Ths author list of all those doctrines that are rejected by him.
I can find threads where Luther is slandered by RC's..and threads where Calvin is called names by Catholics.
Ya all are entitled to your opinion. If you would like to refute specific points raised here please do so..but whinning is not attractive...make a point and defend it.Calvinist welcome the challange.
We see our call to not defend a man or a church , but to defend the Holiness and the Glory of God..
I thought it was a very good article.
When a person becomes a believer, who does the believing?
1. Is it the man who does the believing? 2. Or does God do the believing for the man?
I don't see anything wrong with defending a man or a church. But that is beside the point. God's Glory and Holiness is not advanced by the repugnant and unscriptural teachings of Calvin on predestination. In bible when God is called "holy" it means that he is moral and just, not capricious like pagan gods. God is the Master of the Universe to be sure, and of course he CAN send us all to hell or save us all or do whatever he wants to do with us. But he is also LOVE. And to reject Calvin's horrific docterine is not to reject the truth that God is soverign.
And bringing up the notion that a Catholic, St. Augustine, also believed in predestination really does not help to advance the cause of Calvin because:
"It is just as difficult to find in the writings of the Fathers a solid argument for an absolute predestination. The only one who might be cited with some semblance of truth is St. Augustine, who stands, however, ALMOST ALONE among his predecessors and successors. Not even his most faithful pupils, Prosper and Fulgentius, followed their master in all his exaggerations. But a problem so deep and mysterious, which does not belong to the substance of Faith and which, to use the expression of Pope Celestine I (d. 432), is concerned with profundiores difficilioresque partes incurrentium quœstionum (cf. Denz., n. 142), cannot be decided on the SOLE authority of Augustine. Moreover, the TRUE opinion of the African doctor is a matter of dispute even among the best authorities, so that ALL parties claim him for their conflicting views."
So Calvin was not in accord with the consensus of Christian thought for the first 1500 years, with the exception of Augustine, and that is indeed an exception and a controversial one at that. And Calvin's theory was rejected by many of his peers for the "tendency of the human reason to revolt against Calvin's decretum horrible. Calvin's reckless tenets had banished charity and mercy from the breasts of his followers and had everywhere aroused a fierce spirit of strife and bloodshed." He who has been reprobated negatively, may exhaust all his efforts to attain salvation: it avail's him nothing. Moreover, in order to realize infallibly his decree, God is compelled to frustrate the eternal welfare of all excluded a priori from heaven, and to TAKE CARE that they die in their sins. Is this the language in which Holy Writ speaks to us? No; there we meet an anxious, loving father, who wills not "that any should perish, but that all should return to penance" (II Pet., iii, 9)."
I have to laugh when NC's resort to defending their notions by quoting the Fathers, that is Sacred Tradition, which they reject. Calvin's formulated a novel and horrible docterine. It is a horrible heresy. I am sorry for those who cling to it. Because as the quote above says, "it has banished charity and mercy from the breasts of his followers." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01740c.htm