Opinion of Calvinism

[DC Al Fine]

As the forum's resident Calvinist, I thought I'd start the discussion.

What are your thoughts on Calvinism?

[Free Speech Enjoyer]

I was baptized Presybterian, but I couldn't really get myself to accept Calvinist doctrines.  While it's not a "horrible" philosophy, I have little in common with Calvinists.

EDIT: Actually, scratch that.  I did agree with some of the tenets of Calvinism, but my views changed after I read some theology books.

[afleitch]

It f-cked up one half of my family so any opinion I have would fail to be unbiased.

[DemPGH]

I actually had to go look it up to get straight what its tenets are. I stopped more or less after "total depravity" of humankind. Really? A grand pontification like that from a cleric is so positively outrageous that I have a hard time really characterizing what I think of it, and out of respect to you, DC Al Fine, I will not try. Then the second tenet, I think, was that you don't have a choice in going to heaven - God has chosen you, but somehow it's still possible to achieve "grace" if this or that - but maybe if the wind is blowing from a southerly direction it's different [sarcasm / hyperbole]. I haven't a clue, I simply can't get my head around that arrogance. Stopped reading about it after that.

HP. Although it is possible in later, more humane ages they relaxed some of that, or maybe just the verbiage surrounding it, which is certainly what the Catholic Church has done - relaxed the rhetoric.

[politicus]

In the Lutheran tradition we tend to see Calvinism as a harsher, more intolerant and joyless version of protestantism and my view of it is influenced by this tradition since my actual knowledge of the topic is rather limited.

Since Calvinism has an "image problem" in many countries it would be more interesting to hear from you what you like about it.

[Free Speech Enjoyer]

In the Lutheran tradition we tend to see Calvinism as a harsher, more intolerant and joyless version of protestantism and my view of it is influenced by this tradition since my actual knowledge of the topic is rather limited.

Since Calvinism has an "image problem" in many countries it would be more interesting to hear from you what you like about it.

It's definitely a good bastion for fundamentalists.  I don't think John Calvin himself had a problem with science or felt particularly strong about the issues fundamentalists rally about today, but they certainly like his conservative teachings.

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

In the Lutheran tradition we tend to see Calvinism as a harsher, more intolerant and joyless version of protestantism and my view of it is influenced by this tradition since my actual knowledge of the topic is rather limited.

Since Calvinism has an "image problem" in many countries it would be more interesting to hear from you what you like about it.

This is true in Anglicanism as well.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The biggest reason I'm Arminian is I fundamentally disagree with their doctrine of unconditional eternal security and their not believing in, to quote John Wesley, "efficacious grace".

[tik 🪀✨]

I was a Calvinist when I was Christian. I remember it deeply upsetting my sister. To me it just madesense when you consider omnipotence. Armenians couldn't face the cold truth that free will was an illusion, and that being saved by grace means no act on your part, only the realisation that you were elect. That utter lack of control and complete humility and fearful respect in the shadow of a God that chose me before time and loved me despite my asshattedness.

Yeah, those were the days.. I'm much happier without it.

[The Mikado]

Predestination > Free Will, so Calvinism wins on that leg for me.  Not so much the others.

[politicus]

Predestination > Free Will, so Calvinism wins on that leg for me. 

Why? Isnt life pointless if our fate is predestined?

[Oldiesfreak1854]

A wrong, but not horrible, doctrine.  While I agree that God certainly knows beforehand who will be saved and lost, but He gives everyone a choice while they are alive.  Although He already knows who will accept Him and who will reject Him, people ultimately have to decide themselves.  God doesn't create saved or lost people, He creates people that He knows will choose to be saved or lost.  Regardless of what you may think, Arminianism is on much stronger biblical ground than Calvinism.  That being said, I think Calvin was well-meaning, and I can understand where he would get predestination from.

[tik 🪀✨]

Predestination > Free Will, so Calvinism wins on that leg for me.

Why? Isnt life pointless if our fate is predestined?

Depends how you look at it. Since we don't know our own fates, life is still a mystery and exciting. But, you know no matter how tough it gets that it's under control.

The way I used to think of it was that choices are genuine, but that the route we take is the one God already planned for us before birth. Kind of confusing and contradictory I suppose. This is just how I reconciled it in my own head. No idea if it has a theological basis.

When you read about Moses advocating for the Israelites in Egypt, God himself hardens the Pharaoh's heart, violating his free will. In the Pharaoh's mind he was making his own decisions. Behind the scenes God is in charge.

[Sic Semper Fascistis]

I much prefer Lutheranism.

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

I much prefer Lutheranism.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this. (Although I know I still owe you my thoughts on some things.)

[Sic Semper Fascistis]

I much prefer Lutheranism.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this. (Although I know I still owe you my thoughts on some things.)

I still look forward to those, indeed.

All right, I probably shouldn't do this now, considering I have finals and papers to write, but here are a few quick comments. Sorry for the poor writing.

To be honest, I haven't put much thought in this and my knowledge of either religion is extremely basic. From my little historical knowledge, Calvinism and Lutheranism are the two "original" (or rather the earlies) reformed churches, which is already greatly appreciate, considering how much of an improvement over 16th Century Catholicism the Reformation was. Even today, Protestantism comes much closer to my "ideal" of religion, in that it is based on an individual relationship with God rather than on a strict hierarchy like Catholicism Honestly, Catholicism might be my least favorite religion, at least in terms of its structural principles, which always surprises me considering I was raised as a Catholic and the rest of my family still is. But the idea of a pyramidal structure of command defining the dogma and then imposing it to the greater number is abhorrent to me. Protestantism, though it doesn't go nearly as far as it should, at least starts formulating the idea that it is up to each of us to find out the truth, rather than being told what it is by the priest or the Pope. Unfortunately, this didn't stop most of Protestant churches from eventually becoming as dogmatic (sometimes more) than the Catholic Church.

With regard to Calvinism and Lutheranism themselves, Calvinism always struck me as an extremely austere form of thought, based on an extremely pessimistic vision of humanity. In essence, it seeks to restrain and punish the evil of humanity, as opposed to empowering it to do good. This is a terribly oppressive and obscurantist ideology, IMO. If I remember correctly, Calvin himself set up a sort of dictatorship in Geneva based on very strict norms of conduct and harsh punishments for those who didn't abide to them. While I don't know much about Lutheranism, the emphasis on strict social norms seems much less central in its religious doctrines, and when I see how the societies where it was dominant (Scandinavia and Northern Germany) have evolved, it's pretty clear that religion there wasn't as much of an obstacle on individual emancipation and societal progress as Calvinism or Catholicism. So it seems pretty good as far as religions (of which, as you know, I'm not exactly fond) go.

[TJ in Oregon]

I deeply disagree with Calvinism in many ways and, although I respect those who are strident in their faith, many manifestations of Calvinism lead us to a very flawed mindset where it doesn't matter what you do at all. On the occasion I do meet Calvinists up here north of the Mason-Dixon line, they sometimes take on a belief that since they said some prayer once, they're forever saved no matter what they do with their lives. To me that rings of a telemarketer weight loss type of scam: lose weight now with this little trick (!) and neglect the suffering that one must go through otherwise. Christ's life had suffering in it and ours likely will too if we are truly following him. Many of the issues I have with American style conservatism have roots in Calvinist thought. One idea that permeates though our discourse, especially on the right that is completely off in my opinion is the idea that the US is predestined for a sort of greatness, chosen by God to lead the world for the rest of time. Likewise, the idea that God rewards his people on earth with wealth and worldly success (ie. the prosperity gospel) also has Calvinist roots to it as well. In addition, Calvin was one of the main forces in the Reformation that argued a more complete jettison of the value of tradition than Luther did. None of these necessarily have to apply to Calvinism in theory, but in practice are the result of it in the US at least.

The other very significant problem I have with Calvinism, which many have mentioned already, is the lack of free will. It sets up God as a rather cruel figure, making people predestined for hell without the opportunity to choose to do otherwise. I was taught from a very young age that God loves us so much that He gives us the choice to follow him or not. This choice is deeply intertwined with the belief in the existence of the human soul; it is a piece of the mechanism by which God gives meaning to our lives. Without free will, we don't actually matter. We're just tools. Our lives don't matter. There's no point in having this conversation at all, since we couldn't change our minds if we wanted to anyway.

One of my personal struggles in life is against a despairing nihilism that says all humanity is hopelessly lost beyond any means I can see of turning it all around. But what breaks that idea is the intrinsic value of humanity, intertwined with the belief that God has created each and every one of us as fundamentally good beings, though in a fallen state. That difference shows the value of humanity and makes it much easier to love others no matter what state they're in. That's the model Christ showed us and the one we ought to emulate.

[The Mikado]

Predestination > Free Will, so Calvinism wins on that leg for me.

Why? Isnt life pointless if our fate is predestined?

Why does life need a point?

EDIT: In explanation, my thought process is a product of millions (billions) of pieces of information, memories, instincts, etc, and my thoughts are reactions to those stimuli.   I myself have shed millions of skin cells, dead hairs, nail clippings, etc. over the years that were once part of me and no longer are, and have cells in my body that weren't part of the original me that are now.  What am "I?"  I in my present form didn't even exist this morning when I clipped my nails.  How can "I" be said to be controlling my own fate when parts of me that didn't want that fate are sitting in a trash bin?

[Free Speech Enjoyer]

My position on free will is that it's okay to think you have free will as long as you accept that your thought process is, as The Mikado said, influenced by countless psychological, biological, and social factors.  I'm not yet convinced that any scientist has definitively proven free will to exist or not exist, which is why it's something I take to by faith.  On that note, there was only, I believe, one study conducted to "disprove" free will that was later considered "false" simply based on how free will could still have been applied to it in the grand scheme of things.  I think a lot of it depends on how one defines 'free will.'

[The Mikado]

My problem with free will in a shorter form is that it presumes that the brain/seat of consciousness is "you" in a more real way than the rest of your body, which is a presupposition I can't sign onto.  I don't order my lungs to inhale or my heart to beat.  I don't order my hair to grow.  How am I in control here?

Even with matters of the brain, consider: my grandfather went totally senile before he passed.  He forgot practically everything and required round-the-clock caretakers.  How is he in control of his own fate?  Where does his free will come into play?

[Free Speech Enjoyer]

My problem with free will in a shorter form is that it presumes that the brain/seat of consciousness is "you" in a more real way than the rest of your body, which is a presupposition I can't sign onto.  I don't order my lungs to inhale or my heart to beat.  I don't order my hair to grow.  How am I in control here?

Even with matters of the brain, consider: my grandfather went totally senile before he passed.  He forgot practically everything and required round-the-clock caretakers.  How is he in control of his own fate?  Where does his free will come into play?

I should have mentioned: I do not believe that every human being has free will to the same degree.  This is where defining free will gets tricky.  I concede that there are things people have absolutely no control over, such as basic functions of the body.

Until we fully understand how the human mind works (which sounds like a fool's errand, but I hope to be proven wrong someday), I'm not willing to put full confidence in either position.

[afleitch]

Having free will is neither here nor there. I just think the idea of it not existing and it being in the hands of a 'willful' god (apparently the only being who has free will) who micromanages everything from disasters to farting as being fairly futile.

[politicus]

Well, all you clever boys may be right. I just know that I couldn't bear to go on living if I didn't think I had control over my own actions via my thought process.

I see biological decay as completely irrelevant to who you are since I believe in an eternal soul unrelated to biology and biochemistry. Its a matter of faith, not science.

[opebo]

As the forum's resident Calvinist, I thought I'd start the discussion.

What are your thoughts on Calvinism?

So that's what's wrong with you.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I deeply disagree with Calvinism in many ways and, although I respect those who are strident in their faith, many manifestations of Calvinism lead us to a very flawed mindset where it doesn't matter what you do at all. On the occasion I do meet Calvinists up here north of the Mason-Dixon line, they sometimes take on a belief that since they said some prayer once, they're forever saved no matter what they do with their lives. To me that rings of a telemarketer weight loss type of scam: lose weight now with this little trick (!) and neglect the suffering that one must go through otherwise. Christ's life had suffering in it and ours likely will too if we are truly following him. Many of the issues I have with American style conservatism have roots in Calvinist thought. One idea that permeates though our discourse, especially on the right that is completely off in my opinion is the idea that the US is predestined for a sort of greatness, chosen by God to lead the world for the rest of time. Likewise, the idea that God rewards his people on earth with wealth and worldly success (ie. the prosperity gospel) also has Calvinist roots to it as well. In addition, Calvin was one of the main forces in the Reformation that argued a more complete jettison of the value of tradition than Luther did. None of these necessarily have to apply to Calvinism in theory, but in practice are the result of it in the US at least.

The other very significant problem I have with Calvinism, which many have mentioned already, is the lack of free will. It sets up God as a rather cruel figure, making people predestined for hell without the opportunity to choose to do otherwise. I was taught from a very young age that God loves us so much that He gives us the choice to follow him or not. This choice is deeply intertwined with the belief in the existence of the human soul; it is a piece of the mechanism by which God gives meaning to our lives. Without free will, we don't actually matter. We're just tools. Our lives don't matter. There's no point in having this conversation at all, since we couldn't change our minds if we wanted to anyway.

One of my personal struggles in life is against a despairing nihilism that says all humanity is hopelessly lost beyond any means I can see of turning it all around. But what breaks that idea is the intrinsic value of humanity, intertwined with the belief that God has created each and every one of us as fundamentally good beings, though in a fallen state. That difference shows the value of humanity and makes it much easier to love others no matter what state they're in. That's the model Christ showed us and the one we ought to emulate.

There's not much here I would disagree with.