How much, or little do you subscribe to the five points?

Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints

Just curious

I believe the Bible, so I believe all 5 points. You  cannot believe one without believing all 5 and be consistent.

[QUOTE=puritan_believer;168313]I believe the Bible, so I believe all 5 points. You  cannot believe one without believing all 5 and be consistent.[/QUOTE]

Calvinist soteriology is incoherent. It is logically ludicrous. It is horrific. It is so bad, in my view, that I cannot even bring myself to tell you what I think of it, because I realize your belief in it isn't really your fault, and I don't want to offend or lay the trip for it's existence on your door.

I love God. I've been born-again for 30 years. Yet if I discovered that your doctrine of salvation were true tomorrow, I would REJECT Jesus Christ and Christianity, and probably become a Hindu or something. You don't know me, but for me to say that means I REALLY hate Calvinist doctrine.

LOL. Now that we have that past us, how you guys doin?

[QUOTE=mnwillems;84641]How much, or little do you subscribe to the five points?

Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints

Just curious[/QUOTE]

1. Total Depravity I don't believe man is totally evil there's some good in people.
2. Unconditional Election I don't believe Jesus Christ died only for the elect, in that case, Israel is also the elect.
3. Limited Atonement I believe Jesus blood covers every sin of every man.
4. Irresistible Grace I believe by God's Sovereignity His grace is extended to everyone not only the elect.
5. Perservance of the Saints I don't believe Christians can't preserve in the faith without Christ.

[QUOTE=mnwillems;84641]How much, or little do you subscribe to the five points?

Total depravity
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints

Just curious[/QUOTE]

FWIW, I grew up in a Calvinist household, attended a Calvinist church most of my life, and hold a bachelor's degree from Calvin College:

1.  Total depravity:  It's harder to imagine a lower estimation of humanity, and harder still to imagine a God who characterizes himself as a loving father (and as a nurturing mother, cf Is 49, Is 66) would think of his children in such a manner.  If total depravity merely meant that no one is perfect, it would not be objectionable, but the idea that we are incapable of any act of goodness is despicable theology and completely out of sync with common experience.  Yes, human beings occasionally do horrendous things.  On the other hand, they also perform acts of great heroism and self-sacrifice (9/11 anyone?), whether or not they belong to a Calvinist fellowship.

2.  Unconditional election:  The idea that God chose to save some before the creation of the world becomes intolerable when it is realized that this means that he also chose to damn the rest.  Lest the Calvinist apologist claim that God does not do this in an arbitrary manner, but rather peers into the future and sees who will be faithful, I will point out that what I described is actually the Arminian doctrine of Conditional Election.

3.  Limited atonement:  This is the culmination of the tyranny of unconditional election.  God chooses to save some and damn others.  The offer of grace is only to the elect, who don't deserve it, and the rest, who presumably also don't deserve it, spend eternity in tortured agony.

4.  Irresistible grace:  If you throw out the first three, irresistible grace becomes a beautiful idea--the love and compassion of God overcomes the world.  As the continuation of 1-3, it's just another way of saying that people have no role whatsoever in salvation, presumably to keep it as arbitrary and nonsensical as possible.

5.  Perseverance of the saints:  Ditto to #4.  "It has nothing to do with you depraved worms--I'm doing the saving so just shut up and be saved."

Suffice it to say that I find the whole TULIP smells more than just a little past ripe.  Creeds usually arise as arguments against other creeds.  For those willing to dig into the history, it is possible to understand where Calvin was coming from and what he was trying to fix, but how anyone in 2009 can defend such a five point load of BS is beyond me.