John Calvin said this....

[1Mind1Spirit]

If all of the 12 apostles had made the free will decision not to betray Christ, how would the prophecy that needed to be fulfilled, be fulfilled?

"Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry."

In addition, God's inerrant Word declares that this prophecy was indeed about the specific man Judas although David did not know his name at the time.

Jesus also declared "Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"

Jesus chose them. They did not choose Him. And He also chose one to betray Him to fulfill the scriptures.

Yes David as a prefigure for Christ was a PROPHET, Priest and King.

David took off his royal king's robe wearing only a priest's ephod under it and danced lewdly.

When his wife scorned him he prophesied he would be even more vile.

Which came to pass, as he hadn't yet murdered Uriah after committing adultery with his wife.

There is no extreme Clete wont stoop to in order to hold onto his vanity.

Not judging, just a discernment from one also cut from Adam's ilk. lol

 

[Truster]

I have no problem with this statement....

Afterall, Satan had to ask permission to tempt Job...

God allows Satan to do his evil for our own good and to show his grace.

Satan did not ask for permission to tempt Job it was the Eternal Almighty that brought up the subject of Job.

 

[Truster]

If anyone is given the revelation of the truth of what is found in the OP then they must accept the fact that any evil that befalls them, their family, friends or nation is purposed and sent by the Eternal Almighty. They must be grateful or as James put it, ''consider it pure joy''.

The knowledge of the work of the Almighty gives a man the ability to worship in truth and according to the truth he see's in the providential care and working out of the eternal purpose.

''But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am Yah Veh which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith Yah Veh''.

If you don't know Him you can't know His works nor glory in them and therefore Him.

 

[Clete]

If all of the 12 apostles had made the free will decision not to betray Christ, how would the prophecy that needed to be fulfilled, be fulfilled?

"Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry."

I just answered that question.

If all twelve apostles had been loyal to Jesus where is the prophecy that would have gone unfulfilled?

The Scripture that was fulfilled was not a predictive prophecy. Peter wouldn't have brought it up in the first place.

Of course he did bring it up and so there is good reason to believe that God intentionally "fulfilled" these passages through Judas' betrayal and had it in mind to do so all along but that doesn't mean that Judas was forced by God's will to do what he did nor does it mean that he could not have done otherwise.

In addition, God's inerrant Word declares that this prophecy was indeed about the specific man Judas although David did not know his name at the time.

No it does not say that. You're reading your doctrine into the text. Had Judas been loyal to Jesus you'd never connect the passage with any future event. You'd not even acknowledge it as a prophecy.

If God hadn't used events to parallel this passage He could have used different events to parallel another passage, or simply decided to do something else entirely. In any case, Peter would have been inspired to say something different.

Don't take my word for it. Look it up and read it in context. There's not even the slightest clue that the passages are prophetic.

The confusion here has a lot to do with the fact the we, in the west, have a less than accurate understanding of what people in the middle east, including the Jews, considered prophecy and the fulfillment of scripture. A scripture need not be predictive in nature in order to be "fulfilled" by future events. Any event that God uses to parallel a passage of scripture can be said to "fulfill" that passage of scripture.

Jesus also declared "Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"

Right! Look, just because Judas could have repented doesn't mean it was at all likely. It isn't my intention to portray Judas in the most positive possible light. He was a bad guy and God knew he was a bad guy and clearly used him to parallel these passages of Scripture so as to provide clear evidence of the super natural influence that was present in the events that unfolded with Jesus' death. God (Jesus) was laying down His own life and doing it on purpose.

Jesus chose them. They did not choose Him. And He also chose one to betray Him to fulfill the scriptures.

Again, I do not deny this. What I deny is that God's plan would have blown up in His face had Judas decided to repent. It isn't necessary for God to remove a man's free will to get things done. He is fully capable of working with, through, around and in spite of the free will choices of both His allies and His enemies. Had Judas been loyal, God would have been happy about his turning from evil, not angry about it. In response to Judas' repentance God would have simply gone on to accomplished the work of Calvary without Judas' "help".


Now, I'm going to take this a step further. You might want to wrap your head in duct tape before reading the rest of this. That way, when your head explodes, it'll be easier to collect the pieces!

What was true of Judas' ability to repent was also true of every member of the Sanhedrin and every man woman and child in all of Israel. Israel could have responded to Jesus by accepting Him as the Son of God and their Messiah.

I'll let that sink in a bit before I elaborate.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

If anyone is given the revelation of the truth of what is found in the OP then they must accept the fact that any evil that befalls them, their family, friends or nation is purposed and sent by the Eternal Almighty. They must be grateful or as James put it, ''consider it pure joy''.

The knowledge of the work of the Almighty gives a man the ability to worship in truth and according to the truth he see's in the providential care and working out of the eternal purpose.

''But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am Yah Veh which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith Yah Veh''.

If you don't know Him you can't know His works nor glory in them and therefore Him.

I have a question for you...

What does God say justice is?


It's NOT a trick question! I am asking you to simply think through the implications of your doctrine. What does God's word say justice looks like?

I could have predicted a year in advance that Dialogos would not answer this question. I don't know you. Please! Seriously, please don't be as predictable!

It's just a question, don't be afraid to think things through! You're either right or you're not. If you're right then there's no reason not to answer. If you're wrong, wouldn't you want to discover that? Where the harm in answering what should be a really simple question.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[musterion]

There is no extreme Clete wont stoop to in order to hold onto his vanity.

Not judging, just a discernment from one also cut from Adam's ilk. lol

You are judging, but forget that for a minute.

If Clete is as you say, it's only because he's fulfilling God's reprobative will that Clete cannot resist.

Who, then, are you to question what God does with any vessel, even a vessel fit for destruction?

 

[Clete]

You are judging, but forget that for a minute.

If Clete is as you say, it's only because he's fulfilling God's reprobative will that Clete cannot resist.

Who, then, are you to question what God does with any vessel, even a vessel fit for destruction?

His answer will be that I was predestined to do what I'm doing and that he was predestined to get all worked up about it and that you were predestined to then point out that his getting worked up makes no sense.

That is, that's what his answer would be if he thought it through, which God may not have predestined him to do, in which case who knows.

 

[Truster]

I have a question for you...

What does God say justice is?


It's NOT a trick question! I am asking you to simply think through the implications of your doctrine. What does God's word say justice looks like?

I could have predicted a year in advance that Dialogos would not answer this question. I don't know you. Please! Seriously, please don't be as predictable!

It's just a question, don't be afraid to think things through! You're either right or you're not. If you're right then there's no reason not to answer. If you're wrong, wouldn't you want to discover that? Where the harm in answering what should be a really simple question.

Resting in Him,
Clete

This is not a trick answer.

I have studied this matter in some detail and would suggest you do the same. The place to start is with the problem translators have caused. They took one Hebrew word and conveyed it via numerous English words. Righteous is a mis-translation and should simply be 'just'. 'Just' in and of itself is necessary to fully understand before you can understand what the other English words. Just, justice, righteous, justified, justification and all related words mean in the context they are used. You should read every verse that these words are used in.

I recommend a Strong's Strongest concordance a TWOT and a copy of Gesenius Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon.

This form of discovery takes months or in some cases years, but it's well worth it.

Enjoy.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

You are judging, but forget that for a minute.

Why didn't you?

If Clete is as you say, it's only because he's fulfilling God's reprobative will that Clete cannot resist.

No, I was speaking of vanity which every creature was subjected to.

Who, then, are you to question what God does with any vessel, even a vessel fit for destruction?

See, there you go thinkin' I'm judging.

I stated a fact not a question.

It's known as discernment.

 

[musterion]

His answer will be that I was predestined to do what I'm doing and that he was predestined to get all worked up about it and that you were predestined to then point out that his getting worked up makes no sense.

That is, that's what his answer would be if he thought it through, which God may not have predestined him to do, in which case who knows.

That was probably his first impulse. Instead he took the usual word game route.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

That was probably his first impulse.

Y'all actually crack me up with yer tryin' to convince me of sin.

Instead he took the usual word game route.

Actually speaking things from the manifested mystery.

That being from the manifested fellowship with Christ in me.

You see the mystery is the riches of the fellowship between Christ and the believer, not the fellowship between Jews and Gentiles.:think:

 

[Clete]

This is not a trick answer.

I have studied this matter in some detail and would suggest you do the same. The place to start is with the problem translators have caused. They took one Hebrew word and conveyed it via numerous English words. Righteous is a mis-translation and should simply be 'just'. 'Just' in and of itself is necessary to fully understand before you can understand what the other English words. Just, justice, righteous, justified, justification and all related words mean in the context they are used. You should read every verse that these words are used in.

I recommend a Strong's Strongest concordance a TWOT and a copy of Gesenius Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon.

This form of discovery takes months or in some cases years, but it's well worth it.

Enjoy.

This is not an answer.

I'm fully aware that righteous and justice are the same word in the original language (in most cases), the meaning being determined by the context. That doesn't change the fact that the meaning of the word does change to some degree and that the English words "righteous" and "justice" do a pretty darn good job of conveying that contextual difference.

But I'm not interested in discussing the Hebrew language and grammar with you. I'm interested in discussing justice - or righteousness if your prefer, I don't care which, they're two sides of the same coin, either term will suffice. My question to you then remains the same.

What does God say righteousness is?

What does God's word say righteousness looks like?

Be specific!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

See, there you go thinkin' I'm judging.

I stated a fact not a question.

It's known as discernment.

Discernment is a form of judging you nincompoop!



:Clete: Back to the ignore list with you! :Clete:

 

[glorydaz]

Discernment is a form of judging you nincompoop!



:Clete: Back to the ignore list with you! :Clete:

I think the nincompoops are breeding like flies. :shocked:

 

[George Affleck]

If all twelve apostles had been loyal to Jesus where is the prophecy that would have gone unfulfilled?

Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me. Ps 41:9KJV

Jesus himself identifies this verse as having been placed into scripture for Him to use on this occasion.

In fact, while identifying David's prophecy, Jesus makes a predictive prophecy about the man chosen by God to betray Him which began to be fulfilled not more than a few minutes after he made it.

I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me. John 13:18KJV

Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

But you are telling us that Judas had such power over the Word of God that his free will alone had the potential power to change history and eliminate these verses from the Bible and he could have taken words out of Jesus' mouth so that they would never have been spoken.

The Scripture that was fulfilled was not a predictive prophecy.
Had Judas been loyal to Jesus you'd never connect the passage with any future event. You'd not even acknowledge it as a prophecy.

That's like saying this prophecy would never have been mentioned if Jesus had not been crucified.
And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. Mark 15:28KJV

If God hadn't used events to parallel this passage He could have used different events to parallel another passage, or simply decided to do something else entirely. In any case, Peter would have been inspired to say something different.

Tell us how God could have used different events had Jesus not been crucified. Tell us what Peter would have been inspired to say had he never seen the empty tomb.

Unfortunately you are suggesting what God could have used and could have done without realizing that He did what He did because He is God and He takes full responsibility for His actions. He will not punish Judas unjustly. You might, and I might, but God will only punish justly. For all we know he will not punish Judas for betrayal at all. As we both know, there are plenty of reasons for guilt in the sons of Adam. God's justice does not hinge on one day of Judas' life.

 

[Truster]

This is not an answer.

I'm fully aware that righteous and justice are the same word in the original language (in most cases), the meaning being determined by the context. That doesn't change the fact that the meaning of the word does change to some degree and that the English words "righteous" and "justice" do a pretty darn good job of conveying that contextual difference.

But I'm not interested in discussing the Hebrew language and grammar with you. I'm interested in discussing justice - or righteousness if your prefer, I don't care which, they're two sides of the same coin, either term will suffice. My question to you then remains the same.

What does God say righteousness is?

What does God's word say righteousness looks like?

Be specific!

Resting in Him,
Clete

If He wants you to know then He will inform you, but your need is not knowledge it is the application of redemption to your soul in the act of regeneration. Until this occurs your search for knowledge is no higher than that of a Pharisee.

 

[Clete]

If He wants you to know then He will inform you, but your need is not knowledge it is the application of redemption to your soul in the act of regeneration. Until this occurs your search for knowledge is no higher than that of a Pharisee.

Okay, so you're not going to answer. That's fine! Pathetic, but fine.
It speaks volumes all by itself.

As for the "application of redemption to my soul", how do you suppose that is accomplished apart from the sort of knowledge I'm referring too, by osmosis or by magic? By what means would anyone come to the knowledge that they need redemption if not by an understanding of what righteousness is and what justice demands?

The entire gospel from beginning to end is based upon justice! Indeed, it is the central theme of the entire bible! If God can do ANYTHING AT ALL and remain just then where is the need for Calvary to begin with? Where is the need for God to send His Son to suffer and to die? No Calvinist has ever answered that question either. I suspect you'll be no different. Your mind is as broken as the rest of them.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me. Ps 41:9KJV

It seems like maybe you aren't understanding the point here.

This is not a predictive prophecy. The prophecies in the book of Daniel are good examples of predictive prophecy. The Psalm you quote is David talking about himself and apart from Jesus citing this passage as being in parallel with the things Judas was in the process of doing you'd never suspect that it was anything else.

Jesus himself identifies this verse as having been placed into scripture for Him to use on this occasion.

No, He didn't. He never said that this passage was put into the scriptures to be fulfilled by Judas, that's you reading your doctrine into the text.

In fact, while identifying David's prophecy, Jesus makes a predictive prophecy about the man chosen by God to betray Him which began to be fulfilled not more than a few minutes after he made it.

I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me. John 13:18KJV

Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

Jesus could read people's minds, George! Such a prediction would not have been difficult for either of us to make with the same ability. In addition, Jesus was very familiar with the scriptures, perfectly so and in keeping with normal Jewish ways of thinking in regards to the fulfillment of scripture, He cites this passage. There's probably a dozen other passages that He could have cited with as much validity, none of which you nor anyone else would claim as unfulfilled prophecy.

But you are telling us that Judas had such power over the Word of God that his free will alone had the potential power to change history and eliminate these verses from the Bible and he could have taken words out of Jesus' mouth so that they would never have been spoken.

Yes!

Although by the time Jesus spoke those words the deed was in motion and past a point of no return. In other words, Jesus knew that Judas has made up his mind to take those thirty pieces of silver. Had Judas made up is mind otherwise, Jesus would not have said what He did and you would not cite Psalms 41 as an unfulfilled prophecy because it would not be one.

That's like saying this prophecy would never have been mentioned if Jesus had not been crucified.
And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. Mark 15:28KJV

Well no! Isaiah 53 is pretty obviously a Messianic prophecy. I can't see any other way to read it.

I'm not saying that there are no predictive prophecies concerning a suffering Messiah, there obviously are. I'm simply saying that there is more than one way to skin a cat. It didn't have to unfold precisely the way it did for God to accomplish the work of Calvary and to do so according to the scripture without having to force anyone to do anything and without having had to have peaked into the future to see how it all went down.

Tell us how God could have used different events had Jesus not been crucified. Tell us what Peter would have been inspired to say had he never seen the empty tomb.

Jesus' death was necessary, as was His resurrection. I'm only saying that the details surrounding these events did not have to occur the way they did.

Unfortunately you are suggesting what God could have used and could have done without realizing that He did what He did because He is God and He takes full responsibility for His actions.

No! God did what He did because there were things He needed to accomplish and He responded to and with the people involved as they did what they did.

Accept for its complexity and importance, its no different than when you plan something important and have to deal with other people to get it done. Even if some of those people are in your way, it doesn't mean you can't get it done. And while we human's can be defeated by others, God cannot be.

He will not punish Judas unjustly. You might, and I might, but God will only punish justly. For all we know he will not punish Judas for betrayal at all. As we both know, there are plenty of reasons for guilt in the sons of Adam. God's justice does not hinge on one day of Judas' life.

Well it might hinge on one day but your point is well taken! God is just and meaningfully so, not in some arbitrary, "God's justice" sort of meaningless way. Judas will be punished for that which he is guilty of and nothing more and nothing less.

You are THE only person I have ever spoken with that has ever suggested that Judas may not even be punished for his betrayal. If I'm right your thinking on that is this...

• Judas had to betray Jesus and could not have done otherwise.
  
• I can't read Judas' mind and so don't know whether he chose to do it or was forced to do it supernaturally.
  
• The scripture seems to me to suggest that it was supernatural.
  
• God is just.
  
• Therefore God may not even punish Judas for these apparently supernaturally influenced actions.

This is far more intellectually honest than the average Calvinist, who, instead of accepting what justice is and applying it to God's actions, instead say that God is "super-just" as in "above justice" as though justice doesn't not apply to God in any sense that we can rationally articulate.

I see no reason, scriptural or otherwise, to believe that Judas' actions where a logically necessary part of the events that lead up to Jesus' death and therefore see no need to interject a supernatural cause for his actions. I therefore see Judas doing what he chose to do and believe he received his just reward for those actions.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[moparguy]

Any affirmation of Calvin's comment is blasphemy - pure and simple.

Did you even read the quote? It states directly that God commands sin!

Interestingly, it also calls those who "are even forced to" obey God's "commands" the "whole train of the UNGODLY". How can they be ungodly if they are simply doing what God commands and are entirely incapable of doing otherwise?

Your god is an unjust bully who forces others to do evil and then punishes them for it.

So, according to you, God blasphemes himself in Isaiah 45:7, Amos 3:6, Lamentations 3:38, Micah 1:12 and the like?

Acts 2:22-24
Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know— this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it.

The worst sin there ever was or will be; the only innocent perfectly righteous and even holy human there ever was, Incarnate god, Jesus, was murdered... according to God's plan. God even makes this a part of the Gospel proper:

I Corinthians 15:3
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,...

You claim God is unjust for planning sin and using it to the greatest end, giving himself glory; and yet God has clearly done such. Does that make God an unjust bully to himself? Do you possess all the knowledge necessary to stand in judgement over God?

The box of reality, you mean. Or is it the box of justice and righteousness that you're refer to? Just which box is it that you think I'm stuffing God into by objecting to this quote from Calvin?

The "god can't do what I don't want him to do and still be good" box, regardless of what God has said in his revelation to us in scripture.

This one takes my breath away! Pure unadulterated blasphemy in a bottle!

Murders, according to Calvin, are inflicted on the families of thousands upon thousands of murder victims every year by God via murderers who are "employed by the Lord himself to execute judgments which he has resolved to inflict".

So if you get murdered, its because God has judged you and employed a murderer to do his dirty work!

Your god isn't just a bully, he's a gangster!

The God of scripture is the King of Kings, yours is the mob boss of mob bosses!

What do you do with passages like Isaiah 10:5-15, Where God clearly indicates that he sent the Assyrians to punish Israel; to literally run the Israelites down in the street like mud under the hooves of a horse? The same invading nation who God than punishes for doing exactly what he planned for them to do?

How do you handle things like:

Romans 11:36
For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.

and Genesis 50:20, where it's clearly taught that God intended the evil act of selling joseph into slavery for Good ends?

Do you try to give a biblical answer that doesn't involve twisting the texts or ignoring what's uncomfortable?

Of course they are in the bible and they mean what they say, in context. They do not say what you pretend they say, out of context.

Ah, the lazy man's way out. Cry, "OUT OF CONTEXT," (I wonder if you even know what the phrase means), us it as your central argument against God's own revelation, *and don't even bother* to show everyone how your opponent has "taken things out of context."

I've proposed these texts to you, yet you handwave them away, instead of demonstrating that they really do mean what you say they do.

More blasphemy!

The implication being that creation is a sufficient condition for evil (that's a formal philosophical term, look it up before responding). Creation was a necessary condition but not a sufficient one. There's a gigantic difference.

Non-sequiter. What I posted doesn't have the necessary implication that creation is sufficient for evil to exist. If not necessary in the text you quoted, the idea came from you, not me. You can't get something out of a thing that's not in it.

Slick way to shirk addressing the problem, by the way.

Again, if you believe God created, than you have to address the problem of evil. No creation, no possible evil.

Lucifer was created good and chose to rebel. His rebellion was not caused by God nor was it a logically necessary result of the creation.

See above.

I separate it out only to point out each of your blasphemies. Make no mistake, you will give an account for every idle word.

Both were created along with everything else in six days. At the end of which God declared the whole of creation to be VERY good.

I did not say that God forced lucifer to be evil or that evil is a necessary result of the act of creation. To reiterate what I've already said; I only said that without creation, evil would not be possible. Further, without lucifer and adam, the evils they did and spawned would not have been possible either.

You can't make a hole with a shovel if you don't have the shovel.

God created. He created lucifer. He created adam. How do you *biblically* handle this, knowing what has happened afterwards?

God expected it, yes but there is no reason to believe God knew it in the immutable way your Calvinist brain thinks He did. Lucifer could have done otherwise as could Adam and Eve have done otherwise. God would not have broken in half and cried in the Post Toasties because their righteousness ruined His plan.

How could god have expected it to happen when he, according to what you've posted here, didn't actually know it would happen? By this standard, he should have expected all possible results, thus making it impossible to know *which* would obtain.

Second, but more important, Got biblical backing for your specific claims here?

This is the sort of stupidity (and yes, I do mean stupidity) that is only possible for the Augustinian mind. By what convoluted, wack job, stupidity do you arrive at the conclusion that unless God knows everything in advance, He can't do anything rightly?

Insult and avoid, one of the more common ways to avoid serious discussion.

Again, how (by what means) could God have been right (morally) to have created if he did not know what would obtain as the result of his act of creating?

If there is an actual moral right and a moral wrong based upon the standard of God's nature , and God's act of creation COULD lead to these moral standards being broken, how could God have been morally right to have created WITHOUT this beforehand, sure, immutable knowledge? Open theism does not avoid this problem.

Everything a Calvinist reads is distorted and twisted. Words mean different things, passages that say one thing mean the opposite. It's a real problem. I'm only half kidding when I say that Calvinism is a mental disorder. You cannot fix stupid except by throwing the whole mess in the trash can and starting over from scratch. A process most would be unwilling to do even if they knew how to start.

... and yet all you've done so far is to cry "out of context." You haven't bothered to show how any of the cited texts are taken out of context (and again, I doubt you know what that phrase means). If the distortion and twisting that you claim to exist is real than you should be able to actually point out the twisting and distorting... if you have any truth to back up your claims... and if you care enough about people who aren't like you to try. At a minimum, even if you don't care about reformed people, you could at least be selfish enough to want to really win, which requires you to back up what you say.

This is where you start in proclaiming God to be arbitrary....

Really? I actually said that God does thing for no reason? :think:

Golly, I thought I was just saying that God is the definer of the reasons themselves.

Except that you just got through declaring that sin would not exist if God did not create.

I've been recently trying to convince another poster that Calvinists like to have things both ways. This is a terrific example of exactly that. Did you just forget that you had written that there would have been no fall if God hadn't created Adam, or is your mind so compartmentalized that you just don't notice the glaringly self-contradictory statements that you make within moments of each other?

Of course sin wouldn't exist if God hadn't created. God can't sin. :duh:

I know full well what I posted. The two are not contradictory, regardless of how you may hate them.

And, just for the record. You're flatly wrong. It isn't that God is innocent of wrong doing because He declares Himself innocent. It's because He hasn't done anything wrong. The reason God is righteous is because He acts rightly.

So, according to you, God isn't righteousness itself. He's merely just one that does right.

Where, biblically, do you base this? Also, why don't you worship the thing that forces God to behave a certain way. That which can force God is that which is Greater than him.

This is not what the bible teaches, this is what your doctrine requires you to believe.

You accuse me of blasphemy and than you say that God's nature makes it possible for him to be wrong. :think:

Jesus was God in the flesh and was tempted in all ways as we are. Your doctrine teaches that Jesus' temptations where nothing at all but an academic exercise, the Bible teaches that Jesus was tempted.

Are Matthew 4:1-11 and Hebrews 4:15 not in the bible? Or do you simply not believe the bible is true, or use principals that require you treat the bible as if it was not true?

Newsflash, you don't need to be possibly evil or desire to do evil in order for someone to offer you a chance to do something wrong. If you hate drugs and would never use them, that doesn't mean that someone offering you weed hasn't tempted you; it just means you didn't find the temptation compelling.

Beyond that, are you really trying to say that if Jesus (God incarnate) couldn't be sinful - or didn't find the sins offered to him compelling, he couldn't be tempted? Hello, blasphemy? Compartmentalization? Bueller? Jesus not perfect? Bueller?

Blasphemous non-sense! God is a just judge! He is NOT arbitrary! We are responsible not because God merely declared us responsible but because we actually are responsible! The sins we are responsible for are those sins we chose to perform. It is the act of choosing that makes us responsible for those acts. The same works for rewards. To punish or reward someone for an act they did not choose to perform is to make the reward meaningless and makes a mockery of justice. Everything in your being testifies to the truth of this. You know intuitively what justice is and what it is not, or at least you should. If not, your heart is hardened beyond imagining.

So, you don't think that God can make you actually responsible. There's something that is possible to do that you say God can't do.

Tell me, how does the act of choosing make a person responsible? How do you know this? What - or who - decided that choosing made a person responsible?

You're stuffing God into a box; the box of human intuition.

I did not say that God punishes people for things that they did not choose, by the way. Discussing what defines justice is not the same thing as explaining what that justice is and how it is carried out.

More blasphemy!

God is not evil because He has not ever done anything wrong!
How can you not see that your worldview renders it meaningless to call God righteous!

I say it again! Calvinism is a mental disorder!

Have you simply never considered what actually makes a thing right or wrong?

Three blasphemies in one sentence!

God did not decree evil, God does not always get what He wants and creation was not a sufficient condition for the existence of evil.

God didn't decree... so, God didn't plan the murder of his son, even though God said he planned the murder of his son (hello, acts), Psalms 115:3, 135:6, Daniel 4:35, & Ephesians 1:11, which clearly say that God gets everything he wants don't say that God gets what he wants?

Again, I did not say that creation was a sufficient condition for evil.

Your only possible point being that evil was a logically necessary result of creation. That is flatly not true and there's nothing in the bible that suggests otherwise and if the bible did teach this it would mean that God was evil and would thereby falsify the whole book!

You've know all of my possible points? You know everything I could have possibly meant? Now you're omniscient?

More mind boggling stupidity that is only possible in the mind of a Augustinian.

By what twisted idiocy do you arrive at the conclusion that if God didn't create evil that evil is somehow bigger than God? How is it that if God didn't meticulously plan out every evil thing that its just wildly out of control randomness? How do you come to a place where evil has to be ultimately good or else God isn't God any more?

Calvinism IS a mental disorder!!!!

If you'd bother to read what I posted for what it meant, you'd realize that I didn't say - in any way - that God had to create evil so that it would not be bigger than him.

Are you so blinded by hatred that you can't read the things I post?

Just so you know, I don't think Good or evil are created things. Nor do I think that God created evil... or good.

Blasphemies on top of blasphemies as well as continued moronic stupidity.

This question implies that God causes governments to murder millions of people and that such murders are ultimately good because God is doing it.

OUTRAGIOUS!!!!

You will justly burn in an eternal Hell if you do not repent!

Wow. Thank you.

You at least bothered to care enough to call for repentance. Maybe you *don't* want me to go to hell.

----

No, the question doesn't imply that God causes the murder of millions or that such murders are good - or that God is the one doing the murders. Non-sequiter, again.

Saying that God fulfilled the necessary but non-sufficient pre-conditions and planned all the results does not say that God did the evil or that the evil is good.

Romans 9 is speaking about nations. More specifically, the nation of Israel. Romans 9:4-5 & 30-32

It's not speaking about nations. It's speaking about individuals. All the referents are to individual humans, not to nations. There's zip in the 9:11-18 about nations, and nothing that speaks of the same topic that says otherwise. It's called a change of referents. We do it in speech and text all the time. He goes from speaking about the descendants of araham to speaking about two of the actual descendants of abraham and than applies the things he said about those two individuals to all individuals.

You literally have the lowest opinion of the power of God I've ever come across.

If your god doesn't have the game fixed, he loses. Unbelievable.

Cunning distortion, this.

I say that God has the power to define what actually is right and wrong, and that God gets everything he wants, and that God plans everything, you say that he doesn't define right and wrong, you say that he doesn't get everything he wants, you say that he doesn't plan everything... and you have the intestinal fortitude to say that I have a lower view of God than everyone else you've come across.

Better that than blaming my lack of commitment or passion in sharing of the gospel on God!

I've supposedly blamed your lack of commitment or passion for ... what?

Well Romans has more than one chapter doesn't it?

Read Romans 5 much? Apparently not!

Is Romans 5:18 not in the Bible? Or do you simply not believe the bible is true, or use principals that require you treat the bible as if it was not true?

Of course it's in the bible. It means that Adam's sin led to all humans being condemned under sin; and by Christ's sacrifice all kinds of men are justified and given life.

The two "alls" in the verse aren't defined as to their extent in the passage; so we let God tell us the extent of the condemnatory all and the justifying all in other places where he has spoken about the same topic.

 

[Clete]

I have a new quote from John Calvin! I'll post it here and then update the opening post. But first....




Moparguy,

I came to the thread this morning to post a new quote of John Calvin and see that you wrote a quite lengthy post that I somehow missed.

I apologize for that! I did not intentionally ignore your post. I'll respond to it shortly.





Okay, here's the new quote. This time its on the topic of predestination/unconditional election and beutifully illustrates the arbitrary (i.e. unjust) nature of the Calvinist's god. Additionally, it demonstrates how Calvin used the terms "Preordained" and Predestined" interchangably (because they mean the same thing).

"All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion Book 5, Chapter 21, paragraph 5)​

Is there any Calvinist who would like to take issue with this quote of Calvin?

Resting in Him,
Clete