The Terrible God of Calvinism

[Brother Ducky]

Defend your position. How is it just for God to send a man to hell who never had a chance to respond to him? More fully develop your view on God's mercy and grace. 2 Pe 3:9, Ac 17:27

I think you are bringing up an issue that is not Reformed/non-Reformed in nature. I can tell you that none shall see hell that does deserve it on the basis of his/her own sin.

Can I assume that you hold that if one has not heard, and dies, s/he goes to heaven?

 

[glorydaz]

It's not inability, as in a physical inability. It's a moral inability. It's man's nature to reject God.

Don't pretend like you haven't been shown this.

Romans 2:14
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.​

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

It's not inability, as in a physical inability. It's a moral inability. It's man's nature to reject God.

Mankind was, created with a "free-will choice."

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Calvinists try to tell us: "Day is night and night is day." They've been
brainwashed/indoctrinated that way.

 

[Brother Ducky]

How about the inability of man to believe God, seek God, hear the Gospel? God says man has no excuse, but those all give him excuses.

I think the concepts are part of a Biblical anthropology. And as of now, I have not seen a Biblical anthropology that gives man enough of a free-will to choose to follow Christ.

The issue as I see it is the difference between pre- and post-fall man. Pre-fall man certainly able to believe and seek God. I believe that post-fall man is unable to do so.

 

[musterion]

No, that is you quoting scripture without an ounce of discernment and zip understanding.

That section was Paul describing God's sovereign use of nations as he sees fit, including Israel... building them up and shattering them like pottery as He sees fit...but it never does any good to try to tell a Calvinist that. They've GOT to make it about individual salvation.

 

[Robert Pate]

I think the concepts are part of a Biblical anthropology. And as of now, I have not seen a Biblical anthropology that gives man enough of a free-will to choose to follow Christ.

The issue as I see it is the difference between pre- and post-fall man. Pre-fall man certainly able to believe and seek God. I believe that post-fall man is unable to do so.

So, you apparently believe that God chooses some to be saved and damns the rest.

You are teaching that God is an unjust, umerciful, unrighteous tyrant that delights in creating reprobates so that he can send them to hell.

 

[musterion]

So, you apparently believe that God chooses some to be saved and damns the rest.

You are teaching that God is an unjust, umerciful, unrighteous tyrant that delights in creating reprobates so that he can send them to hell.

Don't forget the lying.

 

[Brother Ducky]

So, you apparently believe that God chooses some to be saved and damns the rest.

You are teaching that God is an unjust, umerciful, unrighteous tyrant that delights in creating reprobates so that he can send them to hell.

I am more inclined to say that God chooses some to be saved.

But again, just how is that unjust?

 

[glorydaz]

That section was Paul describing God's sovereign use of nations as he sees fit, including Israel... building them up and shattering them like pottery as He sees fit...but it never does any good to try to tell a Calvinist that. They've GOT to make it about individual salvation.

And how hard can it be to look up what is written? :idunno:

Besides Isaiah 29, we have this especially explicit text in Jeremiah which would refute many of their ideas (including "turn from their evil") if they would just look.

Jeremiah 18:6-10
O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.​

 

[Brother Ducky]

What are the "fairly narrow theological areas?"

I would think predestination and for some infant baptism.

You want to throw out some others?

 

[glorydaz]

I am more inclined to say that God chooses some to be saved.

But again, just how is that unjust?

See, you're claiming God is doing something He does not do, and then asking how that is unjust. You don't see how crazy that is?




That's like saying, "God saves the unbeliever and sends the believer to hell. How is that unjust?"

 

[Brother Ducky]

Mankind was, created with a "free-will choice."

The question is whether fallen mankind has exactly the same choice, and if fallen mankind can make the choice.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

"Isn't under sin"? Are you just going to make stuff up that has nothing to do with your claim? Paul wasn't "exaggerating" but he certainly wasn't contradicting Scripture as your "interpretation" insists. Have you ever bothered to go read "what is written" in Psalm 14 and Psalm 5:5-9 which Paul was quoting? It's the foolish...."their hearts" are being talked about...not all men.

It's the fool who has said in his heart there is no God. That does not mean all men are fools and don't believe in God. We know from reading Romans 1 and 2 that the things of God are clearly seen and understood by the created. It's why men are without excuse. Even the gentiles can do by nature the things contained in the law.

Psalm 14:1-5
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the Lord. There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.​

There has always been those who are righteous and just (not sin free - and that isn't what Paul is saying).

Why do you ignore Able, Noah and Lot? Mat 23:35 2 Pet 2:7,8

Gen. 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.​

Why do you ignore those who sought the Lord?

Gen. 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.​

Even Adam prophesied when moved by the Holy Spirit.

So what's yer point?

 

[NickCharles]

No, that is you quoting scripture without an ounce of discernment and zip understanding.

That would be incorrect. I read what Paul wrote. It's unambiguous.

God has mercy on whom He has mercy. It's His choice.

And there are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.

 

[Brother Ducky]

See, you're claiming God is doing something He does not do, and then asking how that is unjust. You don't see how crazy that is?

Obviously there is a difference of opinion on the matter. Godly and sincere people have looked at Scripture and have weighed them in different orders and come to different conclusions. I do not think it is a matter of salvation, although I understand that there are those who would disagree with me on that.

Hypothetically, if God, the creator and sustainer of all that is, seen and unseen, chose some to heaven and some to hell, how would that be unjust?

 

[NickCharles]

Don't pretend like you haven't been shown this.

Romans 2:14

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.​

I have read this. It's part of a larger argument Paul is making that all are under sin, even those who are unaware of the law. They are a law unto themselves in other words, they violate their own law that they create for themselves. So even if the never heard the law, they think lying is wrong, yet they've lied. They think stealing is wrong, yet they've stolen. Etc.

No one has an excuse.

 

[NickCharles]

Mankind was, created with a "free-will choice."

Okay. But we cannot make a choice that goes against our nature. In other words? You cannot just chose what you believe.

 

[NickCharles]

That section was Paul describing God's sovereign use of nations as he sees fit, including Israel... building them up and shattering them like pottery as He sees fit...but it never does any good to try to tell a Calvinist that. They've GOT to make it about individual salvation.

It is about individuals. But even if it wasn't that doesn't change much because now you are talking about large groups of individuals (nations).

 

[NickCharles]

And how hard can it be to look up what is written? :idunno:



Besides Isaiah 29, we have this especially explicit text in Jeremiah which would refute many of their ideas (including "turn from their evil") if they would just look.

Jeremiah 18:6-10

O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.​

The problem with this method is that it's not how Paul's readers would have understood it. They wouldn't have thought that Paul must not mean what's right in front of them, but must want them to go look at some OT passage to determine what he really means.

It cannot mean what Paul didn't intend it to mean. And your view contradicts the straight reading of the passage.