Do you think the teachings of John Calvin are correct?
Total Depravity, - also called "total inability," ... all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the necessity of their own natures.
I think this is too simplistic. I agree that we have always needed God and are lost without God. However, we are able to choose -once god gives us a choice- and God has done this many times even before Christ (as paul talks about how some were justified by their faith). You could even say all of life is a choice that God has given us, with our lives existing within God as our choices are revealed.
Unconditional Election, - asserts that God has chosen ... his choice is unconditionally grounded in his mercy alone. ... Those not chosen receive the just wrath that is warranted for their sins against God.
I agree that salvation is initially framed by God's gracious offer, however it is fulfilled by our partnership and cooperation with the Holy Spirit in receiving Christ.
Why would God invite all men and then only 'elect' some of them? The invitation is pointless then.
How can we be justly punished for God's choice?
"Many are called but few are chosen" (matt 22:14) the greek here is essentially 'many are invited but few are elected' with the same term as used for 'the elect' elsewhere. There is an aspect of us that stands outside of time, like God, and it was given to us by God - our spirits. I believe the decisions taking place between our spirits and God's spirit are sometimes described in other tenses because they happen in eternity (heaven's time) instead of in our time.
Limited Atonement, - Some Calvinists have summarized this as "The atonement is sufficient for all and efficient for the elect."
I agree. But it is limited by our relationship with God. I believe God knew that some would accept God and some wouldn't. Whether you look at that relationship within time as something that will happen, or look at it outside of time as something that did happen, the defining factor is not something God is doing to people or something people are doing for God. It is a relationship God is having -with- us and we are having -with- God.
Irresistible Grace, - The doctrine holds that this purposeful influence of God's Holy Spirit cannot be resisted, but that the Holy Spirit, "graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ."
How can you willingly and freely come to someone you can't resist? This is not grace, it's control. This is an anti-relational concept of grace. There may be something within us that makes it impossible for us to resist God's grace, but that something is a part of who we are, not God's hand in the sock puppet. God gave us our own hearts and our will to do with as we please, so that when we give them back to God we are truly giving them, not just pretending to.
In a relational concept of grace, God's grace is the power to change, flowing outward from his heart to find all hearts that will respond to it. When they are found, a relationship ensues and grace continues to flow through it.
Perseverance of the Saints, - asserts that since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end.
I agree in essence, because even if individuals resist God, some are bound to answer the call. God's will, will ultimately manifest in reality. Some will definitely continue in faith until the end, but who exactly, is being revealed by this life.
Calvinism vs. arminianism has been debated here before. Here's something from another thread about it:
When a child is in a mother's womb, is it not still an individual child with its own DNA? And who is causing the child to grow, is it the mother's body, or the child's body? The answer is both, although the mother's body is doing most of the work. But if the child's body doesn't do any work, it becomes stillborn. You can't say it's all the mother or it's all the child, it's relational, it's a partnership. ...
When God chose to give us a choice, his choice contained our choice. They are not mutually exclusive. In the same sense, it is God's will that we have a will.. for as long as it takes for our will to grow into partnership with his greater will, or, for as long as it takes to reveal that it will never do so.
