what's wrong with Calvinism?

[Esdra]

I think partially the problem some people (especially secular, liberal types) is due to the view of all Calvinists as Puritans and defining Puritanism as (in the words of HL Mencken): "The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy" rather than as a theological movement dedicated to reforming the Church of England.

Yes this certainly is true for Scottish Presbyterianism.

But I don't think that the reformers of Switzerland (Calvin himself and zwingli) wanted to reform the Catholic church. They were more aggressive and for me it's clear that they wanted a church split soon after the reformation there's begun.
Unlike Luther in Germany who indeed wanted to reform the Catholic church.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Yes this certainly is true for Scottish Presbyterianism.

But I don't think that the reformers of Switzerland (Calvin himself and zwingli) wanted to reform the Catholic church. They were more aggressive and for me it's clear that they wanted a church split soon after the reformation there's begun. Unlike Luther in Germany who indeed wanted to reform the Catholic church.

Actually, like Luther, Calvin started out as a Catholic, and trained to be a priest. Also Calvin had a deep respect and admiration for St. Augustine and there is little doubt about his influence on Calvin. I recommend reading "The Life of John Calvin" by Theodore Beza (his successor in Geneva). What John Calvin wanted was to study and know the Scriptures, and upon writing a speech for the "festival of All Saints" in Paris orders were given by Parliament to seize him, he happened to not be home, but his writings, letters to friends were seized. This was a small effort by John Calvin to reform the Catholic Church, and I'd say he made many efforts before becoming the famous Reformer of Geneva. In addition to the book by Beza, here is a link to a small work by John Calvin entitled: The Necessity of Reforming the Church.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Hi

I'm wondering why quite a lot of non-reformed believers have such a problem with Calvinism or reformed theology?

Why is that?
Is it because of the believe in predestination?
As far as I understood that concept it "only" means that not all are going to be saved but that that god has chosen/predestined.
What's wrong with that believe? I've heard many non-reformed Christians say that one can only come to God if he draws you or calls you to him. Isn't that the same concept?

Esdra

My problem is I do not believe in once saved always saved the P in TULIP. I also believe that While God draws us we can choose to not accept it. He draws and we choose to accept he KNOWS who will accept, but does not make us change or change you without "permission".

 

[Esdra]

I apologize for that. I will stay out of the thread.

Thank you.
Feel free to make another thread. Maybe I'll have a look there.

And again sorry that you had such bad experiences with calvinism. I know how it feels like not to be able to believe in something (like predestination). I had difficulties in believing in the prosperity gospel (word of faith church) and that all are going to hell who aren't reborn Christians and haven't accepted Jesus in their heart (Baptist church and assemblies of God church).
I also struggled with these two believes and finally left one by one all three and came back to the church I was born into (Roman Catholic).

 

[Esdra]

Maybe that depends on what you mean by unable. Here's one way to think of it. A person does not want to believe in God: this person and their thoughts and their choices can be fully imagined beforehand by an all-knowing being, and as an all-powerful being He can ordain the existence of their life. Who they are and what they do exist in the exact same way as they would in a laissez-faire universe governed by your kindhearted avuncular deity. The only difference between the universes is one of them is foreknown and foreordained. The life of an unbeliever and the consequences of that life have every right to exist in God's economy for the simple reason that God made these things exist.

As for the second part of the statement: who is to say that everyone being saved is a better state of affairs than some other outcome? What if perdition is fair and logical, and justice is accomplished in a morally perfect way? Perhaps it is understood to be so by the souls who endure it.

But this is not about justifying God. There is no God above God to tell Him what kind of God He should be. We are contingent beings created by Him and we have no say in the matter. This is basic theism.

Thank you for this explanation attempt, as also I haven't really understood predestination soefar.
Somehow reminds me on the Baptist position (I also struggled with) where it says that you need to be born again and that god draws you to him. So in a way that is predestination too, isn't it?
But imo the Baptists believe more in free will. As Calvinists seem to say that everyone is predestinated to either come to God or not. Hard to explain somehow...

 

[Esdra]

Actually, like Luther, Calvin started out as a Catholic, and trained to be a priest. Also Calvin had a deep respect and admiration for St. Augustine and there is little doubt about his influence on Calvin. I recommend reading "The Life of John Calvin" by Theodore Beza (his successor in Geneva). What John Calvin wanted was to study and know the Scriptures, and upon writing a speech for the "festival of All Saints" in Paris orders were given by Parliament to seize him, he happened to not be home, but his writings, letters to friends were seized. This was a small effort by John Calvin to reform the Catholic Church, and I'd say he made many efforts before becoming the famous Reformer of Geneva. In addition to the book by Beza, here is a link to a small work by John Calvin entitled: The Necessity of Reforming the Church.

Thank you for this info. I'll certainly read both documents. But probably only at weekend. It's quite stressi in my job at the moment (vacation time)

 

[twin1954]

Thank you for this explanation attempt, as also I haven't really understood predestination soefar.
Somehow reminds me on the Baptist position (I also struggled with) where it says that you need to be born again and that god draws you to him. So in a way that is predestination too, isn't it?
But imo the Baptists believe more in free will. As Calvinists seem to say that everyone is predestinated to either come to God or not. Hard to explain somehow...

The first thing you must understand is that we, Baptists and Calvinists, (of which I am both) stand on the Scriptures alone. We believe according to the Scriptures that all men are dead in trespasses and sin according to Eph. 2:1 and Col. 2:13. that being dead means that you have neither will or ability to come to Christ. You must first be born anew and given the gift of life before you can believe on Christ. We deny the doctrine of baptismal regeneration that the RCC teaches. Given the fact that we are dead in sin and unwilling and unable to come God He must first do something in us and for us before we can ever come to Christ in faith. That is the basic doctrine of total depravity.

Second is the doctrine of unconditional election. We believe, according to the Scriptures, that God chose according to the good pleasure of His will a people who are more numerous than the stars of the sky or the sand of the sea to be the objects of His love, grace and mercy. He passed by all the rest leaving them to their own wills. Election isn't God choosing to damn some it is choosing to save some since we all deserve damnation. God is in no way obligated to save any but He delights in mercy and in His sovereign love chose to save some of us wretches sending His Son into the world to accomplish all that was necessary for their everlasting salvation and eternal bliss.

Third is particular redemption in which the Scriptures clearly teach that the Lord Jesus Christ came into this world and suffered and died accomplishing redemption for all He represented. The Scriptures never speak of His redemption as making anything possible but as having actually made an atonement for sin so that God can never again hold us accountable for it. Since we know that many do not go to everlasting bliss in Heaven and do end up in everlasting destruction then either Christ died for a chosen seed, the elect, or His blood didn't do anything. He shall save His people from their sin, Matt. 1:21 He didn't die to redeem all men because all men are not redeemed.

Effectual calling is the truth that all those whom God chose from before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1:4, and Christ redeemed will be called by the effectual power of the Spirit by the preaching of the Gospel. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to them that believe. Rom. 1:16, 1Cor. 1:18 It reaches the dead heart and the same power that raised Christ from the dead raises the chosen sinner from death unto life everlasting in Christ. God sticks the finger of His grace and love into the heart of the elect by the same Gospel that hardens the reprobate.

Last is perseverance of the saints. All whom God chose, Christ redeemed and the Spirit calls and regenerates are kept in faith by the power of God unto the end.


Now all of these truths stand together. None stand alone and must be understood as a whole.

 

[Iosias]

Esdra, may I encourage you to check out this. Note how we are now in paradigm 6 not paradigm 4 anymore, so as great as the historic creeds of the Reformation were, they are not where we are at now.

 

[theFijian]

Esdra, may I encourage you to check out this. Note how we are now in paradigm 6 not paradigm 4 anymore, so as great as the historic creeds of the Reformation were, they are not where we are at now.

The reality is slightly more nuanced than a 1-page graphic can convey wouldn't you agree?

 

[Iosias]

The reality is slightly more nuanced than a 1-page graphic can convey wouldn't you agree?

The graphic is a summary of Kung's 1000 page book in which the thesis is explained in great detail.

 

[theFijian]

The graphic is a summary of Kung's 1000 page book in which the thesis is explained in great detail.

Well that's put my mind at ease

 

[Esdra]

The first thing you must understand is that we, Baptists and Calvinists, (of which I am both) stand on the Scriptures alone. We believe according to the Scriptures that all men are dead in trespasses and sin according to Eph. 2:1 and Col. 2:13. that being dead means that you have neither will or ability to come to Christ. You must first be born anew and given the gift of life before you can believe on Christ. We deny the doctrine of baptismal regeneration that the RCC teaches. Given the fact that we are dead in sin and unwilling and unable to come God He must first do something in us and for us before we can ever come to Christ in faith. That is the basic doctrine of total depravity.

Second is the doctrine of unconditional election. We believe, according to the Scriptures, that God chose according to the good pleasure of His will a people who are more numerous than the stars of the sky or the sand of the sea to be the objects of His love, grace and mercy. He passed by all the rest leaving them to their own wills. Election isn't God choosing to damn some it is choosing to save some since we all deserve damnation. God is in no way obligated to save any but He delights in mercy and in His sovereign love chose to save some of us wretches sending His Son into the world to accomplish all that was necessary for their everlasting salvation and eternal bliss.

Third is particular redemption in which the Scriptures clearly teach that the Lord Jesus Christ came into this world and suffered and died accomplishing redemption for all He represented. The Scriptures never speak of His redemption as making anything possible but as having actually made an atonement for sin so that God can never again hold us accountable for it. Since we know that many do not go to everlasting bliss in Heaven and do end up in everlasting destruction then either Christ died for a chosen seed, the elect, or His blood didn't do anything. He shall save His people from their sin, Matt. 1:21 He didn't die to redeem all men because all men are not redeemed.

Effectual calling is the truth that all those whom God chose from before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1:4, and Christ redeemed will be called by the effectual power of the Spirit by the preaching of the Gospel. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to them that believe. Rom. 1:16, 1Cor. 1:18 It reaches the dead heart and the same power that raised Christ from the dead raises the chosen sinner from death unto life everlasting in Christ. God sticks the finger of His grace and love into the heart of the elect by the same Gospel that hardens the reprobate.

Last is perseverance of the saints. All whom God chose, Christ redeemed and the Spirit calls and regenerates are kept in faith by the power of God unto the end.


Now all of these truths stand together. None stand alone and must be understood as a whole.

Sounds familiar. I've read most of it in the Heidelberg Catechism.
And predestination is where now in your listing?
I'd say point number 3, correct? So, Christ died for the elect, and not for all? (Actually, the exact opposite to Catholic teaching, where it says that Christ has died for all.)
Really a confusing topic...

 

[mannysee]

...So, Christ died for the elect, and not for all? (Actually, the exact opposite to Catholic teaching, where it says that Christ has died for all.)
Really a confusing topic...

You might want to recall any past thoughts you've had concerning the Old Testament sin offerings, and their correlation with Christs' act in the NT.

If the bond of type and anti-type / shadow and figure hold true within the scriptures, then is there a certain people being represented throughout the pages and time?

I'm sure you've come across the "all" word in this argument. Carry that "all" word as far back into the OT history as you can. Consider who comes into view.

 

[Hammster]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has undergone a clean up.
MOD HAT OFF
​