Calvinism

I'm a Calvinist. Calvinism is the doctrines of grace, also known as the TULIP. What are your thoughts about it?

 

Very True!

 

Well, you asked. I think it is misguided--in some respects the very opposite of what I understand to be the teachings and example of Jesus. I acknowlege you and other Calvinists as my brothers and sisters, and know many sincere Calvinists who are exemplary in their devotion to Christ and Scripture. But I find Calvinism to be an unfortunate example of human tendencies toward elitism and intellectual arrogance getting the better of benevolence and common sense. I was raised Catholic in a Calvinist neighborhood, and early on experienced the pull between my Calvinist friends who told me I'd go to hell if I stayed Catholic and the priests who told me I'd go to hell if I didn't--the classic "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma. So now I'm a Methodist, and share with Methodists an Arminian/Wesleyan belief in Free Will. "Free will is a precious gift from God, for it lets us love him with our “whole heart”—because we want to."— Matthew 22:37.

I came to Jesus as a result of a conversion experience triggered by Genesis 1:26-27: Humans were created in God's image and likeness. From reading the Bible, I get the distinct impression that God loves us--not some of us, but ALL of humankind. 40 Bible Verses About God's Love - Uplifting Scripture Quotes In fact, scripture tells us that "God is Love". (1John 4:7-12). Love of humans also seems to have been something Jesus was majorly into. He told us that love of God and neighbor were the most important commandments. (Mark 12:31). And He told us that our neighbors are everybody. (Luke 10: 29-37). In His ministry, He invited sinners and the dregs of society to table fellowship, and incurred the wrath of the Sadducees and Pharisees for doing so. I find all of this to be inconsistent with the Calvinist view of God as a capricious tyrant, and an example of what happens when the letter of Scripture is lifted from context and put above the spirit behind it.

Now let's look at the TULIP, petal by petal:

• Total Depravity – Man is completely tainted by sin.
• Unconditional Election – God elects a person for salvation based upon nothing that person merits.
  
• Limited Atonement – Christ bore the sin only of the elect, not everyone who ever lived.
  
• Irresistible Grace – the elect cannot resist God’s election.
  
• Perseverance of the Saints – The elect are so secure in Christ, that they can't fall away.

I plan to consider these in future posts.

 

:-(. At then end, all will know the truth.

 

I think the greatest contribution Calvinism has made to American society is the Doctrine of Predestination; the notion that at the beginning of time, God pre-selected those few who would be raptured at the end times; no amount of piety or good works can alter your predestined fate. The way this belief seems to be expressed in American Christianity and society in general (whether or not it's based upon an accurate interpretation of Calvinism), is:
If someone is not one of the Elect, they must be one of the damned; eternally divorced from the love of God (and quite probably demonic).
If the damned are divorced from the love of God, they must de facto be hated by God (Americans do love the image of an angry, vindictive, vengeful, fire-n'-brimstone God).
If the damned are hated by God, it's a perquisite of the Elect (even a moral imperative) to persecute the damned; the enemies of God (who, curiously enough, are comprised entirely of people who do not look, dress, act, and think exactly like themselves). Abusing others becomes their Christian duty.
A sure sign of Elect-ism is financial prosperity. Poverty is not the result of being crushed by the vagaries of fortune or the machinations of Capitalism, but of individual moral depravity. Therefore greed is holy, money is worshiped, oligarchs are revered, and the poor are held in particular contempt; even outright hostility.
The poor, knowing in their heart of hearts that they are damned, hate themselves for it. The Elect secretly doubt their salvation, and hate themselves for it, too. Both strongly suspect that God hates them. All of this self-hatred that isn't assuaged by self-destructive behavior (look at American rates of domestic violence, alcoholism, drug overdose, and suicide) is expressed outwardly as internecine rage at "the Other"; minorities, racism, religious bigotry, homophobia, misogyny, xenophobia.
The Calvinistic Doctrine of Predestination and the hatred, self-loathing, sense of victimization and existential abandonment it engenders is the sine qua non of the American Taliban, Donald Trump, and the American neo-Fascist movement. Nothing has contributed more to the Balkanization of American society.

 

What were the religious practices / rules of 10 million years ago? Yeah, I thought so.ZERO.

 

Maybe. Unfortunately, I expect to know nothing at that point and after.

 

I am totally unfamiliar with calnvinism, and I have done a limited amount of research about it. I also can't say anything about a sect without knowing them personally, but let me speak on the theology.

Total depravity-

Now that is a very strong term that may have roots in the truth, but has drifted slightly. Now sure I think that mankind has fallen into sin, but I don't think that everything that humans do is subject to a state of totaly depravity. To say that human nature itself is fallen seems to neglect the better parts of human nature. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." So we aren't perfect, but I don't think that means that humanity is completely depraved of righteousness. What about righteous Lot? If humanity is depraved, then why was he saved? why would God have spared Sodom for the sake of 10 righteous people if we're all depraved anyway? if humanity is depraved, there would have been no righteous in Sodom. But there was Lot, and he was spared.

Unconditional election-

So do I believe that God foreknew before the foundations of the Earth all that would be saved? Yes. See Ephesians 1:1-14... "having predestined us to adoption as sons"

but I also read somewhere "Because people are dead in their sins, they are unable to initiate a response to God. "

And I think that isn't true, because it goes back to total depravity, which we aren't. But simply that the saints are foreknown, and faith is a gift of God. We ourselves, are of course able to respond. But there is nothing we can do to earn salvation, it is a gift.

Limited Atonement-

Yes, Christ's forgiveness extends only to those who are being saved.

But let me talk about unconditional election and limited atonement a little.

"If someone is not one of the Elect, they must be one of the damned;"

This concept is not correct. Certainly there are righteous people out there that are not damned. They have no sacrifice for their sins if they don't accept Jesus. But that doesn't necessarily mean eternal damnation. Who is to say who the Elect are anyway? Who knows? Especially in the year 2023 when there are so many fractures in christianity. Even if we did somehow know, what about the parable of the wheat and the tares (matthew13:24-30)?

So when we look into Revelations we see that the Elect reign with Christ for 1000 years (revelation20:4-5). "But the rest of the dead did not live again until the 1000 years were finished." So then there is a distinction, and after the 1000 years, the dead are judged (revelation 20:12). Why are they judged if they are all damned just because they didn't make it to the standards of the first judgment in revelation 20:4 when the Elect are vindicated? Why is there a second judgement if everyone is damned? Though certainly it is better to accept Christ and attain to the first resurrection in revelation 20:6 and not have go to death or the second judgement at all.

This goes back to the story about righteous Lot. Genesis 18:25 "Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked; far be it from You!"


Perseverance of the saints-

Yes. John 10:28 "neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand."

But I don't think that should be used as an excuse for sin or being lazy.

 

Even lots of us who accept a Christian God, including Evangelicals, have trouble with Calvinism. Calvin was so obsessed with acknowledging the sovereignty (omnipotence) of God that he overlooked another of God's other distinguishing attributes which 1John4:7-12 tells us is God's very essence: Love. Does God Love Everyone? The Heart of What is Wrong with Calvinism | Denver Seminary Jesus told us we could tell the true prophets from the false ones by their fruits. Mat. 7:16-23 I have the impression from reading Calvinist theology that they spend their days sucking on lemons.

The Doctrine of Predestination wasn't exactly original to Calvin. It was originally formulated in the fourth century by Saint Augustine. Augustine is recognized for his towering intellect. But he was also, from the standpoint of modern psychology, probably mentally disturbed. Fortunately, he provided us with a detailed autobiography of his tortured mental life in Confessions, which is full of anguished quotations reflecting an obsessive-compulsive struggle for moral perfection, and self-reproachment for constantly falling short, yielding to his carnality. ("Lord make me chaste, but not yet.") Like Paul, and Paul's other great admirer, Martin Luther, also both somewhat OCD in their perfectionism and obsessive preoccupation with personal sin and guilt, Augustine eventually found relief in Paul's doctrine of justification by grace through faith. Nothing humans could do could earn salvation, but not to worry. Jesus' sacrifice took care of it, so he didn't have to fret. But Augustine carried it further in relating it to a doctrine of determinism. This may have been influenced by his original membership in the ascetic Gnostic cult, Manichaenism, which was also deterministic in outlook, as well as familiarity with the doctrines of Greco-Roman Stoicism, which saw everything in the universe as strictly determined by natural laws. In fact, scientific materialism today has the same tendency. Saint Augustine formulated his ideas on predestination when he was having his bout with Pelagius over free will and original sin. Pelagius’s saw humans as basically good and capable of choosing righteousness by the exercise of their own will. This was anathema to Augustine, who saw them as rot to the core (like himself) and utterly dependent on God's grace for salvation.

Calvin picked it up from there. He acknowledged: "Augustine is so wholly within me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fullness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings." Calvin, A Treatise on the Eternal Predestination of God. Biographer F. Bruce Gordon portrays Calvin, "a man at once brilliant, arrogant, charismatic, unforgiving, generous, and shrewd," as having a strong sense of his own superiority and a sense that he was a prophet for his age. Bouwsma's biography (1988: John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait) presents another side. Behind a facade of reserve and impersonality, Calvin was beset by a deep sense of inadequacy and concern for his own salvation. "From this perspective the need for control both of oneself and the environment, can be understood as a function of Calvin’s own anxiety." Calvin developed his ideas in the context of the challenge from the Dutch theologian, Jacobus Arminius, who preached free will. Arminius taught that because prevenient grace is given to all people by the Holy Spirit, we have free will.

 

Determinism was thought to be basic to a scientific understanding of the world until Heisenberg discovered indeterminacy at the quantum level. Indeterminacy isn't quite the same as "free will'; objective reality may still be deterministic, though unpredictable to us, because of our inability to measure it accurately. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, Determinism and Free Will The critical question for purposes of evaluating Calvinism is the relation of determinism or free will to responsibility. Ordinarily, we think that if someone has no control over their actions or is completely controlled by some outside force, he/she is not responsible for their ensuing conduct.

Calvinism, however, denies this. God decided before the beginning of time who would be saved and who damned, and programmed the conduct leading to that result. The logical conclusion would be that God is responsible for sin and evil. Yet Calvinists have no compunctions about holding the individual humans responsible and consigning them to an eternity of torment in Hell as punishment. To Arminians, this violates the most basic principles of justice. The major difference between God and Satan would be that Satan wants us all to go to Hell, while God wants some of us to go there. And what would be the point of this perverse puppet show? Why would anyone want to worship such a monster? Power? Fear?

Christians often struggle with the paradoxes of theodicy created by the multiple "omnis" of their Deity: God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent--and why then is there suffering in the world? https://www.dbu.edu/mitchell/_documents/theodicy-overview-010.pdf The Calvinist answer seems to be because God wants it that way, and our poor intellects are incapable or understanding how and why this could is so. Another solution, however, is that God has limited His own power in keeping with His plan. (Hartshorne, Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes). If God is omnipotent and wants to do that, who is Calvin to say He can't? Why would He want to do that? I dunno. Maybe because it would get boring and absurd being a cosmic puppet master, when He can create autonomous actors who can return his love of their own free will.

 

Reality bites, or can occasionally if we don't give it proper respect. Of course, reality is something of a mystery to us humans, but we need to place educated bets on it to get through it as best we can. A set of doctrines like Calvinism or Marxism is untestable and unfalsifiable--i.e., unscientific. We probably won't find out for sure until it's too late, if then, whether or not it's true. How can we tell? We have to use our best judgment, based on available evidence, reason, experience, and intuition. When a Calvinist preacher like Puritan Jonathan Edwards tells me: "The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire," I say: Mebbe so, mebbe not, just as I say that when someone tells me I'm in a matrix-style virtual reality. Some are inclined to believe Calvin out of sheer fear, or because it provides a seemingly consistent map of reality they can accept, assured that by doing so they are likely to be one of God's elect. Calvinism can be a fear-based religion. I see no reason to believe it, because I find other versions of reality more compelling.

Calvin based his conclusions on selected proof texts from the Bible, on the conviction that everything in it is true, and the only truth we can trust Calvin: God giving dictation--especially to Paul and especially in Romans 9. Paul, of course, was the first to write about Jesus, and his letters written for various occasions posthumously were taken as divine truth by Christians. Paul never knew Jesus in person, but claimed to know him through visions. He didn't know a lot about Jesus' life and teachings, but was more interested in His death and resurrection. The life and teachings about peace, love and understanding we got later from the Gospels-- something Calvin seems to be less interested in.

I should probably qualify my remarks above by acknowledging that Calvinists today come in several varieties: United Reformed Churches, Presbyterians, some Baptists, etc. The United Presbyterian church in my community is pretty liberal --not much different from us Methodists. The Reformed Presbyterians are more hard-line: evidence that the Puritans are alive and well!

​

 

I mentioned Romans 9, the centerpiece of Calvin's thesis. Calvin says in his commentary on Romans 9 : “Paul teaches us, that the ruin of the wicked is not only foreseen by the Lord, but also ordained by his counsel and his will… that not only the destruction of the wicked is foreknown, but that the wicked themselves have been created for this very end—that they may perish.” (John Calvin, Commentary on Romans.) Romans 9:18, 22 : “So then, He shows mercy to those He wants to, and He hardens those He wants to harden… And what if God, desiring to display His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience objects of wrath ready for destruction?” Paul brings up God's love of Jacob and hatred of Essau, His hardening of Pharoah's heart, and His choice of a remnant among Israel for salvation. Without getting too much into the weeds of theology, I tend to agree with the numerous commentators who think Calvin misinterpreted the passages as proving "double predestination: creating some to be saved and others to be damned. John Wesley famously said :“Whatever it means, it cannot mean that.”

Briefly, Paul is explaining why God was moving away from the Jews as His chosen people and opening the door for Gentile believers. "Romans 9 is NOT about election to salvation, but election to service. The issue is not personal salvation, but roles of service in carrying out God’s plan for bringing about redemption for this sinful world. The bottom line is that God has the right to choose and use whomever he desires in order to carry out his purposes. This is meant to apply specifically to the nation of Israel." Does Romans 9 Teach Calvinist Predestination? "Calvin, probably due to a personality disorder often apparent in his writings, latched onto this passage as if it were the key to all of Scripture. His belief that this passage is the center and key to all of Scripture caused him to warp, distort, twist and misinterpret almost all of Scripture, forcing every verse and every passage to conform to his understanding of Romans chapter nine and this passage in particular." CALVIN AND THE PROBLEM OF ROMANS 9

For further analysis, see:
Why John Calvin was wrong about Romans 9
Analysis of Romans 9 and Calvinistic Arguments
Romans 9: An Arminian Interpretation | Evidence Unseen
Romans Chapter 9 - An In-Depth, Non-Calvinist Interpretation
crtitiques of calvinism romans 9 - Yahoo Video Search Result

 

Total depravity, in Calvinist terminology, doesn't mean that we're all as evil as can be--rot to the core. But it does means that every part of us, including our reasoning ability, is so damaged by corruption we inherited from Adam and Eve that we cannot do what is good on our own. Calvin gets this, of course, from St. Augustine's interpretation of Genesis 3, coupled with verses from Paul: There is no one who seeks after God” (Romans 3:11) and “There is none that does good, no not one” (Romans 3:12).

I think the Adam and Eve story is a metaphor, not something that actually happened. It describes basic features of human nature: two people in Paradise who can't be happy because they want more, in fact to be like God. It gets at what Buddhists call Upādāna (grasping) and taṇhā (craving; desire), prescriptions for human suffering. The Jews who wrote the story see it as saying humans are not perfect beings and sin (chet), is a result of our human inclinations (yetzer), which must be properly channeled. But the majority Jewish view rejects the Augustinian notion that we are actually born sinners, separated from God and incurring His wrath and loathing. Kolatch, Alfred J.(1989) The Jewish Book of Why. Paul seems to represent the minority Jewish view in this regard. Romans 5:12. "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. By one man's disobediance many were made sinners." Paul talks about death and sin as though they were metaphysical entities, overcome by Christ's resurrectiion. Paul's thinking reflects the deep pessimism prevalent during the inter-testamentary period leading up to Jesus, when many Jews were convinced God had allowed demonic forces take temporary dominion over the world.

A problem with the Pauline/Augustinian/Calvinist view is that Gen.1:27-28 tells us that God created humans in his own image and likeness and gave them dominion over the earth. Gen. 1:31 concludes : God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. If an omnipotent, omniscient God created a product that was so fundamentally defective that He had a bad case of Creator's remorse, does this cast doubt on Calvin's notion that God had it all planned out before time began?

Evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson (2014, The Meaning of Human Existence) thinks that early in our evolution, humans developed separate mental modules for self-interest and societal demands. Cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker (2002, The Blank Slate) confirms this, and suggests that the models that best fit the human psyche are the one in Genesis and Freudian psychology, in which the ego struggles with the pulls of id and superego. That may be what the Genesis metaphor seeks to convey. But there is a brighter side. Humans have countervailing tendencies inherited from lower species: reciprocal altruism and empathy. Initially these were confined to kin, but thanks to the wonders of cultural evolution, became extended to increasingly wider groupings, eventually (by the great religious teachers) to all humankind. Christians know them as the Golden Rule (reciprocal altruism) and Love Thy Neighbor (empathy). Obviously, these have important survival value for our species--theratened by our ever-present Dark Side of selfish impulses.

 

Calvin takes Paul's teaching of "justification by grace through faith" and eliminates the "faith" part. Humans have no role in their own destiny at all. They are pre-programmed to be saved or damned, and to have faith or not. It's entirely God's choice, not theirs. This seems to violate basic ideas of justice, which we also think is a divine attribute. The alternative Arminian doctrine of conditional election is based on humans' response to God's offer of salvation. There are a number of Biblical passages favoring the latter view:
Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live.
Joshua 24:15 And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell.
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Hebrews 11:25 Choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin.
1 Peter 2:16 Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God.
Galatians 5:13 For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

Bryson asks: "Would the God of love and Scripture have me tantalize unsavable men with the offer of salvation?" The Dark Side of Calvinism.

 

"If an omnipotent, omniscient God created a product that was so fundamentally defective that He had a bad case of Creator's remorse, does this cast doubt on Calvin's notion that God had it all planned out before time began?"

Well, it does seem that Jesus was known before the foundations of the earth. 1peter1:20 "He was indeed foreordained before the foundation of the world."

So if God had planned to send Jesus as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind, then He must have also known that mankind would fall (Adam&Eve). We can see foreshadowing to God sacrificing His only Son when He asked Abraham to do the same and it "was accounted to him (Abraham) as righteousness." Why would God ask such a thing of Abraham, if He wasn't going to sacrifice His only Son Jesus?

And then there is more foreshadowing when Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and nights.

But perhaps predestination doesn't contradict free will.

 

But it does, by definition. Calvin doesn't just think God had foreknowledge of the Fall, but that He engineered it.
---------------------------------
Limited Atonement-

I disagree. John 3:16 tells us that :“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.” Calvin's interpretation leaves us with a tortured reading of that passage--by which the “world” refers only to the predestined Elect. “Whosoever” applies only to a small group Elect. “Believes” is not the result of choice choice by the believer but rather a forced response over which the Elect “believer” has no choice. 2 Peter 3:9 says, “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” Calvin, maintains that both the word “all” and the word “any” in that passage refer only to the Elect and that it must mean “…not wishing that any of the Elect should perish, but that all of the Elect should reach repentance.” Such blatant rewriting of Scripture flies in the face of the clear meaning of the words. "When God says that it is his will that none should perish, but that all should reach repentance, He means that in the simplest and most straightforward way, “none” means “none” and “all” means all. But God has given men the power to choose and that includes the right to reject him." David Rice, CALVIN AND THE PROBLEM OF ROMANS 9

 

Irresistible Grace – the elect cannot resist God’s election

How then do we explain biblical passages which seem to be warning against resisting God's saving grace (Hebrews 6; 1 Corinthians 8:11; Romans 14:15?
Why warn against the impossible?

*************

Perseverance of the saints-once saved, always saved.

The passages used to support this are Romans 8:35-39 ("Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?) and John 10:28 (""neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.") Neither of these seems to be on point, since they seem to be concerned with outsiders taking away salvation from the faithful instead of the faithful losing it through complacency. Other passages indicate that maintaining faith requires effort, a “hard fight.”(Jude3,5) Early Christians who had already accepted Christ were told: “Keep working out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” Philippians 2:12 Other scriptures show that those who have been saved need to keep maintaining it. (Mat. 24:13; Hebrews 10:36; 122,3; Revelation 2:10.

None of this will cut much ice with Calvinist diehards. Tautological (circular) systems like this can never really be refuted, which is another way of saying they aren't scientific. If a person thought to have found Jesus (or vice versa) later lapses, they'll simply say (s)he was never really elected in the first place.

 

Well it is probably quite hard for us to comprehend. Certainly it will seem that way for the natural mind. But I am just suggesting the possibility that the two don't contradict each other, as a possibility.

Psalms 91:11-12
[11]For He shall give His angels charge over you, To keep you in all your ways.
[12]In their hands they shall bear you up, Lest you dash your foot against a stone.

So then what if our predistination is upheld by the actions of Angels? So then we still have free will, but then God may move out heart.

Hebrews 1:14
[14]Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?

So then it seems possible that God could uphold predistination by the ministry of Angels and still allow us to have free will.