Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

[Robert Pate]

'Born again' is an abused phrase in non-Catholic sects. The Reformed tradition tends to use the word 'regeneration' to more accurately describe what the Bible means by the words. One's salvation is forensic, meaning it can be seen in the new nature of the person- but these other sects will have one believe it's being an unblemished sheep, which leads to terrible notions such as they do not sin.

The changed life is not evidence that one is saved. I know of some cultist that can outshine most Christians by their works.

Only those that have faith in Christ and his Gospel will be saved.

 

[Crucible]

The changed life is not evidence that one is saved. I know of some cultist that can outshine most Christians by their works.

Only those that have faith in Christ and his Gospel will be saved.

You all are so scared of the concept of 'works' that it's hilarious. As soon as anyone even makes a mention of a person being principled (contrary to reprobate) or forensic salvation (one's works reflected by their faith), you all run for the hills like a dirty bomb just set off.

It's because of that fact that Calvinism sort of slams into you, because it's a mark that your faith isn't effectual- as in, it's not genuine.
Must be a reprobate

 

[popsthebuilder]

You all are so scared of the concept of 'works' that it's hilarious. As soon as anyone even makes a mention of a person being principled (contrary to reprobate) or forensic salvation (one's works reflected by their faith), you all run for the hills like a dirty bomb just set off.

It's because of that fact that Calvinism sort of slams into you, because it's a mark that your faith isn't effectual- as in, it's not genuine.
Must be a reprobate

Of course Faith is effectual in the individual. If it is not then how much do you really believe?

Right?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Nang]

That is not true.

Only when the generation before the flood became unsavable were they destroyed.

Unsavable? No. Reprobate (left sinful, and thereby to suffer from their sinfulness, by the ordinance of God.)

Destroyed? No. Judged. With water. Next judgment will be with fire.

The law was given in order that men could stay within bounds of being able to believe God when He spoke to them.

The law was given in covenant from God to Adam so that man could choose to live a holy life according to God's moral standards. Adam did not believe the terms of this covenant, did not love God, and broke this covenant (as the federal head and representative of the human race). Hosea 6:7

Even little children, even the intellectual impaired can believe before becoming regenerate.

When little children or the intellectually impaired believe, it is because God in His grace has already regenerated them and raised them to life by the power of His Holy Spirit.

 

[Robert Pate]

You all are so scared of the concept of 'works' that it's hilarious. As soon as anyone even makes a mention of a person being principled (contrary to reprobate) or forensic salvation (one's works reflected by their faith), you all run for the hills like a dirty bomb just set off.

It's because of that fact that Calvinism sort of slams into you, because it's a mark that your faith isn't effectual- as in, it's not genuine.
Must be a reprobate

The Bible and the writings of Paul are most certainly anti-works. The reason for that is because that is the most natural way for a man to be saved.

Be a good person. Do good things and God will accept you into heaven. Its one of the devils biggest lies. If we could become acceptable to God by our good works, then Jesus lived and died in vain.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

[MENTION=9508]Robert Pate[/MENTION]

And the original topic is "Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?" which you have not really addressed.

Go back and catch up, Robert. I am not posting in a dark corner where all is not readily available to review. If you have something other than opinion to offer up based upon my detailed posts, I have ears to hear. :AMR:

AMR

 

[Robert Pate]

[MENTION=9508]Robert Pate[/MENTION]


Go back and catch up, Robert. I am not posting in a dark corner where all is not readily available to review. If you have something other than opinion to offer up based upon my detailed posts, I have ears to hear. :AMR:

AMR

You don't need darkness, you like smoke screens. Your detailed post?

You can't defend a God that predestinates people to hell and you know it.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Of you didn't mind the diversions then you wouldn't have mentioned them.

Non Trinitarians should be able to speak on the topic like anyone else.

GOD's omnipotence and omniscience are attested to in scripture. GOD formed existence as we know it. GOD also ordained the elect according to scripture.

The elect are to be guides to the rest. And though the rest may not be ordained that doesn't mean they are doomed to hell. Why would there be elect if all others are damned anyway? Though we know that all may not be saved due to bondage to sin, we also know that it is the will of GOD for all to be saved. Does the Calvinist doctrine say that whoever isn't elect is damned to hell?

AMR? Nang? ? ??

I had high hopes for you, but the above is sad to read.

Those that vehemently deny the Triune Godhead have no warrant to discuss anything concerning special revelation, for they have already demonstrated their inability to understand Scripture and are not open to correction. A house built upon sand cannot stand. Beware of these sorts that bring scandal upon God. Do not give the entrenched Arian/Unitarian a platform to spread their error, lest you lead others to stumble.

I have answered your ending questions earlier. There are only three types of persons in the world. The unregenerated elect, the elect, and the reprobate. There is no extra group, your "though the rest may not be ordained that doesn't mean they are doomed to hell". It is as if you think elect means an extra special class of folks outside of the ordinary believer (the elect), this special class being some sort of priestly folk that lead others to the Lord by their walk of faith. No. No. No. All believers are elect. Those not believing are either the elect not yet regenerated or the reprobate.

And yes, Scripture (and therefore the Reformed and all of orthodox Christendom) teaches us that anyone who is not elected unto salvation—no matter what their view of election may be—is on their way to eternal punishment in Hell.

AMR

 

[Crucible]

The Bible and the writings of Paul are most certainly anti-works. The reason for that is because that is the most natural way for a man to be saved.

Be a good person. Do good things and God will accept you into heaven. Its one of the devils biggest lies. If we could become acceptable to God by our good works, then Jesus lived and died in vain.

'Anti-works'

:rotfl:

Apparently you don't understand the difference between 'faith and works' vs 'faith alone'. Faith alone is not a rejection of works, it is about works coming from faith rather than compensating faith with works.

I think a lot of you need a proper lesson in theology, seriously. You all's notions are built solely on presumption, and ignore things such as James literally stating that faith without works is a dead faith.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You don't need darkness, you like smoke screens. Your detailed post?

You can't defend a God that predestinates people to hell and you know it.

Is all you have for me but opinions only?

I won't do your heavy lifting for you, Robert. Perhaps you should nurture the many redundant threads you start so as to keep up. The thread you started is here to review.

Or you can:

1. Go here: http://theologyonline.com/forumdisplay.php?5-Religion
2. Find the thread near the top entitled: Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?
3. Move your eyes to the right to Replies: 2,111
4. Now click on the number of replies
5. In the window that appears, find Ask Mr. Religion
6. To the far right select the number of posts shown
7. Now dig deeper, for at least the latest 100 posts of the 160+ I have made in the thread are there for review.

AMR

 

[Robert Pate]

Is all you have for me but opinions only?

I won't do your heavy lifting for you, Robert. Perhaps you should nurture the many redundant threads you start so as to keep up. The thread you started is here to review.

Or you can:

1. Go here: http://theologyonline.com/forumdisplay.php?5-Religion
2. Find the thread near the top entitled: Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?
3. Move your eyes to the right to Replies: 2,111
4. Now click on the number of replies
5. In the window that appears, find Ask Mr. Religion
6. To the far right select the number of posts shown
7. Now dig deeper, for at least the latest 100 posts of the 160+ I have made in the thread are there for review.

AMR

None of your post have addressed the unjust God of Calvinism. You beat around the bush and throw up smoke screens, but when it comes to how you can love and trust in a God that predestinates people to hell before they are ever born and still be just is not there.

Why don't you just admit it? There is no defense for a God that predestinates people to hell. Thankfully, there is no God that would do such a terrible thing.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

None of your post have addressed the unjust God of Calvinism. You beat around the bush and throw up smoke screens, but when it comes to how you can love and trust in a God that predestinates people to hell before they are ever born and still be just is not there.

Why don't you just admit it? There is no defense for a God that predestinates people to hell. Thankfully, there is no God that would do such a terrible thing.

So my responses on topic are just not agreeable to you? That is your argument? No, that is just your opinion.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...e-God-Unjust&p=4796431&viewfull=1#post4796431

BTW, that was the 4th post in your thread. :AMR:

If you deny original sin and all its consequences, then the reasons for your confusion is self-evident. If you are going to talk to me and not just at me, then take up my actual words and respond directly to them with your own substantive analysis, dissect them, and discuss them in detail. That is what argumentation entails, Robert. I know your opinions. Unfortunately you do not know why you actually hold to them until you can mount a serious discussion—not mere Scripture citations laden with sentimental statements—on the truth-bearing merits, if any, of your opinions when they are examined by another (me).

AMR

 

[popsthebuilder]

I had high hopes for you, but the above is sad to read.

Those that vehemently deny the Triune Godhead have no warrant to discuss anything concerning special revelation, for they have already demonstrated their inability to understand Scripture and are not open to correction. A house built upon sand cannot stand. Beware of these sorts that bring scandal upon God. Do not give the entrenched Arian/Unitarian a platform to spread their error, lest you lead others to stumble.

I have answered your ending questions earlier. There are only three types of persons in the world. The unregenerated elect, the elect, and the reprobate. There is no extra group, your "though the rest may not be ordained that doesn't mean they are doomed to hell". It is as if you think elect means an extra special class of folks outside of the ordinary believer (the elect), this special class being some sort of priestly folk that lead others to the Lord by their walk of faith. No. No. No. All believers are elect. Those not believing are either the elect not yet regenerated or the reprobate.

And yes, Scripture (and therefore the Reformed and all of orthodox Christendom) teaches us that anyone who is not elected unto salvation—no matter what their view of election may be—is on their way to eternal punishment in Hell.

AMR

How do you expect to teach anyone anything when your opinions are so full of contempt and pride? Why go on to explain your position or even the position of the masses interpretation after such display of utter disregard for your fellow man. As far as high hopes are concerned; the same could have been said of you until I actually started interacting with you and showed you to be willfully ignorant. I said amr thinking maybe I'd get an honest answer from a Calvinists' point of view. I tell ya what; never mind. I'm not going to dwell with a continuous spirit just because you choose to. I regret mentioning your name. I won't make that mistake again. That's what I get for going back on my word I suppose. You are a terrible spokesperson for Calvinism. I honestly question your own faith friend. I wish you the very best. May GOD guide us all towards his Will by the way that is Christ.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Rosenritter]

Arminianism does make God unjust because it teaches that God punishes sinners twice for their sins, those Christ died for are punished in Christ their surety savior and then God punishes them again for their sins if they don't believe, do something! That's double jeopardy and unjust.

That's an example of what is called "sophistry." Is there really any difference here other than the theoretical? Did Christ have to die several billion more times? That argument is weighed and found lacking.

 

[Rosenritter]

That's probably one of the most INSANE conclusions I've ever had the displeasure of reading. So, you attribute something that only God can decide; to Satan?? Whoa! You're worse off than I thought. And, you added: "and satans mouthpieces who repeat it." Therefore, you repeated it so, you MUST be one of Satan's mouthpieces.

It's Satan's first words recorded in scripture, the same words in opposition to the very gospel that Jesus died to proclaim, and those same words which you repeat and chant without shame. Satan doesn't have to appear to say "You shall not surely die, your soul lives forever" because you'll do it for him willingly.

You've been shown that you've been proclaiming contrary to scripture left and right, but it doesn't phase you one bit...

Eze 18:26-27 KJV
(26) When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.
(27) Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

Souls die.

 

[Robert Pate]

So my responses on topic are just not agreeable to you? That is your argument? No, that is just your opinion.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...e-God-Unjust&p=4796431&viewfull=1#post4796431

BTW, that was the 4th post in your thread. :AMR:

If you deny original sin and all its consequences, then the reasons for your confusion is self-evident. If you are going to talk to me and not just at me, then take up my actual words and respond directly to them with your own substantive analysis, dissect them, and discuss them in detail. That is what argumentation entails, Robert. I know your opinions. Unfortunately you do not know why you actually hold to them until you can mount a serious discussion—not mere Scripture citations laden with sentimental statements—on the truth-bearing merits, if any, of your opinions when they are examined by another (me).

AMR

To believe in your Calvinist God you have to believe that God was responsible for Adam's fall. In other words, God made Adam sin so that he could judge him and remove him from the Garden of Eden. If you believe that Adam sinned because he had a free will to do so, then you have no case. Which is it?

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Unsavable? No. Reprobate (left sinful, and thereby to suffer from their sinfulness, by the ordinance of God.)

Destroyed? No. Judged. With water. Next judgment will be with fire.

Geneses records that men who were destroyed became unsavable starting with the falling away of the prophets who were responsible to speak to the people on Gods behalf.

In reading about Adams sin, we find that God shed blood over that and clothed them, so it was not because of Adams sin alone that men were destroyed in the flood.

The law was given in covenant from God to Adam so that man could choose to live a holy life according to God's moral standards. Adam did not believe the terms of this covenant, did not love God, and broke this covenant (as the federal head and representative of the human race). Hosea 6:7

No covenant existed at that time, only the giving of a command.

When little children or the intellectually impaired believe, it is because God in His grace has already regenerated them and raised them to life by the power of His Holy Spirit.

So you are saying God does not care about the children of Moslems.

Why does He not regenerate all of the children of all people so they can believe and save the world from a lot of trouble.

God does not have the character you think He has.

I suggest you put the teachings of Calvin aside and seek the Lord only.

Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.


LA

 

[Arthur Brain]

incensed? :nono:

only if i had no self-control


most people, when faced with viewpoints that they find unpleasant have the ability to say "that's nice" and walk away :idunno:



apparently in your world, finding a viewpoint that you disagree with is an opportunity to be incensed and spew profanities

rather, your sister is a bad parent if she's raising her children to be ignorant of Christ's love



would you think her a good parent if she was withholding from her children the bread of life?

Eh, drop the 'prim & proper' act dude, doesn't suit you. How many of your myriad bans were for sleazy innuendo and at the very least implied profanity again? Some 'self control' you've got...

My sister isn't a bad parent at all. If her daughters go to church she won't stop them but she won't brainwash them either. You probably think the Phelps' are positive role models...

 

[ok doser]

My sister isn't a bad parent at all.

she is if she's keeping them from coming to Christ :idunno:

 

[Arthur Brain]

she is if she's keeping them from coming to Christ :idunno:

She isn't.

Rather ironic given your apparent theology as God Himself could already be doing that anyway.

Calvinism, what a 'laugh'.