Calvinism provides an excuse for those in hell

[Hammster]

Indeed. I've never encountered this particular flavor. It's a different animal, that's for sure.

Though somewhat familiar.

 

[nobdysfool]

Piquant, with a hint of sour apple, and a bitter finish....

 

[FreeGrace2]

Cool verses. Nothing about refusing the gift, though. Try again.

It requires a bit of discernment.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So if eternal life can't be rejected, why doesn't everyone have eternal life?

This is really quite elementary, so you don't have any excuse for your questions.

What can't be rejected is eternal life that has been given and possessed by anyone who has believed in Christ.

Those who never believed don't have it. Because they rejected the gift.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You're dodging the rest of my post.

It wasn't worth responding to.

Why did they not receive eternal life? Because they did not believe, which means that they remained in unbelief. There is no middle ground. If they were in unbelief, then that was the reason they were sent to hell. Not receiving the gift is secondary.

What you consider secondary is unimportant and irrelevant. Those who don't have eternal life CAN'T live with God in eternity. That is the issue.

The primary cause of their condemnation was their failure to believe.

That would be your opinion only.

If they had believed, they would have automatically received the gift according to your doctrine.

According to the Bible.

So the real reason they go to hell is unbelief, which means that your doctrine is wrong. Both logically and Scripturally.

Actually, it is your logic and failure to discern Scripture that is wrong.

What you refuse to see and are trying to deflect from, is that your doctrine collapses when subjected to logical analysis.

You're a real hoot, you know that? LOL

Your OP has been refuted. it is illogical, and your bleating about an "excuse" is ineffectual, because and excuse would not change the fate of those in hell.

Typical lame response. Your claim of refutation is just your own opinion. As for being "illogical", you have mastered that one. And Calvinism Does provide an excuse for hell dwellers, simply BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T CHOSEN.

Since election is such a big deal among the Calvinists, I'm really surprised that y'all bristle so much when it's pointed out that Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers.

Apparently y'all didn't think through your doctrine enough. Huh.

They can have all the excuses they want or can invent! It doesn't make any difference. It does not diminish God's character one iota.

I never said an excuse makes any difference. In fact, the Bible is clear that no one has ANY excuse for being in hell. But Calvinism does provide ane excuse.

Why you think that this is some big important, Calvinism-stopping "revelation" is beyond me, and the rest of us.

I'd say from all the flak y'all have thrown, it's really gotten under your skin.

Not because we can't understand it, but because we cannot understand why you think it's some big deal.

Actually, from all the posts, y'all either DON'T understand it, or y'all just won't admit it. But the whining has been amusing, to be sure.

You haven't been able to give us even one convincing answer for why it makes any difference, or why it should matter.

I've told you repeatedly that an excuse doesn't matter. What DOES matter is that Calvinism, NOT the Bible, provides an excuse for hell dwellers.

Is that really so hard to understand?

If you want to believe it, fine, go ahead. But stop trying to pass it off as something that destroys Calvinism.

You're really a hoot, you know that?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Ooh, bad form old chap! Blaming those who are trying to understand your rather amorphous position, rather than realizing your position makes no sense, or explaining your meaning. Now, can you tell me which of these you believe are in error?

Well, it apprears that even you aren't paying attention. Those who aren't paying attemtion are NOT 'trying to understand" my position at all.

1)Human Free Will - This states that though man is fallen, he is not incapacitated by the sinful nature and can freely choose God. His will is not restricted and enslaved by his sinful nature.

This statement is in error. No one believes from their "will". And free will is about making choices, not about what one "wills".

2)Conditional Election - God chose people for salvation based on his foreknowledge where God looks into the future to see who would respond to the gospel message.

This statement is in error. It suggests that God isn't omniscient.

3)Universal Atonement - The position that Jesus bore the sin of everyone who ever lived.

That is correct, as the Bible says so.

4)Resistable Grace - The teaching that the grace of God can be resisted and finally beaten so as to reject salvation in Christ.

If you hadn't added the goofy "and finally beaten so as" nonsense, it would have been correct. Salvation is a gift which can be received or rejected. There is nothing about "being beaten".

5)Fall from Grace - The Teaching that a person can fall from grace and lose his salvation.

Heretically wrong.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Not conditional election. God just chooses those who believe.

I actually agree with you here. God does choose those who believe.

But note: that is different than "God does choose who will believe". Which the Bible doesn't teach, but is foundational in Calvinism's doctrine of election.

 

[Hammster]

It requires a bit of discernment.

Or in some cases, imagination.

 

[Hammster]

This is really quite elementary, so you don't have any excuse for your questions.

What can't be rejected is eternal life that has been given and possessed by anyone who has believed in Christ.

Those who never believed don't have it. Because they rejected the gift.

I have been referencing non-believers. Somehow you must have thought I was referring to believers.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Right. God saves believers (but doesn't determine who will believe).

While Calvinism thinks that God chooses who will believe, God has always known who will believe, so He doesn't have to "determine" who will.

But don't call it conditional election (even though that's what conditional election teaches... don't call it that!)

In the Biblical doctrine of election, it is unconditional: He elects all believers to be holy and blameless. Eph 1:4 is an election of believers. That's who the "us" refers to. In the same chapter, in v.19 Paul makes that very clear.

and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward US who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might

The "us" in v.4 is the same "us" as in v.19.

 

[Hammster]

I actually agree with you here. God does choose those who believe.

But note: that is different than "God does choose who will believe". Which the Bible doesn't teach, but is foundational in Calvinism's doctrine of election.

So what you agree with is conditional election. Man must do something (believe) to be saved.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So what you agree with is conditional election.

I disagree with Calvinism's doctrine of election. It isn't about being chosen for salvation, but being chosen for special privilege and service.

There are 6 categories of election in the Bible, none of which are about being chosen for salvation:
Christ
national Israel
angels
NT believers (they're already saved)
12 disciples, one of which was Juda
Paul, chosen to preach to Gentiles

 

[Hammster]

While Calvinism thinks that God chooses who will believe, God has always known who will believe, so He doesn't have to "determine" who will.


In the Biblical doctrine of election, it is unconditional: He elects all believers to be holy and blameless. Eph 1:4 is an election of believers. That's who the "us" refers to. In the same chapter, in v.19 Paul makes that very clear.

and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward US who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might

The "us" in v.4 is the same "us" as in v.19.

Of course God knows who will believe. He chose them.

 

[Hammster]

I disagree with Calvinism's doctrine of election. It isn't about being chosen for salvation, but being chosen for special privilege and service.

There are 6 categories of election in the Bible, none of which are about being chosen for salvation:
Christ
national Israel
angels
NT believers (they're already saved)
12 disciples, one of which was Juda
Paul, chosen to preach to Gentiles

So Hod chooses those who are already saved? What's He choosing them for?

 

[Don Maurer]

I disagree with Calvinism's doctrine of election. It isn't about being chosen for salvation, but being chosen for special privilege and service.

There are 6 categories of election in the Bible, none of which are about being chosen for salvation:
Christ
national Israel
angels
NT believers (they're already saved)
12 disciples, one of which was Juda
Paul, chosen to preach to Gentiles

2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

 

[Hammster]

Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed, to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men. For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another. But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:1-7 NASB)

 

[FreeGrace2]

Of course God knows who will believe. He chose them.

Why can't you show from Scripture that God chooses who will believe?

 

[FreeGrace2]

So Hod chooses those who are already saved? What's He choosing them for?

Really? You ask this, after what I posted?

I disagree with Calvinism's doctrine of election. It isn't about being chosen for salvation, but being chosen for special privilege and service.

There are 6 categories of election in the Bible, none of which are about being chosen for salvation:
Christ
national Israel
angels
NT believers (they're already saved)
12 disciples, one of which was Juda
Paul, chosen to preach to Gentiles

The answer to your question can be found in the first line of my post above. Didn't you read my post before you fired off your question?

btw, are you going to ignore or argue against these 6 categories of election?

 

[FreeGrace2]

2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

This word isn't the word translated "elect" or "election", it's different. However, that isn't really the issue. This verse tells us on what basis God chooses for salvation: "through belief in the truth".

 

[FreeGrace2]

Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed, to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men. For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another. But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:1-7 NASB)

Thanks for that. Did you have a point?