The worst thing about Calvinism

[ClementofA]

So in conclusion:
The moral problem I see is two fold with Calvinism.

#1. God force regenerates some people to be saved for no real particular reason and yet He could have saved everyone (if He wanted to).



...

It seems there are people who think Calvinism can be harmonious with Universalism:

Poll: Can I be a Calvinist and a Universalist?

The Calvinist Universalist

Calvinism leads to universalism...

 

[ClementofA]

Some Calvinists i've met online say they are Compatibilists:

"The Compatibilist view - This view affirms that man freely chooses what God has determined that he will chose. In this way, the idea that God is in charge, and the idea that man can be held responsible for his actions are compatible ideas. Free will is affected by human nature and man cannot choose contrary to his nature and desires. This view acknowledges man as a free moral agent who freely makes choices. But due to the effects of the fall, as contained in the doctrine of total depravity, man's nature is corrupted such that he cannot choose contrary to his fallen nature -- He cannot discern spiritual things or turn to God in faith apart from divine intervention."

Libertarian free will | Theopedia

What kind of a "free will" is that which cannot choose to believe in Jesus Christ but can only choose according "to his fallen nature"? That sounds more like an enslaved will, quite the opposite of a "free" will.

 

[ClementofA]

Now, is it not unloving of God to save only a few people when He has the power to save them all?

Your view presents the same problem. Is it not unloving of God to save only a few people & cut off the time for salvation at death when He could offer salvation until all are saved? It is mathematically impossible, given every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, that anyone would reject God forever.

Why would God create the people with freewill that He knew in advance would reject Him & allegedly go to hell forever? Why not just create those who would accept Him, as the poster with a rabbit image asked earlier in this thread.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

This is tiresome. I never said the God of Calvinism was immoral. I never made that distinction. Please stop putting words in my mouth, so to speak.

Then you never believed what I always believed about Calvinism then.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You are correct. That is your problem. No matter how many times it's explained, you ignore the explanation and end up back here.

Not at all. It should be your problem, too. But you simply do not see it as one. This does not mean you are correct in any way. For you have not explained the problem. If you believe you are correct, then you should have no problem defending your view.



...

 

[Hammster]

It seems there are people who think Calvinism can be harmonious with Universalism:

Poll: Can I be a Calvinist and a Universalist?

The Calvinist Universalist

Calvinism leads to universalism...

I'm sure if you look hard enough there are some who think Calvinism leads to all sorts of things. Just like any Theology. That doesn't prove anything, though.

 

[Hammster]

Some Calvinists i've met online say they are Compatibilists:

"The Compatibilist view - This view affirms that man freely chooses what God has determined that he will chose. In this way, the idea that God is in charge, and the idea that man can be held responsible for his actions are compatible ideas. Free will is affected by human nature and man cannot choose contrary to his nature and desires. This view acknowledges man as a free moral agent who freely makes choices. But due to the effects of the fall, as contained in the doctrine of total depravity, man's nature is corrupted such that he cannot choose contrary to his fallen nature -- He cannot discern spiritual things or turn to God in faith apart from divine intervention."

Libertarian free will | Theopedia

What kind of a "free will" is that which cannot choose to believe in Jesus Christ but can only choose according "to his fallen nature"? That sounds more like an enslaved will, quite the opposite of a "free" will.

Do you mean like being a slave to sin?

 

[Hammster]

Then you never believed what I always believed about Calvinism then.


...

That's obvious since most of what you spout isn't Calvinism.

 

[Hammster]

Not at all. It should be your problem, too. But you simply do not see it as one. This does not mean you are correct in any way. For you have not explained the problem. If you believe you are correct, then you should have no problem defending your view.



...

I have. For instance, I've said that everything God does is morally correct. That's as unambiguous as you can get. Yet somehow, you've twisted that into me saying that God could sin if He wanted to.

So I have no problems defending my views. You just don't take what I say at face value if it runs up against your presupposed narratives.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Some Calvinists i've met online say they are Compatibilists:

"The Compatibilist view - This view affirms that man freely chooses what God has determined that he will chose. In this way, the idea that God is in charge, and the idea that man can be held responsible for his actions are compatible ideas. Free will is affected by human nature and man cannot choose contrary to his nature and desires. This view acknowledges man as a free moral agent who freely makes choices. But due to the effects of the fall, as contained in the doctrine of total depravity, man's nature is corrupted such that he cannot choose contrary to his fallen nature -- He cannot discern spiritual things or turn to God in faith apart from divine intervention."

Libertarian free will | Theopedia

What kind of a "free will" is that which cannot choose to believe in Jesus Christ but can only choose according "to his fallen nature"? That sounds more like an enslaved will, quite the opposite of a "free" will.

Free will and determinism are not compatible, unless God designed the universe to be good only. God never wants anyone to sin. The fall was not predetermined or decreed or determined by God to happen. Yes, God knew it was going to happen. But God not stopping the fall does not mean He wanted it to happen. God gave Adam and Eve a free will choice to choose. Now, all men are inclined to sin as part of His sinful choice, but they are not enslaved by Total Inability. For if God predetermines evil and good and yet allows for free will of men to exist within this universe, then this would be wrong because it means God has to predetermine the evil things in this world. Who is ultimately responsible for the evil? Is it God or is it man? The blame has to ultimately fall somewhere. Seeing, most of the world is evil, it is logical to conclude that the evil we see in the world is not something God desires. Can God use evil things in this world for His greater purpose of good? Yes. But that does not mean God predetermines the evil to happen; And nor does it mean that God ever wanted man to sin in the first place.


...

 

[ClementofA]

Do you mean like being a slave to sin?

Wasn't my comment clear enough? If someone is a slave to sin & can do nothing but sin, does he have a "free" will to not sin or do what is the opposite of sin, e.g. believe in Jesus Christ?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That's obvious since most of what you spout isn't Calvinism.

Then stop beating around the bush and tell me what you believe then.

The heart of Calvinism is that God saves some and He does not save others and yet God does have the power to save them all (and yet chooses not to do so). God does whatever He pleases.

Do you think God chooses to save some based on what they will do in the future after they are regenerated? You said before that this was close but you did not exactly say.... "yes." Which means this is not what you believe. So what exactly do you believe? I probably will never get an answer on this point.


...

 

[ClementofA]

Free will and determinism are not compatible, unless God designed the universe to be good only.

Do you think Calvinists are determinists?

 

[Hammster]

Wasn't my comment clear enough? If someone is a slave to sin & can do nothing but sin, does he have a "free" will to not sin or do what is the opposite of sin, e.g. believe in Jesus Christ?

No, he cannot.

 

[Hammster]

Then stop beating around the bush and tell me what you believe then.

The heart of Calvinism is that God saves some and He does not save others and yet God does have the power to save them all (and yet chooses not to do so). God does whatever He pleases.

Do you think God chooses to save some based on what they will do in the future after they are regenerated? You said before that this was close but you did not exactly say.... "yes." Which means this is not what you believe. So what exactly do you believe? I probably will never get an answer on this point.


...

God chooses the save based on the counsel of His will. That He has not given any further info is not for me to complain about, or ponder over. He does what He pleases.

 

[ClementofA]

No, he cannot.

In what sense, then, does the Compatibilist say the slave of sin has "free" will?

Libertarian free will | Theopedia

 

[Hammster]

In what sense, then, does the Compatibilist say the slave of sin has "free" will?

Libertarian free will | Theopedia

Are you asking a question, or wanting me to read an article?

 

[ClementofA]

Are you asking a question, or wanting me to read an article?

Asking a question. The link was for reference.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Your view presents the same problem.

This is simply an empty statement. You have not explained how my view presents the same problem.

Is it not unloving of God to save only a few people & cut off the time for salvation at death when He could offer salvation until all are saved?

Non sequitur. There is no proof that all men would just eventually come to Christ if given enough time. In fact, how would an extension of time beyond what God has given to a person to change their decision for Christ? If a person chooses of their own free will to accept or reject Jesus, God knows their heart. God knows a person's free will choice to accept the Lord or reject Him before they are even born. Time is irrelevant in what God knows about His creation. God knows what choices they are goint to make in regards to Him. Yes, God is not unwilling that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. God gives man space and time to repent. But if God knows if a person is going to reject Him only living 20 years, then God knows they are going to reject Him for all eternity. God makes sure that nobody ever gets an unfair chance. God places each person into a time and place so as to optimize their free will choice in regards to choosing Christ.

It is mathematically impossible, given every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, that anyone would reject God forever.

You are saying that the chances should be 50%. But we are not talking about a random coin toss here. We are talking about free willed human emotional beings (that can be influenced) who are deciding to either follow sin (Which is enticing) or God which is the harder path for them to take (But more rewarding).

Why would God create the people with freewill that He knew in advance would reject Him & allegedly go to hell forever?

I do not believe in Eternal Conscious Torment. I believe in Dualistic Conditional Immortality. This is the view that "hell" is a real and literal place where the wicked reside, but after the Judgment, the wicked will then be punished for their sins for a set amount of time (in proportion to their sin) and then they will be destroyed or erased from existence by the Lake of Fire.

But why create the wicked who would just turn out to be dust or nothing later? Because of true love. True love cannot exist without free will. A marriage between a man and a woman involves free will choice of them each to love each other. If the woman did not honestly love the man of her own free will, then it is not true love. But if they both loved each other willingly of their own free will choice, then we have true love. For if she was brainwashed or forced against her own will to love the man than it would not be true love. But it would be something dark and twisted.

Why not just create those who would accept Him, as the poster with a rabbit image asked earlier in this thread.

You mean poster "JimmyJimmy." You have to give me a post # to his exact words for me to give a proper reply here. I am not going to go off some second information of what you think he said.



...

 

[Hammster]

Asking a question. The link was for reference.

I would say that we are free agents. In other words, we can choose to do or not do. But what we cannot do is go against our nature.

So the unregenerate could chose to follow Christ, but why would he? Scripture states he wants nothing to do with Him. Those in the flesh cannot please God.