Why people hate Calvinism so much?

[saintboniface]

Not every member of a denomination actually believes and holds to the creeds of their church..

So the Christian Reformed church has Calvinist doctrines but some who call themselves Christian Reformed tend to be more Arminian?

 

[dhh712]

I wouldn't say I hate Calvinists. I've only encountered them on here. However, I do feel a sense of disgust at the way, week after week, they come on here, seemingly, to gloat to the haplessly 'unchosen'.

That alone should raise big a question in the mind of a reader. Could you imagine Mother Theresa gloating to people that she was 'saved'? Or the Apostle, Paul, for that matter? Did he not say at one point that he was not yet 'saved' - he had not yet finished his race?

Why did Paul bother to endure all those extraordinary trials, if he needn't even have got out of bed in the morning? 'Come and get me God! I'm all yours. Wow! Isn't it great being a no-good lay-bout, and being loved infinitely just for being me?'

Catholic saints have shed tears for those in particular danger of going to hell, and many of us pray for them daily with the Rosary. It could be us, anyway.

Calvinists seem to think it's a reason to celebrate, since seemingly Michael will be rowing the boat to shore with them in it, however they behaved in this life! It's really not good form to scoff at drowning people from a life-boat you were lucky enough to get in.

You seem to not have the idea of a Calvinist who actually understands the doctrine of predestination; you may have run into a few that have heard of it and found it beneficial to themselves to think they are among the elect (I would seriously doubt though that they have any real understanding of the doctrine).

Most of us though (I would imagine), shed quite a few tears for the lost; I would almost say that you couldn't be a Calvinist if you don't have a love for the lost (but that of course, would just be my bias coming into play--I would rather say, I would want all Calvinists to have a love for the lost!).

Being among the elect is nothing to gloat about. It is rather something which should humble a person.

(Also, having received the grace of God doesn't give a person a free ticket, so to speak, to sin--if whoever you encountered who claims to be a Calvinist acts in that manner, they most certainly are not Calvinists despite their claims to the contrary).

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I wouldn't say I hate Calvinists.

Do you understand the difference between addressing Calvinists and Calvinism? The thread title is "Calvinism" referring to our beliefs, not our personal character. I do not hate Catholics, but I have issues with Catholicism at the points where it does not agree with Scripture, mostly post-Augustine, like during the dark middle ages, the Reformation, etc. Of course I realize Catholics do not have the kind of unanimous agreement many would suggest, some are Papists, some are not, some are Charismatic, others are not, and so on and so forth.

I've only encountered them on here.

A few on my mom's side of the family are Catholic, and I've never had a debate with them, and they have always come across as the nicest people you could ever meet. Their mom made sure they went to Catholic school, but I really cannot tell any difference between them and the average Christian. I will admit that I am not close to them, but there has always been a solid four hour drive between us.

However, I do feel a sense of disgust at the way, week after week, they come on here, seemingly, to gloat to the haplessly 'unchosen'.

Really? That's interesting, especially since there are 50+ Calvinists in the user group I started (making me somewhat in the know here), which consists not of all, but many if not most Calvinists frequenting this site, and only a handful are still around or stay on long enough to log in and to post. So "they" whoever you are referring to, cannot account for but a minute percentage, maybe 1% or maybe less. I must confess, it is not charming to come into our section of the forum making accusations without anything to back it up.

That alone should raise big a question in the mind of a reader. Could you imagine Mother Theresa gloating to people that she was 'saved'? Or the Apostle, Paul, for that matter? Did he not say at one point that he was not yet 'saved' - he had not yet finished his race?

See you have already lost since your argument is based on a accusation without any evidence. Why should any reader with half their wits give your argument half a listen? When the Apostle Paul talked about boasting, what he say's is, if there be any boasting, let it be boasting in Christ. For it is only in Christ alone that we can boast, because as the great Apostle wrote to the Ephesians; 2: "8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast" (ESV).

I would like for you to provide evidence where a Calvinist claims to have already "finished his race". That would be interesting, I should like to read that heretical comment, if it be serious, and not tongue in cheek.

Why did Paul bother to endure all those extraordinary trials, if he needn't even have got out of bed in the morning? 'Come and get me God! I'm all yours. Wow! Isn't it great being a no-good lay-bout, and being loved infinitely just for being me?'

Why do people make the love of God out to be no different than the love men have for one another? Why can Christians, especially ones that have raised children, not seem to understand the concept of "unconditional"? God did not need Paul, He could have just as easily accomplished the same ends through another vessel, but He chose Paul, for Paul did not choose Him. Read Paul's conversion. Where do we read about Paul seeking to follow Christ? To the contrary, Paul, I mean Saul was a Pharisee and persecutor of Christians. He had zero intentions on becoming anything like the new radical sect of "Christians". Paul, I mean Saul would just as soon stone a Christian to death as to stand in the same room with one. Do you not get it, do you not see, that the will of Saul was bent on persecuting Christians? Christ did not beg Saul to follow Him, He did not give an alter call, Christ personally changed him, not based on Saul's will, but based on God's will.

Catholic saints have shed tears for those in particular danger of going to hell, and many of us pray for them daily with the Rosary. It could be us, anyway.

Ah man helping God accomplish what He could not....every time I think about purgatory, I think about the old saying; "As soon as a coin in the coffer rings, the soul from purgatory springs." Which brings to mind the indulgences and abuses of them during the Reformation times especially.

Calvinists seem to think it's a reason to celebrate, since seemingly Michael will be rowing the boat to shore with them in it, however they behaved in this life! It's really not good form to scoff at drowning people from a life-boat you were lucky enough to get in.

Oh but I thought Catholics could do whatever they want mon-sat, so long as they confess to the priest on sun...that's called returning a strawman for a strawman. Isn't it time the false representation be laid to rest? You cannot back that statement up with historical facts. All I desire to respond to that garbage with is, it clearly comes from a position which does not understand nor appreciate the sovereign grace and mercy of God. Finally, it is clearly out of touch with Saint Augustine, who understood correctly, that all of life is grace.

 

[stenerson]

So the Christian Reformed church has Calvinist doctrines but some who call themselves Christian Reformed tend to be more Arminian?

This surprises you? I know Roman Catholics that believe they are saved because they go to church on Christmas and Easter.

 

[saintboniface]

This surprises you? I know Roman Catholics that believe they are saved because they go to church on Christmas and Easter.

No, that was a question mark smiley not a surprised smiley. I am not surprised by that. I was just questioning if that is what you were saying.

 

[stenerson]

No, that was a question mark smiley not a surprised smiley. I am not surprised by that. I was just questioning if that is what you were saying.

Oh, okay, gotcha.

 

[JM]

Should come as no surprise as the "gnashing of teeth" at the truth is well attested to within Scripture.

Having said that, the situation is not helped by "cage-stage" Calvinists with access to the internet. We have all been through that and should know what havoc can be wreaked during that phase.

I believe Arminians go through the "cage-stage" as well.

The Arminian believer's eyes are opened to the majesty of his self determination as the sovereign King of the universe, and their entire life is turned upside down. And for a while, they have more zeal than they have knowledge. We call it the "cage stage." That period in the experience of the new Arminian where they would be better off kept in a cage until they can gain enough maturity to handle these vitally important topics aright. (a play on Dr. White's quote)

In the end...they get upset, call us mean for showing them the frailty of the human will, and because we want to dethrone them as Kings of the Universal!

 

[paul becke]

That makes zero sense...What does gloating about being saved(I don't see it here but let's assume it's true) have to do with Calvinism? ..Arminians also believe they are saved.
Sure there are hyper-Arminians "evangelicals" and of course Papists that don't believe in the eternal security of believers. But that's another issue. Are they somehow more humble because they don't believe Christ work of atonement was sufficient to secure them to the end?

Yes, they are. Not more modest.. more humble. Humility relates to knowing our limitations. As an ant is in God, it is higher than we are in ourselves. We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a 'done deal', and we can sin as much as we like.

The deepest truths are spiritual, including those of leading-edge physics research, and they very much tend to be, probably, are, all paradoxical - what we of the Christian faith call 'mysteries'. This is clearly the case in relation to the way in which our free will interacts with God's providence in he matter of our election.

It incenses me to read young twerps on here, week after week, or perhaps, month after month, asking, "Are you saved?" The implication regarding their own supernatural destiny is clear. I'm not sure whether it's bumptious mockery or actually an instinctive, subliminal sense of fear... that they may have got something wrong, and are 'whistling in the dark'.

 

[stenerson]

Yes, they are. Not more modest.. more humble. Humility relates to knowing our limitations.

Yes, the bible teaches that no one seeks God, no one desires God, no one will believe in God apart from God's gracious action. I guess you're proving to us that Arminians are not very humble, because they don't get this.

As an ant is in God, it is higher than we are in ourselves.

I have no idea what that means?

We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a done deal, and we can sin as much as we like.

Sorry but that makes no sense..What do you think faith is if not believing that God has saved us to the uttermost when we come to Christ. That's like saying "we must have faith, but not too much faith. "

 

[paul becke]

Yes, the bible teaches that no one seeks God, no one desires God, no one will believe in God apart from God's gracious action. I guess you're proving to us that Arminians are not very humble, because they don't get this.



I have no idea what that means?



Sorry but that makes no sense..What do you think faith is if not believing that God has saved us to the uttermost when we come to Christ. That's like saying "we must have faith, but not too much faith. "

Originally Posted by paul becke

As an ant is in God, it is higher than we are in ourselves.
​

I have no idea what that means?

Can't help you with that, I'm afraid, because it means just what it says.

They are the words of an Eastern sage, quoted in Aldous Huxley's essay on comparative religion, The Perennial Philosophy, but a truism of all the major religions.

Originally Posted by paul becke

We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a done deal, and we can sin as much as we like.
​

Sorry but that makes no sense..What do you think faith is if not believing that God has saved us to the uttermost when we come to Christ. That's like saying "we must have faith, but not too much faith. "

I think I see where you are coming from. It just struck me.

If I have the attitude that I'm saved, it doesn't help me. I prefer be in personal communion with God through prayer, and to be regularly reminded that I'm a sinner, and will remain one until I die. But I feel no less joyful and confident, provided I do my best - which can never be any great shakes, but God understands that.

The understanding about 'being saved' in the sense I refer to above is an important corrective to the Pelagianism which Pope Francis has been castigating in the right-wing, Tridentine bitter-enders, who are still, it seems thriving in the US more than in most countries. For that we Catholics must be greatful for the efforts of Calvin and whatever other Protestant church founders insisted on the primacy of God's grace.

Originally Posted by paul becke

We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a done deal, and we can sin as much as we like.


Sorry but that makes no sense..What do you think faith is if not believing that God has saved us to the uttermost when we come to Christ. That's like saying "we must have faith, but not too much faith. "

Sorry, but again your incomprehension here makes no sense to me. Jesus did the salvific 'spadework' on Calvary; now it's up to me to avail myself of his free gift, by doing my best - very very imperfect though it is.

Why do you think that Jesus said to Peter in Luke 22:31-32:

31"Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; 32but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."…

Do you think Peter had thought it was a 'done deal'? In fact, Peter did 'deny' him, as we know. Or that Jesus had just 'gone through the motions' in praying that Peter's faith might not fail him?

God doesn't want us to go through life feeling free to commit serious sins. He does sometimes pardon serious sins, but if they are the result of a doctrinaire complacency prompting us to commit serious sins in the certainty that He will forgive us, that is presumption of a very serious order, (because prone to lead to so many other sins,) and recklessly courts damnation.

Our salvation is contingent, conditional; but it remains God's free gift, not the fruit of even our best endeavours. The reward, yes, but not the product.

 

[stenerson]

Originally Posted by paul becke
Can't help you with that, I'm afraid, because it means just what it says.

They are the words of an Eastern sage, quoted in Aldous Huxley's essay on comparative religion, The Perennial Philosophy, but a truism of all the major religions.

Okay, I'll just have to take your word that it's a very deep and wise saying and that you didn't get it from a fortune cookie.

Originally Posted by paul becke

We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a done deal, and we can sin as much as we like.

Sorry, but again your incomprehension here makes no sense to me. Jesus did the salvific 'spadework' on Calvary; now it's up to me to avail myself of his free gift, by doing my best - very very imperfect though it is.

Why do you think that Jesus said to Peter in Luke 22:31-32:

Okay, I get it, your Catholic.. Jesus does the heavy lifting, now I have to believe in Him, try my best and hope I won't have to spend to much time in semi-hell (purgatury) atoning for some of my sins.

Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; 32but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."…

Do you think Peter had thought it was a 'done deal'? In fact, Peter did 'deny' him, as we know. Or that Jesus had just 'gone through the motions' in praying that Peter's faith might not fail him?

Yes, Christ is the mediator for His elect..He will not lose one..He prays to the Father for them and His prayers are effectual. Good thing it didn't simply fall on Peter doing his best. Thank you for bolstering the Calvinist position.

God doesn't want us to go through life feeling free to commit serious sins. He does sometimes pardon serious sins, but if they are the result of a doctrinaire complacency prompting us to commit serious sins in the certainty that He will forgive us, that is presumption of a very serious order, (because prone to lead to so many other sins,) and recklessly courts damnation.

That shows yours, and Romes complete incomprehension of what grace is, and what it accomplishes. The constant fear of proclaiming the good news in all it's glory because Christians will feel they can sin like crazy with no consequences. A complete blindness to the doctrine of regeneration, and the power and ministry of the Holy Spirit. It is the argument and fear of carnal man..Fallen man, by nature knows he will embrace sin if grace and forgiveness is given him. The truth is that those born of the spirit don't think that way.

 

[twin1954]

Originally Posted by paul becke

As an ant is in God, it is higher than we are in ourselves.
​

I have no idea what that means?

Can't help you with that, I'm afraid, because it means just what it says.

They are the words of an Eastern sage, quoted in Aldous Huxley's essay on comparative religion, The Perennial Philosophy, but a truism of all the major religions.

Originally Posted by paul becke

We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a done deal, and we can sin as much as we like.
​

Sorry but that makes no sense..What do you think faith is if not believing that God has saved us to the uttermost when we come to Christ. That's like saying "we must have faith, but not too much faith. "

I think I see where you are coming from. It just struck me.

If I have the attitude that I'm saved, it doesn't help me. I prefer be in personal communion with God through prayer, and to be regularly reminded that I'm a sinner, and will remain one until I die. But I feel no less joyful and confident, provided I do my best - which can never be any great shakes, but God understands that.

The understanding about 'being saved' in the sense I refer to above is an important corrective to the Pelagianism which Pope Francis has been castigating in the right-wing, Tridentine bitter-enders, who are still, it seems thriving in the US more than in most countries. For that we Catholics must be greatful for the efforts of Calvin and whatever other Protestant church founders insisted on the primacy of God's grace.

Originally Posted by paul becke

We must have faith that God will take us to himself, when we die, but not act as if it's a done deal, and we can sin as much as we like.


Sorry but that makes no sense..What do you think faith is if not believing that God has saved us to the uttermost when we come to Christ. That's like saying "we must have faith, but not too much faith. "

Sorry, but again your incomprehension here makes no sense to me. Jesus did the salvific 'spadework' on Calvary; now it's up to me to avail myself of his free gift, by doing my best - very very imperfect though it is.

Why do you think that Jesus said to Peter in Luke 22:31-32:

31"Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; 32but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."…

Do you think Peter had thought it was a 'done deal'? In fact, Peter did 'deny' him, as we know. Or that Jesus had just 'gone through the motions' in praying that Peter's faith might not fail him?

God doesn't want us to go through life feeling free to commit serious sins. He does sometimes pardon serious sins, but if they are the result of a doctrinaire complacency prompting us to commit serious sins in the certainty that He will forgive us, that is presumption of a very serious order, (because prone to lead to so many other sins,) and recklessly courts damnation.

Our salvation is contingent, conditional; but it remains God's free gift, not the fruit of even our best endeavours. The reward, yes, but not the product.

Please remember the rules here.

Congregational Forum Restrictions, Christian Only Forums, and Off-Topic posts
Do not teach or debate in any Congregational Forum unless you are truly a member and share its core beliefs and teachings. Questions and fellowship are allowed, proselytizing is not.

You are welcome to post here but you are not allowed to debate or teach anything contrary to the statement of belief of the congregational forum.