Calvinism for my Catholic siblings

  • Thread starter Thread starter 2nd_Adam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Don’t think the moderators are ignorant about Reformed Theology or monergism.com. Heck, the Westminister Confession of Faith states that the Pope is from the spirit of the anti-Christ. The Council of Trent is not too Protestant friendly either. So, are you guys opposed to any attempt of ecumenism and unity between Evangelical and Catholics alike?
I think it is great that we try to find common ground but you must understand that the hostility that exists is not because of the common ground, it is because of the differences. We must fully understand what each other believe before we can dialog.

I warn any Catholic that wants to dialog with most Calvinists. The goal will be to convert you from the heretical Catholic church and not to understand you. You paint a picture that I have never seen in my nearly 20 years as a staunch Calvinist.
 
It’s a juggling act for everyone. I personally believe in remnant theology, and the concept of the visible and invislbe church. Heck the Catholic Church has way better theology than many of the liberal Protestant churches. And how many Protestants even understand imputation, forensic justification and substutional atonement?
Can you expound on “remnant theology”? I think I have a general idea what is but I’d like more of an explanation on your part.
 
2ndAdam, I think it would be great if you would review my understanding of the five points and help me understand where Calvinism and Catholicism are in agreement. These are the major tenants of your belief system and Calvinists will tend to argue that those that do not hold such beliefs are not truly saved. If we do not have agreement we should then discuss each point until we resolve the differences.
 
I think it is great that we try to find common ground but you must understand that the hostility that exists is not because of the common ground, it is because of the differences. We must fully understand what each other believe before we can dialog.

I warn any Catholic that wants to dialog with most Calvinists. The goal will be to convert you from the heretical Catholic church and not to understand you. You paint a picture that I have never seen in my nearly 20 years as a staunch Calvinist.
I have had 2,500 posts for others to discern on this site. Maybe I am no longer a staunch Calvinist, but rather I am a Christian first, Evangelical second, and a Calvinist 3rd. Calvinism does not save. And yes, I believe in a forensic justification, subsitutional atonement, and imputation. However, I believe God saves sinners apart from perfect theology. I know in part just like everyone else united to Christ. That is laying the cards on the table.
 
Okay, so what are you trying to say?
You have to be kidding, right? You claimed that my statement on MacArthur was not true and I PROVED to you that it was. You then questioned whether you ever said it was not true. I show you that you did say it and now you are confused.

I am beginning to question your true intentions. You seem to attempt to confuse and misdirect the real issues and questions. I will assure you that I am all too familiar with these tactics, I even taught them for many years. Please stay on track, answer the questions and don’t misdirect.
 
You have to be kidding, right? You claimed that my statement on MacArthur was not true and I PROVED to you that it was. You then questioned whether you ever said it was not true. I show you that you did say it and now you are confused.

I am beginning to question your true intentions. You seem to attempt to confuse and misdirect the real issues and questions. I will assure you that I am all too familiar with these tactics, I even taught them for many years. Please stay on track, answer the questions and don’t misdirect.
Izoid,

I think you have pushed me a little too far, requiring a break from Catholic Answers for a few days. We are not enemies.
 
I think it is GREAT that you are not a staunch Calvinist anymore, good for you. You posted a thread entitled, “Calvinism…” and I think that it is important that the TRUE Calvinist beliefs be discussed.

From your post it seems like you have moved away from Calvinism and I think that is good. Maybe a better title for the thread would have been…my move from Calvinism.
 
Izoid,

I think you have pushed me a little too far, requiring a break from Catholic Answers for a few days. We are not enemies.
Certainly not my intentions, I am sorry you are taking a break.

I was a pastor in a very conservative church. I taught evangelism for many years and one of the key tactics was to use misdirection, answer questions with other questions. Confusion was also a great tactic, twist responses to put the other person on the defensive. I saw those tactics in your posts and assumed you were doing it on purpose. If not, I am sorry and hope you do not leave.
 
Certainly not my intentions, I am sorry you are taking a break.

I was a pastor in a very conservative church. I taught evangelism for many years and one of the key tactics was to use misdirection, answer questions with other questions. Confusion was also a great tactic, twist responses to put the other person on the defensive. I saw those tactics in your posts and assumed you were doing it on purpose. If not, I am sorry and hope you do not leave.
you are so right by this statement.

👍👍
 
Has anyone here heard Steve Wood’s show about Calvinism and Catholicism?

Awesome. Just Awesome.
 
I think it is great that we try to find common ground but you must understand that the hostility that exists is not because of the common ground, it is because of the differences. We must fully understand what each other believe before we can dialog.

I warn any Catholic that wants to dialog with most Calvinists. The goal will be to convert you from the heretical Catholic church and not to understand you. You paint a picture that I have never seen in my nearly 20 years as a staunch Calvinist.
hi izoid. dont worry about that. former calvinist myself. they cant sway me. i belive calvin was a liar, and worse. its always good to look at the founder of any movement. calvin has been weighed, measured, and has been found wanting. God bless you and yours.🙂
 
I think most people here are quite savvy and aware of the techniques. I recently read a post by a confused 14 year old and it is those people that my warning goes out too. 2ndAdam presents Calvinism and those that teach it as being compassionate towards Catholicism and directs us to Calvinist websites. I have attempted to show how top voices in Calvinism are hostile towards us Catholics. I found the following from J I Packer, who signed ECT, and it clearly demonstrates hostility towards those that do not subscrib to Calvinist thought, particularly Arminianism which is a differing Protestant thought.

Excert from, reformationtheology.com/2006/10/j_i_packer_on_calvinism.php

Calvinism is the natural theology written on the heart of the new man in Christ, whereas Arminianism is an intellectual sin of infirmity, natural only in the sense in which all such sins are natural, even to the regenerate. Calvinistic thinking is the Christian being himself on the intellectual level; Arminian thinking is the Christian failing to be himself through the weakness of the flesh.

Calvinism is what the Christian church has always held and taught when its mind has not been distracted by controversy and false traditions from attending to what Scripture actually says; that is the significance of the patristic testimonies to the teaching of the ‘five points’, which can be quoted in abundance.
 
I too have contributed to an earlier thread in apology of the doctrines of grace as delivered through Christ and the Apostles in the peace and purity of the Church. I’m here, at Catholic Answers. I cherish opportunities to love all my family in Christ and in Him to help resolve enmity among dear Christian brethren and facilitate an honourable understanding of one another.

Shall I further tell you what TULIP is?
It is a test and opportunity to “preserve the unity of the Spirit by the peace that binds [us] together” (Eph. 4:3, NJB). The “unity of the Spirit” is eternally established among all believers despite our doctrinal differences. All true believers are members of Christ’s Body, which is indivisible. TULIP is one of but a myriad of opportunities dating back to the Apostle Paul’s first rebuke of the most prominent Apostle Peter, when Peter began to misrepresent the Gospel by separating in fear from eating with gentiles, in defiance of faith in Christ*. The challenge, which was well met by both Paul and Peter, was to navigate, “but even if we ourselves or an angel from heaven preaches to you a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let God’s curse be on him” (Gal. 1:8, NJB), and, “For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6, NAB), toward, “for the whole law is fulfilled in one statement, namely, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ But if you go on biting and devouring one another, beware that you are not consumed by one another” (5:14,15, NAB), and, “brothers, even if a person is caught in some transgression, you who are spiritual should correct that one in a gentle spirit, looking to yourself, so that you also may not be tempted” (6:1, NAB), so that we might, “let all our actions be for the good of everybody, and especially of those who belong to the household of the faith” (6:10, NJB). In summary, TULIP is a providence of God toward facilitating His love, in rising above human limitations and enmity of misunderstandings toward that most glorious of divine gifts, the embrace of communal reverence and charitable empathy.

Calvinistic Christians love God and esteem Him the God of Love - holy, sovereign, full of grace and mercy, and victoriously omnipotent over sin, death, and any affront to His majesty. “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts!..All the earth is filled with his glory!” (Isa.6:3, NAB). Non-Calvinistic Christians love God and esteem Him the God of Love – holy, accommodating in grace and mercy, and respectful of man’s decisions and responsibilities. “But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the desires of the flesh” (Rom. 13:14, NAB). Neither hold God as the author of sin, nor that He does violence to the will of His creatures, nor that a liberty of secondary causes is removed by His sovereignty.

The real test of TULIP, as with any delving into understanding God through revelation, Scripture, and Christian tradition, is whether or not we will prove our love of God by loving one another amidst our human limitations.

I think,
We all agree that man needs God’s grace, which TULIP affirms.
We all agree that God chooses men to salvation through Christ, which TULIP affirms.
We all agree that Christ’s blood is applied to the debt of life man owes to God, which TULIP affirms.
We all agree that God’s grace effectively accomplishes that to which it is applied, which TULIP affirms.
And, we all agree that God is Almighty, able to eternally preserve whatever He destines to preserve.
  • Gal. 2:11-16, NJB. “However, when Cephas came to Antioch, then I did oppose him to his face since he was manifestly in the wrong. Before certain people from James came, he used to eat with gentiles; but as soon as these came, he backed out and kept apart from them, out of fear of the circumcised. And the rest of the Jews put on the same act as he did, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their insincerity.
    When I saw, though, that their behaviour was not true to the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of all of them, ‘Since you, though you are a Jew, live like the gentiles and not like the Jews, how can you compel the gentiles to live like the Jews?’
    We who were born Jews and not gentile sinners have nevertheless learnt that someone is reckoned as upright not by practicing the Law but by faith in Jesus Christ; and we too came to believe in Christ Jesus so as to be reckoned as upright by faith in Christ and not by practising the Law: since no human being can be found upright by keeping the Law.”
    NAB Confraternity of Christian Doctrine note from 2:18: “To return to observance of the law as the means to salvation would entangle one not only in inevitable transgressions of it but also in the admission that it was wrong to have abandoned the law in the first place.”
    :hug1:
 
Hey, we all know there are differences between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. We all seem to agree those differences are significant and important and require a great measure of love, civility, and patient wading through God’s revelation to adequately engage. :hug1:
 
Hey, we all know there are differences between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. We all seem to agree those differences are significant and important and require a great measure of love, civility, and patient wading through God’s revelation to adequately engage. :hug1:
Very true.

Let’s take a look at a Pascal’s wager type of analysis.
  1. If strict 5 points Calvinism is true, then the elect have nothing to worry about and the non elect are hopelessly lost anyway.
This being the case, why bother evengelizing?
  1. If strict 5 points Calvinism is not true, and we are all responsible for our actions on earth, then every single person has the opporunity for salvation. In this case, we have a lot of work to do.
If 1 is true, then our efforts while thinking 2 is true won’t matter one bit.

If 2 is true, you might end up as a goat, so to speak.

Does this make sense to you?
 
…why bother evengelizing?
God commands it.
Matthew 28:18-20, NAB: Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. 13 And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”
Romans 10:12-17, NAB: For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, enriching all who call upon him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” But how can they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone to preach? And how can people preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring (the) good news!” But not everyone has heeded the good news; for Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what was heard from us?” Thus faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ.
  1. If strict 5 points Calvinism is not true, and we are all responsible for our actions on earth, then every single person has the opportunity for salvation. In this case, we have a lot of work to do.
If 1 is true, then our efforts while thinking 2 is true won’t matter one bit.

If 2 is true, you might end up as a goat, so to speak.

Does this make sense to you?
Hmm… I hold, as did Calvin, that Calvinism is true to God’s revelation of truth AND we are responsible for our actions, which Calvinism affirms. I’m no stranger to non-Calvinistic considerations of Calvinism otherwise, regarding how humans are responsible under an almighty, sovereign Lord whose purposes cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2, NAB; “I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be hindered.”), but to quote myself, our confession is that we, “neither hold God as the author of sin, nor that He does violence to the will of His creatures, nor that a liberty of secondary causes is removed by His sovereignty.” (cf. Westminster Confession, V.II. “Although in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first cause, all things come to pass immutably and infallibly, yet, by the same providence, he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently.”).

Calvinism (insomuch as it relates specifically to Calvin) generally also affirms that every single person has the opportunity for salvation and the responsibility to rightly respond to God’s commands. The epistemology of opportunity and responsibility seems to be that which colours Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic perspectives with so much froth - we are strained to see eye-to-eye on a divine perspective of how God can be God as the very definition of holiness, sovereignty, justice, and love, while His creature, man, is yet freely responsible to be perfectly good, obedient, and completely responsive in love to the glory of God, his Creator, where man evidences himself to be none of these. A Calvinistic perspective emphasises opportunity and responsibility as within the confines of God’s sovereignty and decree. A non-Calvinistic perspective emphasises opportunity and responsibility as within the responsiveness of man in reflection of the image of his Creator. Both perspectives seek to honour God’s goodness amidst origins of sin and aspects of the nature of man undisclosed in God’s revelation.

Both positions have their share of such ardent supporters as to err into inappropriate judgment of others with whom they disagree, which, for sure, seems at times far more goat-like than sheep-like, and has the distracting effect of too often scaring the “good” news out of any goat which might otherwise be attracted to sheep. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top