|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Can you be a Christian and a Calvinist?
|
Illustrissimi
Apprentice
# 9296
|
Posted
I've noticed that a common theme on radical Calvinist-inspired web sites is 'Can you be a Christian and a Catholic?'... or words to that effect. The answer (according to them) is almost always 'NO!'. I just wondered, does it work the other way too? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
[ 18. July 2005, 22:16: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 6 | From: Portsmouth | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hazey*Jane
Ship's Biscuit Crumbs
# 8754
|
Posted
Tee hee hee. I'd never thought of asking that one. ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
[Incidently on my screen on the boards home page this came up as 'Can you be a Christian and a C...' - I assumed it was going to finish '...atholic' and was all set to deploy the headbanging smiley!]
Posts: 4266 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
I've certainly heard it argued that you can't be a consistent Christian without being a Calvinist. I'd guess that'd be the line of a lot of the traditional Presbyterian theologians...
[ETA - they'd also generally argue that there are many, many Christians who are not Calvinists, even including those inside the Catholic church]
[ 23. April 2005, 14:37: Message edited by: Custard. ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Funny, Custard, that's what I get from the RCC: sure, you can be a Christian without being RC, but you are not consistent by bypassing Christ's appointed Body on Earth.
God must think the lot of us are a hoot. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pax Romana
Shipmate
# 4653
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Funny, Custard, that's what I get from the RCC: sure, you can be a Christian without being RC, but you are not consistent by bypassing Christ's appointed Body on Earth.
God must think the lot of us are a hoot.
Either that, or He is ready to give all of His children some time out until we learn how to behave with each other.
Pax Romana
--------------------
********************
I used to wake up at 4 A.M. and start sneezing, sometimes for five hours. I tried to find out what sort of allergy I had but finally came to the conclusion that it must be an allergy to consciousness.
James Thurber
Posts: 4598 | From: New York City | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
Of course you can't be a christian and a Calvinist. Calvinists are baptised in the name of John Calvin, nothing to do with Christ. Though I much prefer the Trinitarian Calvinists who baptise in the Name of Luther, Calvin and Zwingli.
Serious tangent:
There are also Arminian Baptist and Pentecostal (among others) groups who think you can't be Catholic and Christian. But of course their arguments are no where near as intelligent and well developed as the Calvinists, and their web sites tend to have really really overdone bad graphics.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Considering that Calvinism is a blasphemy unto high heaven, I'd have to say No.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
luvanddaisies
the'fun'in'fundie'™
# 5761
|
Posted
Calvinist as in which kind ?
--------------------
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines, sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." (Mark Twain)
Posts: 3711 | From: all at sea. | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
Considering that Calvinism is a blasphemy unto high heaven, I'd have to say No.
Ummm, Mousethief, I wasn't being entirely serious with the first part of my post, so there is no need to consider Calvinism to be blasphemy.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
A Christian can only be a Calvinist if they were predestinated to be one from eternity.
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
OK you are back into polishing your halos for not being Calvinists. If you actually knew any Calvin it might be interesting, as it is its just boring.
Lets start Calvin is an elegant smooth writer and as such is very plausible. His theology is however at its best where he is untidy as then he lets truth get in the way of philosophical nicety.
Basically I do not like any theological scheme which are too tidy. It seems inherent to the achievement of tidiness that things have been simplified inorder to achieve it. Give me all the messiness of the actual Calvin, with his uncomfortable God, over anything blandly sweet and tidy, any day.
Getting at theologies based on the thought of John Calvin, I find are normally the tactics of those who want something to feel good about but have nothing in their own tradition with which to do it.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
Considering that Calvinism is a blasphemy unto high heaven, I'd have to say No.
Ummm, Mousethief, I wasn't being entirely serious with the first part of my post, so there is no need to consider Calvinism to be blasphemy.
Don't worry, Zwingli, Mousethief was predestined to that idiotic remark.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Calindreams
Shipmate
# 9147
|
Posted
Given my limited understand of what Calvinistic theology really is, most of my original inspiration that led me to be a universalist came from a Calvinist writer (Robert Short) who wrote the Gospel According to Peanuts.
At least I seem to remember his main arguments were based on Calvinist theology.
--------------------
Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore
Posts: 665 | From: Birmingham, England | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
I'd be fairly confident Calvin wasn't a universalist, though he had a far better grasp of pure grace than he is regularly given credit for.
I have met Roman Catholics who were Christians, or at least claimed to trust only in Jesus for forgiveness and were confident that they were going to heaven. They were few in number, and along the way they had ditched some fairly substantial official RC teaching.
OTOH I have met Calvinists whose lives didn't match what they said they believed and who probably weren't really Christians. (I'm a Calvinist). I hope that they changed their lives, or at least stopped pretending to believe what they said they believed.
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
It's a good thing Calvinism and arrogance aren't mutually exclusive.
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Bede's American Successor
Curmudgeon-in-Training
# 5042
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
I have met Roman Catholics who were Christians, or at least claimed to trust only in Jesus for forgiveness and were confident that they were going to heaven. They were few in number, and along the way they had ditched some fairly substantial official RC teaching.
Like the Nicene and Apostle Creeds?
quote:
OTOH I have met Calvinists whose lives didn't match what they said they believed and who probably weren't really Christians. (I'm a Calvinist). I hope that they changed their lives, or at least stopped pretending to believe what they said they believed.
Mousethief, you just might be right.
Gordon, are you feeling jealous that 103 has managed to hijack and extend a thread to 20 pages? This is a good start to hijack and extend your own 20 pages.
--------------------
This was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride of wealth and food in plenty, comfort and ease, and yet she never helped the poor and the wretched.
—Ezekiel 16.49
Posts: 6079 | From: The banks of Possession Sound | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hazey Jane:
[Incidently on my screen on the boards home page this came up as 'Can you be a Christian and a C...' - I assumed it was going to finish '...atholic' and was all set to deploy the headbanging smiley!]
Looks like you'll get to use that headbanging smiley after all ...
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
Ummm, Mousethief, I wasn't being entirely serious with the first part of my post, so there is no need to consider Calvinism to be blasphemy.
I considered Calvinism to be a blasphemy before your sorry ass came down your mama's baby chute.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
How is Calvinism a blasphemy? I'm genuinely curious.
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas*
Shipmate
# 7147
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
(I'm a Calvinist)
As in the full TULIP?
Or do you believe that we have the free will to choose whether to accept or reject the offer of redeeming Grace?
--------------------
Hamburger (note beetroot, pineapple, bacon and egg)
Posts: 543 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Bede's American Successor
Curmudgeon-in-Training
# 5042
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Living in Gin:
How is Calvinism a blasphemy? I'm genuinely curious.
Are some people automatically damned to Hell? If you agree with John 3.16, you might have trouble with a few points of Calvinism.
(The parts of Calvin theology that aren't problematic don't need Calvin's theology to expound.)
--------------------
This was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride of wealth and food in plenty, comfort and ease, and yet she never helped the poor and the wretched.
—Ezekiel 16.49
Posts: 6079 | From: The banks of Possession Sound | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
Those with dial-up connections find constant web look-ups a pain. For those without a Bible to hand, the verse referenced is:
quote:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.
(Yep, it's the Stainer verse)
Now, I'm no Calvinist (far from it), but do you think that if that were a nice knock down argument against it, Calvinism would still be raging?
Of course it isn't. This line simply tells you that those pre-destined to Hell are also pre-destined to not believe in Jesus. Now, you may find that equally as unbelievable as the first statement, but it's hardly less believable: no reductio here, folks.
ACOL-ite // who's defending logic, not Calvinism, OK? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
(I'm a Calvinist)
As in the full TULIP?
Or do you believe that we have the free will to choose whether to accept or reject the offer of redeeming Grace?
TULIP is a later formulation.
No, I don't believe we have the free will to accept or reject the offer of redeeming grace.
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Okay, I'll bite: TULIP?
(And to think I even grew up Presbyterian...)
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
TULIP
(note: I don't claim these people are RIGHT, only that they spell out what TULIP stands for)
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
Total Depravity; (all sin)
Unconditional election; (no half-way houses, we're all on precisely one list)
Limited salvation; (Christ's salvation was only effective for some)
Irresistable salvation; (if you're saved, you're saved no matter how much you try to squirm out of it)
Perserverance of the elect. (the elect are pre-destined to acheive holiness).
IIRC...
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Wow.... I always knew there was a reason I ran screaming to Anglicanism (besides the GIN, of course).
[ 24. April 2005, 05:28: Message edited by: Living in Gin ]
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
Cross-post with MT. So, I did Recall Correctly... ish...
[Note to self: just use google next time]
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Each and every point a bona fide heresy.
[spling]
[ 24. April 2005, 05:34: Message edited by: Mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
Well, I may be misremembering what they were all about, but only L seems particularly heretical to me. U and I are just wrong, whereas T and P seem OK.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
T to me runs afoul of the truth that we are made in the image of God, and that Christ lifted up our humanity to God when He was incarnate. It also is contrary to freewill.
P is contrary to freewill.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
MT,
Just because Calvinism is heresy doesn't mean that is (i) "blasphemy unto high heaven", or (ii) that those who believe it are not Christian.
I'd agree with you on (i) - possibly for different reasons - but not (ii).
Calvinists would appear to believe in a doctrine of salvation and atonement that (as far as the Elect are concerned) many other Christians would agree with - but differ from others in that they think (and I summarise here) that God is an unspeakable bastard to everyone else. Which I believe is blasphemy, but as I don't think we are called to form a judgment on what God is doing in anyone else's life, I don't think is sufficient to take Calvinists out of the Church.
The argument that Catholics aren't Christians is usually (in my limited experience) based on what Catholics are supposed to believe and trust in for their own salvation - not Catholic views on those outside the Church. It is a different sort of argument to whether Calvinists are Christian as it goes much more to the heart of the Christian faith.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Bede's American Successor
Curmudgeon-in-Training
# 5042
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ACOL-ite:
quote:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.
(Yep, it's the Stainer verse)
Now, I'm no Calvinist (far from it), but do you think that if that were a nice knock down argument against it, Calvinism would still be raging?
Of course it isn't. This line simply tells you that those pre-destined to Hell are also pre-destined to not believe in Jesus. Now, you may find that equally as unbelievable as the first statement, but it's hardly less believable: no reductio here, folks.
ACOL-ite // who's defending logic, not Calvinism, OK?
Uh, what part of giving his life for "the world" means God also damns someone to Hell?
And, by the way, it just isn't the Stainer verse. It is part of the Comfortable Words. Another one is:
If any man sins, he has an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and He is the perfect offering for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2.1-2
If what you are demonstrating is logic, I'll gladly be a fool for Christ.
--------------------
This was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride of wealth and food in plenty, comfort and ease, and yet she never helped the poor and the wretched.
—Ezekiel 16.49
Posts: 6079 | From: The banks of Possession Sound | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
T to me runs afoul of the truth that we are made in the image of God, and that Christ lifted up our humanity to God when He was incarnate. It also is contrary to freewill.
Possibly you've misunderstood the doctrine of total depravity; I don't see that Calvin (or the Bible) teach that the image of God is wiped out by our sin, only that sin affects every aspect of our being.
(Neither does it mean that each and every human being is as bad as he or she could possibly be, BTW).
Genesis 9:6 is still believed by Calvinists, and it refers to our being in the image of God post-Fall.
As for free will, since when was belief in this a condition of orthodoxy? I don't find it asserted in any of the ecumenical creeds.
Oh, and my take on the L is that the atonement is limited in application rather than extent. This understanding is consistent with my reading of Calvin, although later Calvinists may have taken a different line. Again, I can't see that this is actually heretical in the strict meaning of that word.
[ 24. April 2005, 07:06: Message edited by: Gordon Cheng ]
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
OTOH I have met Calvinists whose lives didn't match what they said they believed and who probably weren't really Christians. (I'm a Calvinist). I hope that they changed their lives, or at least stopped pretending to believe what they said they believed.
Um, yeah, that'd be me. Sorry about that. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Mousetheif, I'm not suprised that you have been so ignorant and so pigheaded for so long, but I am amazed that you are so proud of it.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas*
Shipmate
# 7147
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
Oh, and my take on the L is that the atonement is limited in application rather than extent.
Can you unpack this a little? I can see three differing points of view:
* God wishes to save everyone and everyone is/has been/will be saved (Universalist)
* God wants everyone to be saved, but cannot/will not save us if we reject his offer of salvation (Arminian/Weslyan)
* God only wants some to be saved, and those he saves despite their own inability (Calvinist)
Would you subscribe to the third view? Or am I looking at this the wrong way?
--------------------
Hamburger (note beetroot, pineapple, bacon and egg)
Posts: 543 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Flausa
Mad Woman
# 3466
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
* God only wants some to be saved, and those he saves despite their own inability (Calvinist)
What I was taught(from the Calvinist perspective) was that God wants/desires all to be saved, no one is worthy of salvation in light of His holiness, and in His graciousness He saves some (though all are deserving of damnation).
No one's ever been able to explain to me adequately who God saves or why He saves whom He saves. That's where the answer "God is God and can do whatever He pleases" answer comes in.
Q. Why did He love Jacob and hate Esau?
A. Because He did, and it is not ours to question why ("who are you, O man ... ").
God said it, and I believe it, and that settles it for me.
Posts: 4610 | From: bonny Scotland | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
Calvinists would appear to believe in a doctrine of salvation and atonement that (as far as the Elect are concerned) many other Christians would agree with - but differ from others in that they think (and I summarise here) that God is an unspeakable bastard to everyone else. Which I believe is blasphemy,
That is the very reason I think it is a blasphemy also.
quote:
but as I don't think we are called to form a judgment on what God is doing in anyone else's life, I don't think is sufficient to take Calvinists out of the Church.
True. I was being hyperbolic. At least, that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it.
I think if I were going to try to make an argument as to why Calvinists aren't Christian, it would center on Limited Atonement. The Nicene Creed says, "For us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven <etc>" -- Calvinists don't believe it was for all men, as the Creed would plainly imply, but only a few.
As has been noted above, the Scriptures are replete with witnesses to the idea that God's salvation is for all. Some of my favourites include:
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. (2 Peter 3:9)
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
I think many Calvinists believe we cannot accept redeeming grace without being born again, in order to maintain that salvation is all of God. Not of works, lest any should boast.... Faith is a gift of God ....
I think this labels repentance under the influence of the Holy Spirit, as a work, which it is not. Works are the fruit of repentance, and faith is given when a person responds to the conviction of the Holy Spirit to follow Christ.
I agree that a person would never seek God if the Holy Spirit did not convict us.
Christina
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
We have laid this out before. Its a dilemma you are not willing to face up to. You find it easier to blame Calvinists for their option than to realise your options also leave God as a bastard!
The Arminian God is like a cat sitting by a mousehole and blinking occassionally. The mice are going to be caught, but one or two might get through.
Or if you like a God who throws a die to decide whether individuals get into heaven.
Can either of those be called just?
Jengie
[ 24. April 2005, 16:52: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Logic? Logic???
Since when have humans been guaranteed to be swayed by logic? You look at the world around you, and all that has been wrought by humans, and you think that logic is the fundamental underpinning for it all?
ACOL-ite, you're stupider than an inbred garter snake with severe head trauma.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
There have been several discussions of Calvinism on the ship.
One of them in Limbo is entitled: Purgatory: Calvinism: Can It Be Rehabilitated?
Another, also in Limbo, is entitled: Purgatory: Why Calvinism makes sense
If you want to have a knowledgeable disucssion, hell is not the place. Read some of the earlier stuff, and it will likely answer any questions you might have.
[ 24. April 2005, 18:10: Message edited by: sharkshooter ]
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Or if you like a God who throws a die to decide whether individuals get into heaven.
Jengie
That's almost exactly how a Calvinist writer put it. The word for choosing, was 'choosing by lot.' So, people are not chosen because of what they will do, but because they were chosen by lot, as it were.
Why do Calvinists always think that the only alternative to it is Arminianism?
Christina
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lapsed heathen
Hurler on the ditch
# 4403
|
Posted
Poor old Calvin, the most misunderstood and misrepresented thinker ever. Read him and remember that even he didn't't solve the thing to his satisfaction. Calvin was more mystic than logician, unfortunately he seems to appeal to the cut 'n' dried, black and white with nary a shade of grey, protestant school of theology.
Which is a shame really as he has some interesting things in his bag of tricks. T.U.L.I.P. the acronym should be dumped and soon, if ever their was an attempt to put a quart in a pint pot, thats it.
--------------------
"We are the Easter people and our song is Alleluia"
Posts: 1361 | From: Marble county | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
This is a hell thread?
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Calvinists don't think that. Its just that they have only been arguing with the Universalists for a couple of hundred years while they have had 500 odd at the Arminians.
I'm actually a plague on both all their houses. Like many liberal Calvinists I see the problem but not the solution. I'm just fed up with the santimoniousness of the Arminians who seem to think they have the high ground while sponsoring an equally unpalatable God.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
On CARM I would expect such a response, Jengie, but here!!!!
For goodness sake, RCs and Orthodox (to mention just 2 churches) are not Calvinist, Arminian or Universalist.
There's lots of Christians who couldn't give tuppence about Calvin or Arminius. They're in the great majority.
Christina
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
originally posted by lapsed heathen:
quote:
Poor old Calvin, the most misunderstood and misrepresented thinker ever. Read him and remember that even he didn't't solve the thing to his satisfaction. Calvin was more mystic than logician, unfortunately he seems to appeal to the cut 'n' dried, black and white with nary a shade of grey, protestant school of theology.
Which is a shame really as he has some interesting things in his bag of tricks. T.U.L.I.P. the acronym should be dumped and soon, if ever their was an attempt to put a quart in a pint pot, thats it.
What a great point. I love every little bit of it, especially the quart in a pint pot analogy. I doubt Calvin was a mystic, but union with Christ is an architectonic idea in his theology that is relatively overlooked by people wanting to turn his theological ideas into either system or debating station.
Mind you as Calvin hmself tried to systematise what he believed in the Institutes, I don't suppose others can be blamed for having a bash at it too. But it would be better just to read the Institutes to get an idea of what Calvin thinks, they are not that hard to understand.
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
* God only wants some to be saved, and those he saves despite their own inability (Calvinist)
Would you subscribe to [this] view? Or am I looking at this the wrong way?
It depends on what you mean by "wants". It's not as simple as saying God only wants some to be saved, as various Bible quotes above have shown (I'm rather relieved to find a thread where I'm not the Bible-quoter, I must say).
Might be better to say that God wants all to be saved, that the death of Jesus for the sins of the whole world proves this, but that he only effectually calls some — and that this too is an expression of what God wants.
Even though we are not God I think we can all identify with the idea of wanting different options and only doing one of them.
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Logic? Logic???
Since when have humans been guaranteed to be swayed by logic? You look at the world around you, and all that has been wrought by humans, and you think that logic is the fundamental underpinning for it all?
ACOL-ite, you're stupider than an inbred garter snake with severe head trauma.
Well, I at least think it's relevant to make the case that's consistent to believe both double pre-destination and John 3:16. I happen to not hold to double pre-destination (I think I'm an epistemological indeterminist, but don't bet the farm on it staying that way) for many other reasons, but to claim that John 3:16 provides a straight-forward refutation to it is an insult both to the intelligence of Calvinists and my darling logic.
Of course I don't think logic is the fundamental underpinning of all (I think I'd want to reserve that title for God). I don't even think it should be normative for thought. But I do think it's the final arbiter of whether some-one's position is coherent or not.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Cheng:
Might be better to say that God wants all to be saved, that the death of Jesus for the sins of the whole world proves this, but that he only effectually calls some — and that this too is an expression of what God wants.
God as victim of multiple personality disorder. I'm not sure that's better than God as red-eyed demon, frankly.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
