usual suspect wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>> There are many protestant charities and relief organizations acting
>>> with great compassion for humans, and many protestants, individually
>>> and corporately, are very concerned about the environment and animal
>>> welfare.

>> But which ones espouse a specifically Calvinist theological position?

> Aid and relief agencies seldom "espouse" doctrine. They dispense aid.

Glorfindel wrote:

Well, there you are. Of course, there are *many* non-protestant
relief and charity organizations which do specifically identify
themselves with a theological position. On the national level, we
have such groups as the Episcopal Relief and Development fund,
of the Episcopal church, and Catholic Charities, and a wide variety of
charities identified with the various Franciscan orders. There
are Protestant groups such as the Salvation Army, but I don't know
which denomination they identify themselves with, so I can't say if
their parent group is Calvinist or not.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>> You've clearly said that good works are irrelevant --

> Strawman. I said they're the fruit of the redeemed; good works do not
> redeem sinners.

So did I.

>> a sort of mindless spasm resulting from a predestined salvation

> Strawman -- you *don't* understand Calvin, Matthew 25, or what I wrote
> about it.

I understand it. Parts of what you wrote are good Christian doctrine,
and are shared by the Catholic church. The aspect
which is so stressed in Calvinism, and which is less central to
Catholic doctrine is:

>>>>>>>>>>>>

> because God justifies those whom he
> previously elected, (Romans 8:30.) Secondly, although by the
> guidance of the Spirit they aim at the practice of
> righteousness, yet as they never fulfill the law of God,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Catholic doctrine generally stresses that, while the Holy Spirit
helps and encourages Christians to do good works, and we cannot
do them without God's help, yet humans do good works through
their own will, and through the good that is in them, because God
did create us good. Baptism frees us of Original Sin, and we
do express the good nature God gave us in our acts after that, as
well as doing individual sinful acts. We are not "utterly depraved"
in the Calvinist model. We cannot fulfill God's will *perfectly*
(being human and fallible) but we can fulfill God's will and His
law in part, with God as our helper.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> You've said we have no real need
>> to see the environment as God's;

> When did I say that?

see below

>> it's made for humans and we can
>> do anything we want with it.

> It's for our benefit and welfare.

No, it exists for God's glory. It is not for our benefit.

>> So why bother with environmentalism?

> I think it depends on how you mean "environmentalism." You most likely
> mean the old "watermelon" -- green on the outside, red on the inside --

I did not say that.

> as if socialism and communism have good track records for air, water, or
> people.

It depends on where, and what version, especially of socialism. A
number of socialist countries have better records on the environment
and social justice than the United States, which has a generally dismal
record under the last few Republican administrations, and is rapidly
degenerating.

> I don't think we need to embrace radical leftist ideology to
> have clean air and water.

Possibly, but it certainly helps.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> While you're at it, maybe you can explain why you call yourself a
> "vegan":

Because I am.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>