quote:

---

Originally posted by Mousethief:
Is my heart more spacious than God's? Does He not desire their salvation even more than I do? If not, he is an ogre and I would almost rather be damned than bend the knee to such an evil tyrant.

---

Or He is God, and gave us all a "free will" to accept eternal live or death. Those who choose death will not be with us in Heaven.

That is why we are instructed to "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all the creation" (Mark 16:15). If everyone is going to Heaven anyway, why do we need to preach to them?

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharkshooter:
God could have saved everyone, but instead He decided to use us to bring the Word to the world. We should be diligent so that we do not fail Him.

---

I have problems with this, Sharkshooter. This would imply God didn't do all He could to save the world -- that He picked a plan that had less than maximum efficacy. Which is cruel and hard-hearted.

You said,
“God is/is not the only decision maker in the universe is not a conclusion that should stand in a systematic theology ..."
I asked,
“Again does Calvin actually claim that ONLY God makes decisions?”
You replied,
“Is this not the Calvinist definition of Sovreignty?”
I should be extremely surprised if it was. We all making decisions all the time. Are you telling me that there are a certain group of theologians who deny this? God is of course the final decision maker.

You say,
“In the light of current world views Calvinism seems to me to be hopelessly out of date and culture-bound.”
This I think says what and where the problem really is. You need to use a different sort of light.

Mousethief
In reply to my asking why you used the word “forced” when I talked about “inevitability”, you said,
“Because you say they cannot evade it. If that's not forced, I'm a rabbit.”
Reluctantly, on your own premiss, I have to agree with you. You’re a rabbit (in love beloved brother.
“Inevitable” and “forced” are two different words with two different meanings. If you freely decide something and God already knew what you would decide, where does force come into it??? To say that our choices are inevitable does NOT negate the fact that they are real choices which we personally make. God does not make them for us but He does know what they will be. Given any unique individual with their unique situations and circumstances the choices made(by them)in the end always be the ones they were going to make. In that sense they are inevitable.
Now there are those who would misrepresent this as fatalism. Not at all!
Fatalism says “What will be will be so why bother.”
Christian faith says “What will be will be but except for the bits that God has told me about I don’t know what will be so I need to live life to the best of my ability to the glory of God who gives me lots of freedom to decide how I should do that.

But then you need to come up with another word for "could not have done otherwise" besides inevitable.

I don't think God's foreknowledge (because it's not foreknowledge at all, God being outside of Time) makes our choices "inevitable," which according to Merriam-Webster's online (www.m-w.com) means "incapable of being avoided or evaded." God knows what we do, because He sees us do it. His knowledge does not cause what happens; just the opposite; what happens causes his knowledge. Our choices are quite free, and not in the least "inevitable" according to the definition. If I had wanted, I could have worn the striped shirt. God knows (eternally) that I would wear the plaid shirt today, because I chose to, and God observes both my choice and its result.

I know this is bordering on that heresy that says God can be acted upon (I forget the name). I'm afraid I can't make sense of the universe without it, however, so if you need to stone me, please use large stones and aim for the head, thus to get it all over more quickly.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharkshooter:
If everyone is going to Heaven anyway, why do we need to preach to them?

God could have saved everyone, but instead He decided to use us to bring the Word to the world. We should be diligent so that we do not fail Him.

---

The good news is more than just a route to heaven. It's a source of joy and strength on earth.

I don't believe God will send some people to hell because others failed to bring the Word to them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
Was going to stand back from this. I was honestly. But cannot rest unless I deal with the following:
frater-frag
You say,
“Now, since calvinism states that all humans are allready predestined to either Heaven or Hell, my conclusion is that the Incarnation was un-nescessary, ie, that Christ and his actions didn´t have any impact on the future for human souls.”
Why is that your conclusion?
People like me who believe that all things are predestined also believe that without Christ’s sacrificial death there would be no remission from sin. That is, ALL would be separated from God for eternity. Where is the conflict in those beliefs?

---

Hmm... Okey how about this?
Without free will, no-one can be hold responsible for their actions/lifes, in fact, without free-will, humans are nothing but pre-programmed automatons, acting according to their sub-routins!

Note: I don´t say that humans can overcome Sin by free-will alone. The Free-will of every being must accept Christ as God and Saviour etc, if they are to be saved. To use a bad methaphor; Its like allowing the Surgeon to go ahead with his stuff, in order to make us whole and healty again.

To sum it up, since Christ died for our sins, we must have fallen as a race first.
In order to do that, free-will is nescessary!
Without free-will, we wouldn´t have fallen at all. But, since we did fall, we must possess a free will! However, due to the fall of creation etc, that free will is no longer perfect, but heavily reduced and mostly corrupted. But, it is still there, and that gives God somewhere to begin...

From God´s point of wiev, everything must look predestined, ie, he has the complete files in his hand allready. That, is due to his existance outside the time/space continiium(hope I spelled it right , but whe are stuck inside, and therefore, from our point of wiev, most things are not decided yet!

Note, I prefer to put all theories to the extreme, I think thats the only way to find out where the sink-holes are!

[UBB fixed]

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
The problem is that you haven’t shown that the two statements are mutually exclusive. If God has ordained that that each individual is responsible for his own actions, it seems obvious to me that one statement is included in the other.

---

A = Not A is a logical impossibility QED

quote:

---

In the light of current world views Calvinism seems to me to be hopelessly out of date and culture-bound.”
This I think says what and where the problem really is. You need to use a different sort of light.

---

And what light would you suggest I use?

I guess you would say "the light of scripture", but Calvinism is not the Bible.

It has no more inherent validity than other theologies, but it had a power because it was appropriate for its time. Calvinism was accepted into the modern era because it remained acceptable to modernist thought. In the post modern era, its cultural limitations are clear. We can go earlier for inspiration for a new theology, but in the end we have no chance of a "view from nowhere". Our theology will also be culture bound.

frater-frag
I’m almost sure that I agree with every thing you said in your last post. I think one needs to be careful though when one speaks of God being outside the space time continuum not to give the idea that He is outside looking in. God is and there is nowhere where He isn’t. Though as a Master of Divinity no doubt you‘ll know more about the finer details of omnipresence than I do.

sharkshooter
You said, “God could have saved everyone … ” How?
Just think about it. A great deal has been said on this point in this thread.
God cannot lie - He has give us freewill - He says choose between life and death - many choose death - if then God says no to that choice - He has lied about giving us freewill.
Why should we preach the gospel? Because God has asked us to, because we share his compassion for the lost and because when it has been preached to all nations this present age will come to an end and there will be a new beginning.

><>
ah no Stoway won't do.
"God has ordained that we have freewill.", is a perfectly logical statement. To say that it is the same as saying, "A is not A.", is just sophistry.

[UBB fixed]

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
Hopefully we are both a bit clearer about what the other really believes than when we started?

---

I'm sure I'm not any clearer. I knew you believed in predestination, and that it wasn't inconsistent with free will, and I still know that. As to how you manage to wrap your mind around such a contradiction, I am still befogged.

quote:

---

I’ve done my best to show that belief in predestination, freewill, and the other parts of the tulip that we have discussed poses no problems of logicality or inconsistency and in no way require God to be an ogre.

---

And I remain unconvinced. Ah well, another day in Purgatory.

quote:

---

These beliefs are mind stretching, mind boggling.

---

...Wrong...

quote:

---

But far from being blasphemous they in fact show us how glorious and gracious God is.

---

Gracious enough to damn people he could have saved? That doesn't rate as "gracious" in my Funk and Wagnall's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
"God has ordained that we have freewill.", is a perfectly logical statement.

---

indeed it is.

however, to say that "God has ordained that we have free will. God is in complete control of everything." is not a perfectly logical statement.

this is, if i understand it correctly, a central tennant of calvinism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
[QB
sharkshooter
You said, “God could have saved everyone … ” How?
Just think about it. A great deal has been said on this point in this thread.
God cannot lie - He has give us freewill - He says choose between life and death - many choose death - if then God says no to that choice - He has lied about giving us freewill.
Why should we preach the gospel? Because God has asked us to, because we share his compassion for the lost and because when it has been preached to all nations this present age will come to an end and there will be a new beginning.

[/QB]

---

How could God have saved everyone? Any way He wanted to - He is omnipotent after all. For example, He could have said " They are so bad, I will take away their free will."

or

"They make so many bad choices, I will override their free will on this one issue", (even Mousethief, on another thread, said God can and does override free will)

Stooberry said:

quote:

---

however, to say that "God has ordained that we have free will. God is in complete control of everything." is not a perfectly logical statement

---

1)TOTAL DEPRAVITY: Calvinism is unclear on this point. Of course no one can be saved without the grace of God, however, does that mean that there is no effort, at least towards faith on the part of the redeemed? I don't think that is consistent with the Bible at all. Even the worriesome bit in Romans 8 & 9. In Italy we have a saying, "A spoonful of sewage in a barrel of wine makes the whole barrel sewage." I think that accurately describes humanity, from a biblical standpoint as well as a humanistic one. We might be sewage(totally depraved), but even the "non-believer" can taste like a damn fine Pinot Gris sometimes. Call me a humanist, but I believe EVERYONE has the power of choice. When God speaks to Cain (before he murdered his brother), He says, "Sin is crouching at your door, but you may overcome it." I see Christ as the path to overcoming sin, but man as the one who may do the overcoming, through His sacrifice.
2)UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION: OK, breach in reasoning. If God chooses some and not others, either it is because of some merit-even if the merit is distinguishable only to Him-of the chosen that the not chosen lacks, OR it is because God is an arbitrary bastard and in general a tyrant Who has no idea why He decided why He wanted Francis of Assisi and not Ghandi. If you choose the first option (I highly recommend it over the second), it leads you straight away from Calvinism, and towards the merits of the chosen. I conclude from this that God does choose who He wants to save, see John 3:16 "that ALL might live."
3)LIMITED ATONEMENT: See John 3:16 again, as well as the rest of the Gospel content. This is bunk, no matter which way you cut it. I think it is a near-heretical cheapening of the sacrifice God made on the cross.
4)IRRESISTIBLE GRACE: Interesting. But I already denied myself the possibility of entertaining this idea since I accepted that Christ died for the whole world. Obviously the whole world is not saved.
5)PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS: This is really an interesting argument. I believe the Bible does speak in favor of this, but not quite enough to support the full argument. Christ does intercede for us, and we are told (in other terms) that everyone up there is rooting for us. But I don't think that means that it is secure. While princes and principalities and life and death may not seperate us from the love of God, I do believe that choice can. I have known several friends who not only throughly convinced me of their own faith, but helped me along in their own who have now totally renounced God.

Sorry, while I understand much of the complaints against calvinism, I cannot understand why this characterization is necessary.

If I enter a football fantasy league, and choose arbitrarily choose my team, does that make me a bastard for choosing that way? Maybe a poor analagy, but oply given to help try to explain my failure to understand.

If anything proves that western Christianity is still in tortured denial, internal contradiction and spiritual deformity this Calvinist, anti-Calvinist, post-Calvinist thread does.

Why not start again and paint a different picture. This begins to look more and more like "The Scream."

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Why does "arbitrary" have to mean "bastard" or "ogre"?

Sorry, while I understand much of the complaints against calvinism, I cannot understand why this characterization is necessary.

If I enter a football fantasy league, and choose arbitrarily choose my team, does that make me a bastard for choosing that way? Maybe a poor analagy, but oply given to help try to explain my failure to understand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atticus:
[QB]God is in complete control of whom He saves and whom He does not. Nevertheless, we are obviously responsible for whether or not we choose God, so how much power does our choice have?
Christ loved the young rich ruler and, presumably, wanted him to be saved, but in the end the choice fell upon the young man. Christ was saddened, but did He credit the young ruler's lack of faith to God or to his own love of wealth?[QB]

---

I liked reading your take on the five points.

However, I think the young man you spoke of above needs to be put in context. This person came to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good should I do that I may have eternal life?" Jesus replied, "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." Then Jesus listed some of the commandments, and the young man said, "I have kept all these, what do I still lack?" And Jesus told him to go and sell his many possessions and follow Him. And the young man was sorrowful and went away.

This young man believed that keeping the law would save him. Jesus knew that, and used that belief to let the young man see that he had a problem with coveting possessions.

Jesus had the opportunity to preach the gospel to this young man, "Believe on Me if you want life!" But he didn't.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Why does "arbitrary" have to mean "bastard" or "ogre"?

If I enter a football fantasy league, and choose arbitrarily choose my team, does that make me a bastard for choosing that way? Maybe a poor analagy, but oply given to help try to explain my failure to understand.

---

Nobody is going to roast in Hell because of your choices in a football fantasy league. Arbitrarily choosing some people to roast in Hell (regardless of their desires or merit) is a bastardly thing to do.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
I forced myself to take a peep into this thread and no doubt I'll beat a hasty retreat once I have lobbed in the hand grenade.

If anything proves that western Christianity is still in tortured denial, internal contradiction and spiritual deformity this Calvinist, anti-Calvinist, post-Calvinist thread does.

Why not start again and paint a different picture. This begins to look more and more like "The Scream."

Banging the door on my way out ....

---

...........................................
When it comes to God standing outside time and space, the answer is both yes and no!

He is outside in the same sense that an artist is outside his creations!

But, on the other hand His body is inside!

Since Christ is God, and the Church(divided but still here on earth!) is His body, and we the christians are members of that body, logic implies that the Creator is also inside his work!

And finally, having a degree in divinity does not make you understand omnipotence better, however, having that knowledge makes is easier to learn more, and to use ones wits more efficient. But, I do admit that a good part of my "finer details" are a result of reading a certain CS Lewis

This young man believed that keeping the law would save him. Jesus knew that, and used that belief to let the young man see that he had a problem with coveting possessions.

Jesus had the opportunity to preach the gospel to this young man, "Believe on Me if you want life!" But he didn't.

---------------------
Yes, sorry that bit was hastily added without enough attention on my part.
I will say that though Christ could have said, "Believe in me with all your heart, soul and mind and you will have eternal life." You know the straight old Gospel message, but in a sense He was really asking of him exactly that kind of faith. By telling the young man what He did, Christ was asking of him his complete trust, even at the loss of his most prized possessions. It takes faith to take a man at his word and give up your house, your bank account, your car. While I stand by Christ's love for the man and His yearning for the man's salvation, I acknowledge that the passage is not nearly as neatly in favor of my argument as I had presented.
Thanks for calling me on that Mouse.
As for why arbitrary means bastardly, I think Mouse and Mousethief said it best.
I know some Calvinists I love and a few I respect, so I hope I wasn't too offensive, but I do feel very strongly on this issue, I almost quit when I was in senior high because of my frustration with this very issue. I spent a lot of time thinking on those five pints(Freudian slip) before I could even say I believed in Christ.
Off the subject, why does arbitrary mean random and all? doesn't it share the same root as the word arbitrate, which is to decide fairly in a situation of discord?

Where and when in all this does God actually “loose” control? He can close down the whole shamoozle however and whenever He wants. He could “intervene” and start “controlling” people and events like a puppet master. Is that what we want to be, puppets? God is not standing in a corner scratching his head thinking “err umm, O dear where’s it all leading to? How’s it going to end?” He knows. He knew already before He said, “Let us make man in our own image.”

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
Stooberry you say,
“to say that "God has ordained that we have free will. God is in complete control of everything." is not a perfectly logical statement. … I am reminded of henry ford's quote: "you can have any colour, as long as it's black". “
Why is not logical Stoo me old berry? It isn’t, “any colour you want as long as it is black” (more sophistry). It’s, “choose between life and death , between obedience and disobedience, between The Living God and Baal.” The choice is real/free. Some choose life, some choose death. God doesn’t make our choice for us (even though He knew before we did what it would be), it is not forced. God accepts the decisions (even though it is NOT his will that any should perish). If He did not He would be going back on his word and making a nonsense of freewill. We have already seen that there are things that God cannot do. Do you believe that, because God cannot lie He is not Omnipotent or because God does not act nonsensically (making freewill=not freewill) therefore He is not in control?

---

ok... let me put it in simple terms.

'john smith' is not a christian. he has thought about it all, but decided that it's all a load of crap.

it comes down to two possibilities:

1. john chose not to believe because God ordained that he would not believe.

2. john chose not to believe of his own free choice. God may (have attempted to) influence his decision, but did not have the final word.

if 1 is true, then john had no real choice. God decided for him.

if 2 is true, then it is john, and not God who was ultimately in control of that particular situation.

i don't think there's any other alternative. it doesn't matter a pig's trotter whether God knew what john was going to choose or not. either God was in control of it, or he wasn't. therefore, to say that john has freewill in his decision of whether to choose God or not, and that God has already decided what the outcome of john's decision will be, is complete crap, to pardon my french. God cannot be in complete control if we have free will to make our own decisions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by afish:
God doesn’t make our choice for us (even though He knew before we did what it would be), it is not forced. God accepts the decisions (even though it is NOT his will that any should perish). If He did not He would be going back on his word and making a nonsense of freewill.

---

Well, I've jumped to conclusions before but it looks as if you are not defending Calvinism at all with this. You are proposing simple foreknowledge.

Maybe we have been talking at cross-purposes here. To be a Calvinist surely you have to believe that every decision ever made was ultimately ordained by God. To be precise, if I decide to have Cornflakes for breakfast, a Calvinist believes that what I decided was ordained by God. Do you believe that afish? If not, I don't think you can call yourself a Calvinist.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stooberry:
and yes, i believe that because God cannot lie, he is not omnipotent. off the top of my head, i don't see anywhere in the bible that God says he is. if there is evidence of his omnipotence in the bible, then please let me know... but pm me, don't let me derail this thread!

---

oops... need to qualify, or even (shock horror) retract!

having posted, i've since remembered (d'uh) that God is the "almighty God". I think, then, basically, we need to redefine what power/might actually is... it is after all illogical to say that a being able to do all things cannot do x. p'raps it is as simple as God can do x, but he choses not to.

[tangent over]

“'john smith' is not a christian. he has thought about it all, but decided that it's all a load of crap.
it comes down to two possibilities:
1. john chose not to believe because God ordained that he would not believe.
2. john chose not to believe of his own free choice. God may (have attempted to) influence his decision, but did not have the final word.
if 1 is true, then john had no real choice. God decided for him.
if 2 is true, then it is john, and not God who was ultimately in control of that particular situation”

Lets go with 2., except that God did have the final word, after john said “It’s all a load of crap.” God said , “As you will.” And no, God was (and always is) in ultimate control. He gave the choice, He gave john the freedom to make that choice and He chooses how and when his (God’s) just judgement of that choice is implemented.

stowaway you say,

“ Maybe we have been talking at cross-purposes here. To be a Calvinist surely you have to believe that every decision ever made was ultimately ordained by God. To be precise, if I decide to have Cornflakes for breakfast, a Calvinist believes that what I decided was ordained by God. Do you believe that afish? If not, I don't think you can call yourself a Calvinist.”

No it was me who chose (Weetabix with a sprinkle of muesli actually) but God knew already. Was my choice “ordained” by God? Well there is a sense in which we could allow that word. I choose but God decides (ordains?) whether or not to allow (ordain?) my choice. Now concerning my eating preferences I believe God could, when ever He wants , impose his will over mine. He could force me to eat Chocpics if He chose to BUT concerning salvation, as already explained, He can not impose or force without becoming a liar and acting nonsensically. Would I accept the word “ordained” in the sense of, we are just puppets in a puppet show? No of course not. Are there “Calvinists” who really believe that is what ordained (or predestined) means? I’ve never met any. Have you?
Am I a Calvinist? I believe the first two and the last two points of the tulip as presented by Wood, SteveTom and some others at the beginning of this thread are completely in accord with the revelation of God found in The Bible.

quote:

---

. Are there “Calvinists” who really believe that is what ordained (or predestined) means? I’ve never met any. Have you?

---

Psalm 139:15,16 (NIV)

"My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be."

I still take comfort in knowing that God is in control. That He knows what is going to happen. That He is not an ogre or a bastard.

I am not "joyless", and some people actually like me. I am not an "infant" Christian who needs to mature in my faith to come to a more mature belief.

As I indicated earlier, I can accept that ordination (predestination) allows that in most cases God lets us decide, but that He, at the very least, intervenes sometimes. Just that He knows, in advance, what decisions we will make.

I know there are precious few who agree with what I am saying, but David and Paul both referred to it in the Bible and some people think they knew what they were talking about. So I have to believe there is something in it.

I have been reading this thread since it started, and was tired of it being so anti-Calvinist. We don't have to believe in it 100% - I think everyone makes their own conclusions on the issues. That just makes sense.

I gave up the debate in my early twenties. Two reasons, firstly the arminians need to understand that my father requires that all options should be open to a person not just some! If options are not equally weighted or some are off limit are you sure that there is not really only one option available it just feels like you have choice? Secondly like others on the list I began to understand the problems of viewing God as subject to the rules of time!

That said I recently had a metaphor which gets about as close as I can to this. Consider a reader reading a book. The question is who determines the meaning? The author or the reader? While the author has the creative origin the reader is not passive in this task.

If you think of God as the author and you living your life as something akin to the reader reading a book.

quote:

---

I will not worship a God who is not omnipotent.

---

You (or J.C., actually) start with one apparently self-evident first principle (omnipotence) and reason from that to a God that defies our sense of justice which we have always believed was given us by God.

But what it really comes down to, for me, is that Calvinism requires us to believe that God created some people solely for the purpose of damning them to eternal torment. I used to think Calvin just didn't grasp the implications of his convoluted logic, until I was copyediting a book of essays on his work and ran across a quotation in which he said (paraphrasing from memory, but with no doubt about the intended meaning): "If God wants to damn you, he will make sure you do something to deserve it." This is not a God of love.

One might suspect that Calvinism was an atheist plot, a kind of mirror image of Anselm's ontological proof, designed to prove the nonexistence of God by showing that an omnipotent, omniscient, onmibenevolent being is inherently contradictory...

quote:

---

perverse

a God that defies our sense of justice

God created some people solely for the purpose of damning them to eternal torment

Calvinism was an atheist plot

---

Please, can we stop the Calvinist-bashing? (I think the "discussion" ended a while ago.)

Remember, some of us have feelings, too.

Peace,

Anyway, Father Ted says that Timothy has got a good point. What else would you expect from a medieval French lawyer?

quote:

---

She was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and taught that if she died after she committed a mortal sin and before she confessed it, she would go to hell.

---

Yes, it's true (hard though it may be for those of you who haven't been exposed). I was taught the same thing by nuns in Southern California.

quote:

---

The nuns taught her that many of her childish misbehaviors were mortal sins, so she spent most of her childhood trying to avoid hell.

---

I don't remember this. I was taught that missing Mass on Sunday was a mortal sin. I was quite blessed in that i didn't believe what the nuns or priests told me. I didn't like or respect them and to me they seemed like puny people.

This is a general statement explaining what is commonly called "calvinism".

God is revealed in his word, in nature, in man, in Christ, in the eternal covenant with man in Christ, in the cross & resurrection of Christ, and ultimately in a glorious New Heaven & New Earth.

It is common to "refute" calvinism by a simple process of non-Scriptural negative logic such as:
"Man can do nothing but sin & be damned, unless God shooses to save him, if he is elect. Even our behaviour has nothing to do with salvation. If we're elect nothing we can do can lose our salvation. If we're not elect, there is no way we can be saved."

Reformed Theology (aka Calvinism) is positive. We are concerned with the living God, the God whose name is Love, who created a good universe, and sustains that universe by a caring providence. He created man in his image, for fellowship with himself, and gave him woman as an intimate & loving companion. (Gen. 1-2)

We are concerned with a God who hates sin, and condemns those who reject him. Yet he loves, and does not destroy without providing a way to life. More than that, our God has provided for the complete and perfect restoration of the fallen world, and a people to live there with him for a glorious eternity. (Gen. 3, Rev. 21)

God has provided an everlasting covenant with man in Christ, whereby rebel sinners become the people of God. A covenant which cannot be broken, because it is between God and man in Christ. A covenant sealed with the blood of Christ.

God is a God of love, who in his love for his people sent his Son to save them. (Mat. 1:21)

The so-called 5 points of Calvinism are only part of a comprehensive system of Bible understanding.
1. We are all born with a fallen nature, with all our faculties corrupt, totally depraved, therefore we are all born lost and condemned so there is nothing any of us can do to be earn salvation. We are sinners by nature and by practice. Dead in trespasses & sins. (Eph. 2:1)
Total depravity does not mean "absolutely evil from birth" for we are all capable of acting according to an imperfect reflection of our being "in the image of God" for we love our parents, our wife, our husband, our children, and act in kindness to our fellow humans. We act as stewards of creation, in husbandry & land & animal management. Some are more wicked than others, but all are sinners.
Absolute evil is what we see before the flood, in the Amorite practices, and in the final rejection of Christ by the Jewish leaders. Verses which speak of the fulness of iniquity. (e.g. Gen. 6:5, 15:16, Mat. 23:32)

2. God loves his creation, and will restore it, to be inhabited by redeemed and restored people, his people. However, all are lost and condemned.
God elected a vast number of people to be saved, chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. (Eph. 1:4) This election is unconditional with respect to the goodness, faith, etc of the elect, for all are sinners, and all are lost & guilty in God's sight.

3. The people are to be redeemed, by Christ himself dying for our sins, receiving in himself their condemnation, their death for sin. This is a particular redemption, God's people are no longer their own, they are bought with a price, the precious blood of Christ. (1 Peter 1:19)

4. Salvation of the elect has to be achieved in time, and God has a gospel of salvation: "repent and turn to God and do works meet for repentance." (Mark 1:15, Acts 26:20) The state of spiritual death (Eph. 2:1) must be reversed. The Holy Spirit enters the spirit of the sinner giving spiritual life, so that he is born again, born of the Spirit, passed from death to life. (John 1:12-13, 3:3ff, 5:21, 24ff.) The sinner who once rejected Christ and the Gospel sees his sin, and repents, and trusts Christ alone and his saving work as the only basis for his salvation. His will is transformed, so that now he delights in God and God's commandments. This "new creature" is seen in new life, spiritual life, by godly living.

5. Those God loves and saves are saved completely, and are secure in Christ. God will not leave hold of his people, not can they lose that new spiritual life, for they have a new spiritual nature. Nor will they return to sin, or continue in sin, claiming "once saved always saved." (Rom. 6)

While the elect, & only the elect will be saved, and saved completely, the Gospel itself is not limited to the elect. There is the universal command to repent and turn to God. (Is. 45:22, Acts 17:30, 26:20, Rev. 14:6-7) No-one is lost because they are not elect, but because of sin. When Christ is preached, he is preached freely to all. The command to repent & believe is the means of calling the elect. (1 Cor. 1:21ff.) Those who reject that command are rejecting their only way of salvation. THe fact that all are dead in trespasses & sins means that God has to do more than proclaim forgiveness through Christ to save them. He has to regenerate them, give them life.

Calvinism is seen to be hard & anti-evangelical when it is taken out of its place in Scripture.

In its rightful place in Scripture, centred on Christ, it is the Gospel of the grace of God, the Gospel of Love, for God is Love.