Calvinism: is it really this dark, hopeless and sin obsessed?

I'm trying to find out what exactly the Calvinist doctrine of predestination and the elect means, and more particularly how does one become part of the elect. Is it just reserved for Calvinists/Presbyterians? Does a good life lead to it?

I'm reading this page on a website called Calvinist Corner and it's really depressing reading: everything seems to be predicated on the supposed inherent evil of human beings.

The answer so far seems to be that God decides who is saved, and no matter how good a life you live it's irrelevant. And you're not automatically saved if you're a Calvinist/Presbyterian? Is this correct?

Read the following extract, however, as for me it's suffocating with its obsession with sin:

Predestination is the doctrine that God alone chooses (elects) who is saved. He makes His choice independent of any quality or condition in sinful man.... 2) Man's Sinful Condition

Man is sinful. He does not become a sinner by sinning. He sins because he is a sinner. He is depraved, which means that sin has corrupted all that he is: mind, soul, spirit, emotions, and body. Man is so engulfed in sin, so thoroughly touched by it, that there is nothing in him that merits or enables salvation. He, therefore, is born into a state of condemnation: "...and [we] were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest" (Eph. 2:3). This is not to say that we are as evil as we can be, rather, that all of what we are is affected by sin.

The heart is often referred to in scripture as the deepest part of man and the center of his spiritual nature (Esther 7:5; 1 Cor. 7:37; Rom. 6:17; Deut. 29:4). From the heart man understands (Prov. 8:5), reflects (Luke 2:19), feels joy (Isa. 65:14), and experiences pain (Prov. 25:20). Because of his depravity (sinful condition), man's heart is not only impure but desperately sick: "The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?" (Jer. 17:9). Also, it is out of the heart that we speak "...out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks" (Matt. 12:34), and what is in the heart of the person is what comes out of him: "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man" (Mark 7:21-23). It follows then that man's understanding, reflection, feelings, and experiences are all stained by sin.

The unregenerate person is a slave of sin: "For when you were slaves of sin you were free in regard to righteousness" (Rom. 6:20). That means that doing good is not a concern or need of the unbeliever-and naturally so for a person with a sinful nature. The unregenerate is inherently against God: "by abolishing in His flesh the enmity...thus establishing peace" (Eph. 2:15). Enmity is hatred, bitterness, and malice toward an enemy. That was our relationship to God prior to salvation; there was enmity between us.

So, the Bible reveals the true nature of man. It is evil (Mark 7:21-23), sick (Jer. 17:9), a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20), at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15), and, of course, naturally belongs in hell (Eph. 2:3). It then follows that out of his utterly sinful condition, only sinful desires and effects will follow. The question must then be asked, "How can a sinful person ever desire God?"



3) The Result of Man's Sinful Condition

Because of man's sinfulness, he is unable to understand God, seek God, or do any thing good: "...both Jews and Greeks are all under sin as it is written, 'There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one'" (Rom. 3:9-12).

Because of his sinfulness, he loves darkness rather than light; he loves evil rather than good: "And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil" (John 3:19).

Because of his depravity, he is incapable of accepting the things of God or understanding them: "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (1 Cor. 2:14). The natural man is the unregenerate man. The natural man cannot understand the things of God. Notice it does not say, "has trouble understanding," or "can if he's sincere," or "will be able to if he chooses God." It says he cannot understand. Salvation is one of those "things of God," and so is the understanding of being lost, of being a sinner, of needing repentance, etc. All of these are out of reach of the natural man. He cannot understand them.

So, in light of these scriptures, how can an unbeliever come to an understanding that he needs salvation if the Bible teaches that he cannot understand his need (1 Cor. 2:14), that his nature is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and that he does not seek God (Rom. 3:11)? It would seem that man's sinful condition does not permit him to desire, understand, or want God. What effect, then, does this condition have upon his free will?...

Jesus Christ. The whole thing. That's about the most depressing world view I've ever read. What are the positive, life-affirming aspects of Calvinism? Is there not a stronger emphasis on something positive, something beyond sin? What aspect of Calvinism gives hope to people in this denomination?

solodeogloria

Fuaranach wrote: »

I'm trying to find out what exactly the Calvinist doctrine of predestination and the elect means, and more particularly how does one become part of the elect. Is it just reserved for Calvinists/Presbyterians? Does a good life lead to it?

I'm reading this page on a website called Calvinist Corner and it's really depressing reading: everything seems to be predicated on the supposed inherent evil of human beings.

The answer so far seems to be that God decides who is saved, and no matter how good a life you live it's irrelevant. And you're not automatically saved if you're a Calvinist/Presbyterian? Is this correct?

Read the following extract, however, as for me it's suffocating with its obsession with sin:




Jesus Christ. The whole thing. That's about the most depressing world view I've ever read. What are the positive, life-affirming aspects of Calvinism? Is there not a stronger emphasis on something positive, something beyond sin? What aspect of Calvinism gives hope to people in this denomination?

Good evening!

The unmerited grace of Jesus. His mercy to us. His work in our lives.

I wouldn't use the title Calvinist at all. But I do hold that God does predestine people to salvation. I think the Bible is clear on this.

I had started discussing with another poster about my views on it earlier this week. I think you might have started a good thread for it.

Predestination is in and of itself life affirming. Nothing can thwart or stop Jesus' good purposes for our would no matter how bleak things look. God will bring people to Himself and He promises us that. Therefore we can be confident when we tell people about Jesus that if people are His they will hear His voice and come to Him.

If there was no rescue from sin then it would look bleak. But a Reformed view of salvation says that there is a rescue and that God promises that He will rescue people and open eyes.

That is hugely life affirming. There is a work that lasts into eternity. The work of proclaiming the gospel. The good news that Jesus died to save sinners.

By the by - another reason why this truth is life affirming is because our works don't bring us to God. You're right no matter what we've done God can forgive us and make us right with Him through His Son. Why is that depressing? It's great news.

antiskeptic: I'll pick up your posts on this thread too later.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Peregrinus

Is Calvinism "dark, hopeless and sin obsessed"? Well, it can be if you want it to be. I recall a piece by the Canadian humourist Stephen Leacock in which two dour, elderly Presbyterians constantly argued about whether damnation can be achieved by faith alone, or whether good works were also required. That was a joke, but we all recognise the phenomenon that he was poking fun at.

But most Christian traditions can be equally bleak, if you want them to be. (As can most non-Christian traditions, come to think of it.)

Calvinism isn't supposed to be negative and depressing. The focus of Calvinism is not sin, but grace; not damnation, but redemption; not destruction, but perfection.

It does start out from a fairly unoptimistic assessment of the world, which Calvinists traditionally see as "totally depraved", which is perhaps an unfortunate turn of phrase. "Total depravity" doesn't mean that each of us is totally depraved, or that everything we do is depraved. It means that the world we live in is shot through with depravity which reaches into everything we do and everything we are, and limits us, and damages us. So, the person who is neglected and then abused as a child, and who grows up unable to form functional relationships and ends up becoming an abuser to someone else? There's your total depravity at work right there.

Of course, you don't need to be a Calvinist, or even a Christian, to come up with this analysis of the human condition. What Calvinists bring to the mix is not the realisation that we are limited by, and trapped in, family and social and societal structures which can limit us and harm us; it's the notion that this is a temporary state of affairs, and aberration from how things should be. Before the Fall, it was not so and, through the irresistible grace of God in the redeemed and perfected world, it will not be so. And this isn't a perfection just offered to us as a race or species; it's a promise made to each of us individually.

Now, you make like that analysis of the human condition and of Christian faith, or you may not. But it's wrong, I think, to see it as something dark and hopeless and sin-obsessed. I'd argue that it takes a sober, but entirely realistic, view of the prevalence of sin and the structures of sin and how they affect us; the mess we're in. But that's just the starting-point, and the focus is not on the mess, but on the way out of the mess.

branie2

In the past, they didn't celebrate Christmas at all.

antiskeptic

solodeogloria wrote: »

antisceptic: I'll pick up your posts on this thread too later

Whenever is fine. I'm running around a bit at present so bear with me getting back to the thread.

Before investing too much on the issue of whether predestined or not, it might be worth addressing a precursor issue.

It seems to me that God deciding to move a person from category lost to category found either has nothing to do with the will of a person or depends utterly upon the will of the person.

If his decision has nothing do with the will of a person, then God having compassion upon whoever he chooses to have compassion on could be as simple a matter as him throwing a dice. Or working according to some kind of algorithm which sifts through fair hair, red hair, brown hair and saves (or not) according to the algorithm. Or something more noble than that but still mysteriously disconnected from our notions of fair play (which demands our will-participation)

If it has something to do with the will of the person, then we are in the territory of whether or not the will of the person fulfills the criterion God has for applying salvation to them. You might suppose that this criterion-fulfillment happens between the "many (everybody) are called" and "few are chosen".

If you hold to some form of the latter, then there isn't really any need to discuss predestination. The predestining here would be occurring because God knows, before the creation of the world, who will, in time, will-fulfill his criterion for applying salvation to them. In other words: the hinge-point of salvation becomes the will of the person: will they respond to the call issued to all, or will they not. All the badges of salvation which follow: chosen, adopted, saved, put in Christ, eyes opened, glorified are consequences of the will bringing about a tipping over the hinge point.

If you hold to some form of the former, then we ought proceed with the discussion.

antiskeptic

Fuaranach wrote: »

I'm trying to find out what exactly the Calvinist doctrine of predestination and the elect means, and more particularly how does one become part of the elect. Is it just reserved for Calvinists/Presbyterians?

As I understand it, Calvinism holds that God chooses who to save for reasons which have nothing at all to do with the will of the individual. The election is unconditional (the U in TULIP) - it has nothing at all to do with the will or desire of a man.

There appears to be a fatal flaw with TULIPS U however. You can assemble a list of conditions which the bible excludes from being involved in a man's salvation. You cannot, however, say you've identified every condition that is possible and found biblical exclusion for it. And so you cannot say UNCONDITIONAL.

Does a good life lead to it?

Thus no.

I'm reading this page on a website called Calvinist Corner and it's really depressing reading: everything seems to be predicated on the supposed inherent evil of human beings.

Peregrinus elaborates well.

When I was saved (not Calvinist saved, I might add), the realisation that there is something intrinsically corrupt about human nature was the most refreshing idea I ever encountered. The reasons why the world is the way it is (and has always been that way, and will always be that way) were now understood. It makes you a lot more forgiving of your fellow man when you realize that he's not fully in control of his actions. Culpable yes, but not fully in control.

I find it depressing when I encounter people who have faith that ultimately, mankind is on the up and up and will, eventually, get to the pinnacle and sort out all his problems

The biblical view tallies with what we see (and have always seen) on the ground

The answer so far seems to be that God decides who is saved, and no matter how good a life you live it's irrelevant. And you're not automatically saved if you're a Calvinist/Presbyterian? Is this correct?

I'd agree that how good a life you live has nothing to do with it. But I don't agree with Calvinism's position that it has nothing to do with us. This verse is instructive in how I see things work

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God's messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn't let me."

It speaks of God's LOVE yearning to gather, protect .. (i.e. save us from the WRATH of God). God want's that none would perish but that all would come to repentance. Salvation, in my view, depends not on whether you will it: the bible appears to exclude both a man working for his salvation and willing for his salvation.

Rather, your being saved depends on whether you will it not. If you will it not, you won't be saved. I'd bullet point it this way

- All men are born on a path that leads to damnation by default.

- God attempts to save all. He works to bring the person (or rather, the will of the person) to salvation

- if the person won't be brought, then they remain on the default path. They will be lost, because they willed it not.


Interestingly, Jesus describes the saving of men in fishing terms. The sea, in the bible, is a picture of destruction. So, men are fish in the sea (on the default path to destruction). God attempts to fish them out. Yes, they die if removed from the sea - but that's okay, you must die (spiritually) and be born again. If they won't be caught then they remain in the sea and are lost.

Jesus Christ. The whole thing. That's about the most depressing world view I've ever read. What are the positive, life-affirming aspects of Calvinism? Is there not a stronger emphasis on something positive, something beyond sin? What aspect of Calvinism gives hope to people in this denomination?

They are saved?

I'd agree Calvinism is depressing - in the sense of supposing that there is no hope of salvation for those who are predestined to be lost (for want of being predestined to be saved).

solodeogloria

antiskeptic wrote: »

As I understand it, Calvinism holds that God chooses who to save for reasons which have nothing at all to do with the will of the individual. The election is unconditional (the U in TULIP) - it has nothing at all to do with the will or desire of a man.

Good morning!

From what I understand this isn't quite accurate. Predestination also has an impact on the desires and the will on the individual. Only God can open someone's eyes to receive Him. Our innate desire is to reject God. It is only God that can change our affections to love Him.

This gives more precedence to the idea that God chooses those who believe. God chooses those who will love Him. God changes their hearts from hearts of stone to hearts of flesh to use Ezekiel language.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

antiskeptic

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

From what I understand this isn't quite accurate. Predestination also has an impact on the desires and the will on the individual.

Yes, but merely as a precursor to the salvation which is to follow inevitably. Which renders this 'impact' just a component in the overall process of predestined salvation.

God choosing to impact-unto-causing-man-to-respond-to-God is, Calvinism holds, unconditional.

Our innate desire is to reject God.

That's not quite true. The fact that man knows what is /does .. what's good (even as he knows and does what is bad) indicates man occupying a place between two stools. Men, in so far as they are attracted to doing what's good (by way of conscience) are indicating a love of what's good.

It isn't a conscience loving of God (as a being). But God is more than a being. He is goodness. He is truth. In so far as you love these, you love God. And in so far as you swing the other way you hate him.

homer911

The whole concept of predestination has to be taken in the context of a God who lives outside of time and space, knowing past, present and future all at the same time. Just because God knows who will be saved and who wont doesn't mean that we don't have a choice and free will. By acknowledging the all-powerful, all-knowing God of the Bible, you have to accept a form of predestination, but its a bit like a chicken/egg situation, something our human minds will always struggle to understand

Nick Park

homer911 wrote: »

The whole concept of predestination has to be taken in the context of a God who lives outside of time and space, knowing past, present and future all at the same time. Just because God knows who will be saved and who wont doesn't mean that we don't have a choice and free will. By acknowledging the all-powerful, all-knowing God of the Bible, you have to accept a form of predestination, but its a bit like a chicken/egg situation, something our human minds will always struggle to understand

I think this is confusing foreknowledge with predestination.

Predestination does not just mean that God knows who all be saved. It means that God determines who will be saved.

Personally, while I have good Christian friends who are Calvinist, I find it impossible to reconcile such a belief with the concept of a good God, or indeed with the Gospel, or with the problem of evil.

I would not want to worship a God who creates human beings that he has already purposed beforehand have no possibility whatsoever of being saved.

Equally, predestination when coupled with the Calvinist doctrine of Limited Atonement (the L in TULIP) nullifies the Gospel. We are left with the absurd conclusion that people are condemned for rejecting a Gospel (Jesus Christ died for you, and you can be saved by putting your faith in Him) which is actually untrue (because according to Limited atonement if you're not part of the elect then Jesus didn't actually die for you, and according to predestination you can't be saved because He has already programmed you so you can't put your faith in Him.)

The problem of evil, which is fairly easily explained be a free will argument, also then becomes intractable.

branie2

I think we Catholics are obsessed with sin as well

antiskeptic

Nick Park wrote: »

Predestination does not just mean that God knows who all be saved. It means that God determines who will be saved.

I think this confuses the biblical word "predestination" with the Calvinist understanding of the biblical word predestination.

As is being argued with Solo, one can better read 'predestination' to mean that which God (in advance) decided would be attached to those who would, in time, be saved by non-predestination means

Personally, while I have good Christian friends who are Calvinist, I find it impossible to reconcile such a belief with the concept of a good God, or indeed with the Gospel, or with the problem of evil.

Amen

I would not want to worship a God who creates human beings that he has already purposed beforehand have no possibility whatsoever of being saved.

Amen

Equally, predestination when coupled with the Calvinist doctrine of Limited Atonement (the L in TULIP) nullifies the Gospel. We are left with the absurd conclusion that people are condemned for rejecting a Gospel (Jesus Christ died for you, and you can be saved by putting your faith in Him) which is actually untrue (because according to Limited atonement if you're not part of the elect then Jesus didn't actually die for you, and according to predestination you can't be saved because He has already programmed you so you can't put your faith in Him.)

Amen again.

This is the problem with Calvinism. It leaves too many unsatisfactory solutions. You either reject the God of Calvinism or reject Calvinism itself and find more satisfactory solutions. I'm not sure how Calvinists rest in in Calvinism.