Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

[Ask Mr. Religion]

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.

Your desperation and frustration is getting the best of you, lady. So now you want to move the goalposts past your obvious Trinity errors onto something else hoping the former gets lost in the shuffle. Sigh.

Who were those formally saved by God? What was their moral condition?

Answer: Jer. 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; Eph. 2:2; Eph. 2:4-5; Titus 3:5; John 3:19; Rom. 3:10-12; 5:6; 6:16-20; Eph. 2:1,3;1 Cor. 2:14

In other words, the unregenerate is deceitful and desperately sick, full of evil, not able to come to Jesus unless given to by God, must be quickened by God, cannot choose righteousness until regenerated, loves darkness rather than light, is unrighteous, does not understand, does not seek for God, is helpless and ungodly, is dead in his trespasses and sins, is by nature a child of wrath, cannot understand spiritual things, and is a slave of sin.

All such as described and chosen by God were quickened from spiritual death to life. That is these so chosen were given the moral ability to believe rightly (Eze. 36:26).

At the instant of their regeneration they possessed the ability to irrevocably choose the good.

So, as I have answered you in the past on this very same question, if you are playing word games that intend to mean that these regenerated persons, following their re-birth, believed and were saved, then there is no issue with your unstated intentions.

But first, to avoid the confusion which you are proliferating with infelicitous words, you need to admit that those so saved after re-birth could not possibly have re-birthed themselves, given their morally unable state, until God first regenerated (re-birthed) them and then granted them the very faith they claim.

This is now the second time I have answered this question for you. My kingdom for a man or woman who actually keeps up with all their words. :AMR:

AMR

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

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

The debate is there for all to review. That you cannot see how poorly your performance therein was is not my fault.

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

This is why your performance in the debate was so dreadful. You seem to think mere quotation of Scripture, accompanied by the occasional boldface or italic emphasis and some naked opinion, is a substitute for actual exegetical analysis of Scripture quotes.

Debate without drowning out your opponents answers.

The rules of the debate were plain and limited to a maximum number of words allowed by the forum's software. That you did not see fit to avail yourself of these facts is not my fault, but your own.

Instead of hopping all over the place with one or two sentences in many forums, retire to your study and take the time to actually lay out what you actually believe along with reasoned discussion of why you believe it, including answers to obvious objections that may be raised about what you believe. When you do so, you will find that it takes more than the sound-bites you offer up. You will also find yourself a wee bit more better equipped when someone comes along and challenges you.

Debate without insults and demeaning the other.

Your anti-Calvinist canards, notwithstanding, of course. :AMR:

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

Your desperation and frustration is getting the best of you, lady.

This is the beginning of your defense.

 

[God's Truth]

Your desperation and frustration is getting the best of you, lady. So now you want to move the goalposts past your obvious Trinity errors onto something else hoping the former gets lost in the shuffle. Sigh.

Who were those formally saved by God? What was their moral condition?

Answer: Jer. 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; Eph. 2:2; Eph. 2:4-5; Titus 3:5; John 3:19; Rom. 3:10-12; 5:6; 6:16-20; Eph. 2:1,3;1 Cor. 2:14

In other words, the unregenerate is deceitful and desperately sick, full of evil, not able to come to Jesus unless given to by God, must be quickened by God, cannot choose righteousness until regenerated, loves darkness rather than light, is unrighteous, does not understand, does not seek for God, is helpless and ungodly, is dead in his trespasses and sins, is by nature a child of wrath, cannot understand spiritual things, and is a slave of sin.

All such as described and chosen by God were quickened from spiritual death to life. That is these so chosen were given the moral ability to believe rightly (Eze. 36:26).

At the instant of their regeneration they possessed the ability to irrevocably choose the good.

So, as I have answered you in the past on this very same question, if you are playing word games that intend to mean that these regenerated persons, following their re-birth, believed and were saved, then there is no issue with your unstated intentions.

But first, to avoid the confusion which you are proliferating with infelicitous words, you need to admit that those so saved after re-birth could not possibly have re-birthed themselves, given their morally unable state, until God first regenerated (re-birthed) them and then granted them the very faith they claim.

This is now the second time I have answered this question for you. My kingdom for a man or woman who actually keeps up with all their words. :AMR:

AMR

No. Post the whole scripture which says God saves unbelievers.

Stop trying to drown out what I asked.

 

[popsthebuilder]

[MENTION=17355]popsthebuilder[/MENTION]


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

I wouldn't know who is a calvinist, madist, dispensationalist, whateverist. These things don't so much matter to me and I don't take issue with them unless they are brought to light for whatever reason by the two conversing.
I respond to what people say. I do try to keep in mind that all these people have some sort or level of faith; I do not, however, consider their denomination.

I respond to their words and compare them to what I know to be true. Nothing more, nothing less. At least that is always the starting goal. Things have a way of veering off into vanities and imaginings though, don't they?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

No. Post the whole scripture which says God saves unbelievers.

Post the whole Scripture that says we should only drive on the right side of the road.

So stop playing games like the above.

[FONT=&quot]God saved Paul on the road to Damascus. Was he a [/FONT]believer[FONT=&quot] prior to that encounter with My Lord?
[/FONT]
Use the whole counsel of God when crafting one's doctrine. I have provided enough of said counsel in my response to indicate the state of those prior to their re-birth. If you struggle to conclude that these persons in that state are not unbelievers, nothing I can say will change your mind.

AMR

 

[Robert Pate]

I wouldn't know who is a calvinist, madist, dispensationalist, whateverist. These things don't so much matter to me and I don't take issue with them unless they are brought to light for whatever reason by the two conversing.
I respond to what people say. I do try to keep in mind that all these people have some sort or level of faith; I do not, however, consider their denomination.

I respond to their words and compare them to what I know to be true. Nothing more, nothing less. At least that is always the starting goal. Things have a way of veering off into vanities and imaginings though, don't they?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

In this case it is the blind leading the blind. Neither one have the truth, what they have is religion.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I wouldn't know who is a calvinist, madist, dispensationalist, whateverist. These things don't so much matter to me and I don't take issue with them unless they are brought to light for whatever reason by the two conversing.
I respond to what people say. I do try to keep in mind that all these people have some sort or level of faith; I do not, however, consider their denomination.

I respond to their words and compare them to what I know to be true. Nothing more, nothing less. At least that is always the starting goal. Things have a way of veering off into vanities and imaginings though, don't they?

It helps to know one's audience, no? Encountering the fellow knocking on the door with a WatchTower leaflet in his hand and not knowing something about JW's usually ends oddly. Similarly for the fellow with a "burning in his bosom" at your door (Mormon). If you understand the other person's positions, it helps move the dialog along effectively. You know this so couching your response in a winsome manner that ignores the gifts given you to reason and learn to be better equipped before rushing headlong into a discussion is unbecoming.

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

Post the whole Scripture that says we should only drive on the right side of the road.

That makes no sense and has nothing to do with anything that I said.

God saved Paul on the road to Damascus. Was he a believer prior to that encounter with My Lord?

Paul's conversion PROVES your Calvinistic beliefs are dead wrong.

So stop playing games like this one. Use the whole counsel of God when crafting one's doctrine.

Your insults and demeaning statements are no defense for any truth.

I have provided enough of said counsel in my response to indicate the state of those prior to their re-birth. If you struggle to conclude that these persons in that state are not unbelievers, nothing I can say will change your mind.

Again, stop trying to drown out your opponents post.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Paul conversion PROVES your Calvinistic beliefs are dead wrong.

See, you really do not know how to engage. In addition to my immediate above concerning Paul, I previously supplied examples from Scripture in support of the view that unbelievers are saved.

Your response was but some opinion about Calvinism unrelated to the actual question you asked and to which I responded. You are sort of talking out of your head here, GT.

AMR

 

[Robert Pate]

The topic of this thread is "Does Calvinism Make God Unjust". Why not just stay on topic?

 

[God's Truth]

See, you really do not know how to engage. I supplied an example from Scripture in support of the view that unbelievers are saved. Your response was but some opinion unrelated to the actual question you asked and to which I responded. You are sort of talking out of your head here, GT.

AMR

See, you prove me right. You got insults and demeaning words to defend your false doctrines.

Paul's conversion proves Calvinistic beliefs to be wrong.

Notice that Paul finally believed in Jesus on that road to Damascus, but he still was not yet saved.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

That makes no sense and has nothing to do with anything that I said.

It plenty of sense in the context of your seeking to mine quotes from Scripture specific to your own wording and then declaring if none are found you are correct.

My answer was in kind to show the foolishness of such a position you are adopting.

Get it, now?

AMR

 

[God's Truth]

The topic of this thread is "Does Calvinism Make God Unjust". Why not just stay on topic?

Your thread would be dead if it were not for this increased discussion.

 

[God's Truth]

AMR, let's get at it. Make a thread where we can discuss without people trying to stop us.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Notice that Paul finally believed in Jesus on that road to Damascus, but he still was not yet saved.

Like I said, do more than just pronounce you are correct. How about taking the texts in question and provide some substantive analysis of what you think they are teaching in support of your position? Lay it all out so the reader actually has something to work with other than your opinions.

Take your time, too. Make it detailed. I have to go now and tend to some things at home for now.

AMR

 

[Crucible]

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.

Oh, whatever. Seriously, you wouldn't have made it a day back then. It's easy to sit there with your high morals as you live like only kings did in those times

 

[God's Truth]

Like I said, do more than just pronounce you are correct. How about taking the texts in question and provide some substantive analysis of what you think they are teaching in support of your position? Lay it all out so the reader actually has something to work with other than your opinions.

Take your time, too. Make it detailed. I have to go now and tend to some things at home for now.

AMR

Stop with the demeaning untruths, for you brought up Paul and did not use any truth of scripture.

You want proof that Paul's conversion proves Calvinism false, you got it.

When Paul finally believed in Christ, Paul was NOT yet saved. Paul still had to obey. That PROVES Calvinism is false.

Why didn't Jesus just make Paul believe and save him at that time? Why did Jesus have to appear to him?

Paul finally believed and still had to do what Jesus said to do.

 

[marhig]

I do sin daily.

I smoke cigarettes regardless of debilitating COPD.

this is transgressing against the temple or vessel GOD has blessed me with.

I had made an oath with GOD yet seemingly go against that oath. That is transgressing against my own word that I made towards GOD.

I know of GOD's will as it pertains to my own life, yet tarry about and meander along as opposed to utterly and wholly following that will. That seems to me like acting as if one is indifferent, though it is of the utmost significance. That is placing other things before the Will of GOD, idol worship.

I strive daily to remove these things from me. But I am aware of them and that they are sin to some degree. Not murder, but sin is sin.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

We all sin daily, me too only in a different way. Mine is eating sweets and cakes etc. I know it's wrong before God, and I know I have to stop because i too am just ruining the body that God has given me. My auntie did the same as GMs mum with smoking. She tried many times and couldn't do it, then she went to God and said please help me, I can't do it, if you don't take this away then I'm never going to be able to do it and she begged him to help her, and he took it away.

She always tells me that when we know it's wrong then we have to suffer and deny it and pray to God for strength, she's given up many things this way as have other members of my family including myself, smoking was one if her hardest to stop, but she's 80 now and doing well. But this is my big one, like smoking is yours. I'm going to pray more and try and turn away. I don't know about you, but as soon as I try, I get tempted. And I do fall. But I'm going to have to try harder, I've cut down a lot so the next step is to stop. My husband cut out smoking by cutting down, he went down bit by bit, from 40 a day and ended up on 3 a day, then he quit. But he had my help because I hate it so much that I nagged him off them

But the sins of the heart are worse, hardness, hatred wickedness, an unforgiving heart, etc.etc. these separate us from God. But I do know as you said, it's still a sin and i believe that I will suffer for the sins that I destroy my body with. As I said I've cut right down, next thing is to stop. I know one thing, as I've cut down, my arthritis has improved so that is good. So hopefully it will help you if you can cut down too. I hope and pray that you can. And I hope that God blesses you and gives you the strength to overcome and that he takes it away. You're not on your own. God bless

 

[popsthebuilder]

It helps to know one's audience, no? Encountering the fellow knocking on the door with a WatchTower leaflet in his hand and not knowing something about JW's usually ends oddly. Similarly for the fellow with a "burning in his bosom" at your door (Mormon). If you understand the other person's positions, it helps move the dialog along effectively. You know this so couching your response in a winsome manner that ignores the gifts given you to reason and learn to be better equipped before rushing headlong into a discussion is unbecoming.

AMR

Sir, you mistake what I say for haste.

Let me put it differently since you didn't get it the first time. No doubt due to my poor articulation of what I am generally attempting to say. (not sarcasm)

It seems to me that you, for example indeed use these very techniques you speak of, and have, in fact employed them in regards to your perception of me personally. Tell me; did these presuppositions based on stereotypes based on the doctrines of men help you to rightly identify me, or did they more effectively work to confuse you on my own actual stance?

In a way I agree that knowing the other parties general beliefs is key to profitable conversation. I'm not refuting that sir. I was simply trying to say that one's words are a reflection of their beliefs and doctrines or things they hold dear, and seeing these things and responding to these things directly is quite efficient and works well for my purpose. It isn't a shirking of duty because scripture and the Holy Spirit tell us what is right, not the many divergent opinions of the thousands of denominations.

Why are we even discussing this.

Are you genuinely trying to say I am being lazy in my duty or are you just bored and looking to chat? It seems you are generally serious when it comes to things of faith and religion so I will assume the former. So my next question would be why?

Peace



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk