On Sin

In the Garden of Eden
I was thinking. A lot of people think of women as weaker in faith, or more susceptible to sin, or unqualified for religious leadership, or simply as symbols of temptation because Eve was the one who ate of the apple, then offered it to Adam.

It seems to me that the opposite conclusions are more appropriately drawn from the scene, if you choose to read it literally.

Eve was tempted by Satan and succumbed. Adam was merely tempted by Eve. Doesn't that imply that Adam was more susceptible to corruption?

In the Las Vegas Airport
A friend loaned me a book by Richard J. Mouw called Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport. It's a Dutch Calvinist theologian's response to a scene from the 1979 movie Hardcore in which a dour Dutch Calvinist tries to explain his religion to a Pagan prostitute. He does a lousy job of sharing the message in a manner appropriate to his specific audience in the airport and to the late 20th Century audience more generally. Mouw has set out to write the response that the movie character should have given, if he really wanted to reach his audience.

I must admit that I know very little about Calvinism and "Reform" Christianity. In fact, I thought that most of us Protestants were "Reformed" and that Presbyterianism was based on the teachings of John Calvin, so what's the difference?

A lot, it turns out. For example, Dutch Calvinism is based on the TULIP doctrine.
T = Total depravity
U = Unconditional election
L = Limited atonement
I = Irresistible grace
P = Perseverance of the saints

I have only read the first two letters so far, but I have problems with both.

As far as total depravity goes, I have a hard time reconciling "love your neighbor" Christianity with the belief that we are all inherently depraved, though capable of some good acts. I prefer to think of most of us as inherently good, though tempted to commit evil acts from time to time. I'm still working on this one. I am willing to stipulate that every aspect of our lives is touched by sin. And that's not a pretty thought.

As for unconditional election, I have a hard time with the author's suggestion that we can determine who has been chosen for eternal life with God by the gifts they are given in this life. He gives the example of a Midwestern American woman raised in a Christian community and given the tools to foster her spiritual growth from a young age, versus a woman born in a small village in North Korea without the same supportive Christian community. My concerns are:

1. Who are we to assume we can know the mind of God? How can we know who is selected?
   
2. I don't think we can assume that only Christians will be elected, given that according to Calvinist doctrine, none of our own actions can merit salvation.
   
3. I am seriously uncomfortable with the implication that those selected by God will be born into wonderful families and live wonderful lives. That's too much of a short and slippery slope toward othering our neighbors. And it's too close to justifying the evil that befalls so many of us.

This has been an interesting read so far, though.