The Good News According to Calvin

  • Thread starter Thread starter CHESTERTONRULES
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Contarini said:
So you understand that for Calvinists grace affects how we behave?

In that case, what is your complaint? That a lifelong sinner who repents late in life will be saved, while another person can live an outwardly righteous life and be damned? That is not Calvinism. That’s just Christianity.

If you’re objecting to the predestination part (as I do), please explain briefly how the Calvinist view of predestination differs from the views of Augustine and Aquinas. (It does, but your posts haven’t shown any sensitivity to those nuances.)

Edwin
Click to expand...
Calvinists claim that we are all equally depraved but that our salvation has nothing to do with accepting God’s grace. God’s grace acts on those he chooses and he condems the rest with no regard to our actions, desires, or prayers.

Clearly, we need God’s grace, but it is up to us to respond.

What I find interesting is that Calvinists seem to find my opening statement offensive or inaccurate then they proceed to argue for that exact position.

Tell me, as a Calvinist defender, how can someone who is not predestined as elect get to heaven in your theology?

Tell me how someone who is predestined to heaven can end up in hell.
 
Reformed said:
Thanks for the post on the issue Edwin! 🙂

For those who think Calvinism leads to antinominism, please study the issues. I think antinominism is a bi-product of Arminianism and is not found in Reformed circles. Don’t you remember the Lordship controversay started about 15 years ago by John MacArthur? He jumped ship from Arminianism to Calvinism. All of those who fought against Lordship salvation came from the Arminian camp. Lordship has always been the Reformed position. Have you guys read books by the Puritans? They were on the far opposite end of antinomianism. Heck, I am reading a book by John Owen on mortfying the flesh from the verse in Romans 8. I think mainstream evangelicalism will agree with my posting.
Click to expand...
What is “mainstream evangelicalism”? These days it is certainly what you would call “Arminian” if it’s anything (which I would call watered-down Calvinism).

The problem is that Arminianism is not really one thing. It has popped up in different sectors of Protestantism at different times, with different theological starting points.

Wesleyans, for instance, are not antinomian at all. Are we Arminians? Traditionally we have called ourselves that. Charles Finney, on the other hand, repudiated the term but arguably was more “Arminian” (in the sense of being less Augustinian) than Wesley.

As I see it, the antinomian wing of evangelical Protestantism is “Arminian” in the sense that they’ve rejected at least three of the traditional five points of Calvinism. But they usually believe in eternal security, which is not an Arminian position. The problem is that they take forensic justification from classic Protestantism in general, eternal security from Calvinism, free will from Arminianism, and an emphasis on a conversion experience from the broad Pietist/evangelical tradition as a whole, and combine them into a noxious mix.

Edwin
 
RobHom said:
Your trite and pedantic response indicates clearly your lack of understanding the issue, especially where Catholics are concerned. In case you “failed to notice” Catholicism regards “calvinism” as a whole as “heresy”.

Then you truly fail to understand that which believe.

So you are saying that the t & u parts of tulip as I posted from that calvinist site are false and erroneous?

If this is the case, are you willing to tell the owner of that site that he is in error, does not know what he is talking about, and further …you want a retraction of the information and for it to be posted correctly? If not… you are talking to your hand.

You remind me of a child. :whackadoo: :whackadoo: :choocho: :choocho:

Face it sport…you just can’t handle the fact that the published information available concerning your “ersatz theology”. Not my fault you don’t understand what it says… Perhaps a refresher course on English comprehension at the local grade school might be of benefit?
Click to expand...
You’re very non-specific in your criticisms.

Perhaps you’ll go through my reponses to your points, point-by-point, and point out what you perceive as errors?
 
sandusky said:
So does the Scripture, and your church.
Click to expand...
Your “interpretations” of scripture are specious at best.

Your actual and factual knowledge of the Catholic Church is pathetic to the point of disgust.

Perhaps you could spend some time actually learning about what you have been “prattling” about…get some actual knowledge so that you can actual make an honest attempt to not mislead others whose knowledge is less than yours.

Might I also suggest that rather than continuing to embarrass yourself with your false witnessing and continuing campaign of disinformation…get your information straight. Otherwise, you will continue to look silly when you are refuted. I refuted you with fact, the only problem is that you don’t want to understand facts or can’t.

You can continue to dress your pet pig…but it will never be more than a pig.
 
sandusky said:
You’re very non-specific in your criticisms.

Perhaps you’ll go through my reponses to your points, point-by-point, and point out what you perceive as errors?
Click to expand...
No need to. You know precisely what I am talking about. Your entire last post…that was childish and beneath even you.
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
Calvinists claim that we are all equally depraved but that our salvation has nothing to do with accepting God’s grace.
Click to expand...
No, they do not believe this. I have explained this, and you said that you agreed. Then you go and say the opposite. Stop contradicting yourself!

For Calvinists, God’s grace moves us to repent and believe (accept God’s grace).
God’s grace acts on those he chooses and he condems the rest with no regard to our actions, desires, or prayers.
Click to expand...
Calvinists think that God has chosen from all eternity whom He will save, yes. He did not choose to save us because he foreknew that we would somehow deserve it. He chose this because He is merciful and gracious, and He then graciously moved us to accept His gift of forgiveness and eternal life, in accordance with His eternal purpose. So God’s predestining grace has no regard for our foreseen actions. Our actions follow from His grace.

This is where Aquinas is more complicated and more defensible. But as I said, you have shown no understanding of where Calvinists either agree with or differ from the Thomist/Augustinian tradition within Catholicism.
Clearly, we need God’s grace, but it is up to us to respond.
Click to expand...
We need to respond, yes. But we will only respond if God’s grace moves us to do so. The same grace that offers the gift moves us to accept it. That is not just Calvinism. It’s in Augustine.
What I find interesting is that Calvinists seem to find my opening statement offensive or inaccurate then they proceed to argue for that exact position.
Click to expand...
You are unwilling to think about the nuances of the issue. And it’s not just Calvinists who find your position inaccurate. I find it inaccurate, and I’m not a Calvinist. Steadfast and OSL aren’t either.
Tell me, as a Calvinist defender,
Click to expand...
I’m not a “Calvinist defender,” except in the sense that I’ll defend anyone who is being maligned.

I’m a church historian who studies the early stages of the Reformed tradition. I disagree with Calvinism, but I will not stand by and let people misrepresent it.
how can someone who is not predestined as elect get to heaven in your theology?
Click to expand...
By repenting and believing. Which they will not do, because they don’t want to.
Tell me how someone who is predestined to heaven can end up in hell.
Click to expand...
By rejecting God’s grace. Which, again, they will not do.

This is not just a Calvinist issue. Any orthodox Christian is going to have some kind of doctrine of predestination. Myself, I find the issue pretty much insoluble from a philosophical point of view. I am impressed by Thomism logically, but I find it cold-blooded (unless you go with universalism, which of course Thomists historically don’t). Calvinists, poor dears, run themselves into all sorts of difficulties by tying predestination directly into their soteriology, instead of leaving it as an abstruse philosophical issue.

Edwin
 
RobHom said:
No need to. You know precisely what I am talking about. Your entire last post…that was childish and beneath even you.
Click to expand...
My responses in that post are correct.

If you don’t think so, point out specifically where they err.
 
RobHom said:
Your trite and pedantic response indicates clearly your lack of understanding the issue, especially where Catholics are concerned. In case you “failed to notice” Catholicism regards “calvinism” as a whole as “heresy”.
Click to expand...
As a whole. But no heresy is wrong on every points. Do you understand the precise points on which Catholics are bound to consider Calvinism heretical? Suppose you name those points, so sandusky can respond to them instead of responding to vague, blanket condemnations?

Edwin
 
.
Myself, I find the issue pretty much insoluble from a philosophical point of view. I am impressed by Thomism logically, but I find it cold-blooded (unless you go with universalism, which of course Thomists historically don’t). Calvinists, poor dears, run themselves into all sorts of difficulties by tying predestination directly into their soteriology, instead of leaving it as an abstruse philosophical issue.
Click to expand...
I prefer Molinism.

The problem with Calvinism is that it can be devastating for those undergoing a temporary separation from God.

Someone very close to me is convinced they are destined for Hell because they are not one of the elect.

This is a direct result of the heretical teaching of the PCA that she attends.

Calvinism can lead people to hell by convincing them that all hope is lost.
 
40.png
CHESTERTONRULES:
That’s the point. For a Calvinists the ACCEPTANCE of God’s grace is irresistible. It is not an act of will by the individual, it is an act of will by God alone. It is not a cooperation with God’s grace.
Click to expand...
It’s an act of the will. A will made alive by God from having been dead in sins and trespasses.
40.png
CHESTERTONRULES:
What must an individual do to gain salvation from a Calvinistic perspective?
Click to expand...
Repent and believe the Gospel.
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
Contarini;4296703:
CHESTERTONRULES;4296673:
That is not accurate.

Calvinists claim that nothing we do has any impact on our salvation.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Then obviously I am not agreeing with you, right? Has it finally dawned on you that we are saying different things?

Glad we got that settled.:confused:

Clearly sandusky agrees with me, with the possible exception that he didn’t mention perseverance. However, other Calvinists I have talked to see “salvation” as the entire process, including sanctification and glorification. I think Sandusky is giving a more Baptist interpretation here.

Anyway, until you find a Calvinist to tell me I’m wrong, I don’t see why I should listen to you. You are not a Calvinist or, as far as I know, an expert on Calvinism. You have one Calvinist and one person with a Ph.D. in the study of the Reformation telling you that you are wrong. Don’t you think a little more study might be in order?

Chesterton does rule, BTW, but not as an interpreter of Calvinism.

Edwin
Click to expand...
 
sandusky said:
My responses in that post are correct.

If you don’t think so, point out specifically where they err.
Click to expand...
As I consider your above already asked and answered, I won’t bother. I have already provided detailed and concise answers backed with facts, as have others. You are apparently too full of pride and arrogance to admit you don’t understand the issue, or admit your error. You have already been proven wrong by more than one besides me, but you haven’t the good sense to know when to quit.
 
RobHom said:
As I consider your above already asked and answered, I won’t bother. I have already provided detailed and concise answers backed with facts, as have others. You are apparently too full of pride and arrogance to admit you don’t understand the issue, or admit your error. You have already been proven wrong by more than one besides me, but you haven’t the good sense to know when to quit.
Click to expand...
OK, my post stands.
 
CHESTERTONRULES said:
.

I prefer Molinism.
Click to expand...
I respect that. Although you do know that some Molinists (including, I believe, Molina himself) believe(d) in predestination ante praevisa merita, right? Molinism is not in fact an opinion about the basis for predestination, but an opinion about how God brings it about that the elect are saved. Thomists hold that God causes the elect to repent, believe, and persevere by giving them effectual grace; Molinism holds that God uses middle knowledge to put the elect in the circumstances that will lead them to repent, believe, and persevere. One can of course use Molinism to support predestination post praevisa merita–since middle knowledge offers a way this might work (God saves everyone except those whom He knows, by middle knowledge, will not believe no matter what; or He somehow gives everyone an equal chance and has predestined those whom He knows by middle knowledge will use that chance well; or perhaps some other way I haven’t figured out–I really think it’s more complicated than it seems when you stop to think about it). But Molinism does not require one to do so.
The problem with Calvinism is that it can be devastating for those undergoing a temporary separation from God.
Click to expand...
Someone very close to me is convinced they are destined for Hell because they are not one of the elect.
Click to expand...
Yes. One hears such stories. IMy parents met people like that in Scotland. I’ve never met anyone who is convinced of this, but I have known at least one Presbyterian who worried about it.
This is a direct result of the heretical teaching of the PCA that she attends.
Click to expand...
Has she talked to her pastor? Calvinists have developed ways of dealing with this problem pastorally.

And if you read medieval literature you find people worrying about it there too. Dante talks about this, and so does William Langland. It’s not a problem that originated with Calvinism.

I understand that this is a personal issue for you. But this is a discussion board–I can’t let you misrepresent Calvinism just because of your personal feelings about it. (Well, obviously I can’t stop you, but I can protest and try to convince you.)
Calvinism can lead people to hell by convincing them that all hope is lost.
Click to expand...
I have a stronger opinion of God’s mercy than you appear to. If you think that God damns people because they were tormented by unorthodox teaching, then I don’t see how you can accuse Calvinists of cruelty:rolleyes:

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top