The Practical Implications of Calvinism

[Humble_Disciple]

Anti-Calvinists often make claims about the practical implications of Calvinism, such as Calvinism somehow being anti-mission, that have little to nothing to do with what Calvinists actually believe.

This article presents nine positive aspects of Calvinism if it were actually true:
https://founders.org/2017/05/11/some-practical-implications-of-calvinism/

Of these nine points, are there any that you would disagree with, and if so, why? Can you please explain how any of these points is not reflective of what Calvinism is in reality?

I am not posting this to start a debate, but only that there can hopefully be better understanding of why Calvinists believe what they do. Not only are the five points of Calvinism Biblical, there are practical benefits for our everyday lives that are presented in the above article.

Is anyone able to explain how these practical implications presented aren't true?

 

[HTacianas]

Anti-Calvinists often make claims about the practical implications of Calvinism, such as Calvinism somehow being anti-mission, that have little to nothing to do with what Calvinists actually believe.

This article presents nine positive aspects of Calvinism if it were actually true:
https://founders.org/2017/05/11/some-practical-implications-of-calvinism/

Of these nine points, are there any that you would disagree with, and if so, why? Can you please explain how any of these points is not reflective of what Calvinism is in reality?

I am not posting this to start a debate, but only that there can hopefully be better understanding of why Calvinists believe what they do. Not only are the five points of Calvinism Biblical, there are practical benefits for our everyday lives that are presented in the above article.

Is anyone able to explain how these practical implications presented aren't true?

For instance, take the very first one:

1. Calvinism gives us confidence in the Bible’s sufficiency.

As we were discussing in the thread below, Calvinism is directly contrary to the bible. How then can Calvinism give us confidence in the bible's sufficiency when it directly contradicts it?

Free will or predestination?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Anti-Calvinists often make claims about the practical implications of Calvinism, such as Calvinism somehow being anti-mission, that have little to nothing to do with what Calvinists actually believe.

This article presents nine positive aspects of Calvinism if it were actually true:
https://founders.org/2017/05/11/some-practical-implications-of-calvinism/

Of these nine points, are there any that you would disagree with, and if so, why? Can you please explain how any of these points is not reflective of what Calvinism is in reality?

I am not posting this to start a debate, but only that there can hopefully be better understanding of why Calvinists believe what they do. Not only are the five points of Calvinism Biblical, there are practical benefits for our everyday lives that are presented in the above article.

Is anyone able to explain how these practical implications presented aren't true?

Calvinism directly attacks the "goodness of God", which:

Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

Calvinism presents a cruel uncaring God. It prevents sinners from coming to Christ, shrouding the nature of God.

Is Predestination real? | Everybody Matters Ministry

 

[Dave L]

If Calvinism is true, how many hate God and worship idols bearing Christ's name instead? Be careful in how you handle this discussion.

 

[Mark Quayle]

For instance, take the very first one:

1. Calvinism gives us confidence in the Bible’s sufficiency.

As we were discussing in the thread below, Calvinism is directly contrary to the bible. How then can Calvinism give us confidence in the bible's sufficiency when it directly contradicts it?

Free will or predestination?

Circular reasoning.

 

[JesusFreak78]

Calvinism directly attacks the "goodness of God", which:

How does it attack the goodness of God?

Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

Calvinism presents a cruel uncaring God. It prevents sinners from coming to Christ, shrouding the nature of God.

Is Predestination real? | Everybody Matters Ministry

This post shows that you don't know the Calvinistic position on Biblical doctrine. There is no "cruel uncaring" God in Calvinistic theology.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Calvinism directly attacks the "goodness of God", which:

Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

Calvinism presents a cruel uncaring God. It prevents sinners from coming to Christ, shrouding the nature of God.

Is Predestination real? | Everybody Matters Ministry

How so? Most Calvinists I read don't go far enough in showing God's absolute control over all things. Yet I see more reason through the truths of Calvinism to believe in the goodness of God than in other other theology.

 

[Mark Quayle]

For instance, take the very first one:

1. Calvinism gives us confidence in the Bible’s sufficiency.

As we were discussing in the thread below, Calvinism is directly contrary to the bible. How then can Calvinism give us confidence in the bible's sufficiency when it directly contradicts it?

Free will or predestination?

Quoted from your link: Some Practical Implications of Calvinism

1. Calvinism gives us confidence in the Bible’s sufficiency.

God saves His chosen people through the Word of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:18). That means preachers have no need to use innovation in persuading anyone of the gospel. The salvation of souls depends on the gospel, faithfully preached and effectively applied by the Holy Spirit, not on the creativity or ingenuity of the preacher. This implication is wonderfully freeing to the preacher.

If we preach the gospel and people do not believe our message, then we know it is not because there is any problem with the gospel. It is because God saves whom He chooses through the means He has appointed. Scripture says, “We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and wisdom of God” (1 Corinthians 1:23-24).

I would add to this, that also tremendously freeing to the preacher/teacher, is that the knowledge that 'God gives the increase' implies that the numbers that result from the preaching/teaching are not the business of the preacher/teacher. Yet, this also implies all the more reason the preacher/teacher must be careful and diligent to be both Scriptural and sensible.

 

[HTacianas]

Quoted from your link: Some Practical Implications of Calvinism

1. Calvinism gives us confidence in the Bible’s sufficiency.

God saves His chosen people through the Word of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:18). That means preachers have no need to use innovation in persuading anyone of the gospel. The salvation of souls depends on the gospel, faithfully preached and effectively applied by the Holy Spirit, not on the creativity or ingenuity of the preacher. This implication is wonderfully freeing to the preacher.

If we preach the gospel and people do not believe our message, then we know it is not because there is any problem with the gospel. It is because God saves whom He chooses through the means He has appointed. Scripture says, “We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and wisdom of God” (1 Corinthians 1:23-24).

I would add to this, that also tremendously freeing to the preacher/teacher, is that the knowledge that 'God gives the increase' implies that the numbers that result from the preaching/teaching are not the business of the preacher/teacher. Yet, this also implies all the more reason the preacher/teacher must be careful and diligent to be both Scriptural and sensible.

I don't think you read my link.

 

[Hmm]

There is no "cruel uncaring" God in Calvinistic theology.

Do you not think a god who creates someone solely to go to ECT is cruel? If you don't, what act would you say was crueller than that?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

How does it attack the goodness of God?

A God who planned to send the majority of people to hell, planned out to send most men to hell, saving only an elected few, as a part of divine will, giving no chance of repentance to mankind is uncaring.

Firstly, God did not know how man would respond to him, as we see here:

Gen 6:6-7 And the Lord had sorrow because he had made man on the earth, and grief was in his heart. And the Lord said, I will take away man, whom I have made, from the face of the earth, even man and beast and that which goes on the earth and every bird of the air; for I have sorrow for having made them.

The only way this is possible is if free will is true.

But God does give ALL people a chance of repentance:

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

2Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

This post shows that you don't know the Calvinistic position on Biblical doctrine. There is no "cruel uncaring" God in Calvinistic theology.

what?

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don't think you read my link.

Lol, sorry. No, I meant the OP link.

I read your link, but unless you want to debate, I see no use in answering it. If you do wish for me to answer it, then define for me, "Free Will" and "Double Predestination" as thoroughly as you can. I am tired of spending more time defining terms than actually debating.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

For instance, take the very first one:

1. Calvinism gives us confidence in the Bible’s sufficiency.

As we were discussing in the thread below, Calvinism is directly contrary to the bible. How then can Calvinism give us confidence in the bible's sufficiency when it directly contradicts it?

Free will or predestination?

I've made great efforts to show others the Biblical basis of Calvinism:

Jesus is the Reason for Calvinism

Limited Atonement: God's Power to Save

I've done this, not to force others into accepting Calvinism, but instead to avoid being mislabeled as heretical.

When you are looking at the practical implications of a doctrine, you are looking at what it would mean if it were true. Does the above article in the OP accurately explain what the practical implications of Calvinism would be?

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Calvinism directly attacks the "goodness of God"

Paul addresses that concern in Romans 9:

"Romans 9 is referring to individual election of temporal and material blessing. It is not referring to election to salvation."
To make this argument, you must ignore the entire context of Romans 1-8 which is all about salvation by faith appropriated by the individual.
In fact Romans 8 is where Paul introduces the concept of predestination:
"For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified." (Romans 8:29-30)

We were chosen by God before we were born.
We were chosen so God’s purposes will stand.
We were chosen not based on man’s works or will -
but based on God’s sovereign free will to extend mercy. (Romans 9:16)
Because all men are sinful and deserve God’s condemnation, no person is wronged or treated unjustly if God chooses to condemn him.
For God to condemn sinners is not injustice.
That is justice. Justice is good. Mercy is good.
God choose who gets justice and who gets mercy.
With God, no one gets injustice.
“Why did God choose Jacob, not Esau?”
Answer: God chooses to whom He grants mercy not on the basis of man’s will, but based on God’s sovereign free will so that His purposes might stand. And that divine prerogative is what makes Him God.
Why Did God Choose Jacob, Not Esau?

Of the nine practical implications presented in the OP's article, which one of those nine are not true and why?

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Most Calvinists I read don't go far enough in showing God's absolute control over all things.

God is not the author of sin. When people sin, they are acting in accordance to their own fallen natures, not because God is directing their sin.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

So far, no one has addressed the content of the OP's article:

This article presents nine positive aspects of Calvinism if it were actually true:
https://founders.org/2017/05/11/some-practical-implications-of-calvinism/

Of these nine points, are there any that you would disagree with, and if so, why? Can you please explain how any of these points is not reflective of what Calvinism is in reality?

 

[Mark Quayle]

God is not the author of sin. When people sin, they are acting in accordance to their own fallen natures, not because God is directing their sin.

Correct. I say no different.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Throughout the New Testament, we are told that God's elect aren't just chosen to salvation, but also chosen to service and chosen to obedience. If you really believe that, it should influence how you live out your faith. If predestination has no practical significance to our daily lives, then we're interpreting it wrong.

 

[Mark Quayle]

So far, no one has addressed the content of the OP's article:

Sorry. I disagree with none of them, unless they mean to say that their explanations are the only practical reasons for each one of their points.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Do you not think a god who creates someone solely to go to ECT is cruel? If you don't, what act would you say was crueller than that?

Where do you get the notion that is the sole reason God creates those who go to the Lake of Fire?