Calvin's treatise on "The Necessity of Reforming the Church"

2,993 Views | 54 Replies | Last: 3 days ago by CrackerJackAg
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I have been going through a teaching series on this treatise and thought I would share some of the key takeaways and summaries (much thanks to ChatGPT with some of the summary points). I just think it is interesting, mostly some of the quotes by Calvin, to read what he actually had to say regarding the Reformation. I don't think anyone's mind is changing, but I do think it can be helpful to take in some of these words and get a feel for the position being taken.
(None of the below is my personal opinion or commentary)

Calvin wrote this treatise in 1543 to present to Emperor Charles V and the leaders of the Holy Roman Empire at the Diet of Speyer. It was meant as a defense of the Protestant Reformation, showing that the movement was not a rebellion or novelty, but a necessary return to biblical Christianity after centuries of corruption in the Roman Church. The overall contention was that The Reformation was not optional or divisive; it was necessary to restore the true worship of God, the purity of doctrine, the proper use of the sacraments, and the right government of the Church. Calvin argued that these four areas had been so deeply corrupted that reform was morally and spiritually unavoidable.

"The last and principal charge which they bring against us is, that we have made a schism in the Church. And here they boldly maintain against us, that in no case is it lawful to break the unity of the Church. How far they do us injustice, the books of our authors bear witness. Now, however, let them take this brief reply that we neither dissent from the Church, nor are aliens from her communion. But, as by this specious name of Church, they are wont to cast dust in the eyes even of persons otherwise pious and righthearted, I beseech your Imperial Majesty, and you, Most Illustrious Princes, first, to divest yourselves of all prejudice, that you may give an impartial ear to our defense; secondly, not to be instantly terrified on hearing the name of Church, but to remember that the Prophets and Apostles had, with the pretended church of their days, a contest similar to that which you see us have in the present day with the Roman Pontiff and his whole train."

"For, since Paul declares that the Church is "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets," (Ephesians 2:20) it necessarily follows that any church not resting on this foundation must immediately fall."

1. True Worship of God: Calvin begins with the worship of God, which he calls the chief purpose of human life. He argues that the medieval Church had replaced spiritual worship with superstition, images, ceremonies, and idolatry. He insists that true worship must be governed by Scripture alone and directed solely to God through Christ.
- The Mass had become a human invention that obscured Christ's once-for-all sacrifice.
- Images and relics had displaced the true focus on God.
- Worship had become "outward show," not inward faith.

"If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped; and, secondly of the source from which salvation is to be obtained.."

The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.
John 4:23

"I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honor of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course?"

In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Matthew 15:9

"Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere "will worship" evqeloqrhskei,a is vanity. This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate."

2. Doctrine of Salvation: Calvin next addresses doctrine, especially salvation and justification:
- The Church had obscured the gospel by teaching salvation through works, indulgences, and the mediation of priests and saints.
- The Reformers restored the biblical truth that justification is by faith alone (Romans 35).
- The grace of Christ, not human merit or sacramental performance, is the only ground of salvation.

"But the only man who thus seeks salvation in Christ is the man who is aware of the extent of his power; that is, acknowledges Him as the only Priest who reconciles us to the Father, and His death as the only sacrifice by which sin is expiated, the divine justice satisfied, and a true and perfect righteousness acquired; who, in fine, does not divide the work between himself and Christ, but acknowledges it to be by mere gratuitous favor that he is justified in the sight of God."

"The dispute is not, whether good works ought to be performed by the pious, and whether they are accepted by God and rewarded by him, but whether, by their own worth, they reconcile us to God; whether we acquire eternal life at their price, whether they are compensations which are made to the justice of God, so as to take away guilt, and whether they are to be confided in as a ground of salvation."

"Here, mighty Emperor, and most Illustrious Princes, it will be necessary to recall to your remembrance what I formerly observed, viz., that the safety of the Church depends as much on this doctrine as human life does on the soul. If the purity of this doctrine is in any degree impaired, the Church has received a deadly wound; and, therefore, when I shall have shown that it was for the greater part extinguished, it will be the same as if I had shown that the Church had been brought to the very brink of destruction."

3. Right Use of the Sacraments: Calvin criticizes the Roman sacramental system for turning signs of grace into magical rites:
- Baptism and the Lord's Supper had been distorted by superstition and false teaching.
- The Mass, in particular, was "the chief pillar of all superstition," making it seem like Christ is repeatedly sacrificed.
- The Reformers sought to restore the true meaning of the sacraments as signs and seals of God's promises, not works that earn grace.

"For seven sacraments were received without any distinction, though Christ appointed two only, the others resting merely on human authority. Yet to these the grace of God was held to be annexed, just as much as if Christ had been present in them. Moreover, the two which Christ instituted were fearfully corrupted. Baptism was so disguised by superfluous additions, that scarcely a vestige of pure and genuine baptism could be traced; while the Holy Supper was not only corrupted by extraneous observances, but its very form was altogether changed."

"For the priest separates himself from the rest of the assembly, and devours apart that which ought to have been brought forward into the midst and distributed. Then, as if he were some successor of Aaron, he pretends that he offers a sacrifice to expiate the sins of the people. But where does Christ once mention sacrifice? He bids us take, eat, and drink."

"Hence that most pestilential superstition, under which, as if the sacraments alone were sufficient for salvation, without feeling any solicitude about faith or repentance, or even Christ himself, they fasten upon the sign instead of the thing signified by it."

4. Church Government: Calvin argues that the Church's government had become tyrannical and corrupt:
- Popes and bishops sought power and wealth, not pastoral care.
- True biblical government by elders, pastors, and teachers had been replaced by hierarchical domination.
- The Reformers reestablished the biblical model of leadership, centered on service and teaching, not control.

"His object in appointing Bishops and Pastors, or whatever the name be by which they are called, certainly was, as Paul declares, that they might edify the Church with sound doctrine. According to this view, no man is a true pastor of the Church who does not perform the office of teaching. But, in the present day, almost all those who have the name of pastors have left that work to others. Scarcely one in a hundred of the Bishops will be found who ever mounts the pulpit in order to teach."

"We know the kind of examination which the Holy Spirit, by the mouth of Paul, (Epistles of Timothy and Titus,) requires a pastor to undergo, and that which the ancient laws of the Fathers enjoin. At the present day, in appointing Bishops is anything of the kind perceived? Nay, how few of those who are raised to the office are endowed even slenderly with those qualities without which they cannot be fit ministers of the Church?"

"But the most crying evil of all is, that they exercise a most cruel tyranny, and that a tyranny over souls. Nay, what is the vaunted power of the Church in the present day, but a lawless, licentious, unrestricted domination over souls, subjecting them to the most miserable bondage? Christ gave to the Apostles an authority similar to that which God had conferred on the Prophets, an authority exactly defined, viz., to act as his ambassadors to men."

"While the Church is oppressed by this tyrannical yoke, any one who dares to say a word against it is instantly condemned as a heretic. In short, to give vent to our grief is a capital offense. And in order to ensure the possession of this insufferable domination, they, by sanguinary edicts, prevent the people from reading and understanding the Scriptures, and fulminate against those who stir any question as to their power."

"It was forbidden by the ancient canons to give two churches to one individual. Well, let this prohibition be as if it had never been. Still, with what gloss will they excuse the absurdity of bestowing five benefices, or more, on one man? of allowing one, and that one sometimes a boy, to possess three bishoprics, seated at such a distance from each other that he could scarcely make the circuit of them in a year, were he to do nothing else?"

"And ancient Synods define the duties of a bishop to consist in feeding the people by the preaching the Word, in administering, the sacraments, in curbing clergy and people by holy discipline, and, in order not to be distracted from these duties, in withdrawing from all the ordinary cares of the present life. In all these duties, presbyters ought to be the bishop's coadjutors. Which of them do the Pope and his Cardinals pretend to perform?"


Calvin repeatedly insists that the Reformers did not seek to destroy the Church but to purify and restore it according to Scripture. He compares the situation to the prophets calling Israel back to God - reformation, not innovation. He argues that remaining silent or passive in the face of corruption would be a greater sin than separation.

"We are accused of rash and impious innovation, for having ventured to propose any change at all on the former state of the Church. What! Even if it has not been done either with out cause or imperfectly? I hear there are persons who, even in this case, do not hesitate to condemn us; their opinion being, that we were indeed right in desiring amendment, but not right in attempting it."

"…it is most unfair not only to boast as if they themselves were innocent, but also to insult over us; and that we, who desire nothing else than unity, and whose only bond of union is the eternal truth of God, should bear all the blame and odium, as much as if we were the authors of dissension."
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

I have been going through a teaching series on this treatise and thought I would share some of the key takeaways and summaries (much thanks to ChatGPT with some of the summary points). I just think it is interesting, mostly some of the quotes by Calvin, to read what he actually had to say regarding the Reformation. I don't think anyone's mind is changing, but I do think it can be helpful to take in some of these words and get a feel for the position being taken.
(None of the below is my personal opinion or commentary)

Calvin wrote this treatise in 1543 to present to Emperor Charles V and the leaders of the Holy Roman Empire at the Diet of Speyer. It was meant as a defense of the Protestant Reformation, showing that the movement was not a rebellion or novelty, but a necessary return to biblical Christianity after centuries of corruption in the Roman Church. The overall contention was that The Reformation was not optional or divisive; it was necessary to restore the true worship of God, the purity of doctrine, the proper use of the sacraments, and the right government of the Church. Calvin argued that these four areas had been so deeply corrupted that reform was morally and spiritually unavoidable.

"The last and principal charge which they bring against us is, that we have made a schism in the Church. And here they boldly maintain against us, that in no case is it lawful to break the unity of the Church. How far they do us injustice, the books of our authors bear witness. Now, however, let them take this brief reply that we neither dissent from the Church, nor are aliens from her communion. But, as by this specious name of Church, they are wont to cast dust in the eyes even of persons otherwise pious and righthearted, I beseech your Imperial Majesty, and you, Most Illustrious Princes, first, to divest yourselves of all prejudice, that you may give an impartial ear to our defense; secondly, not to be instantly terrified on hearing the name of Church, but to remember that the Prophets and Apostles had, with the pretended church of their days, a contest similar to that which you see us have in the present day with the Roman Pontiff and his whole train."

"For, since Paul declares that the Church is "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets," (Ephesians 2:20) it necessarily follows that any church not resting on this foundation must immediately fall."

1. True Worship of God: Calvin begins with the worship of God, which he calls the chief purpose of human life. He argues that the medieval Church had replaced spiritual worship with superstition, images, ceremonies, and idolatry. He insists that true worship must be governed by Scripture alone and directed solely to God through Christ.
- The Mass had become a human invention that obscured Christ's once-for-all sacrifice.
- Images and relics had displaced the true focus on God.
- Worship had become "outward show," not inward faith.

"If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped; and, secondly of the source from which salvation is to be obtained.."

The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.
John 4:23

"I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honor of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course?"

In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Matthew 15:9

"Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere "will worship" evqeloqrhskei,a is vanity. This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate."

2. Doctrine of Salvation: Calvin next addresses doctrine, especially salvation and justification:
- The Church had obscured the gospel by teaching salvation through works, indulgences, and the mediation of priests and saints.
- The Reformers restored the biblical truth that justification is by faith alone (Romans 35).
- The grace of Christ, not human merit or sacramental performance, is the only ground of salvation.

"But the only man who thus seeks salvation in Christ is the man who is aware of the extent of his power; that is, acknowledges Him as the only Priest who reconciles us to the Father, and His death as the only sacrifice by which sin is expiated, the divine justice satisfied, and a true and perfect righteousness acquired; who, in fine, does not divide the work between himself and Christ, but acknowledges it to be by mere gratuitous favor that he is justified in the sight of God."

"The dispute is not, whether good works ought to be performed by the pious, and whether they are accepted by God and rewarded by him, but whether, by their own worth, they reconcile us to God; whether we acquire eternal life at their price, whether they are compensations which are made to the justice of God, so as to take away guilt, and whether they are to be confided in as a ground of salvation."

"Here, mighty Emperor, and most Illustrious Princes, it will be necessary to recall to your remembrance what I formerly observed, viz., that the safety of the Church depends as much on this doctrine as human life does on the soul. If the purity of this doctrine is in any degree impaired, the Church has received a deadly wound; and, therefore, when I shall have shown that it was for the greater part extinguished, it will be the same as if I had shown that the Church had been brought to the very brink of destruction."

3. Right Use of the Sacraments: Calvin criticizes the Roman sacramental system for turning signs of grace into magical rites:
- Baptism and the Lord's Supper had been distorted by superstition and false teaching.
- The Mass, in particular, was "the chief pillar of all superstition," making it seem like Christ is repeatedly sacrificed.
- The Reformers sought to restore the true meaning of the sacraments as signs and seals of God's promises, not works that earn grace.

"For seven sacraments were received without any distinction, though Christ appointed two only, the others resting merely on human authority. Yet to these the grace of God was held to be annexed, just as much as if Christ had been present in them. Moreover, the two which Christ instituted were fearfully corrupted. Baptism was so disguised by superfluous additions, that scarcely a vestige of pure and genuine baptism could be traced; while the Holy Supper was not only corrupted by extraneous observances, but its very form was altogether changed."

"For the priest separates himself from the rest of the assembly, and devours apart that which ought to have been brought forward into the midst and distributed. Then, as if he were some successor of Aaron, he pretends that he offers a sacrifice to expiate the sins of the people. But where does Christ once mention sacrifice? He bids us take, eat, and drink."

"Hence that most pestilential superstition, under which, as if the sacraments alone were sufficient for salvation, without feeling any solicitude about faith or repentance, or even Christ himself, they fasten upon the sign instead of the thing signified by it."

4. Church Government: Calvin argues that the Church's government had become tyrannical and corrupt:
- Popes and bishops sought power and wealth, not pastoral care.
- True biblical government by elders, pastors, and teachers had been replaced by hierarchical domination.
- The Reformers reestablished the biblical model of leadership, centered on service and teaching, not control.

"His object in appointing Bishops and Pastors, or whatever the name be by which they are called, certainly was, as Paul declares, that they might edify the Church with sound doctrine. According to this view, no man is a true pastor of the Church who does not perform the office of teaching. But, in the present day, almost all those who have the name of pastors have left that work to others. Scarcely one in a hundred of the Bishops will be found who ever mounts the pulpit in order to teach."

"We know the kind of examination which the Holy Spirit, by the mouth of Paul, (Epistles of Timothy and Titus,) requires a pastor to undergo, and that which the ancient laws of the Fathers enjoin. At the present day, in appointing Bishops is anything of the kind perceived? Nay, how few of those who are raised to the office are endowed even slenderly with those qualities without which they cannot be fit ministers of the Church?"

"But the most crying evil of all is, that they exercise a most cruel tyranny, and that a tyranny over souls. Nay, what is the vaunted power of the Church in the present day, but a lawless, licentious, unrestricted domination over souls, subjecting them to the most miserable bondage? Christ gave to the Apostles an authority similar to that which God had conferred on the Prophets, an authority exactly defined, viz., to act as his ambassadors to men."

"While the Church is oppressed by this tyrannical yoke, any one who dares to say a word against it is instantly condemned as a heretic. In short, to give vent to our grief is a capital offense. And in order to ensure the possession of this insufferable domination, they, by sanguinary edicts, prevent the people from reading and understanding the Scriptures, and fulminate against those who stir any question as to their power."

"It was forbidden by the ancient canons to give two churches to one individual. Well, let this prohibition be as if it had never been. Still, with what gloss will they excuse the absurdity of bestowing five benefices, or more, on one man? of allowing one, and that one sometimes a boy, to possess three bishoprics, seated at such a distance from each other that he could scarcely make the circuit of them in a year, were he to do nothing else?"

"And ancient Synods define the duties of a bishop to consist in feeding the people by the preaching the Word, in administering, the sacraments, in curbing clergy and people by holy discipline, and, in order not to be distracted from these duties, in withdrawing from all the ordinary cares of the present life. In all these duties, presbyters ought to be the bishop's coadjutors. Which of them do the Pope and his Cardinals pretend to perform?"


Calvin repeatedly insists that the Reformers did not seek to destroy the Church but to purify and restore it according to Scripture. He compares the situation to the prophets calling Israel back to God - reformation, not innovation. He argues that remaining silent or passive in the face of corruption would be a greater sin than separation.

"We are accused of rash and impious innovation, for having ventured to propose any change at all on the former state of the Church. What! Even if it has not been done either with out cause or imperfectly? I hear there are persons who, even in this case, do not hesitate to condemn us; their opinion being, that we were indeed right in desiring amendment, but not right in attempting it."

"…it is most unfair not only to boast as if they themselves were innocent, but also to insult over us; and that we, who desire nothing else than unity, and whose only bond of union is the eternal truth of God, should bear all the blame and odium, as much as if we were the authors of dissension."


I agree with everything he said here. I do not agree with TULIP, especially limited atonement and double predestination.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
From what I have gathered, Calvin kind of gets a bad stigma attached to him due to the TULIP teaching, and I understand why it can be offensive. He however, seemed like he genuinely was concerned with the pastoral care for those in Christ.

Thanks for taking a look and chiming in.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

From what I have gathered, Calvin kind of gets a bad stigma attached to him due to the TULIP teaching, and I understand why it can be offensive. He however, seemed like he genuinely was concerned with the pastoral care for those in Christ.

Thanks for taking a look and chiming in.

Agree.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Baby and bath water.
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well…that's like your opinion man.

I'll personally pass on the dark age medieval whims of a smelly French man that ate with his hands and didn't bathe.

I just don't have much confidence in someone who created this whacky philosophy.

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

Sounds like a guy who was covered in **** all the time and read the Gospels in a foul mood suffering from dysentery while picking at a really bad boil.

"I'm crap, your crap, most everyone is crap. You can't not be crap. Even if you're an elected piece of crap your only a bit less crap and there's no hope you won't ever not be pretty much straight crap."

In regards to your comment about Calvin receiving a bad rap for having had the whole TULIP thing put on him unfairly:

The thought of Calvin maybe having been this pretty chill dude just having the worst day ever when he wrote that tickles me. His wife's in the background just lecturing about how with this newfangled "printing thing" that books are forever and you just can't go around saying stuff when you have a bad day. His dad just sitting over in the corner, picking his own boil, laughing and thanking God printed books didn't exist back in his day because he was a wild boy.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?

cvenag03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
what the hell are you talking about lol
Goose98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have been reading a book called "Fatal Discord-Erasmus, Luther and the Fight for the Western Mind" by a historian named Michael Massing. It's really some interesting history, not really written to argue one way or the other but I think it is well done (predating Calvin himself of course).

Some here might find it worth checking out, but it is a long book. Erasmus to the author is essentially a 'path not taken' in terms of ecumenical thought vs. the evangelicals that followed.
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
cvenag03 said:

what the hell are you talking about lol


I think Calvinism reflects the state of his times. I believe it is a dark and hateful take on The Gospels.

Calvin was an ignorant, dark age dirty, miserable person and his theology reflects it.

I think it's silly to follow any faith that came from that time period.
DarkBrandon01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CrackerJackAg said:

Well…that's like your opinion man.

I'll personally pass on the dark age medieval whims of a smelly French man that ate with his hands and didn't bathe.

I just don't have much confidence in someone who created this whacky philosophy.

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

Sounds like a guy who was covered in **** all the time and read the Gospels in a foul mood suffering from dysentery while picking at a really bad boil.

"I'm crap, your crap, most everyone is crap. You can't not be crap. Even if you're an elected piece of crap your only a bit less crap and there's no hope you won't ever not be pretty much straight crap."

In regards to your comment about Calvin receiving a bad rap for having had the whole TULIP thing put on him unfairly:

The thought of Calvin maybe having been this pretty chill dude just having the worst day ever when he wrote that tickles me. His wife's in the background just lecturing about how with this newfangled "printing thing" that books are forever and you just can't go around saying stuff when you have a bad day. His dad just sitting over in the corner, picking his own boil, laughing and thanking God printed books didn't exist back in his day because he was a wild boy.

Calvinism seems wacky until you start to piece together the puzzle that is salvation.

The bible says that salvation is a gift. It is not earned and you do not deserve it. Neither it is a test or reward. You cannot work towards salvation. It is not based on anything you do.

Ephesians 2:89
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Faith does not come from us, it comes from God. This means that God chooses who he wants to save and there are countless verses to back this up.

John 15:16
"You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give it to you."

2 Thessalonians 2:13
"But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth."

Acts 13:48
"And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."

These verses support predestination and TULIP is just the logical conclusion of predestination.

Many Christians oppose this idea because they have incorrect understanding of salvation. They believe that God owes everyone an equal chance at salvation, and that if God were to withhold salvation from anyone, or everyone, then he would be evil. This contradicts the idea that salvation is a gift that no one deserves. God could withhold salvation from everyone and still be perfectly good.

Many Christians wonder what happens to children who die before understanding the gospel or uncontacted tribes who have never heard the gospel. The bible is clear; they do not deserve salvation. If God allows them to die without ever having the chance to receive salvation, he is still perfectly good.

If this upsets you or makes you think that God is evil, then you have a fundamental disagreement with Christian theology.

Anyway, I am not trying to convert you to Calvinism. I am not even a Christian. I just find Calvinism fascinating because it is the only interpretation of Christianity seems honest and logically consistent.

dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DarkBrandon01 said:

CrackerJackAg said:

Well…that's like your opinion man.

I'll personally pass on the dark age medieval whims of a smelly French man that ate with his hands and didn't bathe.

I just don't have much confidence in someone who created this whacky philosophy.

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

Sounds like a guy who was covered in **** all the time and read the Gospels in a foul mood suffering from dysentery while picking at a really bad boil.

"I'm crap, your crap, most everyone is crap. You can't not be crap. Even if you're an elected piece of crap your only a bit less crap and there's no hope you won't ever not be pretty much straight crap."

In regards to your comment about Calvin receiving a bad rap for having had the whole TULIP thing put on him unfairly:

The thought of Calvin maybe having been this pretty chill dude just having the worst day ever when he wrote that tickles me. His wife's in the background just lecturing about how with this newfangled "printing thing" that books are forever and you just can't go around saying stuff when you have a bad day. His dad just sitting over in the corner, picking his own boil, laughing and thanking God printed books didn't exist back in his day because he was a wild boy.

Calvinism seems wacky until you start to piece together the puzzle that is salvation.

The bible says that salvation is a gift. It is not earned and you do not deserve it. Neither it is a test or reward. You cannot work towards salvation. It is not based on anything you do.

Ephesians 2:89
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Faith does not come from us, it comes from God. This means that God chooses who he wants to save and there are countless verses to back this up.

John 15:16
"You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give it to you."

2 Thessalonians 2:13
"But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth."

Acts 13:48
"And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."

These verses support predestination and TULIP is just the logical conclusion of predestination.

Many Christians oppose this idea because they have incorrect understanding of salvation. They believe that God owes everyone an equal chance at salvation, and that if God were to withhold salvation from anyone, or everyone, then he would be evil. This contradicts the idea that salvation is a gift that no one deserves. God could withhold salvation from everyone and still be perfectly good.

Many Christians wonder what happens to children who die before understanding the gospel or uncontacted tribes who have never heard the gospel. The bible is clear; they do not deserve salvation. If God allows them to die without ever having the chance to receive salvation, he is still perfectly good.

If this upsets you or makes you think that God is evil, then you have a fundamental disagreement with Christian theology.

Anyway, I am not trying to convert you to Calvinism. I am not even a Christian. I just find Calvinism fascinating because it is the only interpretation of Christianity seems honest and logically consistent.



1 Timothy 2 3-4 and 2 Peter 3 9 clearly state that God desires all men to be saved. Which nips TULIP in the bud.
1 John says God is love. Why would a loving God create people predestined to damnation? That would make God evil. Which is a fundamental disagreement with Christian theology.
And God does not owe anybody anything. The question is what is the character of God. God is love. Scripture says so.
I reject TULIP on Scriptural grounds.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
some atheist discovers TULIP
"bro Calvinism is the only honest Christianity"
proceeds to explain only right understanding of the Bible that didn't exist for centuries
"I'm not even Christian btw"
thanks. peak fedora energy.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

some atheist discovers TULIP
"bro Calvinism is the only honest Christianity"
proceeds to explain only right understanding of the Bible that didn't exist for centuries
"I'm not even Christian btw"
thanks. peak fedora energy.

Calvin radically changed the theology of predestination and election. Why should we accept this change? Calvinists will say because of Sola Scriptura but then disregard Scripture that directly refute Calvin's views on predestination and election.
TULIP is based on eisegesis not exegesis. You believe something and then make Scripture validate that belief. When the clear meaning does not.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
CrackerJackAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DarkBrandon01 said:

CrackerJackAg said:

Well…that's like your opinion man.

I'll personally pass on the dark age medieval whims of a smelly French man that ate with his hands and didn't bathe.

I just don't have much confidence in someone who created this whacky philosophy.

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

Sounds like a guy who was covered in **** all the time and read the Gospels in a foul mood suffering from dysentery while picking at a really bad boil.

"I'm crap, your crap, most everyone is crap. You can't not be crap. Even if you're an elected piece of crap your only a bit less crap and there's no hope you won't ever not be pretty much straight crap."

In regards to your comment about Calvin receiving a bad rap for having had the whole TULIP thing put on him unfairly:

The thought of Calvin maybe having been this pretty chill dude just having the worst day ever when he wrote that tickles me. His wife's in the background just lecturing about how with this newfangled "printing thing" that books are forever and you just can't go around saying stuff when you have a bad day. His dad just sitting over in the corner, picking his own boil, laughing and thanking God printed books didn't exist back in his day because he was a wild boy.

Calvinism seems wacky until you start to piece together the puzzle that is salvation.

The bible says that salvation is a gift. It is not earned and you do not deserve it. Neither it is a test or reward. You cannot work towards salvation. It is not based on anything you do.

Ephesians 2:89
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Faith does not come from us, it comes from God. This means that God chooses who he wants to save and there are countless verses to back this up.

John 15:16
"You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give it to you."

2 Thessalonians 2:13
"But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth."

Acts 13:48
"And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."

These verses support predestination and TULIP is just the logical conclusion of predestination.

Many Christians oppose this idea because they have incorrect understanding of salvation. They believe that God owes everyone an equal chance at salvation, and that if God were to withhold salvation from anyone, or everyone, then he would be evil. This contradicts the idea that salvation is a gift that no one deserves. God could withhold salvation from everyone and still be perfectly good.

Many Christians wonder what happens to children who die before understanding the gospel or uncontacted tribes who have never heard the gospel. The bible is clear; they do not deserve salvation. If God allows them to die without ever having the chance to receive salvation, he is still perfectly good.

If this upsets you or makes you think that God is evil, then you have a fundamental disagreement with Christian theology.

Anyway, I am not trying to convert you to Calvinism. I am not even a Christian. I just find Calvinism fascinating because it is the only interpretation of Christianity seems honest and logically consistent.




I appreciate you offering your thoughts on a faith system you won't accept for yourself and greatly misunderstand.

Sounds like you are justifying why you don't have faith in God using Calvin's twisted version of Christianity as an excuse.

My hunch is that you hate God and Christianity and Calvin embodies your feelings.

I hope you open your heart and don't use Calvinism to stop you from finding God.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
CrackerJackAg said:

I hope you open your heart and don't use Calvinism to stop you from finding God.

Ah, yes, the Calvinist hating, free will loving, pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality.

Ever been around sheep? I am always fascinated with the illustration as the Lord Jesus as the Good Shepherd and us as his sheep. They aren't really an animal that goes after and seeks out their shepherd when they are in need. They are almost wholly dependent on that shepherd to use that crook to bring them in when they go astray (not if they do, but when) and to not be consumed by countless threats. Sheep would literally die without their shepherd.

Ezekiel 34:11
For thus says the Lord God: Behold, I, I myself will search for my sheep and will seek them out.

dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

CrackerJackAg said:

I hope you open your heart and don't use Calvinism to stop you from finding God.

Ah, yes, the Calvinist hating, free will loving, pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality.

Ever been around sheep? I am always fascinated with the illustration as the Lord Jesus as the Good Shepherd and us as his sheep. They aren't really an animal that goes after and seeks out their shepherd when they are in need. They are almost wholly dependent on that shepherd to use that crook to bring them in when they go astray (not if they do, but when) and to not be consumed by countless threats. Sheep would literally die without their shepherd.

Ezekiel 34:11
For thus says the Lord God: Behold, I, I myself will search for my sheep and will seek them out.




Have no problem with that analogy. It is the double predestination thing. Believing God knowingly creates people pre ordained to ECT hell. Trying to force myself to believe that almost drove me crazy. Was depressed, drinking to sleep, almost suicidal.
I honestly do not know how believers in double predestination do it. I could not risk having kids knowing they could be pre ordained to ECT hell.
Guess I am different than Calvinists.
And I do not hate Calvinists and actually applaud them for their faith. I can't do it.
I want to add that I am not denying God's total sovereignty. The God I know and love's character would not pre ordain people He created to ECT hell. Even though He could.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

CrackerJackAg said:

I hope you open your heart and don't use Calvinism to stop you from finding God.

Ah, yes, the Calvinist hating, free will loving, pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality.

Ever been around sheep? I am always fascinated with the illustration as the Lord Jesus as the Good Shepherd and us as his sheep. They aren't really an animal that goes after and seeks out their shepherd when they are in need. They are almost wholly dependent on that shepherd to use that crook to bring them in when they go astray (not if they do, but when) and to not be consumed by countless threats. Sheep would literally die without their shepherd.

Ezekiel 34:11
For thus says the Lord God: Behold, I, I myself will search for my sheep and will seek them out.




Have no problem with that analogy. It is the double predestination thing. Believing God knowingly creates people pre ordained to ECT hell. Trying to force myself to believe that almost drove me crazy. Was depressed, drinking to sleep, almost suicidal.
I honestly do not know how believers in double predestination do it. I could not risk having kids knowing they could be pre ordained to ECT hell.
Guess I am different than Calvinists.
And I do not hate Calvinists and actually applaud them for their faith. I can't do it.
I want to add that I am not denying God's total sovereignty. The God I know and love's character would not pre ordain people He created to ECT hell. Even though He could.


Of course you are different than Calvinists

And that's a good thing
DarkBrandon01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I asked a Calvinist once if they planned on having kids, even knowing there is a chance they might not be elect. They still said yes. At the time, it blew my mind how this person could hold such a horrible belief. The main reason I find Calvinism interesting is because they acknowledge the unfairness and hopelessness of the unelect, and yet the still have faith. How could anyone have faith in God that was so apparently evil?

It reminds me of the story where Abraham nearly killed his son Isaac. I imagine being in Abraham's shoes and being told to kill me own son. I would definitely disobey God and believe he is evil. Abraham probably had doubts too, yet he stilled obeyed. He had faith that this apparently evil act was somehow good in a way he could not comprehend.

This is the same way that Calvinists view TULIP. I've listened to many of John Piper's lectures. He used to not be a Calvinist and then became one when he studied the bible in seminary. As he was coming to this discovery, he did not want it to be true. I think this is the case for most Calvinists, even Calvin himself. They wish it was not true, yet they still believe it is good anyway.

I completely disagree with morality of both TULIP and general Christianity, but I do have respect the amount of faith it takes to believe in these doctrines, especially Calvinism.

10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The proper Calvinistic response to the idea it is frightening to have children in a world in which God has preordained salvation is that God is in control and God has stated in his Word that children are a blessing. I would much rather the God, Creator, and Sustainer of the universe be in charge of who is saved than sinful man. I don't have all the answers and neither do you.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

The proper Calvinistic response to the idea it is frightening to have children in a world in which God has preordained salvation is that God is in control and God has stated in his Word that children are a blessing. I would much rather the God, Creator, and Sustainer of the universe be in charge of who is saved than sinful man. I don't have all the answers and neither do you.


What if YOU are a reprobate?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If I were, I would get what I deserve.

But the "P" in TULIP is my favorite. The Lord Jesus will ensure his flock will endure to the end, if we are truly His. What good shepherd would actually allow his little sheep to wander off and be consumed by the enemy? Not mine.

While we can all find ourselves in seasons of doubt, I know I belong to Jesus. Not because I ate of a specific loaf or was baptized at just the right time, but because I know who Christ is, what He did me on the cross, and I have placed all of my trust in him, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. I desire to mold my life after Christ as Scripture has outlined, and I aim to carry on until my time on Earth is over.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

If I were, I would get what I deserve.

But the "P" in TULIP is my favorite. The Lord Jesus will ensure his flock will endure to the end, if we are truly His. What good shepherd would actually allow his little sheep to wander off and be consumed by the enemy? Not mine.

While we can all find ourselves in seasons of doubt, I know I belong to Jesus. Not because I ate of a specific loaf or was baptized at just the right time, but because I know who Christ is, what He did me on the cross, and I have placed all of my trust in him, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. I desire to mold my life after Christ as Scripture has outlined, and I aim to carry on until my time on Earth is over.


What does that have to do with anything?

What if it's already a done deal that you are damned? A fate decided before you were even born

Not much you can do about that, right?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It in fact was determined before the foundation of the world as it says in Ephesians 1, 1 Peter 1, Revelation 13 and 17, 2 Timothy 1, and Titus 1.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

It in fact was determined before the foundation of the world as it says in Ephesians 1, 1 Peter 1, Revelation 13 and 17, 2 Timothy 1, and Titus 1.


So decent chance you're s*** out of luck, right?
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

If I were, I would get what I deserve.

But the "P" in TULIP is my favorite. The Lord Jesus will ensure his flock will endure to the end, if we are truly His. What good shepherd would actually allow his little sheep to wander off and be consumed by the enemy? Not mine.

While we can all find ourselves in seasons of doubt, I know I belong to Jesus. Not because I ate of a specific loaf or was baptized at just the right time, but because I know who Christ is, what He did me on the cross, and I have placed all of my trust in him, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. I desire to mold my life after Christ as Scripture has outlined, and I aim to carry on until my time on Earth is over.


How can you have kids with this theology?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

It in fact was determined before the foundation of the world as it says in Ephesians 1, 1 Peter 1, Revelation 13 and 17, 2 Timothy 1, and Titus 1.


Only if you interpret the elect, defined by Calvin, as the only saved people. I reject that. Why do we give so much credence to this man when Scripture nips TULIP in the bud. God desires ALL people to be saved.
Who created the supposed damned? And what does that say about God's character?
This is "Sinner's in the hands of an angry God stuff".
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

If I were, I would get what I deserve.

But the "P" in TULIP is my favorite. The Lord Jesus will ensure his flock will endure to the end, if we are truly His. What good shepherd would actually allow his little sheep to wander off and be consumed by the enemy? Not mine.

While we can all find ourselves in seasons of doubt, I know I belong to Jesus. Not because I ate of a specific loaf or was baptized at just the right time, but because I know who Christ is, what He did me on the cross, and I have placed all of my trust in him, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. I desire to mold my life after Christ as Scripture has outlined, and I aim to carry on until my time on Earth is over.


How can you have kids with this theology?

Well, since God is totally sovereign in this theology, did he really have any choice but to have kids? If God wants X number of kids for His elect from 10&B, what can 10&B do to stop Him?
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10andBOUNCE said:

If I were, I would get what I deserve.

But the "P" in TULIP is my favorite. The Lord Jesus will ensure his flock will endure to the end, if we are truly His. What good shepherd would actually allow his little sheep to wander off and be consumed by the enemy? Not mine.

While we can all find ourselves in seasons of doubt, I know I belong to Jesus. Not because I ate of a specific loaf or was baptized at just the right time, but because I know who Christ is, what He did me on the cross, and I have placed all of my trust in him, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. I desire to mold my life after Christ as Scripture has outlined, and I aim to carry on until my time on Earth is over.

This is my favorite part of the Calvinist dilemma. There seems to be a certain number of things you have to do to be assured of your perseverance. If it's not you doing it, then it's more accurate to say God has placed particular knowledge in your head that He didn't do for other, He made you put your trust in Him, and He is assuring you will carry on until the end of your time on earth.

What's crazy to me is that there are a number of atheists on this board that you have interacted with. These are real human beings. You probably know some atheists in real life to. And you have to look into that person's eyes or read their words on this board and know that they are only unbelievers because God doesn't want that person to be saved. That's it. DarkBrandon is bound for hell because God doesn't want to help him.

Once you moved beyond the conceptual and into the reality of Calvinism, it's absolutely brutal.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DarkBrandon01 said:

I asked a Calvinist once if they planned on having kids, even knowing there is a chance they might not be elect. They still said yes. At the time, it blew my mind how this person could hold such a horrible belief. The main reason I find Calvinism interesting is because they acknowledge the unfairness and hopelessness of the unelect, and yet the still have faith. How could anyone have faith in God that was so apparently evil?

It reminds me of the story where Abraham nearly killed his son Isaac. I imagine being in Abraham's shoes and being told to kill me own son. I would definitely disobey God and believe he is evil. Abraham probably had doubts too, yet he stilled obeyed. He had faith that this apparently evil act was somehow good in a way he could not comprehend.

This is the same way that Calvinists view TULIP. I've listened to many of John Piper's lectures. He used to not be a Calvinist and then became one when he studied the bible in seminary. As he was coming to this discovery, he did not want it to be true. I think this is the case for most Calvinists, even Calvin himself. They wish it was not true, yet they still believe it is good anyway.

I completely disagree with morality of both TULIP and general Christianity, but I do have respect the amount of faith it takes to believe in these doctrines, especially Calvinism.



Your bolded makes no sense. In Calvinism, God is doing 100% of the saving. He is placing 100% of the saving faith into these individuals. They have no choice but to believe what they believe. They aren't "acknowledging unfairness" and having faith anyway. They're forced to believe it.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

If I were, I would get what I deserve.

But the "P" in TULIP is my favorite. The Lord Jesus will ensure his flock will endure to the end, if we are truly His. What good shepherd would actually allow his little sheep to wander off and be consumed by the enemy? Not mine.

While we can all find ourselves in seasons of doubt, I know I belong to Jesus. Not because I ate of a specific loaf or was baptized at just the right time, but because I know who Christ is, what He did me on the cross, and I have placed all of my trust in him, albeit in a very flawed and incomplete way. I desire to mold my life after Christ as Scripture has outlined, and I aim to carry on until my time on Earth is over.


How can you have kids with this theology?

I have a lot more comfort in every walk of life with the fact God is truly sovereign over everything versus God is sovereign over most and left his creation to their own devices and free will.

To me, it is the opposite of your perspective. How can you have children and how can you as a parent take that amount of responsibility to raise them rightly and not screw up? How can you live with yourself if your children go astray? Did you do everything you possibly could have to lead them to the narrow path?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Banned said:

DarkBrandon01 said:

I asked a Calvinist once if they planned on having kids, even knowing there is a chance they might not be elect. They still said yes. At the time, it blew my mind how this person could hold such a horrible belief. The main reason I find Calvinism interesting is because they acknowledge the unfairness and hopelessness of the unelect, and yet the still have faith. How could anyone have faith in God that was so apparently evil?

It reminds me of the story where Abraham nearly killed his son Isaac. I imagine being in Abraham's shoes and being told to kill me own son. I would definitely disobey God and believe he is evil. Abraham probably had doubts too, yet he stilled obeyed. He had faith that this apparently evil act was somehow good in a way he could not comprehend.

This is the same way that Calvinists view TULIP. I've listened to many of John Piper's lectures. He used to not be a Calvinist and then became one when he studied the bible in seminary. As he was coming to this discovery, he did not want it to be true. I think this is the case for most Calvinists, even Calvin himself. They wish it was not true, yet they still believe it is good anyway.

I completely disagree with morality of both TULIP and general Christianity, but I do have respect the amount of faith it takes to believe in these doctrines, especially Calvinism.



They're forced

Ever force your children to do something they at first might refuse because you know it's for their own good?
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10andBOUNCE said:

The Banned said:

DarkBrandon01 said:

I asked a Calvinist once if they planned on having kids, even knowing there is a chance they might not be elect. They still said yes. At the time, it blew my mind how this person could hold such a horrible belief. The main reason I find Calvinism interesting is because they acknowledge the unfairness and hopelessness of the unelect, and yet the still have faith. How could anyone have faith in God that was so apparently evil?

It reminds me of the story where Abraham nearly killed his son Isaac. I imagine being in Abraham's shoes and being told to kill me own son. I would definitely disobey God and believe he is evil. Abraham probably had doubts too, yet he stilled obeyed. He had faith that this apparently evil act was somehow good in a way he could not comprehend.

This is the same way that Calvinists view TULIP. I've listened to many of John Piper's lectures. He used to not be a Calvinist and then became one when he studied the bible in seminary. As he was coming to this discovery, he did not want it to be true. I think this is the case for most Calvinists, even Calvin himself. They wish it was not true, yet they still believe it is good anyway.

I completely disagree with morality of both TULIP and general Christianity, but I do have respect the amount of faith it takes to believe in these doctrines, especially Calvinism.



They're forced

Ever force your children to do something they at first might refuse because you know it's for their own good?

I might have the capacity to physically make them do something, but no, I nor any other human has the capacity to force someone to truly believe something. Hence the reason so many kids leave the faith when they make it to college. Being forced to believe something requires removing the freedom to think for ourselves, erasing free will.
Captain Pablo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Banned said:

10andBOUNCE said:

The Banned said:

DarkBrandon01 said:

I asked a Calvinist once if they planned on having kids, even knowing there is a chance they might not be elect. They still said yes. At the time, it blew my mind how this person could hold such a horrible belief. The main reason I find Calvinism interesting is because they acknowledge the unfairness and hopelessness of the unelect, and yet the still have faith. How could anyone have faith in God that was so apparently evil?

It reminds me of the story where Abraham nearly killed his son Isaac. I imagine being in Abraham's shoes and being told to kill me own son. I would definitely disobey God and believe he is evil. Abraham probably had doubts too, yet he stilled obeyed. He had faith that this apparently evil act was somehow good in a way he could not comprehend.

This is the same way that Calvinists view TULIP. I've listened to many of John Piper's lectures. He used to not be a Calvinist and then became one when he studied the bible in seminary. As he was coming to this discovery, he did not want it to be true. I think this is the case for most Calvinists, even Calvin himself. They wish it was not true, yet they still believe it is good anyway.

I completely disagree with morality of both TULIP and general Christianity, but I do have respect the amount of faith it takes to believe in these doctrines, especially Calvinism.



They're forced

Ever force your children to do something they at first might refuse because you know it's for their own good?

I might have the capacity to physically make them do something, but no, I nor any other human has the capacity to force someone to truly believe something. Hence the reason so many kids leave the faith when they make it to college. Being forced to believe something requires removing the freedom to think for ourselves, erasing free will.


There is no free will to erase

- Calvinism
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Link?
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.