Bigotry Unleashed: "SeN" Declares Open Season on Calvinism and Other Faiths

[Philo Sofee]

Thanks, Dean—that does help to clarify. My understanding is the same as yours. The Mopologists have always maintained a facade where *they* never have anything negative to say about other faiths. But this latest “lashing out” against Calvinism shows that it really was a facade all along.

Well they certainly could not have gotten that approach from Joseph Smith..... He threw every other religion entirely under the bus as did Nelson with his weird talk about Priesthood Keys showing them the holy chosen nation and implying all others are locked out.

[Alphus and Omegus]

Calvinism is indeed a repellent and self-centered theology which allows and even glorifies all sorts of despicable acts such as slavery, tyranny, removal of women's rights, and much more. Just read up on RJ Rushdoony, if you have any doubt about what pure, undistilled American Calvinism looks like.

All that said, I think it's pretty clear that much of the enmity with which fundamentalist Mormons, such as Peterson, regard Calvinism stems from the fact that they also make similar intolerant claims. One could say at least one thing for the Calvinists, however, and that is they do not believe it to be sinful to read the words of theological critics.

[huckelberry]

Calvinism is indeed a repellent and self-centered theology which allows and even glorifies all sorts of despicable acts such as slavery, tyranny, removal of women's rights, and much more. Just read up on RJ Rushdoony, if you have any doubt about what pure, undistilled American Calvinism looks like.

All that said, I think it's pretty clear that much of the enmity with which fundamentalist Mormons, such as Peterson, regard Calvinism stems from the fact that they also make similar intolerant claims. One could say at least one thing for the Calvinists, however, and that is they do not believe it to be sinful to read the words of theological critics.

Calvinism has quite a wide variety. Rushdoony is so far out on an extreme end he somehow got his head stuck in his anus.

I guess it is a criticism of Calvinism that it doesn't protect better against such extremes.The difficulty is that the inventiveness of people aiming to create extremes can be hard to counter. It is like the growth of political extremes that form around political movements that have some good sense to start with.

Alpha, do you see specific central ideas in Calvinism which lead to Rushdoony extremes, supporting slavery instead of working to prevent it?

[drumdude]

To quote again what Dan has said about Calvinism:

Regarding Calvinism, I have tried to be appreciative and, where not admiring, at least fair. I’ve never forgotten a comment: “I would feel a whole lot better about Calvinism,” Daniel recounts, “if I had ever met a Calvinist theologian who wasn’t sure that he himself was one of the Elect.”

And said about appreciating other religions and worldviews:

I prefer to go beyond mere “toleration” to mutual appreciation. I’ve long loved (and have long appropriated) Krister Stendahl’s three principles for thinking about other religions and worldviews, including (most relevantly here) his endorsement of what he termed “holy envy.”

To push back on Daniel's assertion that no Calvinist is worried about their own election:

"I think it is a great honor to be chosen by God before the foundation of the world to be His child and to be kept by the power of God through faith. But nobody should presume that they are the elect. We should work out our salvation with fear and trembling." (Desiring God podcast, "The Calvinist," August 10, 2008)

"We should preach the doctrine of election. We should stand in awe of the mystery of it. We should be amazed that God has set His favor upon us before the foundation of the world. But we should not use it as a club to beat people over the head, and we should not presume upon it." (Desiring God article, "Does God Predestine People to Hell?" December 30, 2015)

"The doctrine of election is a very humbling and very reassuring doctrine. It’s humbling because it tells us we contributed nothing to our salvation. ... But it’s also very reassuring because it tells us that if we have faith in Christ, it’s going to hold." (Sermon transcript, "Doctrine: God," October 28, 1990)

"Now, how can you know if you’re one of the elect? The answer is, you can’t. That’s part of the point. It keeps you humble." (The Reason for God, chapter 11, "Religion and the Gospel")

"We should be careful not to treat election as if it were a comfortable pillow for lazy heads to lean on, rather than an incentive to holy living." (Knowing God, Chapter 19, "Sons of God")

"The important thing for us is not to pry into God's secret decrees, but to trust and obey Him in the light of what He has chosen to reveal." (Concise Theology, "Predestination")

"The mystery of election should lead us to humility and worship, not to arrogance or complacency." (Chosen by God, Chapter 10, "The Practical Importance of Predestination")

"We cannot know with absolute certainty our own election, but we can have assurance of salvation through faith in Christ." (What Is Reformed Theology?, Chapter 11, "Reformed Theology and Assurance of Salvation")

"We must trust in God's promises and strive for holiness, leaving the mystery of election in His hands." (Freedom of the Will, Part IV, Section V)

"The doctrine of election should lead us to humility, gratitude, and a deeper dependence on God's grace." (The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 2, "The End for Which God Created the World")

I recall Dan lamenting that Mormons aren't judged with a complete view, and are often dismissed with a false mischaracterization of their religion. It seems to me Dan is doing the same here.

[Alphus and Omegus]

Calvinism has quite a wide variety. Rushdoony is so far out on an extreme end he somehow got his head stuck in his anus.

I guess it is a criticism of Calvinism that it doesn't protect better against such extremes.The difficulty is that the inventiveness of people aiming to create extremes can be hard to counter. It is like the growth of political extremes that form around political movements that have some good sense to start with.

Alpha, do you see specific central ideas in Calvinism which lead to Rushdoony extremes, supporting slavery instead of working to prevent it?

The central problem of Protestantism is enhanced within Calvinist tradition, which is that there is no standard of moral authority. They claim that the Bible is their central authority, however, as anyone should know by now, the Bible can be interpreted in many different ways. Individual chapters and verses can have contradictory meanings in some people's views, let alone specific books.

Catholicism and Orthodox faiths can at least lay claim to legendary authority. Mormonism is founded on this same premise.

None of these claims are true, of course, since Christianity is just a mishmash of neo-Platonism with badly misinterpreted Judaism, which itself is a fusion of Egyptian religion and Canaanite paganism.

[Failed Prophecy]

The actual word DCP either doesn't know, or doesn't care to use is "Reformed". "Calvinism" is not the proper word to describe these belief systems. There's no such thing as Calvinist theology it's Reformed theology. Churches like the Orthodox Presbyterian Church or the Presbyterian Church in America are Reformed, not Calvinist.

Since DCP mislabels entire groups of people, it's only fair to keep using the term "Mormon".

[drumdude]

The actual word DCP either doesn't know, or doesn't care to use is "Reformed". "Calvinism" is not the proper word to describe these belief systems. There's no such thing as Calvinist theology it's Reformed theology. Churches like the Orthodox Presbyterian Church or the Presbyterian Church in America are Reformed, not Calvinist.

Since DCP mislabels entire groups of people, it's only fair to keep using the term "Mormon".

He doesn’t even acknowledge the Restoration movement is bigger than his Brighamite branch alone. He’s not a serious academic or person, he’s just a polemicist.

[Manetho]

Christianity is just a mishmash of neo-Platonism with badly misinterpreted Judaism, which itself is a fusion of Egyptian religion and Canaanite paganism.

None of the core elements of Judaism derive from Egyptian religion. (People keep trying to connect monotheism centered on Yahweh with Akhenaten's monotheism centered on the Aten, but the idea doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at it closely.)

[huckelberry]

https://postbarthian.com/2016/02/12/kar ... calvinist/
something from a rather opposite end of thought than Rushdoony. I do not think one has to agree completely with Barth to reject Rushdoony. There are all sorts of people who would reject him.

In 1922, Karl Barth loved John Calvin so much that he wrote a letter to his friend Eduard Thurneysen to confess that he could spent the rest of his life with Calvin alone! (♥) This short letter, which I've quoted below, has become so famous that anytime Calvin and Barth are mentioned in the same sentence this letter is referenced. I've seen it happen a half-dozen times this week alone! Barth loved Calvin, but does this make Karl Barth some sort of Evangelical Calvinist? The answer in short is Nein! Yet Barth was a Calvinist in his own way. I will explain, but first read the quote:

Karl Barth's letter to Eduard Thurneysen on June 8, 1922

". . . Eduard, what a business this is and how questionable whether it is quite that. I am definitely not homesick for the pastorate but have only a certain feeling that something thoroughly different should be taking place from what I am able to do here within the narrow limitations imposed upon me by vocation and capacity. The little bit of 'Reformed theology' that I teach is really nothing in comparison to the trumpet blast which needs to be blown in our sick time . . . Calvin is a cataract, a primeval forest, a demonic power, something directly down from Himalaya, absolutely Chinese, strange, mythological; I lack completely the means, the suction cups, even to assimilate this phenomenon, not to speak of presenting it adequately. What I receive is only a thin little stream and what I can then give out again is only a yet thinner extract of this little stream. I could gladly and profitably set myself down and spend all the rest of my life just with Calvin. But it is really like this for me at each point of the history . . . In the next semester there will be the same exercises in Zwingli. But it will always be only a beginning over which I must wring my hands . . . Thus 'teaching office' ==groaning; there can be no talk of "splendor." More than once what I presented at 7 a.m. was not ready until 3-5 a.m."

Barth, Karl, and Eduard Thurneysen. Revolutionary Theology in the Making: Barth-Thurneysen Correspondence, 1914-1925. Richmond: John Knox, 1964. 10. Print.

If an Evangelical Calvinist is defined by affirming the T.U.L.I.P., then hell no, Karl Barth was not an Evangelical Calvinist! (But neither was John Calvin!) Barth knew this misrepresentation of Calvin, and that's why he called Calvin a "demonic power" in his 1922 letter. Karl Barth did not affirm John Calvin's doctrine of Double Predestination (and even Calvin admitted it was a horrible and dreadful decree.) Karl Barth utilized and pillaged Calvin's theology, and entirely reconstructed Calvin's doctrine of predestination to his own revolutionary reconstruction of the doctrine of election in The Church Dogmatics, Vol. II/2. But, Barth was able to do so because he stood on the shoulders of the giant named John Calvin. Karl Barth is not an Evangelical Calvinist, but he is one the greatest interpreters and students of John Calvin, and therefore Barth was a PostCalvinist!

Rushdoody may be the American extremist most open about his perverted ideas but there are a number of people orbiting his type of thought. If Daniel Peterson wants to criticize them I say, great, good for him , go for it and God bless his snarky little....

[Alphus and Omegus]

Christianity is just a mishmash of neo-Platonism with badly misinterpreted Judaism, which itself is a fusion of Egyptian religion and Canaanite paganism.

None of the core elements of Judaism derive from Egyptian religion. (People keep trying to connect monotheism centered on Yahweh with Akhenaten's monotheism centered on the Aten, but the idea doesn't make a lot of sense when you look at it closely.)

I was not even thinking of Atenism when I wrote that. The Ten Commandments are like a slimmed-down ripoff of the Negative Confessions of Ma'at.

https://www.worldhistory.org/The_Negative_Confession/

And then of course, the gradual evolution of Hebrew religion from polytheism -> henotheism -> monotheism is very evident in the Biblical text. So while there does not seem (at present) to be a direct descent from Atenism, a similar process took place for the Israelite creators of monotheism as it did in ancient Egypt. It's not clear who invented Atenism either, or whether it survived or changed to something else.