Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

[Ask Mr. Religion]

...but AMR tells people they are unregenerate.

Those that vehemently deny the Trinity are not believers. I have stated (try to keep up with the thread) that it is theoretically possible, by extraordinary means, for a non-Trinitarian to be regenerate, but that person would quickly come to the truth and not remain in their sin.

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

Yes, yes, your is but an old canard made even more obvious given your denial of the Trinity. If you actually had a more firm grasp of God's truths, you would not be in this situation.

View attachment 24804
[Click to enlarge]

AMR

Who are you trying to fool? I did not bring up the Inquisition and Servetus until you condemned people for not believing the trinity as you do.

That is what the Catholics did, and that is what Calvin did, they had people condemned for not believing as they do.

 

[God's Truth]

Those that vehemently deny the Trinity are not believers. I have stated (try to keep up with the thread) that it is theoretically possible, by extraordinary means, for a non-Trinitarian to be regenerate, but that person would quickly come to the truth and not remain in their sin.

AMR

What you say about the trinity is not true, and your condemnation of others is not true either.

 

[God's Truth]

I just did, and you dont believe it. Those Christ died for were reconciled [saved] while they were enemies/unbelievers Rom 5:10 !

Post that scripture and show where it says God saves UNBELIEVERS.

God does not save unbelievers.

Prove your beliefs with scripture.

Calvinists say God saves unbelievers.

Their denomination falls apart at that falseness.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Can you show me where it says that in the Bible? Thanks

Do you affirm the Trinity?

If one is rightly confessing Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, then by the good and necessary consequence of Scripture's teachings about exactly who Jesus Christ is—fully God and fully man in an indissoluble union whereby the second subsistence of the Trinity assumed a human nature that cannot be separated, divided, mixed, or confused—then one is confessing the Triune Godhead. To do otherwise is to confess an intellectual idol of one's own making.

The mystical union of the divine and human natures of Our Lord is not:

1. a denial that our Lord was truly God (Ebionites, Elkasites, Arians);
2. a dissimilar or different substance (anomoios) with the Father (semi-Arianism);
3. a denial that our Lord had a genuine human soul (Apollinarians);
4. a denial of a distinct subsistence in the Trinity (Dynamic Monarchianism);
5. God acting merely in the forms of the Son and Spirit (Modalistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/United Pentecostal Church);
6. a mixture or change when the two natures were united (Eutychianism/Monophysitism);
7. two distinct subsistences (often called persons) (Nestorianism);
8. a denial of the true humanity of Christ (docetism);
9. a view that God the Son laid aside all or some of His divine attributes (kenoticism);
10. a view that there was a communication of the attributes between the divine and human natures (Lutheranism, with respect to the Lord's Supper); and
11. a view that our Lord existed independently as a human before God entered His body (Adoptionism).

AMR

 

[Crucible]

Who are you trying to fool? I did not bring up the Inquisition and Servetus until you condemned people for not believing the trinity as you do.

That is what the Catholics did, and that is what Calvin did, they had people condemned for not believing as they do.

In those times, religion was intrinsic to society and government. If there was no system of dogma, things became disordered. People didn't live so arbitrarily back then because they didn't have the vanities and distractions of today- religion is what made the world go around.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

[MENTION=17355]popsthebuilder[/MENTION]

We've been over that. Read more than a singular verse.

Why do you continue to dialog with a hyper-Calvinist? First, take the time to understand where these minority view Calvinists are coming from:

http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?115439-Eternal-Security-!&p=4643308&viewfull=1#post4643308

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

Do you affirm the Trinity?

If one is rightly confessing Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, then by the good and necessary consequence of Scripture's teachings about exactly who Jesus Christ is—fully God and fully man in an indissoluble union whereby the second subsistence of the Trinity assumed a human nature that cannot be separated, divided, mixed, or confused—then one is confessing the Triune Godhead. To do otherwise is to confess an intellectual idol of one's own making.

The mystical union of the divine and human natures of Our Lord is not:

1. a denial that our Lord was truly God (Ebionites, Elkasites, Arians);
2. a dissimilar or different substance (anomoios) with the Father (semi-Arianism);
3. a denial that our Lord had a genuine human soul (Apollinarians);
4. a denial of a distinct subsistence in the Trinity (Dynamic Monarchianism);
5. God acting merely in the forms of the Son and Spirit (Modalistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/United Pentecostal Church);
6. a mixture or change when the two natures were united (Eutychianism/Monophysitism);
7. two distinct subsistences (often called persons) (Nestorianism);
8. a denial of the true humanity of Christ (docetism);
9. a view that God the Son laid aside all or some of His divine attributes (kenoticism);
10. a view that there was a communication of the attributes between the divine and human natures (Lutheranism, with respect to the Lord's Supper); and
11. a view that our Lord existed independently as a human before God entered His body (Adoptionism).

AMR

There you go copy/pasting things and not relying on the scriptures.

 

[God's Truth]

Why do you continue to dialog with a hyper-Calvinist? First, take the time to understand where these minority view Calvinists are coming from:

http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?115439-Eternal-Security-!&p=4643308&viewfull=1#post4643308

AMR

The hyper Calvinist is truer to the false Calvinist teachings than you are.

 

[God's Truth]

In those times, religion was intrinsic to society and government. If there was no system of dogma, things became disordered. People didn't live so arbitrarily back then because they didn't have the vanities and distractions of today- religion is what made the world go around.

Are you making up excuses for people who tortured and killed others for not believing in what you call the truth about Christ?

We are not told to kill those who do not believe as we do.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You didn't win that debate and you repeatedly claiming you did does not make it so.

If you want to start a thread on it let us discuss some more about it; and this time you stop posting massive amounts of copy/paste material and instead reply with one or two sentences and just a yes or no answer.

The reader can decide for his or her self. :AMR:

You had your chance and you failed to demonstrate your views are within the bounds of orthodoxy.

AMR

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

What you say about the trinity is not true, and your condemnation of others is not true either.

Would that you could have demonstrated what you assert when you had the opportunity. :AMR:

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

The reader can decide for his or her self. :AMR:

You had your chance and you failed to demonstrate your views are within the bounds of orthodoxy.

AMR

You are the one who failed to prove God's Truth.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

There you go copy/pasting things and not relying on the scriptures.

I actually wrote these words and others unless otherwise so attributed, so what is the issue?

Unlike yourself, I do not just put down on paper whatever pops into my noggin at the time, but take the time to consider what it is I actually have to say on the matter of sacred topics.

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

Would that you could have demonstrated what you assert when you had the opportunity. :AMR:

AMR

You merely copy and paste and cannot debate any other way. That is not debating.

 

[God's Truth]

I actually wrote these words, so what is the issue? Unlike yourself, I do not just put down on paper whatever pops into my noggin at the time, but take the time to consider what it is I actually have to say on the matter of sacred topics.

AMR

You try to drown out the opponents questions and proof by merely copying and pasting large amounts of material with Calvinistic words not from the Bible, and then you result to insults and insist that you have won and proven the other is false.

That is not debating.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You merely copy and paste and cannot debate any other way. That is not debating.

That I have written much on matters of the faith in no way prevents me from relying upon what I have so written. I actually take the time to put down on paper what I actually believe about many theological topics and why I believe them. Your whining about the fact that I do so hints that you do not. Why? :AMR:

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

AMR,

Right here, right now, prove that God saves unbelievers, as Calvinists claim. Prove it by posting the scripture or scriptures that say God saves UNBELIEVERS.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You try to drown out the opponents questions and proof by merely copying and pasting large amounts of material with Calvinistic words not from the Bible, and then you result to insults and insist that you have won and proven the other is false.

That is not debating.

They are my own words. Are you really so obtuse to claim that I am forbidden to rely upon my own endeavors? :idunno:

A formal debate is not some real-time, off the cuff, conversation. It is a scheduled event with rules. You knew the schedule and the rules. You do not know what formal debates consist of if you think otherwise. That you entered into a debate with me on the matter of the Trinity and showed up unprepared and unable is not my fault.

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

They are my own words. Are you really so obtuse to claim that I am forbidden to rely upon my own endeavors? :idunno:

A formal debate is not some real-time, off the cuff, conversation. It is a scheduled event with rules. You knew the schedule and the rules. You do not know what formal debates consist of if you think otherwise. That you entered into a debate with me on the matter of the Trinity and showed up unprepared and unable is not my fault.

AMR

Again, you claiming you won does not make it so no matter how many times you repeat it.

Debate God's Truth with scriptures and not your Calvinist lingo that is not in the Bible.

Debate without drowning out your opponents answers.

Debate without insults and demeaning the other.