Calvinist Church Dumps Free Will Offerings

I read the article and this is one of the paragraphs:

"I want people who come to our church to know that they have absolutely nothing to do with how much money they put in that plate," Galan said. "God elected before the creation of the universe how much money will be collected in each of our offerings, and there is nothing that any human being can do to change that amount. The only 'free will' here is God's."

At least he is being logical. The next step for him, in this Calvinistic logic, is to realize that there is also no need to preach and he should find another line of work. Those who are saved, in Calvinist doctrine, are saved and those who aren't, aren't, and there is nothing anyone can do with any part of it. We are nothing but robots invented by a deity startlingly lacking in the compassion even his robots can show to one another. Strange doctrine...

 

Why not just join hand, pray to our Lord, thank Him for all the $ He had provided and use it as planned and then begin calling the offerings a special gift? Sounds like extreme behavior to burn money given by congregants! Wonder how they felt with their $ going up in smoke? Perhaps the offerings will now decrease! I've also heard of 'love offerings' for performing guests! Another thing to wonder about is by whose authority did he burn the $? Strange!!

 

Why isn't this in the joke forum?

...it's from the Holy Observer . . .

 

I can't believe someone took that seriously, lol!

 

It may be meant as a joke, but the logic is real.

 

No, Helen, the logic isn't real, and Calvinism isn't about logic anyway. It is about what we believe Scripture revealed. Please don't misrepresent our position to try to gain a few debate points.

 

Larry, I know Calvinism isn't ABOUT logic, for it defies it. I am not trying to score any 'points', simply making one. Nor am I misrepresenting anything.

 

Reformed belief does use logic, but it is logic from what the scriptures say, about God's nature, man's nature, the nature of sin, and the nature of redemption.

 

Helen, I must ask in all sincerety if you ever read The Sovereignty of God and verified its statements by all the scriptures stated therin? I am amazed that you take such an adamant stand in opposing what most of us clearly see as God's truth!! Just try it and pray that our sweet Lord open your eyes and your heart if in fact the claims are truthful! Sure worked for me!! Our sovereign God rules in the hearts of men!

 

This should forever put the rest the idea that Calvinism is a system based on logic and man's thinking. It should also put to rest the idea that Calvinists are trying to stuff God in a box of their own size and making. It should confirm that Calvinism is a system based on Scripture, and we are willing to let Scripture stand even when it doesn't make sense to our minds. Unfortunately, I doubt that it will.

Yes you are.

You said The next step for him, in this Calvinistic logic, is to realize that there is also no need to preach and he should find another line of work. This is misrepresentative. Calvinist insist that the gospel must be preached and that the elect must believe for salvation. Those who deny this usually deny the name Calvinist as well. Very few Calvinist would say that there is no need to preach. When you say this is the "next step," you are misrepresenting Calvinism.

YOu also said We are nothing but robots invented by a deity startlingly lacking in the compassion even his robots can show to one another.This is a misrepresentation of Calvinism. Either you understand Calvinism and know this is a misrepresentation, or you don't understand CAlvinism and think this is true. If you think this is true, then you don't understand Calvninism. If you understand Calvinism, then you don't think this is true. I am not sure which category to put you in. You keep saying you understand it, but then you say stuff like this.

Regarding man, Calvinism says that man is created in the image of God, but that the image of God is marred by sin. It is not destroyed. That sin has brought spiritual death so that man willingly and freely chooses to sin and reject God. He is not a robot being forced to do anything. He does just what he wants. God, in love, sent His Son Jesus Christ so that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. Nothing separates man from God except his own willful sin and rejection. Nothing prevents man from having salvation in Christ except his refusal to believe.

It has been a major doctrine of Christianity for centuries, and finds it root in the Scriptures. If that's strange, then so be it.

 

boy would my face be red if i were the original poster!

 

I think Ben's 'with it' enough to have known it was a spoof.

 

Calvinism is an extremely logical system. All points work well together. This is not to say that other systems are not logical. Some other systems are logical, if you start with different scriptural interpretations.

Even though I'm not a Calvinist, I can respect that those who are Calvinists are brothers and sisters in Christ who merely want to emphasize the wickedness of humanity and the greatness of our God. I just do not agree on the details.

Maybe I'm just a bit too postmodern here, but why is there always a such a fuss over this issue? A little bit of doctrinal variety over the non-essentials can be beneficial for intellectual and spiritual growth. We can learn much from different perspectives.

 

My comments should not be interpreted to mean that Calvinism is illogical, but rather that it is not driven by logic. Our first concern is not "Is this logical to our (depraved, darkened, and deceived) minds?" Our first concern is "What does Scripture say?"

 

I believe an "election collection" should have the SAME results whether the pastor gets up and calls for the offering or not!

It should also have the same results whether the congregation can hear or understand the pastor or not. So lets say that someone wants to call for the offering in German or French - the "appeal" should be just as effective without having to "explain in english" that everyone should be giving out of election.

(How much "outside help" does that election "collection" need from the speaker anyway?)

In Christ,

Bob

 

Of course the Calvinist would argue that if the "election collection" is not managed in the SAME way as an offering appeal in the Arminian model (so you just change the offering NAME and NOT the Arminian methods used to APPEAL for it) - then it is not really the "kind of election" they were thinking of --

How wonderful!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Although I respect our Calvinist brethren and wouldn't villify them in any way I believe Helen is right when she states that Calvinism defies logic. 1st Tim 2 v 4 clearly states that God desires all people to be saved, yet Calvinists say that this does not contradict their doctrine of Unconditional Election. No Calvinist has ever given me a simple explanation of this verse.

Kind regards to all.

Bob

 

I have just read John 5 v 40 where Jesus rebukes people for refusing to follow Him. If unconditional election was right that verse would have no meaning. How could Jesus rebuke people for refusing to follow Him if He they were not elected by Him in the first place.

Kind regards to all.

Bob