The Witness of the Apostles Refutes Calvinism, Predestinationism

[crimsonleaf]

Okekoki - did not take long.

If you followed this thread you will see two answers in response to a standard Calvinist straw-man deflection.


Originally Posted by cygnusx1
Precisely !

There seem to be only two answers :

1. God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself in order to overthrow it .

2. God doesn't permit evil , it just happens ! He has no control or say over the future , such is Gods nature that He must take risks in order to be Love ....


I know which one is scriptural .


arrow Okekoki - did not take long.

If you followed this thread you will see two answers in response to a standard Calvinist straw-man deflection.


Originally Posted by cygnusx1
Precisely !

There seem to be only two answers :

1. God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself in order to overthrow it .

2. God doesn't permit evil , it just happens ! He has no control or say over the future , such is Gods nature that He must take risks in order to be Love ....


I know which one is scriptural .


Originally Posted by JackSparrow

As you know, I am not a Calvinist,. I go with option 1 - mostly. I do not believe any non calvinist will go with option 2 unless they are nuts (IMO).

God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to himself, Why ? Why in order to overthrow it if he could of just of not permitted it in the first place.

I rather think along the line of God permitted man some free will ( I know you will hate this ). Adam had two options sin or not sin. He did not have the option of be more good or sinless. Why did God permit Adam to make a wrong choice.

One answer would be he did not want robots but genuine love.

Another would be that it was the only way God could reveal more of himself to man. How could God show his all powerfulness if man never disobeyed ?


So I believe God willingly permitted evil with much suffering to Himself. He did not decree evil. As for the reasons, I expect there are more.
​

Thanks. This is from the Weep Over Jerusalem thread, so I'm concerned about exactly what the question is you're both attempting to answer, because it seems to be about permitting evil which is not the question I'm asking - and you talk about "standard Calvinist straw-man deflection".

Let me state my question in a different way, hopefully that won't allow you to answer a different one:

God created some men in the certain knowledge that they'd be condemned - yes or no?

He could have chosen to create only those he knew would use their free will to believe (I'm using your terminology here) - yes or no?

There will be a supplementary question once you've answered these two, as you seem to have taken over from Arcoe. It may then segue with your answer above depending on which way you go.

 

[crimsonleaf]

It would be just for God to do so? Really?

I'm curious, why do you think that God would not decide to kill all such babies? What is the difference between God deciding to kill all such babies and God withholding salvation from the non-elect?

You think God would not kill the babies but you think he would withhold salvation.

Janx I don't know why you don't get this but here's a surprise for you: Even under your own theology God withholds salvation. Got is omnipotent and could save all. He doesn't.

The difference between us is that we see God's justice and wrath and you prefer to just see the love and mercy at the expense of justice and wrath.

 

[Keachian]

Janx I don't know why you don't get this but here's a surprise for you: Even under your own theology God withholds salvation. Got is omnipotent and could save all. He doesn't.

The difference between us is that we see God's justice and wrath and you prefer to just see the love and mercy at the expense of justice and wrath.

Just so that we're not accused of leaving out his love and mercy I want to affirm that we do see his love and mercy, displayed in his Cross, in his kenosis.

 

[crimsonleaf]

Just so that we're not accused of leaving out his love and mercy I want to affirm that we do see his love and mercy, displayed in his Cross, in his kenosis.

Ditto - we see all four major attributes not just the pretty ones.

 

[janxharris]

Janx I don't know why you don't get this but here's a surprise for you: Even under your own theology God withholds salvation. Got is omnipotent and could save all. He doesn't.

The difference between us is that we see God's justice and wrath and you prefer to just see the love and mercy at the expense of justice and wrath.

This is not a surprise.

No, justice and wrath are important and I do see them.

 

[janxharris]

Just so that we're not accused of leaving out his love and mercy I want to affirm that we do see his love and mercy, displayed in his Cross, in his kenosis.

Love and mercy for all? Or just love and mercy for those He chose pre-creation?

 

[Keachian]

Love and mercy for all? Or just love and mercy for those He chose pre-creation?

Exodus 33:19

 

[janxharris]

Exodus 33:19

Is killing babies without a good reason good or bad?
Is withholding salvation from some people without good reason good or bad?

 

[drstevej]

Is withholding salvation from some people without good reason good or bad?

Is sin a good reason? Does God owe any salvation?

 

[janxharris]

I believe that he has done one and will not do the other because he has revealed it as such in the Scriptures

That you believe this leaves me speechless.

 

[Keachian]

Is killing babies without a good reason good or bad?
Is withholding salvation from some people without good reason good or bad?

Why are you holding God to an objective morality outside of himself?

 

[janxharris]

Is sin a good reason? Does God owe any salvation?

Under Calvinism, God does not withhold salvation from some men because they are sinful but because he decided that he would withhold it.

What is your point?

Do you agree with progmonk that God can do as he wishes and remain just?
Is killing babies without a good reason good or bad?
Is withholding salvation from some people without good reason good or bad?

 

[Keachian]

That you believe this leaves me speechless.

Gal 1:10

 

[MuffinTheMan]

Is killing babies without a good reason good or bad?
Is withholding salvation from some people without good reason good or bad?

Dr Steve already hit on it, but the straw man is your saying we believe God does things "without good reason."

 

[JackSparrow]

Thanks....

Let me state my question in a different way, hopefully that won't allow you to answer a different one:

God created some men in the certain knowledge that they'd be condemned - yes or no?

What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction?

The text say WHAT IF doesn't it ? Yes it does. Is there a reason ? Think about it.

What if God made crimson leaf an atheist and then ping, two years ago made him a Calvinist who gets stuck with the idea that God made most men for destruction. Also not able to absorb ALL of scripture in order to get the big picture.

Gmm4 has already shown you the difference between God making all these reprobates and an alternative so go back 2 or 3 posts and read it.

You Crimson are limiting God.
1. God makes most people unable to repent. or
2. The free willers with the problem of God not being omniscient and so forth.
Ever occurred to you that God is bigger than all Calvinists put together ?

This is old old stuff going on since around 385 AD when Augustine first invented it. No I do not have an answer as Like you I have not been given access the the secret will of God. No one knows. The dispute is really do we bend and ignore a load of scripture to suit our finite minds.

Or do we acknowledge say an experienced Calvinist who preached. "The Bible teaches both so must I preach both"

Extra brownie point if you know who the preacher is. Being a Calvinist you ought to. Especially as he lived near Crouch End.

He could have chosen to create only those he knew would use their free will to believe (I'm using your terminology here) - yes or no?

Correction It is NOT my terminology. I am not an Arminian as you should know if you have ever read my posts. Get your facts straight.

Yes he COULD. Did he ? Opinions vary as the Bible does not say. Some extrapolate a few verses for this idea. Even the various branches within Calvinism itself are split over this. So I doubt if you being new in the faith can help out much.

Here is a REPEAT of a couple of answers OK. Answers to your actual question. Not a different question as you wrongly allege.

"One answer would be he did not want robots but genuine love. "

"Another would be that it was the only way God could reveal more of himself"


BTW Arcoe and GM are way ahead of me. I am only a newbie like yourself.

The irony is I am fighting the position that men are puppets and robots. You being a Calvinist should be doing that, not me.

 

[janxharris]

Why are you holding God to an objective morality outside of himself?

God's morality is the same morality that we feel in our conscience is it not?

I think killing babies and withholding salvation for no good reason is bad. What do you think?

 

[janxharris]

Dr Steve already hit on it, but the straw man is your saying we believe God does things "without good reason."

Sorry?

 

[MuffinTheMan]

God's morality is the same morality that we feel in our conscience is it not?

I think killing babies and withholding salvation for no good reason is bad. What do you think?

Again, "for no good reason" = strawman.

 

[MuffinTheMan]

Sorry?

What "Calvinist" here says God does anything "for no good reason"?

 

[Keachian]

God's morality is the same morality that we feel in our conscience is it not?

Jer 17:9

I think killing babies and withholding salvation for no good reason is bad. What do you think?

Is 45:7, Eph 1:11