(July 30, 2015 at 2:07 pm)Nope Wrote: It was sort of interesting to read the debates between Catholics and Calvinists on the forum for Catholic Answers. Usually it just ended up in a bible verse slinging contest but at least the Catholics tried to explain how opposing verses actually fit with their theology. The Calvinist tended to ignore verses that didn't fit their ideology so I think that the Catholics came out a little better in those debates.
I have been told that Calvinists do not believe in an omnibenevolent god. I'd agree that their god is an ass but why worship him? Seriously, what is the point?
Drich has gotten annoyed at me for labeling him a Calvinist but some of his statements are similar to what I have read from other Calvinists. Westboro Baptists are a type of Calvinists although it would be unfair to think that they are a fair representation of anyone but themselves. The Good Person test by Ray Comfort is based on Calvinism.
Most practitioners of modern "Calvinism" would say they believe in an omnibenevolent God. I think though they distort the modern meaning of the word "good" though; to them it would mean only that anything that God does is good, and infinitely so, thereby leaving out partial goods and bads. This highly rings of indoctrination to me haha. As for the Catholic debate, I'd say they have an advantage, seeing as they literally prepare Jesuits for years, and for mainly this reason. The "Calvinist" side was most likely formed up of the regular people. At least that's my bet. Additionally, thank you for not condemning all Christians with those Westboro loons. I am not really sure on their belief relationships with other denominations, but I figure that most protestant churches should have something in common with Calvinism, since Protestantism stemmed from the Reformation that Calvin and Luther headed.
