their own, never hears of Jesus then that person won’t automatically go to hell. Forgive me if I haven’t stated the belief well, I am still in RCIA.

Based on your question, you understand that people are saved through Christ. Scripture says that all man have an innate knowledge of God and that is also a consideration of God’s judgment.

Gen 18:25 finishes with the rhetorical question, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?” The expected answer is, “yes, He will.” That is probably the basis for the invincible ignorance. So I do believe that God does only what is just, and only what is right, He is never wrong.

I don’t how that squares with invincible ignorance as articulated by the CCC, but it probably agrees in general.

The one problem I have with the way you phrased your question, “through no fault of their own,” assume some innocence on the part of the person in question. I believe that Scripture is also clear that no one is innocent of the crime of rebellion.

 

[sandusky]

Philthy:

Hi Sandusky! :tiphat:

Did you inadvertantly miss my post 186? I know you ar greatly outnumbered here, but if you get the chance I would appreciate hearing your thoughts…

Thanks,

Phil

Didn’t realize you were expecting a response, thought you were just telling me my answers were not answers.

So in response, I am sorry that the answers I gave were not the answers you were expecting me to give.

It seems that you have something you want to say about all of that. Why not just say it?

 

[sandusky]

Matt16_18:

No. Apostasy is not the same thing as heresy, incredulity, or schism.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2089

Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.

"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;

apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;

schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

So, apostasy is not a repudiation of Catholic faith, but of the Christian faith. So one could be guilty of the sin of incredulity, and not be an apostate; or, one could be a heretic, and not be an apostate; or, one could be a schismatic, and not be an apostate; or, one could be any combination of those in any one of the 33,000 Christian denominations, and not be an apostate. Is that correct?

When did that change? As I recall, and I don’t have any sources in front of me, but apostasy used to be defined by the RCC as an “abandonment of religious orders; renunciation of ecclesiastical authority; defection from the [Catholic] faith.”

When did that change?

 

[deb1]

sandusky:

Based on your question, you understand that people are saved through Christ. Scripture says that all man have an innate knowledge of God and that is also a consideration of God’s judgment.

Gen 18:25 finishes with the rhetorical question, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?” The expected answer is, “yes, He will.” That is probably the basis for the invincible ignorance. So I do believe that God does only what is just, and only what is right, He is never wrong.

I don’t how that squares with invincible ignorance as articulated by the CCC, but it probably agrees in general.

The one problem I have with the way you phrased your question, “through no fault of their own,” assume some innocence on the part of the person in question. I believe that Scripture is also clear that no one is innocent of the crime of rebellion.

Thank you for answering the question. Just to clarify, if say a bushman in Africa has never heard the gospel then Calvinist do not think that he is automatically going to hell? I am curious because I have come across a fewpeople that would think that he-the bushman- is doomed because he has never had the opportunity to reject Jesus. In all honesty I have no idea if these people were Calvinists or some other school of thought.

 

[sandusky]

deb1:

Thank you for answering the question. Just to clarify, if say a bushman in Africa has never heard the gospel then Calvinist do not think that he is automatically going to hell? I am curious because I have come across a fewpeople that would think that he-the bushman- is doomed because he has never had the opportunity to reject Jesus. In all honesty I have no idea if these people were Calvinists or some other school of thought.

You’re welcome.

I assume from what you have said above, that you understand that a Calvinist agrees with you: God does what is just, or right, and God never does what is wrong.

No Calvinist believes that God sends innocent people to hell, but the guilty only.

Yet, in spite of not hearing the Gospel, I must say that the bushman is sent to hell.

That puzzles you.

Your presumption is that the bushman is innocent, and so, God should do what is right, and not condemn him; but is the bushman innocent?

The Calvinist believes he is guilty.

In the U.S., and other places, the legal system presumes a man innocent, until he is proven guilty.

The Scripture does not know of such innocence, but says that all men are guilty of breaking God’s law.

No man is righteous (Rom 3:10ff), all men have sinned, and continue to sin (Rom 3:23), God’s Word has confined (as fish in a net) all men under sin (Gal. 3:22). There are only guilty men.

Another presumption that underlies your question, is that God is obligated to make sure that all men hear the Gospel. I don’t believe that God has obligated Himself to that. God is obligated to do only that which He has promised to do. God has not promised to save all men; therefore, He is under no obligation to ensure that all men hear the Gospel; and God is not wrong in condemning those to hell who have not heard the Gospel, because He has already declared them guilty.

The bushman, not hearing the Gospel, may have his punishment lessened; nevertheless, his guilt is not lessened because he never had the opportunity to reject the Gospel.

Does that help you understand the Calvinist’s answer to the bushman’s dilemma?

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

So, apostasy is not a repudiation of Catholic faith, but of the Christian faith. So one could be guilty of the sin of incredulity, and not be an apostate; or, one could be a heretic, and not be an apostate; or, one could be a schismatic, and not be an apostate; or, one could be any combination of those in any one of the 33,000 Christian denominations, and not be an apostate. Is that correct?

Apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith. A Catholic can become a Protestant heretic and not be guilty of the sin of apostasy. Protestants that convert to the Catholic faith are not required to confess the sin of apostasy, they are only required to renounce the heresies of Protestantism.

When did that change? As I recall, and I don’t have any sources in front of me, but apostasy used to be defined by the RCC as an “abandonment of religious orders; renunciation of ecclesiastical authority; defection from the [Catholic] faith.”

When did that change?

It hasn’t changed. I know priests and nuns that have left the religious life that are still good practicing Catholics. They are anything but apostates.

 

[Matt16_18]

sandusky:

Calvinist believes that God sends innocent people to hell, but the guilty only.

The Calvinist redefines in an irrational manner of what constitutes guilt and innocence. But true Christians will never accept the Calvinist revisionism on this point since it is nothing but rank heresy.

The Calvinist believes that the man created by God for damnation is predestined by God to commit sin the sins he commits. The damned man is “guilty” of actions that he had no choice but to commit, which means that he is not really guilty of anything at all.

According to Calvinists, the damned man was forced by the omnipotent power of God to commit his “sins”. In Calvinism, God is the source of all that is sick, depraved and evil in the world, and evil manifests itself in the world by the actions of totally depraved men who do only what God wills for them.

According to Calvinism, the man created for damnation was never once disobedient to the will of God – he was, in fact, innocent of being disobedient to the will of God. The God of Calvinism does condemn the innocent, because he condenms those who were innocent of being disobedient to his will.

Calvinists blaspheme God when they assert the all holy God is not only the source of all good, but also the source of all evil.