The Injustice of Arminianism

jimmyjimmy said:

What is this choice you are speaking of?

Click to expand...

The choice of whether or not to follow God.

jimmyjimmy said:

See Romans 1. Where are these saints wishing to know God?

Romans 1:18-32

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. (ESV)

Click to expand...

Lovely passage. Paul goes on to write ...

jimmyjimmy said:

Firstly, if Christ never came, God would be just in His condemnation of all.

Click to expand...

Sure, cuz you say so.

Secondly, Romans 1 explains what we do with our "choice".

Click to expand...

It says what SOME have done, yes. Others choose better, as Romans 2:14-15 indicates.

jimmyjimmy said:

Do you believe salvation comes through obedience to the law?

Click to expand...

What do you make of what Paul wrote in the quote that you ignored in my post?

jimmyjimmy said:

Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved, but leaves them to their own devices, i.e., "free will", makes God out to be truly unjust because not all people have had equal opportunity in which to make their "choice".

Click to expand...

I was ignoring this thread because I didn't want to get into this debate. But I have to say that I always felt there was no advantage to having "free will."

Whether or not God showed mercy to some hadn't entered my mind until I realized that many were privileged to grow up in Christian homes. I didn't. My five siblings didn't become Christians. Why me?

God chooses where we should be born. He is omniscient. But I don't think a person can explain why one person chooses to follow Christ and another doesn't unless we invent our own faith and thoughts or God uses His wisdom to lead us.

Jeremiah 17
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

The Father brought me to Christ.

Jimmy, what do you think of Sir Winston Churchill's definition of "fanatic?"
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

Jimmy: "Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved, but leaves them to their own devices, i.e., "free will", makes God out to be truly unjust because not all people have had equal opportunity in which to make their "choice"."

No, Jesus and the Bible teach that God will judge us according to how faithful we are in living up to the limited light we have received. So whether you are a Jehovah's Witness, a Calvinist, or a Mormon, you can be saved by grace by using your free will to make the best choices your flawed understanding allows you to make.


Jimmy: "The Biblical doctrine of election teaches that God gives mercy on some, and justice to the rest. He would be completely just in condemning all mankind, would He not?"

No, He would be morally monstrous for 3 reasons:
(1) According to Calvinism, the rest would be condemned even though (a) they were not free to choose not to sin and (b) they had either never heard the Gospel or had never been chosen by the Holy Spirit to be convicted of their sin.

(2) Common sense demonstrates that flawed humans who must all learn by trial and error can't make enough mistakes in their comparatively brief moment on earth to merit eternal conscious torment. No thought contrived by man is more ghastly and reprehensible than that one. But the God of the Bible wants to save everyone and is unwilling for anyone to perish. So a little thing like death is far too small a barrier for His omnipotence to overcome with additional chances to receive grace.

(3) Justice has 3 indispensable requirements: to be retributive, reformative, and consistent. The Calvinist heresy flunks the last 2 requirements.

Jimmy, Jimmy, if you were in fact wrong to believe in Calvinism--I say, if you were in fact wrong to believe in Calvinism, would you even want to find that out? I repeat: Would you even want to find that out? If so, would you like me to start a thread in which the biblical texts that destroy Calvinism are carefully explained?

Deadworm said:

Jimmy, what do you think of Sir Winston Churchill's definition of "fanatic?"
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

Jimmy: "Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved, but leaves them to their own devices, i.e., "free will", makes God out to be truly unjust because not all people have had equal opportunity in which to make their "choice"."

No, Jesus and the Bible teach that God will judge us according to how faithful we are in living up to the limited light we have received. So whether you are a Jehovah's Witness, a Calvinist, or a Mormon, you can be saved by grace by using your free will to make the best choices your flawed understanding allows you to make.


Jimmy: "The Biblical doctrine of election teaches that God gives mercy on some, and justice to the rest. He would be completely just in condemning all mankind, would He not?"

No, He would be morally monstrous for 3 reasons:
(1) According to Calvinism, the rest would be condemned even though (a) they were not free to choose not to sin and (b) they had either never heard the Gospel or had never been chosen by the Holy Spirit to be convicted of their sin.

(2) Common sense demonstrates that flawed humans who must all learn by trial and error can't make enough mistakes in their comparatively brief moment on earth to merit eternal conscious torment. No thought contrived by man is more ghastly and reprehensible than that one. But the God of the Bible wants to save everyone and is unwilling for anyone to perish. So a little thing like death is far too small a barrier for His omnipotence to overcome with additional chances to receive grace.

(3) Justice has 3 indispensable requirements: to be retributive, reformative, and consistent. The Calvinist heresy flunks the last 2 requirements.

Jimmy, Jimmy, if you were in fact wrong to believe in Calvinism--I say, if you were in fact wrong to believe in Calvinism, would you even want to find that out? I repeat: Would you even want to find that out? If so, would you like me to start a thread in which the biblical texts that destroy Calvinism are carefully explained?

Click to expand...

Why is faith in Christ a requirement at all in your view?

jimmyjimmy said:

*snip*
Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved.....
The reality is that many many millions have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel. How "fair" is that?

Click to expand...

Good post.
And millions more will continue dying for centuries to come w/o ever hearing about Jesus Christ and His words of life. This is a rather interesting commentary on that topic, for those interested:

Kingdom Bible Studies Table of Contents

Kindgdom Bible Studies Savior of the World Series Part 1

God Will Have All Men Be Saved

On this earth there are more than seven billion people! The most populous lands are China, India, and other parts of Asia, and in spite of missionaries from the West, actually more than half of all people on the earth have never so much as heard the ONLY NAME BY WHICH MEN MAY BE SAVED - the name of JESUS CHRIST! For your Bible says....... "there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).
This means that billions of people here on this earth have lived, and died, without having known anything about God's provision of salvation - without saving knowledge - neither having heard the only name by which men may be saved! Now think what that means. If all unsaved are eternally lost, then more than HALF the people who have ever lived on this earth have been consigned to eternal hell without ever having been given so much as a chance to escape it!

What about the millions of people living now in the modern nations of Red China where the Gospel is suppressed? Those people did not choose to be born into these godless nations. Are they lost forever because they never heard the true message of God's love in Christ? Is this their only day of salvation? Are they eternally doomed when they die? Will a just God and Saviour condemn to eternal damnation those people who died before the true Gospel was ever brought to them? Is God about to "shut the door" of mercy in their face?.....................

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyone remember this interview by Larry King with Joel Osteen? It became fairly controversial as JO admitted he couldn't say whether non-Christian believer are saved


*snip*

CALLER: Hello, Larry. You're the best, and thank you, Joe -- Joel -- for your positive messages and your book. I'm wondering, though, why you side-stepped Larry's earlier question about how we get to heaven? The bible clearly tells us that Jesus is the way, the truth and the light and the only way to the father is through him. That's not really a message of condemnation but of truth.

OSTEEN: Yes, I would agree with her. I believe that...

KING: So then a Jew is not going to heaven?

OSTEEN: No. Here's my thing, Larry, is I can't judge somebody's heart. You know? Only god can look at somebody's heart, and so -- I don't know. To me, it's not my business to say, you know, this one is or this one isn't. I just say, here's what the bible teaches and I'm going to put my faith in Christ. And I just I think it's wrong when you go around saying, you're saying you're not going, you're not going, you're not going, because it's not exactly my way. I'm just...

KING: But you believe your way.

OSTEEN: I believe my way. I believe my way with all my heart.

KING: But for someone who doesn't share it is wrong, isn't he?

OSTEEN: Well, yes. Well, I don't know if I look at it like that. I would present my way, but I'm just going to let god be the judge of that. I don't know. I don't know.

KING: So you make no judgment on anyone?

OSTEEN: No. But I...

KING: What about atheists?

OSTEEN: You know what, I'm going to let someone -- I'm going to let god be the judge of who goes to heaven and hell. I just -- again, I present the truth, and I say it every week.
You know, I believe it's a relationship with Jesus. But you know what? I'm not going to go around telling everybody else if they don't want to believe that that's going to be their choice. God's got to look at your own heart. God's got to look at your heart, and only god knows that.

KING: You believe there's a place called heaven?

OSTEEN: I believe there is. Yes. You know, you've had a lot of the near-death experiences and things like that. Some of that is very, to me, not that you need that as proof, but it shows you these little kids seeing the angels and things like that.

KING: We'll take a break, and when we come back, the better half, Victoria, will join us. Don't go away.............................

.

Well, my mother is a strong believer in God, beautiful loving woman. It's true that scripture says no one comes to the Father except through Jesus. She's not Christian but I would hate to think she'll be summarily discarded even though she clearly has greater faith in God than many who were brought up in Christiandom (and grew lukewarm.) That would be really awkward...

jimmyjimmy said:

Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved, but leaves them to their own devices, i.e., "free will", makes God out to be truly unjust because not all people have had equal opportunity in which to make their "choice".

The Biblical doctrine of election teaches that God gives mercy on some, and justice to the rest. He would be completely just in condemning all mankind, would He not?

The alternate, and errant, view is that God gives everyone a choice, assuming that every person who has every lived has had access to good preachers, godly teachers, Bibles in their language, Christlike neighbors. . . The reality is that many many millions have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel. How "fair" is that?

Do you hold to a view of salvation which makes God out to be unjust? How do you defend your position?

Click to expand...

The elephant in the room is liability of ownership ... "If a pit is opened or dug and left uncovered, and an animal falls into it, the owner of the pit shall pay the owner of the animal but he can keep the dead animal". Exod. 21:33-34.

Who "dug the pit" for Adam to "fall" into?

Who paid for Adam's "fall"?

In return for that payment Who accepted the "dead animal"?

I invite everyone to read the attached pdf study and share with me your thoughts.

Many thx to Jimmy for raising such an important subject!

jimmyjimmy said:

Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved, but leaves them to their own devices, i.e., "free will", makes God out to be truly unjust because not all people have had equal opportunity in which to make their "choice".

The Biblical doctrine of election teaches that God gives mercy on some, and justice to the rest. He would be completely just in condemning all mankind, would He not?

The alternate, and errant, view is that God gives everyone a choice, assuming that every person who has every lived has had access to good preachers, godly teachers, Bibles in their language, Christlike neighbors. . . The reality is that many many millions have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel. How "fair" is that?

Do you hold to a view of salvation which makes God out to be unjust? How do you defend your position?

Click to expand...

Utmost cruelty?

You asked for it, but this is going to be a long one, so I hope you don't mind reading to get the answer you sought for. I've studied and written on this particular subject for years, so I hope my answer is satisfactory in relinquishing the confusion surrounding the ostensibly contrasting Scriptures that are conducive to this debate.

Gracia Singh said:

I agree. God's capacity to fairly and mercifully judge all through Christ, combined with His desire to see all men come to the knowledge of Christ gives us a profound and awesome mystery to think upon. Many, many Scripture passages present us with the fact of God's will, desire, and longing to see all men repent and come to Him through Christ.

That He would not in His mercy at least grant all souls an opportunity at some point to see and comprehend and accept or refuse the One God who is Triune is something that somehow does not synch up with Scripture for me.

Apart from Calvinism or Arminianism, there surely is a separate option.

Click to expand...

There is a separate, better and sound option that reconciles the Scriptures that provide the constitution for both sides of the debate. If you want a title for it, call it Molinism (after Luis de Molina). But most importantly, call it Scriptural, which I will demonstrate using the Scriptures pervasively without causing them to appear as though they oppose each other (which this kind of debate mistakenly conveys without a reconciling understanding of the knowledge of God, as conveyed in the Scriptures, in conjunction with our free will, as conveyed in the Scriptures).

jimmyjimmy said:

Some accuse God of being, "unfair" in His election of some, but not all, people; however, they don't seem to understand that the alternative view in which God simply provides a way for men to be saved, but leaves them to their own devices, i.e., "free will", makes God out to be truly unjust because not all people have had equal opportunity in which to make their "choice".

The Biblical doctrine of election teaches that God gives mercy on some, and justice to the rest. He would be completely just in condemning all mankind, would He not?

The alternate, and errant, view is that God gives everyone a choice, assuming that every person who has every lived has had access to good preachers, godly teachers, Bibles in their language, Christlike neighbors. . . The reality is that many many millions have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel. How "fair" is that?

Do you hold to a view of salvation which makes God out to be unjust? How do you defend your position?

Click to expand...

The very reason we were put in our specific times and places in world history was to prepare all those who would receive the salvation that comes through Jesus Christ to do so:

"From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us (Acts 17:26-27)."

"...He has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Hebrews 9:26)."

And again: "...when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons (Galatians 4:4-5)."

That salvation is intended for all is also multiply attested: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16, emphasis mine)." The Scripture continues:

"The death He died, He died to sin once for all (Romans 6:10..." And He died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for Him who died for them and was raised again (2 Corinthians 5:15)." "The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9)." Jesus said: "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself (John 12:32)."

Proceeding from these Scriptures then, how can we reconcile this with the usage of language such as "election" and "predestination" concerning the Saints in the Scriptures? We reconcile it by demonstrating Scripturally, as well, what the knowledge of God comprises, and what the implications are in the world in which we find ourselves, and in the method God has chosen to distribute the Gospel. In creating a universe that would accommodate truly free moral agents, God would have a potentially infinite number of options available to Him with an equal amount of possible outcomes. From what we know about the nature of God, He would naturally choose to create the world which would produce the greatest possible outcome. What is the greatest possible outcome? There is none other than that world which provides the circumstances which leads the largest number of souls to freely accept the grace of God through the salvation provided in Jesus Christ. From what we know about God's nature, particularly that God is omni-benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent, this can be deductively inferred as follows:

1. Because God is omni-benevolent, He would be desire to create the world which would produce the greatest potential good
2. Because God is omniscient, He would know which world would produce the greatest potential good
3. Because God is omnipotent, He would be able to create the world which would produce the greatest potential good

Therefore the world in which we exist is that which would produce the great potential good. To repeat, this greatest good is the largest number of souls that would freely surrender themselves to God and receive His grace. It would follow that, in a world of free creatures, the world which produces the greatest potential good does not contain any gratuitous evil, but only whatever evil is necessarily permitted in the course that results in the best possible outcome.

Again, God would have had a potentially infinite number of options present of worlds to create with an equal number of outcomes. By His perfect nature, however, God would not create a world at random in which His will to create concurrently free and absolutely loved creatures was not accomplished. So God would have to narrow His options to feasible worlds which accommodate creaturely freedom and yet lovingly provides the circumstances that permits each person who would freely choose God to do so. Knowing God, once He had narrowed the options to the assortment of great results, He would naturally choose the greatest of these possible outcomes. This is not to say God is predestining our decisions, but the creation of the world which would provide the social, environmental and personal circumstances that are necessary for each individual, in their own times and places as God foreknew, to interact with each other, their environment and God in a way that corresponds to their psychology/personality, ultimately and inevitably leading to the salvation of those who would freely respond affirmatively to God's grace in whatever circumstance they find themselves. In this sense, then, God can literally be said to have elected those who are saved, though their choices as well as those who reject God are entirely free.

As is stated in Acts 17, God placed us within our context because He knew that if given that context we would freely choose to accept Him by the testimony and in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. It could then be rightly asked "well then could God have not provided a precise set of circumstances that would be those which are necessary to win the soul of every person?", and the answer would be no. For some people, there is no such set of circumstances that would be sufficient for them to freely receive the salvation of Christ by the Holy Spirit's testimony. This is affirmed doubly in the Scriptures. First, in Daniel 12:10 concerning the course through to the end times Jesus says: "Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand." Again, concerning God's providence Paul says in Romans 9:22: "What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?"

It may also seem confusing to think that God has among His human creation "objects of wrath" which He prepares for destruction, until you comprehend these points and Scriptures collectively. There are some souls which God would create that will freely reject Him under any and all circumstances, but are still necessary in the grand scheme of world history to play a role in drawing all those who will be freely saved into that salvation. God Himself illustrates this wonderfully in His statement to Pharaoh in Exodus 9:15-16: "For by now I could have stretched out my hand and struck you and your people with a plague that would have wiped you off the earth. But I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."

See Acts 17:26-27, Genesis 50:20, Jeremiah 25:8-14 and Judges 14:4 for more Scriptural examples on the providence of God and how it works.

God is perfectly just and shows no partiality (Deuteronomy 10:7, 2 Chronicles 19:7). No person is favoured, whether man or woman, rich or poor, slave or free, great or small (Galatians 3:28). Thus we can be certain that if God selects the specific times and places of every individual for the explicit purpose of preparing them to receive the salvation that is in Christ, it follows that all who extend beyond the means of receiving that salvation on account of their place or time are not victims of misfortune, but are those whom God foreknew would freely reject that salvation. Their existence then serves to play a role, indiscernible to us, in world history in maximizing the number of souls who would freely come to Christ on account of the unfolding effects and ripples of their lives.

Finally, we could ask: "Isn’t God showing partiality by creating a soul He foreknew would be condemned if they existed for the purpose of playing a role in leading another soul to salvation?"

There are two points to consider in answering this question:

1. To be partial is to show special favour towards someone or something. God is not being partial in the grace He extends towards any individual at any time in any place, but rather places us each in our contexts with the exclusive purpose of maximizing the number of souls that freely accept the salvation found through Christ alone (Acts 17:26-27). The circumstances vary because the individuals placed in them do, and thus their courses are plotted according to how they will affect other courses and respond to their own. That being said, those who accept salvation and those who reject it do so freely, and those who reject it would do so under any circumstances (Daniel 12:10, Revelations 9:20). Thus, God would be partial if He did not create the wicked who will be self-condemned rather than create them, as He would be favouring souls that would freely choose wickedness over souls that would freely choose righteousness, thereby precluding the one who would choose rightly from enjoying the eternal knowledge of God on account of a reprobate individual who would incessantly reject Him.

2. This question also neglects to consider that the inadvertent benefit of this self-condemned person’s life will likely extend beyond the salvation of one individual. The person who finds themselves lead to Christ by the direct or indirect causes of this person’s existence will, in many cases, have the broad opportunity to intentionally direct others to the salvation found in Him, resulting in potentially dozens, to hundreds, or even thousands more saved souls. To reemphasize the first point, partiality would be the cause for not creating the self-condemned person at so large an expense, which would be true even if it were only for the one, which is unlikely.

In summation, God being unwilling to create the self-condemned to spare the freely saved would be like a man who refuses to spare the lives of his family in defending them from an armed attacker, who has had many warnings not to enter his house and threaten them, because He (God) does not want to choose between their lives and the assailant’s. The devil has come to steal, kill and destroy, but Christ has come to destroy the devil’s work (John 10:10, 1 John 3:8).

GingerBeer said:

Lovely passage. Paul goes on to write ...

All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. But if you call yourself a Jew and rely upon the law and boast of your relation to God and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed in the law, and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth-- you then who teach others, will you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? For, as it is written, "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." Circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then those who are physically uncircumcised but keep the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God.
Romans 2:12-29
​

Click to expand...

For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God.

Requires an operation be performed on the heart, Circumcision involved removing something.
Regarding the heart, God removes the stony dead heart, and gives a person a heart of flesh, a living heart. Then they can believe spiritual truth, be taught by the Holy Spirit and believe in Christ.
This concept was first explained by God in the OT, and the same thing God does in the NT, creating us as new creations in Christ.

In Romans 10, the heart believes unto righteousness, and since from the heart the mouth speaks, people are confessing Christ as LORD due to God forming within them the new heart. And no one can say Jesus is LORD except by the HOLY SPIRIT.

To me this is truth that cannot be disputed, when you believe and are thankful for what God has done, you will give Him all the glory for saving you. But of HIM you are in Christ Jesus, because He chose you for salvation, read 1 Corinthians 1:26-31

Ezekiel 36
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

Ezekiel 19
19 Then I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within them, and take the stony heart out of their flesh, and give them a heart of flesh, 20 that they may walk in My statutes and keep My judgments and do them; and they shall be My people, and I will be their God.

You know some people complain about calvinist mind games, but you should ignore the disputers of this age and simply believe what God and Christ and His apostles teach.

jimmyjimmy said:

God knew all that, and yet the majority will be damned (wide road). Therefore, He created people who He knew, prior to creating them, that they would be condemned. That is my only point.

The God of "free will" created people who He knew would not "have a chance" at reconciliation.

Sinners are not only will participants in this on their own account, they help others rebel against God. Your analogy isn't a good one because men aren't simply victims of Satan. They willfully cooperate with him.

Click to expand...

Three massive problems:

1. I'm not convinced you even read the entire thing or you would have noticed and not responded with something I answered in anticipation of it being asked. "To answer before listening— that is folly and shame." (Proverbs 18:13)

2. Yes, God knew all that (which the Scriptures declare: Acts 17:26-27, Psalms 139, Isaiah 46:9-10), and yes, the majority will be damned (as Christ declared). What is fascinating about this complaint is, again, I answered it (in great detail, no less), and two, it is hypocritical and ironic as only on Calvinism could this complaint be made, since God condemns people having simply not chosen them, rather than on account of their rejection of His most gracious efforts according to His foreknowledge of their individual lives and world history. Calvinism is unsustainable theologically as it contradicts much of what the Scripture declares about God's purposes in the Gospel and it's preparation, whereas middle-knowledge perfectly reconciles the Scriptural declarations of man's free will and God's providence.

3. More evidence you answered before listening, I never said that people are victims of the devil uncooperatively. If you exercised a few more than a couple minutes patience reading, you may have apprehended that the assailant in this analogy was EXPLICITLY sinful mankind as he is in rejection of God. Did you literally read only the first and last sentence of that post?