Do Calvinist really believe that a person is either born into salvation or born into condemnation ?

Answer 1

Well all men which are born will take one of those paths but your question implies (though lacks) the word "inevitably" or you might mean "foreordained" into rather than born into - in the sense you mean they have no choice in the matter. I believe they have a choice.

But SOME Hyper-Calvinists certainly do believe the destiny of a man is foreordained by decree at or before a man's birth. This makes their God very much more like the god of Islam. His immutable decrees mean that any sinner saved is saved by irresistable grace (this comes from the I in the acrostic acronym TULIP) -
Grace is irresistable so the sinner can claim to have no part of his or her own salvation.
Yet the unsaved man is prescribed to perdition and he or she has only themselves to blame - yet the illogical Calvinism damns a person for NOT repenting and accepting Christ whilst at the same time declares that NO one can be saved unless the Father draws them through the preaching of the gospel. This causes a lot of difficulties for the Calvinist where the word "ALL" such as God wishes ALL men to be saved and Christ died for ALL men.
Indeed labyrinthine arguments have come from the Calvinist apologists to twist God's gracious offer of the gospel to reject the accusation that God created the damned for his own pleasure and despite their utter inability to repent (TULIP) they still get blamed and have to go to hell. Having wrestled with this for many years I concluded they misinterpret the following verse:
Romans 9
14What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

17For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

20Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

25As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.


By taking verse 18 to mean God actively hardens the will of those such as Pharoah and all the other reprobates - this makes God the ultimate puppet master where the hapless sinner CAN'T accept the free offer of the gospel which plainly says WHOSOEVER (ie all man are offered salvation but many refuse it) WILL - and turn it into a kind of pre programed necessary salvation.

The fact is God (according to Christian theology) offers salvation *through Christ alone* to ALL men. And by playing fast and loose with the scriptures there is a type of surrealism within some Calvinist Churches where the chosen enjoy the company of the chosen but almost shrug their shoulders over those who do not repent as opposed to Christ who wept over them.

Calvin's religion appeared to be an austere Magisterial Judgmental religion. The URL will give a fair report on this.

Calvin had to be the ultimate modern Reformed Pharisee. I have had many times discussing this strange Frenchman with others and concluded he was a Christian by name. His fruits seem to me to elude such an appellation.

The world is divided into those in Christ and those outside of Christ. By prying into the mechanics or the metaphysics of this in order to have a complete reducible theology can lead to a hardness of heart and a type of shoulder shrugging which removes the immediate command to love one's neighbor the way Christ did. And HE reserved His wrath whilst on earth and when on the final day of judgment, for the religious experts........................ think about it.

http://sbcoutpost.blogspot.com/2006/06/tiptoeing-through-tulip.html

Answer 2

Some do, some don't. Those that do, believe in what is theologically known as "supralapsarianism". Those that don't, believe in what is theologically known as "infralapsarianism" . Sometimes, you'll here the term "sublapsarian" instead of "infralapsarian", but I don't care too much for the nomenclature [sub]lapsarian. Why? It's a technical issue. A matter of semantics. The prefix Supra can mean: before, or above. Most Supralapsarians deem it as: before, which is the proper rendition for their view. I've encountered situations where Supras indeed held to a rather lofty view that the meaning is: above. Infra means: below, only in the sense that it "follows"-i.e. comes after (later)! This is why I say that I'm Infralapsarian. It's the proper rendition for this view! Sub means: under. It can also mean: next in line, but this is not the intent.
For the sake of those on the list who may not know what the controversy is about, I offer the following with the hope that it will be helpful.
The issue being dealt with is: When the decrees of election and reprobation came into existence were men considered fallen or unfallen? Were the objects of these decrees contemplated as members of a sinful, corrupt mass, or were they contemplated merely as men whom God would create?.
Supralapsarians believe that God, contemplating man as yet unfallen, chose some to receive eternal life and rejected all others.
Infralapsarians believe that God's decree to permit the fall logically preceded His decree of election. So, when God chose the elect and passed over the non-elect, He was contemplating them all as fallen creatures.
It is interesting that there's no Reformed confession which teaches the Supralapsarian view. In fact, the scriptures give support to the Infralapsarian view. In Ro. 9:21, Paul asks: "Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?" In Jn. 15:19 our Lord says: "... I chose you out of the world..." In Eze. 18: 32 we read that God takes no pleasure in the one who dies. In the preceding verse God even asks: "For why should [will] you die...?" He urges them to "turn and live"!
One final note: Supralapsarianism is associated with Hyper-Calvinism. Not that all Supralapsarians are Hyper-Calvinists, but all Hyper-Calvinists are Supralapsarians.

The above comments were in part extracted from: Phil Johnson's essays on "Hyper-Calvinism" and "Supralapsarianism, Infralapsarianism"; Loraine Boetner's "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination"; "The Works of B. B. Warfield".

Answer 3

Some people will believe anything.
If you tell the same lie often enough, it will eventually be seen as the truth.

Since religion is just a psychological fantasy, human beings should abandon it so that they can grow to respond appropriately to deal with the world as it is.

What a great idea.
Let's all try it right now.

Answer 4

If God is choosing who is saved, doesn’t that undermine our free will to chose and believe in Christ? The Bible says that we have the free will choice – all we have to do is believe in Jesus Christ and we will be saved (John 3:16; Romans 10:9-10). The Bible never describes God rejecting anyone who believes in Him or turning away anyone who was seeking Him (Deuteronomy 4:29). Somehow, in the mystery of God, predestination works hand in hand with a person being drawn by God (John 6:44) and believing unto salvation (Romans 1:16). God predestines who will be saved, and we must choose Christ in order to be saved. Both facts are equally true.

Answer 5

Kait's response got a chuckle out of me, because false religion will always give you something to do, and sure enough, "all you have to do" is right there to side with Islam and other worldly religions in attaining heaven based on the "all you have to do" of the decision for Christ.

And contrary to pwwatson's assumptions that Calvinism holds a maze of logical conundrums, I find Arminianism to hold the conundrums that Calvinism does not -- but that gets into apologetics beyond the scope of your question. He also addressed hyper Calvinism which is not biblical. And that partially answers your question, God does not condemn some and save others while giving us free will to accept or reject him (the latter concept being an assumption that he takes that we are not totally depraved, only partially guilty before the Lord).

Your question has two thoughts to it, and they need to be parted out. We DO enter this world under a federal representation of Adam in our guilt before the Lord. So yes, God would be fully righteous in condemning all of mankind to hell. Therefore, Calvinism states that all of mankind stands in need of a Savior. No one merits heaven on their own, and this is what I consider to be true Protestant belief, as opposed to Arminian belief that some can merit heaven on their own, i.e. those under the age of reason, developmentally deficient adults, and for some, the "chance" at redeeming yourself with a choice for Christ if you have never heard of him.

For Calvinists, the ONLY way to salvation is through God's prerogative, i.e. foreknowledge, predestination, and effectual calling that does draw God's people unto himself. This is reflected in the Old Testament with God's "chosen people" of Israel, expanded to the Gentiles of the New Testament. God's desire that "all men be saved" has a different meaning, then, of "all that he chooses" meaning not just the Jews anymore, but the same thing that the Jews understood in the Old Testament, i.e. a "chosen people" or a remnant that does not include all of mankind in salvation.

To assume that "all" really does this, gives us a God, by definition, who can only sit on the sidelines, hoping, wishing, and begging all of mankind to come to him. This is not the God that I read about in the Bible, who sent a flood to destroy the world; killed people instantly when they did not obey the law; demanded death for certain crimes; killed firstborn males in Egypt; and promises a "second death" in Revelation in a lake of fire reserved for the devil and his angels. He is not sad about relegating those who are not his own, to the fiery pits of hell. He is righteous in this act. To say that God would be sad, is indicative of a schizophrenic deity when he created hell in the first place specifically for the punishment of unbelievers. So who is His love reserved for? His own, obviously, elected unto salvation, the shepherd knowing his sheep, and his sheep knowing his voice. This gives the elect a wonderful comfort and knowing that God did not just respond to their decision. Rather he not only knew them prior to their decision, but loved them from before the foundations of the world were laid. And this overpowering love was predestined to bring them to himself at a time of his choosing, not ours, safely keeping us in the palm of his hand, saved from eternity to eternity. This to me is a supreme love that Arminians can't match with their theology.

Now, with all of that said, do we have free will? No, but we do have free agency to make day-to-day decisions, although without God's direct intervention, those decisions do not lead to God. They always lead away from him. This is our condition, and it is supported far more than pwwatson may think. How does any Christian have that fellowship with God then? The answer is through the work of the Holy Spirit, who empowers us to "see through a glass darkly" in our struggle against sin. But to rely on ourselves, rather than God, in our obedience is a fatal mistake that will end up with theology that ultimately teaches that God is not all-powerful and is nothing more than a choice on a menu that competes with the gods of this world for our attention. And that, to me, is a God not worthy of worship.

Answer 6

Of course. John Calvin was an inspired man.

Answer 7

Yes, and there is nothing you can do during your life to change it.

Answer 8

Yes they do.