Thoughts on Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion? I think I'm starting to become a Calvinist...

he drove one of the settlements of his followers to experience spontaneous psychosis, though it may have been mass ingestion of ergot but u like to think it really was the psychosis of his faith. Either way leave it to nordids to make a faith that evil and repressive

God doesn't exist.

Calvinist here (I go to Calvin College). ama

I lean more towards Lutheranism in my Protestantism, but I deeply respect Calvinist theology in its consistency as well as in the sense that i respect the Puritan tradition.

What is your response to "Why does God send people to Hell for eternity when he knew they would end up like that"? It seems to me that either Hell doesn't exist or God doesn't really love us as most believe. Romans 9 makes him appear ungodly and imperfect. Why does he crave worship so much? Is this how the infinite Creator of the universe behaves? Emotional and wanting?

This is the most complicated question in Christianity. Augustine says that God made us with free will, but did not create evil. The two ways that Calvinists answer it is that 1)everyone deserves hell but God saves some and 2)it is to God's glory that some are saved and some are damned (protestant reformed position)

But I lean more towards 1. God does nothing in some cases but intervenes in other cases. Also, the punishment of hell is more aptly seen as spending eternity in the absence of God, rather than a literal fire.

>Calvinist here (I go to Calvin College). ama
How does it feel knowing you are going to hell for the mortal sin of heresy?

Papist detected, better go do more good works or else you can't go to heaven!

Indeed, I can't be a garbage person and go to Haven when Christ explicitly asks us to do good deeds.

Do you know of any biblical passage to support your view of hell and not the fiery version?
y-jesus.com/jesus-say-about-hell/
I can't find a reason to worship a god who creates people for the sole purpose that they will suffer for eternity. If this can be twisted into an act of love, then anything can be described as an act of love, and a god could take on any quality and still propagate through human belief!

>This doesn't mean people are as bad as they can be
It literally does
>God chooses to save people unconditionally; that is, they are not chosen on the basis of their own merit.
Alright Sally I know you've been a puritan religious fanatic your whole life and spread the word of Jesus far and wide but none of that matters, you're still a worthless sinner and I'm gonna save Bob the child molester just cause
>The sacrifice of Christ on the cross was for the purpose of saving the elect.
I'm an all powerful omnipresent God but sorry I'm not powerful enough to save everyone
>When God has chosen to save someone, He will.
This drug dealing murderer was once a good christian so I'll still save him

Calvinism is morally and spiritually bankrupt.

>Criticizing the belief that you have to do GOOD things to get everlasting life.

You brainlets are entirely skipping the point. Doing good works is a product of sanctification - God saves the elect and makes us more Christ-like. Good works are a result of being saved, not a prerequisite for salvation.

>I think I'm starting to become a Calvinist, his arguments are literally irrefutable.

Calvin's is a dubious autist's grasp of Christianity through Scripture alone -- which, alas, is a reading which Scripture itself refutes (2 Thes 2:15).

What I don't get is:
if god has already chosen someone to be saved, what does that person have to gain by living their life like a pussy (since according to TULIP their saving will happen regardless)?
i'm curious, go on...

>It literally does
No it doesn't. Calvinists believe that God restrains people through common grace. This allows for the operations of governments among other things.
>Alright Sally I know you've been a puritan religious fanatic your whole life and spread the word of Jesus far and wide but none of that matters...
You don't understand the position you're trying to criticize. Someone who has faith in Christ is among the elect; they're the only people who are given saving faith.
>I'm an all powerful omnipresent God but sorry I'm not powerful enough to save everyone
He can but chooses not to. Is he obligated to save everyone? No one believes this.
>This drug dealing murderer was once a good christian so I'll still save him
Again, you don't understand what you're criticizing. We are saved through faith in Jesus Christ. If someone does not have faith they are not saved. Faith likewise produces good fruits. An unrepentant murderer does not have faith.

>if god has already chosen someone to be saved, what does that person have to gain by living their life like a pussy (since according to TULIP their saving will happen regardless)?
An elect person is regenerated and has their heart turned toward the love of God. As a product of this and the faith that they are given, they will desire to obey their Father. We don't obey God to get something out of it, we obey God because we love him.

God's favor is not divorced from human morality, but with respect to justification, it's not earned by the works and efforts of unregenerate, totally depraved humans either. Given a heart of flesh by God, regenerate humans will freely seek a moral life.

I don't think you've answered my particular question. What I mean is, if someone tells me "I've already decided whether or not I'm going to murder you next week, there's nothing you can do to change it", then I'm not going to waste my time trying to make friends with him or change his mind.

Similarly, if you tell me "Hey Chesterton, I'm going to give you $50,000 next week" and I know for 100% certainty that this will happen, you can bet your ass I'm going to go to my guy tonight and grab an 8 ball on credit.

The soul of a regenerate person has been permanently reoriented toward the love of God. It does not mean that they cannot experience moral failure (our love of God and obedience increases throughout our life) but to deliberately choose to live a life of sin because you are "already saved" means that you are not saved. Such a person does not show the fruit of his faith.

>Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
>2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
>3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
>4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

>James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Calvin's theology is flawed from its axioms because it only uses Sacred Scripture. The Christian faith can only be understood through Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Teaching Authority of St. Peter's Church, not through any one of those sources alone.

Of course Catholics think that scripture can only be interpreted by the magisterium, tradition can only be interpreted by the magisterium, and the magisterium can only be interpreted by the magisterium. Ultimately the only thing that matters in Catholicism is the magisterium.

Meanwhile Protestants think anyone should be able to pick up a Bible and invent their own theology for themselves. I'm sure that's how God wanted it. It's not like there's anything in the Bible establishing that Christ gave full authority to the Church in all matters of faith and morals--oh wait, there actually is!

>Peters church

The largest early theological controversy was one that Peter lost, and the final decision wasn't even made by him, but by St James

>Meanwhile Protestants think anyone should be able to pick up a Bible and invent their own theology for themselves.
Reformed theology does not teach this.
>It's not like there's anything in the Bible establishing that Christ gave full authority to the Church in all matters of faith and morals--oh wait, there actually is!
Not in the sense that Catholicism means that.

>If this can be twisted into an act of love, then anything can be described as an act of love, and a god could take on any quality and still propagate through human belief!
Pretty much. He's God, the father of reason and moralty.

If God is all-powerful and all-knowing then not only must He know the destiny of every human, but He also must have ordained it. If sin is displeasing to God (and it'd have to be if God is all-good), then humans in their fallen and sinful state are necessarily separated from God.

How does one determine which religion is correct, then? I can't determine whether or not Islam or Christianity describes God the best because I can't assess God's objective morality with my flawed judgment, but I also can't know for sure if Jesus or Muhammed were true prophets, either, simply because history can be faked in numerous ways. We know this is true, because more than one religion exists. If I knew for sure that Jesus rose from the dead, I would be a Christian. How do Christians overcome this leap of faith while ignoring other religions? Or can I arrive to Christianity through reason?

john calvin is a strong contendor for my least favorite person ever

Since this is a thread about Calvinism, I'll answer from that perspective. Christians have faith because we have been given faith by God through the means of hearing the gospel. As for "reasoning", from the Westminster Confession Ch. 1 (on scripture):
>IV. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.
>V. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scripture. And the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it does abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God: yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.

Man is unable to understand much less accept the truth of God unless his heart is congenitally changed by divine decree. This is an asked-and-answered question within Calvinist doctrine. A graceless person could theoretically make this choice, but he would never because of his instructive evil.

If doing good works is the product of sanctification, does that mean the atheist who does charity work is saved?

>I read a book, considered the options thought about converting to a religion

lmao at born again atomised "christians"

I was born and raised a Christian

The more John Henry Newman and Wittgenstein one reads the exponentially more retarded Protestantism seems.

Wittgenstein? He wasn't even catholic

These aren't arguments, these are dogmas. Of course you'd conflate those, though.

So? Protestant epistomology falls on its face in the light of late Wittgenstein. It's almost laughable.

I know they aren't, I just posted those for people unfamiliar with Calvinism. Barely anyone on this board has read Calvin's Institutes on the Christian Religion

Calvinism is a good way of landing yourself directly in hell by refusing to acknowledge that love requires freewill thereby nullifying the crux of Calvinism which is rooted in a modern philosophical interpretation of predestination.

Lol ok dude. Unfortunately I've read the Bible so I don't need to read anything else to know how retarded Catholicism is

So does Catholicism's, or don't you remember how the Investigations starts?

Election and choice aren't incompatible. free will affirms the will of God

The only people that can go to heaven are those who don't become drones for organized Christianity. The catholics are syncretic drones, the evangelicals are based on "Saved by faith alone," and the proponent for protestantism Martin Luther called the book of James, aka the book that says faith without works is dead, "The book of straw because it doesn't hold up to Romans." Let's say you're kind of heading on the right path of following the old Jewish law but you also accept Christ as you should so you pursue messianic judaism; well they have syncretic bullshit in their talmud.

My advice: Leave these foolish doctrines of men like Calvinism, etc, and seek out your own salvation (As the bible literally commands you to do verbatim) with a KJV or NASB. You can read.

Yeah I'm not in the mood to play with tautological calvinist bullshit. The bible was not intended to be a 5D chess match that could never be properly interpreted until the great John Calvin came along. The only way you would come to the conclusions that John Calvin came to would be if you intentionally soundbited verses from John the Divine under the instruction of the schizophrenic John Calvin. Anybody with basic reading comprehension understands that when it says Christ died for the world, that "world" means everybody, not the region of Jerusalem that Christ was in as Calvinists claim (and no I'm not strawmanning, this is a part of the crux your tautological circlejerk is based off of.)

I can understand how this system would be one way to grapple with the problem of evil as well as numerous other issues, but it just seems terribly unjust no matter what mental gymnastics you go through to try to make it sound okay. I would be shocked if there any non-Calvinist who heard this who would think, "Yeah, that seems perfectly fair."

History is slowly correcting her mistakes. Hopefully by the end of the century Calvinism will be completely dead.

The doctrines predate Calvin himself.

Wrong, Reformed Christianity is undergoing a renaissance

No one here has read it. Go back

To where, is there a theology forum?

I dont see how acknowledging the sovereignty of God over mind and soul, and His role in salvation is unjust

Of course someone with literal satan trips would say that they can't see how predestinating a very small few to be saved in the end is unjust and that anyone else who wishes to be saved but is not of the elect can't do anything about their deprived state because God didn't "choose" them (although the Bible says he did and Calvinism is blatantly wrong).

I already covered this. If God is all-powerful and all-knowing then not only must He know the destiny of every human, but He also must have ordained it. If sin is displeasing to God then humans in their fallen and sinful state are necessarily separated from God. The idea that man chooses his salvation, or in fact freely chooses anything in the manner described by conventional wisdom is absurd. What happens without God? Where do desires come from and what forms our nature? Like you said, there's no way to "exonerate" God, from the human perspective, for the problem of evil, and yet I am compelled to believe in Him, and find Him almost self-evident nonetheless.

>anyone else who wishes to be saved but is not of the elect
No such thing. You act like there are these people out there who sincerely want to believe in Christ but can't do it because God didn't elect them. There aren't any people like that. If a person is unregenerate then they do not desire God.

How can you get so abstract with what God is and still call him a "him?"

What makes him a "him." Surely not a penis or chromosomes. Is it intelligence? Do you find it insulting to imagine God as anything other than a male because it would imply sub-optimal intelligence?

Our knowledge of God is analogous. Or rather, our knowledge of God, the archetype, is a condescension, an ectype, suited to human understanding. This condescension is revealed to man by God himself infallibly through his word and is thus true. God has revealed himself as Father and has the qualities thereof. He has revealed himself as Son, and literally incarnated as a human man. It is correct to refer to God using masculine language.

I always find these high fallutin dogmas interesting but when I look up Protestant churches I'm always dismayed to see that they endorse fag marriages, abortion, female clergy, etc. I don't think I'll be leaving Rome anytime soon but I have a lot of respect for the Anglican church's role in the British Empire and I'm aware that the Church of England was heavily influenced by Calvin while maintaining some Catholic elements.

Anyway, for the time-being, I'm just reading the Bible. I don't really see the point of reading theology without knowing scripture well which I don't know well at all yet.

So you're saying what makes God male is that he identifies as male

Not a penis or chromosomes

So you're saying the trannies are correct when they apply this reasoning to themselves?

>So you're saying what makes God male is that he identifies as male
No. I am referring to God's self-revelation and qualities.
>Not a penis or chromosomes
God is literally a biological human man.
>So you're saying the trannies are correct when they apply this reasoning to themselves?
No. This semantic game isn't amusing.

If you're in North America, you could look into the denominations associated through NAPARC. If you're in another area I don't know enough to suggest anything.

Its more of reconciling free will and predetermination. These points are all derived from predetermination.

just stop tbqhwy
the problem is finding motivation to, which is hard to come by, albeit you should accept that you are addicted.

The desire to do evil, does that come from God?

First off Adam was made male in the image of God, Adam is the first male, thus God is a male. We know God through man,

Second Jesus is God and Jesus was a male.

...

made from a rib you stupid cunt

Yes, read Romans 9

>I would be shocked if there any non-Calvinist who heard this who would think, "Yeah, that seems perfectly fair."
Count me in.
I'm not a calvinist but its God's decision what is just. The question of what is moral and what is not was never mine to answer. It's terrifying and sad but why not.

I'd say that this was the stupidest thing I've read in a while, but then again this is a thread about calvinism and that's hard to trump.

god is light and light is a penetrative force, as is the idea of "good"
evil is seductive and inviting, dark like the womb

>Christ died for everyone

All this shit sounds like it's made up desu.