- Mar 4, 2005
- 27,898
- 7,989
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
If that's what they believe, then Calvinism is scary.
Upvote
0
This is possible according to predestination?
- Thread starter JohnB445
- Start date
If that's what they believe, then Calvinism is scary.
- Aug 21, 2003
- 9,865
- 1,714
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good Day, Strong In Him
I am still waiting for the source... right now it is just a basless assertion.
Romans does say he created some for honor and some for dishonor.
some is not most.
In Him,
Bill
Upvote
0
aiki
Regular Member
Well, one of the ways it is argued that most people (or, at least, the majority of them) are made by God for hell is by reference to Matthew 7:13-14. Coupled with the Calvinist notion of deterministic (unconditional) election, the conclusion is readily drawn that most people are made by God for hell.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
fhansen
Oldbie
And yet, in any case the question arises, what causes the will to be purified; what's the mechanism or what does purification mean/consist of? What causes man to no longer will to sin? Does God simply turn a few knobs? Or does something change; is something more attractive to us, to the will, than any and all alternatives once heaven is entered?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Mar 4, 2005
- 27,898
- 7,989
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good evening. (I'm in the UK
.)No, and personally I don't believe that means that he created some for damnation.
"some for dishonour" might just mean that some people are created, or given gifts, to do "lowly" jobs - never be famous or in the limelight, that sort of thing.
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 9,865
- 1,714
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good evening. (I'm in the UK
No, and personally I don't believe that means that he created some for damnation.
"some for dishonour" might just mean that some people are created, or given gifts, to do "lowly" jobs - never be famous or in the limelight, that sort of thing.
Good day, Across the pond person
Rom 9:21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory--
The problem with the way you understand the text vessels of wrath were made (Prepared )for the explicit purpose of destruction. There is no way you can come away with your understanding unless you throw out the meanings of the words used by God in this passage, Words have meaning and are used in context to convey truth.
Those vessels serve Gods purpose as well, they make his riches known to those prepared for Glory.
Word used for destruction in the text:
apōleia
Thayer Definition:
1) destroying, utter destruction
1a) of vessels
2) a perishing, ruin, destruction
2a) of money
2b) the destruction which consists of eternal misery in hell
The text is very clear when it is allowed to speak for itself. What it may mean to you really in the end does not matter, what it says it what it means.
In Him,
Bill
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 9,865
- 1,714
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good Day, Aiki
We see your understanding, but it yours not even sure you have represented the doctrines of Grace correctly(that is is different matter) You have yet to point me to a source... your assertion is growing very weak and baseless.
You appeal to a majority surely you can tell me one.
In Him,
Bill
Upvote
0
aiki
Regular Member
We? Are you royalty?
I notice you've offered nothing in refutation of what I pointed out, however. Interesting, that.
One superior to Scripture itself? I can't say as I know of one...
Well, your saying doesn't make it so.
So far, you haven't actually dealt with what I pointed out. Why is that? You seem to want to slide right on by it with deflective remarks. Again, interesting.
Upvote
0
ICONO'CLAST
Well-Known Member
JohnB445,
{The fall is because Adam and Eve disobeyed God, now we are all damned with them. I always knew this]
yes, however, it is the effects of the fall I am thinking of.
eph2
2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
[Salvation is being saved,]
saved from sins dominion
.[ We are saved because of faith,]
We are saved by or through faith, ...........never because of
in Jesus Christ dying for our sins. He was buried and rose.
[And by good people, I'm talking about people who seeked out God and somehow they end up becoming a sihk or something,]
I understand what you mean, but in reality, they are seeking a god of their own imagination...they are sincere but sincerely wrong.
[Do I think that they will be going to heaven because they are good people? No I never claimed that.]
Agreed
{The fall is because Adam and Eve disobeyed God, now we are all damned with them. I always knew this]
yes, however, it is the effects of the fall I am thinking of.
eph2
2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
[Salvation is being saved,]
saved from sins dominion
.[ We are saved because of faith,]
We are saved by or through faith, ...........never because of
in Jesus Christ dying for our sins. He was buried and rose.
[And by good people, I'm talking about people who seeked out God and somehow they end up becoming a sihk or something,]
I understand what you mean, but in reality, they are seeking a god of their own imagination...they are sincere but sincerely wrong.
[Do I think that they will be going to heaven because they are good people? No I never claimed that.]
Agreed
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
oldWorshipper
Member
I have struggled with the whole "predestination" thing too. It seems at once so clear and yet at the same time it seems to not "gel" with so many other things in the Bible. The following quote from John Wesley really feels like it is pulling words out from me that I wasn't smart enough to come up with on my own:
John Wesley, in writing on Predestination, says,--"Let it be observed that this doctrine represents our blessed Lord Jesus Christ, the righteous, the only-begotten Son of the Father, full of grace and truth, as an hypocrite, a deceiver of the people, a man void of common sincerity. For it cannot be denied that He everywhere speaks as if He was willing that all men should be saved. Therefore, to say that He was not willing that all men should be saved, is to represent Him as a mere hypocrite and dissembler.
It cannot be denied that the gracious words which came out of His mouth are full of invitations to all sinners. To say, then, He did not intend to save all sinners, is to represent Him as a gross deceiver of the people. You cannot deny that He says, 'Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden.' If, then, you say He calls those that cannot come, those whom He knows to be unable to come, those whom He can make able to come but will not; how is it possible to describe greater insincerity?
You represent Him as mocking His helpless creatures, by offering what He never intends to give. You describe Him as saying one thing and meaning another, as pretending the love which He had not.
Him in whose mouth was no guile, you make full of deceit, void of common sincerity; then, especially when drawing nigh the city He wept over it, and said, 'O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, and ye would not.' Now, if ye say they would but He would not, you represent Him (which who could hear) as weeping crocodile's tears; weeping over the prey which himself had doomed to destruction" (Ser. 128).
John Wesley, in writing on Predestination, says,--"Let it be observed that this doctrine represents our blessed Lord Jesus Christ, the righteous, the only-begotten Son of the Father, full of grace and truth, as an hypocrite, a deceiver of the people, a man void of common sincerity. For it cannot be denied that He everywhere speaks as if He was willing that all men should be saved. Therefore, to say that He was not willing that all men should be saved, is to represent Him as a mere hypocrite and dissembler.
It cannot be denied that the gracious words which came out of His mouth are full of invitations to all sinners. To say, then, He did not intend to save all sinners, is to represent Him as a gross deceiver of the people. You cannot deny that He says, 'Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden.' If, then, you say He calls those that cannot come, those whom He knows to be unable to come, those whom He can make able to come but will not; how is it possible to describe greater insincerity?
You represent Him as mocking His helpless creatures, by offering what He never intends to give. You describe Him as saying one thing and meaning another, as pretending the love which He had not.
Him in whose mouth was no guile, you make full of deceit, void of common sincerity; then, especially when drawing nigh the city He wept over it, and said, 'O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, and ye would not.' Now, if ye say they would but He would not, you represent Him (which who could hear) as weeping crocodile's tears; weeping over the prey which himself had doomed to destruction" (Ser. 128).
Upvote
0
- Mar 4, 2005
- 27,898
- 7,989
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good day, Across the pond person
Morning. The problem with saying that God created some people just to send the to hell is that, for me, it contradicts the whole nature of God revealed in Scripture.
God created men and women in his image, Genesis 1:26-27.
Psalms 139 says that God created us, saw us before we were born and that we are fearfully and wonderfully made.
The NT says that God is love, 1 John 4:8 and lists the qualities of Agape love, 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.
Paul says that when we were sinners - without God and his enemies - he sent his perfect Son to die for us, Romans 5:6-8. John says that this defines love, 1 John 3:16.
Jesus says that we are to love as God loves us, John 13:34. He says to love our enemies, Matthew 5:46-47 - because that is how God loves us - and also says that God is perfect, Matthew 5:48.
So my question is, "would a God, who IS love, who is perfect, and who created humans in his image and declared his creation to be very good, Genesis 1:31, create some people with the deliberate intention that they will go to hell?"
God KNOWS that some people will hear about him and choose to reject him - but would he create people who were incapable of listening and responding to the Gospel and whose only destiny in life was to live without him?
If you were married, would you say to your wife, "I got you pregnant, but I don't want this baby. I'll allow you to give birth and I'll provide for it - but it will never bear my name, know me, nor inherit anything from me. I will love, and be a father to, the next one you have; but not this one"?
I would suggest that if you did say that, you might very quickly find yourself divorced - you wouldn't ever win 'Father of the year' and may find yourself accused of neglect.
So if you, and others, wouldn't behave like this; how can you believe that God does?
Jesus even said "if you, bad as you are, know how to give good things to your children, how much more will God give good things to those who ask him?"
As I said, it is clear from Scripture that not all will ask him - I'm not a universalist - but would God deliberately create some people in his image, with his breath of life in them, Genesis 2:7, yet without the possibility that they will ever come to know him?
I think not - I think it's clear from Scripture that God is more loving and merciful than that.
I have read the verse that you quoted, but Scripture does not contradict itself, and, for me, that verse, and the doctrine it seems to teach, does go against the rest of Scripture. Which makes it very likely that it has another meaning.
God doesn't need to create people and deliberately send the to hell just to show the rest of us how merciful he is.
The cross does that. The fact that we are all sinners, deserve death and eternal separation from God and yet, instead of doing that, God sent his perfect, spotless Son to become sin for us, 2 Corinthians 5:21 - shows us God's love, mercy and grace.
Creating people in his image just to throw them into hell, and with the knowledge that whatever they do or believe they will end up in hell; does not speak to me of a God of love, but of a selective God, who does things on a whim, or randomly.
As I said, ONE verse does not contradict what we know of God from the whole of the rest of Scripture. If it did, that verse would be wrong - but God's word is not wrong, unreliable or untruthful.
Upvote
0
- Aug 21, 2003
- 9,865
- 1,714
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Good Day, Aiki
The weight is on you.. you asserted:
You said-
"The scary thing about predestination as the Calvinist understands it is that God has made most people to be cast into hell. He's made only a comparatively few for heaven. And those who are made for hell have no choice whatever in their eternal destination. They were made to be destroyed. Nice, eh?"
I am looking for a source..
Do you have a primary historical source of any body that said such a thing??
If you do not have one that is fine... just say you do not and drop your baseless assertion.
Here for you edification is the London Baptist confession of faith on the issue:
That God has(1) decreed in Himself from everlasting touching all things, effectually to work and dispose them(2) according to the counsel of His own will, to the glory of His name; in which decree appears His wisdom, constancy, truth, and faithfulness;(3) Wisdom is that whereby He contrives all things;(4) Constancy is that whereby the decree of God remains always immutable;(5) Truth is that whereby He declares that alone which He has decreed, and though His sayings may seem to sound sometimes another thing, yet the sense of them does always agree with the decree;(6) Faithfulness is that whereby He effects that He has decreed, as He has decreed. And touching His creature man,(7) God had in Christ before the foundation of the world, according to the good pleasure of His will, foreordained some men to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of His grace,(8) leaving the rest in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His justice.
1) Isa. 46:10
2) Eph. 1:11
3) Col. 2:3
4) Num. 23:19-20
5) Jer. 10:10; Rom. 3:4
6) Isa. 44:10
7) Eph. 1:3-7; 2 Tim. 1:9; Acts 13:48; Rom. 8:29-30
8) Jude 4,6; Rom. 9:11-13; Prov. 16:4
Your turn to prove your assertion, or back away from it.
In Him,
Bill
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Aug 21, 2003
- 9,865
- 1,714
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
The problem with saying that God created some people just to send the to hell is that, for me, it contradicts the whole nature of God revealed in Scripture.
God created men and women in his image, Genesis 1:26-27.
Psalms 139 says that God created us, saw us before we were born and that we are fearfully and wonderfully made.
The NT says that God is love, 1 John 4:8 and lists the qualities of Agape love, 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.
Paul says that when we were sinners - without God and his enemies - he sent his perfect Son to die for us, Romans 5:6-8. John says that this defines love, 1 John 3:16.
Jesus says that we are to love as God loves us, John 13:34. He says to love our enemies, Matthew 5:46-47 - because that is how God loves us - and also says that God is perfect, Matthew 5:48.
So my question is, "would a God, who IS love, who is perfect, and who created humans in his image and declared his creation to be very good, Genesis 1:31, create some people with the deliberate intention that they will go to hell?"
God KNOWS that some people will hear about him and choose to reject him - but would he create people who were incapable of listening and responding to the Gospel and whose only destiny in life was to live without him?
If you were married, would you say to your wife, "I got you pregnant, but I don't want this baby. I'll allow you to give birth and I'll provide for it - but it will never bear my name, know me, nor inherit anything from me. I will love, and be a father to, the next one you have; but not this one"?
I would suggest that if you did say that, you might very quickly find yourself divorced - you wouldn't ever win 'Father of the year' and may find yourself accused of neglect.
So if you, and others, wouldn't behave like this; how can you believe that God does?
Jesus even said "if you, bad as you are, know how to give good things to your children, how much more will God give good things to those who ask him?"
As I said, it is clear from Scripture that not all will ask him - I'm not a universalist - but would God deliberately create some people in his image, with his breath of life in them, Genesis 2:7, yet without the possibility that they will ever come to know him?
I think not - I think it's clear from Scripture that God is more loving and merciful than that.
I have read the verse that you quoted, but Scripture does not contradict itself, and, for me, that verse, and the doctrine it seems to teach, does go against the rest of Scripture. Which makes it very likely that it has another meaning.
God doesn't need to create people and deliberately send the to hell just to show the rest of us how merciful he is.
The cross does that. The fact that we are all sinners, deserve death and eternal separation from God and yet, instead of doing that, God sent his perfect, spotless Son to become sin for us, 2 Corinthians 5:21 - shows us God's love, mercy and grace.
Creating people in his image just to throw them into hell, and with the knowledge that whatever they do or believe they will end up in hell; does not speak to me of a God of love, but of a selective God, who does things on a whim, or randomly.
As I said, ONE verse does not contradict what we know of God from the whole of the rest of Scripture. If it did, that verse would be wrong - but God's word is not wrong, unreliable or untruthful.
Good Day, Strong In Him
I totally understand where you are coming from... the issue is very quickly you run against the plain meaning of scripture you have a God that fits into your human definition of what you think God should be. I can affirm all the verses you have posted and made reference to and maintain a constant handling of the text.
You have yet to deal with the text I have posted in it own context, would you mind doing so.
Yes God is love.. but he is also Holy, Just, and Righteous all his qualities are to the max degree, you can not rip those qualities apart for the sake of making God more understandable on your own mind. Yes he is the creator, and can do what ever he wishes with his own creation, and who are we to question God on that. He is Good objectively, all the time even when he exercises Judgment and wrath.
Think about the cross... It please God to Crush his Son (Judgement and Wrath) He (God)who knew no sin become sin for us (Love). It is hard to wrap our heads around... but it is who God is,
I can recommended some resources if you like. In the end we must let scripture speak and in the case of the passage I have posted it is quite clear what it says and is not contradictory of any other passages with in Scripture.
In Him,
Bill
Upvote
0
oldWorshipper
Member
While I didn't make the quote, it seemed clear to me reading it that the poster was simply applying common sense, and showing the end result of the Calvinist view without directly quoting any Calvinist along the way. I'll attempt here to show how I understood the assertion:
- Jesus spoke about the WIDE versus NARROW paths, and how there are many fewer that find it and walk it versus those that don't. This is where I think the poster gets the "most people are going to be cast into hell" part.
- God is our creator. He made us.
- The Calvinist doctrine asserts that in all cases God made the decision before the foundation of the world as to who would walk that path and who would not.
- Therefore, it would mean that He made most people to be cast into hell.
And, hey, maybe He did. This isn't one of those doctrines that I think I've completely understood yet, so I'm not here trying to come down on either side. I just felt that you are pushing back against pretty hard against a comment that didn't deserve it. Sort of like "even if we don't have any direct quote from Hillary Clinton that she hates Donald Trump, do we we really need a direct quote?"
Upvote
0
- Mar 4, 2005
- 27,898
- 7,989
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Hi again,
Just to say that I will try to address this, but it may take a while.
I'm not ignoring you.
Upvote
0
aiki
Regular Member
I already gave you one: Matthew 7:13-14. Couple this verse with the U of the Calvinist TULIP and you get exactly what I described in the quotation above. You still haven't actually directly refuted what I pointed out. You've just tried to slip the problem by "looking for a source."
Again, why do I need one? I never asserted anything about "primary historical sources."
I'll drop it when you demonstrate that the conclusion is in error. You haven't even tried to do so, yet.
One loong deflection.
Aaand more deflection.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Hello to you.
I don't know if it is right to analyse singular and plural tenses.
However, what about Ephesians 2:11 ? It says: Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised .... ” We cannot deny that "you who are GentileS" is clearly plural.
In context, Paul was really saying that God had always pre-planned or predestined to offer redemption to the Gentiles.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
