Abortion and TULIP

[annsni]

It's not my argument - I'm just pointing out that it's something of a logical conclusion of the 5-point Calvinist argument and that it poses something of a theological and moral problem.

If you do not understand the doctrine of grace, then don't say what it means.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

If you do not understand the doctrine of grace, then don't say what it means.

It is somewhat presumptuous to equate "the doctrine of grace" with Five-point TULIP Calvinism, considering that the latter wasn't invented until the 1500s. (OTOH, the doctine of God's grace had been taught in the Church long before that) :smilewinkgrin:

 

[annsni]

It is somewhat presumptuous to equate "the doctrine of grace" with Five-point TULIP Calvinism, considering that the latter wasn't invented until the 1500s. (OTOH, the doctine of God's grace had been taught in the Church long before that) :smilewinkgrin:

And there's a difference?

 

[Matt Black]

Yup - big difference between Augustinianism and TULIP-Calvinism.

So, I guess, annsni, that I'm just dumb and I need you to enlighten me: what is your understanding of the doctrine of grace, how does this agree or differ from TULIP, and how does your understanding of it assist in the abortion dilemma?

 

[Matt Black]

So what you're saying is that Calvinists believe God is the author of sin. Is that right? God makes man sin.

I don't see Scriptural support for that. Man is sinful - he sins because of that. Those who perform abortions are doing so because they are sinners. End of story.

Yes, but the OP question is to do with the victims of abortion, not the perpetrators - what is their status soteriologically, and how, if at all, is this affected by them being aborted, with particular reference to 5-point Calvinism.

 

[annsni]

Yes, but the OP question is to do with the victims of abortion, not the perpetrators - what is their status soteriologically, and how, if at all, is this affected by them being aborted, with particular reference to 5-point Calvinism.

God elects. End of story.

 

[annsni]

Yup - big difference between Augustinianism and TULIP-Calvinism.

So, I guess, annsni, that I'm just dumb and I need you to enlighten me: what is your understanding of the doctrine of grace, how does this agree or differ from TULIP, and how does your understanding of it assist in the abortion dilemma?

No need - you enlighten me. To me there is no difference.

 

[webdog]

God elects. End of story.

If only it were...

 

[Jim1999]

Frankly, I think someone needs to give the history of abortion, starting with the butchering of young women in back allies to rightly understand how legal abortions came about before pointing a finger.

Just perhaps someone was showing concern for the butchered women in those days, and the looseness of society has allowed free abortions to get out of hand.

Just perhaps there needs to be more education on what it means to engage in sexual promescuity. With kids getting involved at a younger age, perhaps parents need to spend more time with their children including sex education and relationships.

Just a thought, Cheers,

Jim

 

[Matt Black]

So, one shouldn't protest against abortion then, annsni, since it is all the will of God...?

 

[Doubting Thomas]

God elects. End of story.

Umm....no :smilewinkgrin:

God indeed elects but that certainly isn't the "end of (the) story" when it comes to evaluating TULIP (Calvinism) in light of what the Church has traditionally taught from the Scriptures regarding the relationship between God's grace and man's responsibility.

 

[annsni]

So, one shouldn't protest against abortion then, annsni, since it is all the will of God...?

Did I once say that God orchestrates sin? I don't think so.

 

[annsni]

Umm....no :smilewinkgrin:

God indeed elects but that certainly isn't the "end of (the) story" when it comes to evaluating TULIP (Calvinism) in light of what the Church has traditionally taught from the Scriptures regarding the relationship between God's grace and man's responsibility.

My response was to Matt Black who asked what happens to the children who are aborted. Are they saved or not. As I said, God chooses. What happens to the baby? I trust a sovereign, loving, just God. That's all I can say about it because God never told us in Scripture what He does with children that die before they're born.

 

[Matt Black]

Did I once say that God orchestrates sin? I don't think so.

I meant that since God wills who gets saved and who doesn't (according to your schema of soteriology) abortion makes no difference one way or the other. The implications of such a soteriological schema therefore profoundly disturb me.

 

[Havensdad]

So, it better soteriologically then for babies to die in the womb and thus go to heaven rather than make it out into the world and risk dying in their sins?

Do you believe that babies go to hell?

If you believe babies go to heaven (as the Bible teaches) this same thing can be said of any soteriology, Calvinistic or Arminian.

"Is it not better for those babies to die in the womb and go to heaven, than to later "choose" to reject God and Go to hell?"> Anonymous Arminian.

 

[Matt Black]

It was more a reference to (alleged) total depravity of newborns. But your point is well-taken generally.

 

[Havensdad]

It was more a reference to (alleged) total depravity of newborns. But your point is well-taken generally.

Newborns do have a depraved, sinful, corrupt nature. However, without knowledge of sin, there is no penalty. Newborns, having never consciously broken the law, have their new life in Heaven bought and paid for by the blood of Christ.

 

[Havensdad]

Of course, if Babies do NOT have a depraved nature, you have a situation where for all eternity in Heaven, the VAST majority of individuals, ARE NOT having to praise Christ for their salvation: which is contrary to scripture.

Depraved Babies are purchased by the blood of Christ. They are not saved by their own righteousness.

 

[webdog]

Newborns do have a depraved, sinful, corrupt nature. However, without knowledge of sin, there is no penalty. Newborns, having never consciously broken the law, have their new life in Heaven bought and paid for by the blood of Christ.

I agree with your view of infants, but have to say as someone who is reformed, your view differs from the majority of those who hold to the same soteriology. It's refreshing

 

[Matt Black]

Ditto: your view, with which I would agree, breaks the (theo)logical impasse presented by TULIP to which I alluded earlier