Ep. 76: Earthquakes, Toyotas, and submissive wives

[Brad]

Mike is a TULIP Calvinist. That group, if it engages at all in Christian love, does so in a fashion that is usually unrecognizable as such. You cannot expect them to replicate the broad-based charity and good will of the Catholics, Methodists, or even many Baptists. Instead, you will be better off expecting the kind of venom spewed by the Westborough Baptist Church/Phelps clan, although they represent the extreme end of TULIP Calvinism.

Well, to Mike's credit, the entire TULIP framework is based upon a very thorough and fairly straight-forward reading of the Bible.

So, clearly Mike is one of the "elect" and Scott and the rest of us are DOOMED!

It must be true, because it says so in the Bible, right?

[marcuspnw]

Mike is a TULIP Calvinist. That group, if it engages at all in Christian love, does so in a fashion that is usually unrecognizable as such. You cannot expect them to replicate the broad-based charity and good will of the Catholics, Methodists, or even many Baptists. Instead, you will be better off expecting the kind of venom spewed by the Westborough Baptist Church/Phelps clan, although they represent the extreme end of TULIP Calvinism.

Well, to Mike's credit, the entire TULIP framework is based upon a very thorough and fairly straight-forward reading of the Bible.

So, clearly Mike is one of the "elect" and Scott and the rest of us are DOOMED!

It must be true, because it says so in the Bible, right?

I grew up in the Reformed, Calvinistic tradition and these are the impressions that it has left on me.

There is genuine love but it is an uncompromising tough love. Calvinists are confident that the Bible perfectly
expresses God's will for every important aspect of life. If the message seems unclear, the fault lies in the human
heart that is by nature sinful. The calvinist does not accommodate the world because it is under the domain and
control of Satan. God and the devil have tremendous power while humans are mere pawns destined to obey
one or the other. Calvinists are extremely sensitive to heresy and mistrust established church tradition, personal
revelation and humanism. Any new ideas for Christian living must first be picked apart by examining scripture
in order to be trustworthy. This branch has had difficulty with reexamining the role of women in the church,
welcoming gay Christians into full fellowship, nontraditional gender roles in the family and ecumenical
movements. They strongly support the family and democratic government (both in the church and the world),
are anti-Communists, proclaim that you are doing God's work regardless of vocation and emphasize that men, as
husbands and fathers, are to be actively involved in church life including attendance at worship services.

The food at their potlucks is delicious.

[Tim-the-Hermit]

Is that why you have Hobbes as your avatar, marcuspnw? You're a Hobbes fan rather than a Calvin fan?

[marcuspnw]

Is that why you have Hobbes as your avatar, marcuspnw? You're a Hobbes fan rather than a Calvin fan?

Good one, Tim!

[Pseudonym]

I see what you're saying. But Ed was not the author of a book, and Emery did participate in the discussion of, and make many comments upon, the Christian proselytizing handbook.

Of course. I agree that there have been zero podcasts discussing books about Atheism. But, of course, there's really only been one series discussing books at all, and it was an experiment of sorts. I don't think we should read too much into this.

How many episodes were there, again?

Can't remember. They all run together after the first couple.

Still, my comments were based upon my own reflections with evangelicalism, in which I'm confident the majority of Deacons and Elders would have first soiled themselves upon hearing about, and second righteously and vigorously fired, a minister who would politely discuss or admit any merit within, any book advocating non-belief.

Granted my experience was in the U.S. Maybe things like that never happen in the more enlightened Australia?

Obviously that would depend on the church. In Australia, for example, you'd be more likely to get away with it in a typical Baptist Church than you would in a typical Presbyterian Church, which is the other way around than it would be in the US.

Having said that, I guess this should be taken in the context of the earlier note that in most US churches, ministers are payed by the congregation. Elders and Deacons probably have more power in such a system.

[Brad]

I don't think we should read too much into this.

Yes, I don't mean to make a big deal of it - just idle musing on my part. Still, back at the end of the discussion of the Turek book several people made suggestions for discussions of a contrasting book, there seemed to be some enthusiasm for the idea (not just my own), and then later Emery mentioned that he felt as though they were running out of fresh stuff to discuss, thus my curiosity about it. But no worries, the podcast is great, and if Scott and Emery get around to discussing an atheist book, that will be fun, and if not, that's fine, too.
I very much appreciate both their efforts to provide the podcast and forum for us all.

In Australia, for example, you'd be more likely to get away with it in a typical Baptist Church than you would in a typical Presbyterian Church, which is the other way around than it would be in the US.

That's very interesting. The divisions and quirks among and between denominations are a continuing source of fascination and amusement! Just what we'd expect from human beings, of course.

Having said that, I guess this should be taken in the context of the earlier note that in most US churches, ministers are payed by the congregation. Elders and Deacons probably have more power in such a system.

How are ministers of evangelical churches typically paid in Oz?