Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

P

popsthebuilder

New member
Rosenritter said:
Marhig, aside from several hundred words not addressing those passages, how do you avoid that the LORD God says that he is the first and the last, and that Jesus names himself as that same first and the last? You have never answered that, not to me ever at least.
Click to expand...
I had answered it

The Christ is the first born and the final judge.

Alpha and Omega.

Think it was in this thread.

Anyway, peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 
Rosenritter

Rosenritter

New member
popsthebuilder said:
I had answered it

The Christ is the first born and the final judge.

Alpha and Omega.

Think it was in this thread.

Anyway, peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That's not a good answer for several reasons. It doesn't answer why the LORD is using that title in Isaiah, and it doesn't answer why Jesus uses that same title and applies it to himself in Revelation.

It also doesn't explain why two different subjects "first born" and "judge" would be used in a phrase that if it were applying to subjects would be the same subject, and not varied.

It also defies the words of Isaiah "I am the LORD: that is my name: my glory I will not give to another" (42:8) and again " for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another."

Isaiah 48:11-12 KJV
(11) For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another.
(12) Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.

Those words have meaning in that combination and context. It's not where you can casually fill in the blank like a Mad Libs puzzle, it's a specific title.
 
Rosenritter

Rosenritter

New member
Clete said:
The words 'love' and 'nice' are not synonyms.

Which is less loving, to state factually that someone has wasted their time by saying dumb things or to be the person who actually wastes everyone's time by saying dumb things?

If you don't like being called a waste of time then find some child near you (3rd grade or older) and ask him whether what you've typed up makes sense. If he says something like, "How can a plural noun be singular?" then maybe you just delete that post and start again.

I'll take your sarcastic reminder that I'm supposed to be loving as a passive aggressive indication that you have no intention of answering my question and will place you back on ignore.

Resting in Him,
Clete
Click to expand...

I asked you to take one thing to heart, and even if you ignored all else, to pay attention to that one thing. You couldn't do that, could you? As such you fail to understand the most basic meaning of a response, be it short or lengthy. I wasn't reminding you of Christ's command for my own benefit, nor with respect to our discussion. Go and learn what that meaneth.
 
P

popsthebuilder

New member
Rosenritter said:
That's not a good answer for several reasons. It doesn't answer why the LORD is using that title in Isaiah, and it doesn't answer why Jesus uses that same title and applies it to himself in Revelation.

It also doesn't explain why two different subjects "first born" and "judge" would be used in a phrase that if it were applying to subjects would be the same subject, and not varied.

It also defies the words of Isaiah "I am the LORD: that is my name: my glory I will not give to another" (42:8) and again " for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another."

Isaiah 48:11-12 KJV
(11) For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another.
(12) Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.

Those words have meaning in that combination and context. It's not where you can casually fill in the blank like a Mad Libs puzzle, it's a specific title.
Click to expand...
The Christ is the fullness of GOD as far as man can perceive. The Christ is what we can know of GOD. Indeed the title LORD is fitting. All the attributes we assign to GOD, the Christ had. Is that to say that the man Jesus was the utter eternal fullness of GOD as man. No. We know that GOD is spirit. And not material. And though that spirit was manifest in the son of man, the Christ, the anointed of GOD, Jesus of Nazareth, blessed be his name, that doesn't make that material physical being, though full of the Spirit of GOD, in that material form the utter fullness of GOD.

Really it is neither here nor there; the Christ is GOD to the extent that we can know of GOD. The teachings, example, and self sacrifice of the Christ it the way to GOD.

If the Christ, Jesus was the utter eternal fullness of GOD, the Creator of all existence, then what was He praying to all those times? If Jesus of Nazareth, blessed is He, was the coeternal fullness of GOD as man then why didn't he know when the Christ would return or when the end was?

For me personally there is no difference.

The Christ has returned to the Father. If you pray to one you pray to the other.

My whole issue is that I can't justify calling any man the utter fullness of GOD as they are man for many reasons.

Perhaps this is my folly. By the grace, and will of GOD, if I am wrong and blinded by my own hypocrisy, pride, arrogance, greed, and, or lack of repentance, then GOD will guide me towards His Will.

I mean not to offend, and admit that I am relatively new to these types of discussions. I don't claim to be right in all things, and look forward to your rebuttal.

Sincerely,
Peace with humility

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 
Rosenritter

Rosenritter

New member
popsthebuilder said:
The Christ is the fullness of GOD as far as man can perceive. The Christ is what we can know of GOD. Indeed the title LORD is fitting. All the attributes we assign to GOD, the Christ had. Is that to say that the man Jesus was the utter eternal fullness of GOD as man. No. We know that GOD is spirit. And not material. And though that spirit was manifest in the son of man, the Christ, the anointed of GOD, Jesus of Nazareth, blessed be his name, that doesn't make that material physical being, though full of the Spirit of GOD, in that material form the utter fullness of GOD.

Really it is neither here nor there; the Christ is GOD to the extent that we can know of GOD. The teachings, example, and self sacrifice of the Christ it the way to GOD.

If the Christ, Jesus was the utter eternal fullness of GOD, the Creator of all existence, then what was He praying to all those times? If Jesus of Nazareth, blessed is He, was the coeternal fullness of GOD as man then why didn't he know when the Christ would return or when the end was?

For me personally there is no difference.

The Christ has returned to the Father. If you pray to one you pray to the other.

My whole issue is that I can't justify calling any man the utter fullness of GOD as they are man for many reasons.

Perhaps this is my folly. By the grace, and will of GOD, if I am wrong and blinded by my own hypocrisy, pride, arrogance, greed, and, or lack of repentance, then GOD will guide me towards His Will.

I mean not to offend, and admit that I am relatively new to these types of discussions. I don't claim to be right in all things, and look forward to your rebuttal.

Sincerely,
Peace with humility

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I have a question for you. But I need a couple sentences for describing it first.

I imagine that somewhere in the universe, there's a person, a specific person with eyes, nose, arms, legs, that's sitting in front of a computer monitor. I imagine that he's logged into a site called "Theology Online" and reading (and typing) under an account called "popsthebuilder." I do not know this person's name. It is an unknown name, a secret name. For purposes of discussion let's call this person "POPS."

Here's my question. As you were answering above, is popsthebuilder (that I am speaking with now) the utter fullness of POPS?
 
P

popsthebuilder

New member
Rosenritter said:
I have a question for you. But I need a couple sentences for describing it first.

I imagine that somewhere in the universe, there's a person, a specific person with eyes, nose, arms, legs, that's sitting in front of a computer monitor. I imagine that he's logged into a site called "Theology Online" and reading (and typing) under an account called "popsthebuilder." I do not know this person's name. It is an unknown name, a secret name. For purposes of discussion let's call this person "POPS."

Here's my question. As you were answering above, is popsthebuilder (that I am speaking with now) the utter fullness of POPS?
Click to expand...
I would have to say.

Though I strive to be honest in my conversations here, it is not accurately representative of me as a whole.

You answered your own question by stating you didn't know my name. Right?

You only know what you are able to based on what I present.

Does that make sense?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 
Rosenritter

Rosenritter

New member
popsthebuilder said:
I would have to say.

Though I strive to be honest in my conversations here, it is not accurately representative of me as a whole.

You answered your own question by stating you didn't know my name. Right?

You only know what you are able to based on what I present.

Does that make sense?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Your answer is consistent within itself. It would also explain why one might be hesitant to unilaterally say that God manifest in the flesh was the same as God Almighty. After all, POPS is greater than PopstheBuilder, right?

Colossians 2:8-9 KJV
(8) Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
(9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Would it be too much to say that Jesus was representative of God as a whole, that in him dwelt all the fulness of God bodily? Add in his statements that He WAS before Abraham, that he beheld Satan fall like lightning from heaven, and that in the beginning He created the heavens and the earth, and I don't think it's wrong to say Jesus was God. I prefer that as the simplest way to say it.
 
P

popsthebuilder

New member
Rosenritter said:
Your answer is consistent within itself. It would also explain why one might be hesitant to unilaterally say that God manifest in the flesh was the same as God Almighty. After all, POPS is greater than PopstheBuilder, right?

Colossians 2:8-9 KJV
(8) Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
(9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Would it be too much to say that Jesus was representative of God as a whole, that in him dwelt all the fulness of God bodily? Add in his statements that He WAS before Abraham, that he beheld Satan fall like lightning from heaven, and that in the beginning He created the heavens and the earth, and I don't think it's wrong to say Jesus was God. I prefer that as the simplest way to say it.
Click to expand...
I understand the Christ to be full of the Spirit of GOD, but he was a man too and as such, in human form, not coeternal with the Spirit of GOD in the flesh.

Again, the rest is irrelevant.

The Christ is GOD, but following the teachings of the Christ and the conscience, and keeping humility close at heart, I understand man to be creation, and understand the Christ, the anointed of GOD to be subsidiary to GOD at very least while in human form.

We should really be focusing on what needs to be done to bring the faithful unto GOD together peaceably for the benefit of all, not splitting hairs about what we can or cannot know, about the nature of GOD. Christ is the way to GOD. This is so very true on so many levels. We all, as Christians understand this. And that statement alone makes it obvious that I don't deny the Christ.

Is it pertinent to salvation or is perseverance in faith until ones end, long-suffering, and lack of hypocrisy pertinent to salvation?

You seem quite versed in Christian scripture so that question is rhetorical.

I wish you the best friend, and sincerely hope that others here can learn to articulate their opinions in a similar fashion as you.

My name is Jerry by the way, but even that is only a symbol associated to me.

Similar to the multitude of names and attributes associated with GOD, not that I am trying to compare myself to the benevolent, merciful, righteous Creator.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 
TulipBee

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
Jeremiah 1:5, "Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee; and before thou came out of the womb I sanctified thee, and ordained thee a prophet unto the nations"

Jeremiah's salvation is a given in this verse. I think that is obvious, even though it is not explicitly stated. It is apparent that his life was decided for him by God, even before he was in the womb.

There
 
TulipBee

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
"Total depravity means the entire absence of holiness, not the highest intensity of sin. A totally depraved man is not as bad as he can be, but he has no holiness, that is, no supreme love of God."

~ William G. T. Shedd 1820-1894
 
Rosenritter

Rosenritter

New member
TulipBee said:
Jeremiah 1:5, "Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee; and before thou came out of the womb I sanctified thee, and ordained thee a prophet unto the nations"

Jeremiah's salvation is a given in this verse. I think that is obvious, even though it is not explicitly stated. It is apparent that his life was decided for him by God, even before he was in the womb.

There
Click to expand...

There are fathers today that decide their children's lives while they are still in the womb. "If it's a girl she will be a doctor, if it's a boy he will be an engineer." That doesn't mean that they can make their child be a good doctor, or a good engineer, or whether the child will be obedient or rebellious.

That passage you cited does not establish that God would know each and every decision Jeremiah would make, or whether his heart would choose good or evil in the end.
 
TulipBee

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
Rosenritter said:
There are fathers today that decide their children's lives while they are still in the womb. "If it's a girl she will be a doctor, if it's a boy he will be an engineer." That doesn't mean that they can make their child be a good doctor, or a good engineer, or whether the child will be obedient or rebellious.

That passage you cited does not establish that God would know each and every decision Jeremiah would make, or whether his heart would choose good or evil in the end.
Click to expand...
Ouch ! Are you open theism ?
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
Rosenritter said:
There are fathers today that decide their children's lives while they are still in the womb. "If it's a girl she will be a doctor, if it's a boy he will be an engineer." That doesn't mean that they can make their child be a good doctor, or a good engineer, or whether the child will be obedient or rebellious.

That passage you cited does not establish that God would know each and every decision Jeremiah would make, or whether his heart would choose good or evil in the end.
Click to expand...

Jeremiah was a prophet, especially chosen by God. What applies to Jeremiah does not apply to us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top