Replies

You must read very selectively, due to the fact that God's love and God's mercy are paramount to us, as they have been to those of our persuasion down through the centuries. Woody demonstrated this much better than I can with some of his earlier posts. You might want to go back and read some of his statements on this thread. Additionally, you might want to consider the works of C.H. Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, Thomas Watson, and John Piper, to name a few. The depth of the treatment of the subjects of God's love and God's mercy seen in the works of these men is unrivalled in all of Christendom. We proclaim the wonder of God's mercy, recognizing that all of us deserve death and hell, yet by His love and His mercy He has chosen to save from among the totally undone mass of humanity.

I am glad I caught this. Someone said you had answered me 'masterfully' (you guys are always talking like that among yourselves).

You guys may talk about mercy but it is only in the context of one of the most horrendous views of God ever put forth, TULIP.

Thus, your expressions of grace, love, mercy are meaningless, since you attribute to God a coldness that only Calvin himself had. They are like most of Calvinist words-empty of any real meaning.

ftD to Jerry_M: Thus, your expressions of grace, love, mercy are meaningless, since you attribute to God a coldness that only Calvin himself had. They are like most of Calvinist words-empty of any real meaning.

Actually, some members of this particular group are quite unrepresentative of Calvin. You really must have a very limited acquaintance with Calvin's actual work. Calvin was neither cold nor careless. He was a very sober and diligent Bible student. The Institutes might be considered a dry and intellectual work by some but his Commentaries are outstanding in scholarship and are second to none in their devotional quality. I think if you examine his Commentaries, you'd readily see the real passion and love he had for the Word.

Arminius himself, while rejecting the teachings of the Institutes, recommended Calvin's Commentaries to his followers over all other reading except for the Bible itself, specifically mentioning that Calvin's work was more worthy reading than the patristic fathers. And Arminius was right to do so. Please do not tar the gentle and learned Calvin of Geneva with the failings of those who lay claim to his legacy. They routinely repudiate him while claiming him anyway.

One of the more amazing things about these "Calvinism" threads is that Calvin's most original contribution to theology is actually never discussed. His most original work dealt with what can be known of the Holy Spirit from scripture and is considered seminal in the development of theology. His Institutes and the derived TULIP doctrines are, as he readily admitted, directly tracable to Augustine and represent a forceful and more modern defense of Augustine's teachings on the subject, applied within the context of the Reformation. Calvin merely restated and reinforced the Augustinian position. He didn't invent predestinarian theology nor did he make a particularly extreme statement of it.

Re. 754.

Face it, you really do hate God (unless He somehow conforms to your understanding). Go ahead and worship the god of your imagination, I will worship the Creator who has revealed Himself through all of His Word and in the person of Christ Jesus.

He is Sovereign and Merciful, the Omnipotent Judge and the Lover of my soul, the One to be feared and the loving Father.