Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: Per request - Ask a Calvinist
Wiki says that Calvinism is like Reformed. Is that true? Were you ever a part of a Calvinist/Reformed religious community or is this someone you are practicing on your own (I know you said you attend another type of church now)
Does Calvinism teach to do the modest dress and to cover your head like you do or is that something you chose on your own/ separately?
thank you, it really does help to have some definitive frame of reference to see where you are coming from.
Hmmm. This is my (as an atheist) personal definition of would-be Heaven, actually. As in, it's what I prefer to happen - but also what I expect to happen - to everyone after they die. I understand it is viewed by many others that we as humans lack the ability to imagine or understand what Heaven really is, and so I (am forced to, but am comfortable to) accept my being so limited to and confined within the power of my imagination.
Not that you believe the following theory, but the idea of reuniting with lost loved ones and living in eternity in a place filled with love, zero hate, perpetual perfection sounds like it would be mind-numbingly miserable after, say, a week.
Thank you for taking the time to present your view and answer these questions. It's as informative as it is interesting.
I thought I remembered that from somewhere in the cobwebs of my brain (12 years Catholic schooling, right here!), but that makes sense.
2V- can you give some comparisons/differences as far as AW's explanation of unconditional election and limited atonement?
Yes,I'm smiling...I'm a marathoner!
Bloggy McBloggerson
CO Nestie Award Winner-Prettiest Brain-Back to Back!
2011 Bests
5K-22:49 10K-47:38 Half Mary-1:51:50
2012 Race Report
1/1-New Year's 5K-22:11
2/11-Sweetheart Classic 4-mile-29:49
3/24-Coulee Chase 5K-21:40
5/6-Colorado Marathon-4:08:30
5/28-Bolder Boulder 10K
Still trying to digest the following. It is a decent comparison from a Catholic convert from Calvinism, Jimmy Akin, but I'm thinking there is something better and easier to follow than this. I copy and pasted the section on the q's you specifically were asking about:
www.cin.org/users/james/files/tulip.htm
Unconditional election The doctrine of unconditional election means God does not base his choice (election) of certain individuals on anything other than his own good will [13]. God chooses whomever he pleases and passes over the rest. The ones God chooses will desire to come to him, will accept his offer of salvation, and will do so precisely because he has chosen them.
To show that God positively chooses, rather than merely foresees, those who will come to him, Calvinists cite passages such as Romans 9:15-18, which says, "[The Lord] says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So it depends not upon man's will or exertion, but upon God's mercy.... So then he has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills [14]."
What would a Catholic say about this? He certainly is free to disagree with the Calvinist interpretation, but he also is free to agree. All Thomists and even some Molinists (such as Robert Bellarmine and Francisco Suarez) taught unconditional election.
Thomas Aquinas wrote, "God wills to manifest his goodness in men: in respect to those whom he predestines, by means of his mercy, in sparing them; and in respect of others, whom he reprobates, by means of his justice, in punishing them. This is the reason why God elects some and rejects others.... Yet why he chooses some for glory and reprobates others has no reason except the divine will. Hence Augustine says, 'Why he draws one, and another he draws not, seek not to judge, if thou dost not wish to err.'" [15]
Although a Catholic may agree with unconditional election, he may not affirm "double-predestination," a doctrine Calvinists often infer from it. This teaching claims that in addition to electing some people to salvation God also sends others to damnation.
The alternative to double-predestination is to say that while God predestines some people, he simply passes over the remainder. They will not come to God, but it is because of their inherent sin, not because God damns them. This is the doctrine of passive reprobation, which Aquinas taught [16].
The Council of Trent stated, "If anyone says that it is not in the power of man to make his ways evil, but that God produces the evil as well as the good works, not only by permission, but also properly and of himself, so that the betrayal of Judas is no less his own proper work than the vocation of Paul, let him be anathema.... If anyone shall say that the grace of justification is attained by those only who are predestined unto life, but that all others, who are called, are called indeed, but do not receive grace, as if they are by divine power predestined to evil, let him be anathema." [17]
Limited Atonement Calvinists believe the atonement is limited, that Christ offered it for some men but not for all. They claim Christ died only for the elect. To prove this they cite verses which say Christ died for his sheep (John 10:11), for his friends (John 15:13-14a), and for the Church (Acts 20:28, Eph. 5:25) [18].
One cannot use these verses to prove Christ died only for the elect. A person may be said to have given himself for one person or group without denying that he gave himself for others as well [19]. Biblical proof of this principle is found in Galatians 2:20, where Paul says that Christ "loved me and gave himself for me," not at all implying that Christ did not also give himself for other people. That Christ is said to have given himself in a special way for his sheep, his friends, or the Church cannot be used to prove Christ did not also give himself for all men in a different way.
The Bible maintains that there is a sense in which Christ died for all men. John 4:42 describes Christ as "the Savior of the world," and 1 John 2:2 states that Christ "is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." 1 Timothy 4:10 describes God as "the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe." These passages, as well as the official teaching of the Church [20], require the Catholic to affirm that Christ died to atone for all men.
Aquinas stated, "Christ's passion was not only a sufficient but a superabundant atonement for the sins of the human race; according to 1 John 2:2, 'He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.'" [21]
This is not to say there is no sense in which limitation may be ascribed to the atonement. While the grace it provided is sufficient to pay for the sins of all men, this grace is not made efficacious (put into effect) in the case of everyone. One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited. This is something everyone who believes in hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell.
The difference between the atonement's sufficiency and its efficiency accounts for Paul's statement that God is "the Savior of all men, especially those who believe." [22] God is the Savior of all men because he arranged a sacrifice sufficient for all men. He is the Savior of those who believe in a special and superior sense because these have the sacrifice made efficacious for them. According to Aquinas, "[Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, efficaciously for some, but sufficiently for all, because the price of his blood is sufficient for the salvation of all; but it has its effect only in the elect." [23]
A Catholic also may say that, in going to the cross, Christ intended to make salvation possible for all men, but he did not intend to make salvation actual for all men--otherwise we would have to say that Christ went to the cross intending that all men would end up in heaven. This is clearly not the case. [24] A Catholic therefore may say that the atonement is limited in efficacy, if not in sufficiency, and that God intended it to be this way. [25] While a Catholic could not say that the atonement was limited in that it was made only for the elect, he could say that the atonement was limited in that God only intended it to be efficacious for the elect (although he intended it to be sufficient for all). [26]
For me, calvinism is how God makes total sense. I absolutely get that. My problem is that I have never felt touched by the Holy Spirit, so I basically in time accepted that I was not elected by Him and thus stepped away from the church. What do think about that?
I was baptized as a Methodist and confirmed as a Lutheran growing up. Lutherans believe very similarly, but there also some distinct differences (as with Catholics and Calvinists). DH was raised non-denominational, but his family believes very much in predestination and an elect. When DH and I got married we had very different opinions on some of these issues (and still do on others), but we have both grown together and have found ourselves firmly planted in Calvinism.
There are denominations in America that preach Calvinism - mainly Baptists and Presbyterians. If I take one of those online denomination quizzes I am usually categorized as a Presbyterian (but DH and I don't enjoy services at our local Presbyterian church so we don't attend - except for the annual Kirkin O' the Tartan because we're Scottish and it's fun).
We attend a Christian Missionary Alliance church. It's an evangelical church and the core beliefs align pretty closely with ours, but there are several differences. In Bible studies and conversations with our pastor, we have discovered that he also has Calvinist leanings, which is probably why we enjoy his sermons so much. We go to the church not because it fits our beliefs 100% (we can't find one that actually does). We go to our church because we feel God's presence there, really enjoy the community, and like the worship.
My views on modesty and headcovering didn't come from my church or Calvinist doctrine. These are all things that I felt the Holy Spirit leading me to do in my own private Bible studies and prayer life. It's not a requirement for me to attend a church that holds my same views on issues like this because they have nothing to do with the Gospel or salvation to me. These are personal convictions that I live out because I feel they are God-honoring, not because I feel they are required in order for me to be in God's favor or to be welcome in my church community. I am the only headcovering woman at my church (besides a few older ladies) and one of a few women that dress the way I do. My fellow church sisters accept me the way that I am and I do the same for them. We all realize that God calls us each to do different things.
I have no idea why God has called me to cover my head. To me it's a symbolic representation of headship and God's authority in my life. Sometimes I hate wearing the covering. I want to be normal and curl my hair and wear it down for my husband to enjoy more often. But I truly feel like God is asking me to do this for a reason. I'm not sure I'll ever know why, but for now I'm just trying to honor His wishes for me.
That was probably more than you care to know. I just started rambling. Sorry
In my mind, predestination/election is a just theological concept that has little effect on how we live our lives. Salvation comes from having faith in Christ as the perfect atonement for our sins, as repeated throughout the NT. Predestination is just a way to make sense of why some people chose to accept Christ's sacrifice and others do not. If you believe that man is totally corrupt and depraved (a la Calvinism), then man by himself is not able to move towards faith. Thus, Calvinists believe that it is the Holy Spirit who moves men towards faith. And the Holy Spirit moves those whom God has chosen.
Also, Christ told us to tell the world about Him, so believers are required to evangelize -- even if they believe in predestination.
I realize you are saying what you believe as a Calvinist, but as a Christian I could not disagree with you more.
I don't believe in the idea of a few elect people who God chose to be saved.
In 2Peter 3:9 it says that God is not willing that ANY should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance.
Jesus said "If I be lifted up, I will draw ALL men until me."
John 3:16 says that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him shold not perish, but have everlasting life.
It continues by saying that God sent not his son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.
Jesus spent his ministry going around preaching the gospel as well as healing the sick, etc.
When Jesus left his disciples he told them to go into all the world preaching the gospel.
I could give many, many more examples from the bible. They all mention ALL people being able to receive grace.
All of these would be in vain, if only an already selected elect were to be saved. That idea seems to be in direct opposition to the entire nature of God. God is described as "Love". I can not imagine him creating people he had already decided he was going to not allow access to the free gift of salvation that Jesus purchased for all.
I do believe we were created with free will. God wanted people to freely accept him and love him and accept his way of salvation. The whole idea is one of a loving relationship. I have trouble with the idea of it being a religion only thing.
It is not a matter of a religion with a bunch of rules and laws. It is a matter of coming to God in love and accepting the loving gift he gave us through the death of his son for all people.
I believe God knows the beginning and the end, but to me that is not predestination.
This is important to me because if people think God already selected a few elite people, they have no reason to hope. I would actually be pretty upset with a God that you are saying may not even want me as his child. I believe everything the bible says about God says he wants us all as his precious children.
I think that if you know Christ in your heart (living a life of strong faith means that to me, because faith means you have a personal relationship with Christ) that you are assured salvation. I have a problem with people preaching that all you have to do is say a prayer and accept Christ into your heart and you are saved, because I think it's a little more complex than that. That's just the beginning. There is a reason why most of those people who make altar calls in church wanting to be saved don't come back to church when they pray their prayer. They haven't been transformed. They haven't felt the Holy Spirit leading them. I feel like when you do, you know and there is no turning back. Hopefully this isn't blasphemous to say, but it's the best thing I can compare it to. As a woman, it's like the first time you have an orgasm. Once you know, there is no going back. You just know. All those times before when everyone else was trying to describe it and you were wondering what they were talking about. When it happens, you're like, "Aha!" Does that make sense?
Perhaps you should have an Ask a kbmom thread.
The Bible gives us some descriptions of what it may be like. I think they are just worldly attempts to describe something that is undescribable. Some stories describe Heaven as a banquet of food that never ends. Like a party. You never go hungry - it's everything you could want. Others have described it as a Kingdom or like a huge castle. God sits on a throne. My DH thinks heaven is like another life without any sin - no pain, no hate, no sadness, no fear.
I have no clue what it will look like, but I do have an expectation for what it will feel like. It will feel like pure love. Do you ever have one of those moments where everything feels perfect and blissful? For me it's like the moment I see my newborn babies for the first time. Or how I felt when I got married. The way I feel sometimes when I'm alone in nature. Or (once again, I hope this isn't blasphemous) maybe how an orgasm feels. I think there is nothing we have ever experienced that will describe what Heaven will feel like to us, but these are the closest things I can think of.
I also am not sure that we will be reunited with our loved ones in Heaven like we like to think. I think we may see them there, but it won't be the same. We won't care who our children, parents, or spouse were on earth when we are there, because everything is so perfect and the love is so pure that we will all treat everyone the same. My love for my children will be the same love I feel for everyone else.
This made me choke on a grape.
I apologize if I overstepped. I didn't mean to highjack the thread.
If I were you I would just continue to pray for it. Get out your Bible and read (that's usually how I can feel it working in me). Figure out the way in which you feel most at home worshipping and worship until you can't do it anymore (google Spiritual Pathways Assessment for something that can help you with this - I have found that I feel most at home worshipping in nature. I feel God's presence alone in nature more than anywhere else.)
To me it says something that you have a desire to know Him. Calvinism teaches that you cannot come to Christ alone, but only if God leads you there. Wanting to know Him, to me, shows that He has already chosen you. Just keep seeking Him and He will be there!
I'm trying to digest all of that as well. AW, you've done a good job of explaining your beliefs, but I am having a really hard time wrapping my head around the concept of unconditional election.
2V, I know I'm not the "best" Catholic, but from what I understand being a good person/following the Church's teachings/etc. is what, for lack of a better phrase, gets you into Heaven. Sinning/being a bad person/punching puppies/etc. is what keeps you out. No?
I totally respect what you are saying and understand it. I also do not think that most of the Scripture you cited goes against the doctrines of Calvinism. Take John 3:16 for example, I can be a Calvinist and still feel that anyone that believes in Christ has everlasting life. If you truly believe in Christ, my faith teaches that you are saved (there is a difference between truly believing and just saying you believe IMO). No one knows whether or not you truly believe but you and God.
And I don't think God sent His Son to condemn the world either. I think He sent Jesus here so that there is hope for salvation.
This is why Calvinism and Arminianism have been so hotly debated, because there is evidence in the Bible for both POV depending on how you interpret Scripture. (Emphasis mine in below Scripture)
Look at the Parable of the Wedding Banquet - ?For many are invited, but few are chosen.?
Romans is full of examples. Take chapter 8 for example - 28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, whoi]'>[i] have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Ephesians 2 - 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith?and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God? 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God?s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
Acts 13:48 - 48 When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.
Jesus even talked about having an elect. He talks about opening the eyes of the blind. He had to open their eyes. If salvation is something given to us by God, He gets to choose whether or not we receive it IMO. We give ourselves too much power if we think we have anything to do with the matter.
God can still be Love and have an elect. His act of Love is even allowing any of us into Heaven. We don't deserve it at all.
I think it's hard for even me to wrap my head around. That's because, as humans, we like to think there is some formula or pathway for obtaining salvation. We think it should be as easy as doing X, Y, and Z and being good. That's what works for us to get rewards on earth - we listen and follow the rules and we get what we want.
But I don't think God works that way. We can't understand how and why He chooses to do it the way He does, because we aren't Him. There is nothing we can do to gain His mercy.
But I have found that being a good person and following the Church's teachings are generally a good indicator that someone is truly saved (not that I know whether or not people are saved - just that people who I know who are assured of their salvation are usually the ones that attempt to do God's Will). Like Jesus said, you can usually tell whether or not someone knows the Truth by their fruit. A good tree doesn't bear bad fruit. Good works are the result of true faith. A bad tree is going to bear bad fruit in one way or another.
AW
I know you didn't mean it that way, but I have to admit I was insulted by the first paragraph in your last post (can't quote on here). It seemed like a put down of those of us who believe in good works. I hardly see my view as the easy way out. In fact, I find it to be quite the contrary.
Again, based on your history, I know you didn't mean that as an insult. I just wanted it point that out so you know how it might come across.
I'm sorry. I wasn't implying that Catholics think that their way is the easy way out. I was just saying that I think for me, it's hard to wrap my head around how God would choose an elect because even I think that there should be a formula. It only makes sense that way. Any other way seems like some type of random lottery to me.
I don't think that Catholics take the easy way out at all. I've said before and will say it again that I think Catholicism is beautiful and as a person who craves routine and ceremony in formal worship, I find the Catholic mass and way of life very comforting.
And for the record, I believe that Christians of all denominations are part of the elect. I have nothing against Catholicism.
I'm so sorry if I insulted you.
AW, it was not my intent to say you were wrong. I don't have all the answers and was more questioning the differences in how we believe.
I seem to have offended others. I didn't mean to offend you. I will simply stay away from commenting.
I wasn't offended, just relied on cheap humor as I tend to do. Certainly don't discontinue discussion on this thread on anyone's account other than AW - especially since she made it clear she wasn't at all bothered by it.
Thank you for this.
You didn't offend me at all. I said in the first paragraph of the OP that I was hoping that some Arminians would chime in and start a discussion.
I think you brought up some good points.
I think there is a lot written in the gospels that is tricky to understand (at least for me). I feel like sometimes when the elect are mentioned in the NT, the author is referring to the nation of Israel, since the audience was the Jews. For example, when I read 1 John 2:2 (And he is the propiation for our sins: and not for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world) I read it that "our" is referring to the nation of Israel and the whole world is referring to the Gentiles. Jesus was sent not just for the Jews, but also for the Gentiles. But someone else who doesn't believe context plays a role could interpret that text to mean that Jesus came not just to save the Christians, but to save everyone.
I think we're all just doing our best to try to interpret the Word in the way we think the Holy Spirit is guiding us to. As of now, this is the way in which God has revealed His truth to me. He has revealed something different to you. I totally respect you as a sister in Christ. I hope you feel the same.
Thank you AW. I do respect you. It is very hard sometimes to understand how differently we all see the same God. It is almost easier to understand those who don't believe in God at all.
Do you have more info on this? Though now I'm wondering if you mean Methodism vs. United Methodism. I know I've heard that UMs believe that unbelievers are still "saved" through grace, (so no need to pray fro them to get into heaven or do crap like baptism by proxy)
It seems like Calvinism = Reformed and I know Reformed and UM are pretty different. UMs believe in free will and reject predestination, for example.