The typical complaint of the anti-Calvinist...
Unless on is a heretical hyper-Calvinist, those so destined for eternal punishment were contemplated by God as already fallen in Adam (a fallen lump of clay). They were not contemplated by God to be morally neutral. Thus, the justice of God in condemning those seen as already fallen in Adam is not impugned by this doctrine. It is only when the doctrine is mis-characterized by the anti-Calvinist that questions arise, and are easily answered.
Rather than assuming you know what the Calvinist believes, if one wants to actually understand predestination as viewed by the Calvinist or the Reformed, one should just ask bona fide Calvinists or Reformed...or at least quote from their primary confessional standards, as in the Westminster, Belgic, Heidelberg or Helvetic confessions. After all, it is not a topic that any Calvinist or Reformed is afraid to answer sincere questions about honestly. Unfortunately, most just take the tactic of hyperbolic vitriol and await an answer. It as if persons are afraid of being seen as sympathetic to actually ask an honest question.
For a more about the sin of Adam and its impacts upon all his progeny, see:
Fall Of Adam - Original Sin | Christian Forums
The Fall of Adam | Christian Forums
In general, if one denies the full impacts of the sin of Adam, then discussion about matters such as predestination is fruitless. Deniers of original sin desperately cling to Rome's notions of prevenient grace. It is actually embarrassing to see a Protestant upholding Rome' thinking, especially given this year marks the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. The Reformers are rolling over in their graves at the nonsense that now passes for Protestantism.
To better understand how the decree of God is viewed related to this topic see:
Notes on Supralapsarianism & Infralapsarianism
Given these sort of complaints, I often wonder how much some actually understand about salvation. Take the test:
A Quiz on the Doctrine of Salvation - Tim Challies
How did you do?
AMR
Unless on is a heretical hyper-Calvinist, those so destined for eternal punishment were contemplated by God as already fallen in Adam (a fallen lump of clay). They were not contemplated by God to be morally neutral. Thus, the justice of God in condemning those seen as already fallen in Adam is not impugned by this doctrine. It is only when the doctrine is mis-characterized by the anti-Calvinist that questions arise, and are easily answered.
Rather than assuming you know what the Calvinist believes, if one wants to actually understand predestination as viewed by the Calvinist or the Reformed, one should just ask bona fide Calvinists or Reformed...or at least quote from their primary confessional standards, as in the Westminster, Belgic, Heidelberg or Helvetic confessions. After all, it is not a topic that any Calvinist or Reformed is afraid to answer sincere questions about honestly. Unfortunately, most just take the tactic of hyperbolic vitriol and await an answer. It as if persons are afraid of being seen as sympathetic to actually ask an honest question.
For a more about the sin of Adam and its impacts upon all his progeny, see:
Fall Of Adam - Original Sin | Christian Forums
The Fall of Adam | Christian Forums
In general, if one denies the full impacts of the sin of Adam, then discussion about matters such as predestination is fruitless. Deniers of original sin desperately cling to Rome's notions of prevenient grace. It is actually embarrassing to see a Protestant upholding Rome' thinking, especially given this year marks the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. The Reformers are rolling over in their graves at the nonsense that now passes for Protestantism.
To better understand how the decree of God is viewed related to this topic see:
Notes on Supralapsarianism & Infralapsarianism
Given these sort of complaints, I often wonder how much some actually understand about salvation. Take the test:
A Quiz on the Doctrine of Salvation - Tim Challies
How did you do?
AMR
