Calvinism huh?

[puriteen18]

How could a loving God deprive any one of Salvation?

How could a just and righteous God not send us all to hell?

 

[G4m]

How could a just and righteous God not send us all to hell?

exactly! He can't and won't...we will all learn our lesson though...

 

[puriteen18]

You see it is like this:


Man is a sinner and makes himself worthy of nothing else but the eternal Wrath of God.

God set His Love to His people and saved them that He may bring Glory to Himself. It is about God, not man.

Christ lived a perfect life. He died on the cross and bore the sins of His chosen ones.

The children of God are imputed with the righteousness of Christ.

God judged His Son on the cross. He poured His wrath out on our sins there. It was not the physical pain that was the worse, but the pain of the divine hate of God on His Son that was so terrible. God turned His back on Christ because He,the Holy One, will not look upon sin.

When God sees us, his children, He sees not our sin, but the righteousness of His Son. Therefore, He brings us into His Heaven.

The Blood of Christ has purged us.

 

[puriteen18]

The Puritans have been accused as well of burning heretics, but whether those accounts are accurate, only those involved and the Lord truly knows. However, I do not know of any Wesleyans or Anabaptists who have done the same. If you know of any, please tell me.

I do not think that the Puritans ever burned people, I believe that they only hung.

My church too was called heretic and persecuted in the 1600's and 1700's: the Particular Baptists. Today, we are organized into the denominations Reformed Baptist, Strict Baptist, Founder's Southern Baptists, and all other pro-missionary Calvinistic Baptists.

As for the Wesleyans, I know that the reviver of the Ku Klux Klan was William J. Simmons, a Methodist Preacher.

In 1921, lawyer Hugo Black, defended a Methodists Minister for shooting a Catholic priest to death.

(Please understand, I do not mean to stir up trash, just to answer you. On one side of my family I have a Methodist lineage going almost back to Wesley himself. Yet on the other, I am pround to say, that I have a rich history of Puritan Baptists, though in the past 50 years they have become mostly Free-willers.)

The Anabaptists have always been pacifists and non violent. Though most Anabaptists have no clear doctrine of predestination today (that I know of), their founder, Ulrich Zwingli, heartily believed in it, as can be seen from his sermon at the Colloquy of Marburg in 1529 (where he was to meet with Luther) and in his Book De providentia.

If Zwingli were alive today, you woudl probably call him a pacifistic Calvinist, and he would as well be in oppostion to your view.

 

[victoryword]

How could a just and righteous God not send us all to hell?

I believe that a better way of phrasing Charismaniac's question is, "How could a righteous and just God offer salvation to some but deny it to others?"

I will add on that either He be fair and offer salvation equally to all of His creatures, and give them opportunity to accept and reject it, or He equally **** us all and give no one this opportunity. He would be righteous and just in offering salvation to all and He would be righteous and just and damning us all without opportunity. However, He would NOT be righteous and just in giving only a selct few this opportunity while denying it to others. Furthermore, such a teaching is in contradiction to what God says about His own fairness and partiality (Acts 10:34; Eph. 6:9)

How could a just and righteous God not send us all to hell?

Let me add one more thought to your post. Perhaps you are right that a righteous and just God could rightfully send us all to hell and remain righteous and just. However, He would then lack other attributes that make Him God: love and mercy. The Bible teaches us that God is LOVE (1 John 4:8). If God did as you state above, offering no chance of salvation, then we would have to remove from our Bibles every passage that speaks of His love, mercy, grace, longsuffering, etc.

We would not have much of a Bible left.

 

[puriteen18]

I believe that a better way of phrasing Charismaniac's question is, "How could a righteous and just God offer salvation to some but deny it to others?"

I will add on that either He be fair and offer salvation equally to all of His creatures, and give them opportunity to accept and reject it, or He equally **** us all and give no one this opportunity. He would be righteous and just in offering salvation to all and He would be righteous and just and damning us all without opportunity. However, He would NOT be righteous and just in giving only a selct few this opportunity while denying it to others.

Sir, you have set your own trap, for Paul nicely answers the first of your post
here:

Romans 9
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

God will have mercy on whomever He wishes. And verse 11 of this chapter explains that He loves and hates whom He will so that His purpose according to election might stand. It is not because of anything they did (for He chose them before they were even born), but because of His mere pleasure.

Let me add one more thought to your post. Perhaps you are right that a righteous and just God could rightfully send us all to hell and remain righteous and just. However, He would then lack other attributes that make Him God: love and mercy. The Bible teaches us that God is LOVE (1 John 4:8). If God did as you state above, offering no chance of salvation, then we would have to remove from our Bibles every passage that speaks of His love, mercy, grace, longsuffering, etc.

We would not have much of a Bible left.

Sir, I was only in defence of His righteousness here. However, as has been said earlier, we must weigh Scipture to Scripture. If God claims to be Love there yet hates here, do we just pock which one we like better?

Certainly not, for God is not like us. He can be all Love and yet hate. This is paradox, a commonality in theology. One verse does not simply cancel out the other. Though we as humans cannot understand, both are harmonius in the Divine.

 

[victoryword]

Sir, you have set your own trap, for Paul nicely answers the first of your post
here:

Romans 9
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

God will have mercy on whomever He wishes. And verse 11 of this chapter explains that He loves and hates whom He will so that His purpose according to election might stand. It is not because of anything they did (for He chose them before they were even born), but because of His mere pleasure.

Let me teach you a lesson sir: I am NEVER trapped by Calvinistic twisting of Romans 9. Remember that from now on before you ever again decide to post in such a condescending manner with me.

My first question to you is for you to show me where in that passage you cite or any other part of Romans 9 that Paul is dealing with the subject of salvation, especially as pertaining to INDIVIDUALS? Basically, show me where that passage even HINTS at the lie that God would elect one to salvation and **** another?

Second, you (as Calvinists often do) failed to address those passages in my last post that clearly show that God is an IMPARTIAL God - not one who shows FAVORITISM as Calvinism preaches. I would also encourage you sir, to tell me how you reconcile your misapplication of Romans 9 with the following passages that plainly state that salvation is available to all of God's creation:

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)
"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:4)
"Who (speaking of Christ) gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." (1 Timothy 2:6)
"For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: (2 Corinthians 5:14)
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to very creature." (Mark 16:15)
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)
"And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:" (Acts 17:30)
"Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (Romans 5:18)
"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." (Hebrews 2:9)

Keep in mind that God's Word does NOT contradict itself. Either you are misapplying Scripture sir, or I am. I seriously doubt that it's me. But you are welcome to prove me wrong.

Sir, I was only in defence of His righteousness here. However, as has been said earlier, we must weigh Scipture to Scripture. If God claims to be Love there yet hates here, do we just pock which one we like better?

Certainly not, for God is not like us. He can be all Love and yet hate. This is paradox, a commonality in theology. One verse does not simply cancel out the other. Though we as humans cannot understand, both are harmonius in the Divine.

You are doing nothing more than giving convoluted philosophy sir, one that cannot be reconciled with Scripture. There is not one place in the Bible that teaches that God is HATE. It only says that God is LOVE!!! Now, of course God hates SIN, which is a natural consequence of His holiness. However, nothing says that God is HATE and LOVE at the same time. I love my children but they do sometimes do things that I hate.

I did not get my wife pregnant, let her go through all of that labor, bear me children for the express purpose of loving some of them and hating the rest. This evil teaching of God creating mankind for the express purpose of hating some and loving others is a wicked and evil invention direct from the Father of lies himself.

The Bible clearly expresses God's love for the entire world (John 3:16) and His desire that the entire world be saved (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9). Any twisting of words, misinterpretation and misaaplication of Scripture does nothing to dissolve this eternal truth. Men go to hell, not because God has elected their damnation, but because they reject His offer of salvation.

 

[Netpreacher]

Well first of all I do not think it is fair to judge the papacy compared to Luther and Calvin alone. The Papacy has involved many more people and many more thousands of years.

Also whose history stands in the characterization of Luther and Calvin? Sure we might know most of the facts although we do not all agree on them. Also we do not know all the whys involved. And finally whose view of history are we supposed to take as truth? Think about the civil war in America. There many who think it was primarily about slavery and many others who say no it was primarily about state rights. See just saying "history will stand for itself" does not mean anything to me because we have to define who interpretation of history we are speaking about.



Then we are all doomed to hell. For we all commit unrighteous act everyday and we are considered righteouss. But where does the Bible say this?


Does it? Does it when one looks at the history of the time? I personally think that great men (and women) write above themselves. Paul and John did that. And I also think that Calvin and Luther did also. (although not inspired) But are we to just throw out all the good writings that one did because they did some stupid things? I am not so quick to do so. Also if we look at the history of the time period we can understand the whys a little bit more. And although I do not want to excuse anyone for sin I think the whys are very important and can determine how we look at someone.

And finally who has shown that Calvin was a murderer? i have seen no proof. Sure he was instrumental in having Servetus killed for heresy but has anyone proved that was murder?



I got news for you. Edwards, Wesley, Finney (especially), Savonarola, Fenelon, Guyon, and Bunyan committed acts ofsin all of their lives. They were never perfect. That is the problem with men. However I think we would both agree that it is good to accept the good things that they said. Christ is the only man who we should completely imitate. Luther, Calvin, Edwards, Wesley, etc. we should only imitate when they were not messing up.

Fiest, I never mentioned anything concerning self-witness automatically disqualifying anyone from anything.

Second, in Ezekiel, we are told that the righteousness of anyone who then commits sin will have that righteousness removed. Of course, the blood of Christ Jesus has paid the price for our sin, but if we continue in our sins, then the blood cannot be applied to unrepentant sinners; only the penitent.

Please tell me one sin that Edwards, Wesley, Finney, Savonarola, Fenelon, Guyon, or Bunyan committed after their conversion.

 

[Netpreacher]

Always prepared "In season and out of season to give an explanation for the hope i have in me"

That's a great verse, but I wanted to know what practical applications of that verse have you done in the past three years concerning the active evangelism of the lost.

 

[Netpreacher]

I do not think that the Puritans ever burned people, I believe that they only hung.

My church too was called heretic and persecuted in the 1600's and 1700's: the Particular Baptists. Today, we are organized into the denominations Reformed Baptist, Strict Baptist, Founder's Southern Baptists, and all other pro-missionary Calvinistic Baptists.

As for the Wesleyans, I know that the reviver of the Ku Klux Klan was William J. Simmons, a Methodist Preacher.

In 1921, lawyer Hugo Black, defended a Methodists Minister for shooting a Catholic priest to death.

(Please understand, I do not mean to stir up trash, just to answer you. On one side of my family I have a Methodist lineage going almost back to Wesley himself. Yet on the other, I am pround to say, that I have a rich history of Puritan Baptists, though in the past 50 years they have become mostly Free-willers.)

The Anabaptists have always been pacifists and non violent. Though most Anabaptists have no clear doctrine of predestination today (that I know of), their founder, Ulrich Zwingli, heartily believed in it, as can be seen from his sermon at the Colloquy of Marburg in 1529 (where he was to meet with Luther) and in his Book De providentia.

If Zwingli were alive today, you woudl probably call him a pacifistic Calvinist, and he would as well be in oppostion to your view.

But the FOUNDER of Methodism didn't do anything. I agree that shooting Catholic priests and reviging the KKK are sinful acts ready for punishment, but the founder of Methodism did not do this.

Zwingli founded his own particular sect of the Anabaptists, but by far, the anabaptists I know personally are far from the reformed perspective of doctrine.

 

[Netpreacher]

I have one question concerning the reformed doctrine:

If somebody calls upon the name of the Lord and continues therein, but is not chosen by God, will that person still go to heaven?

 

[puriteen18]

I have one question concerning the reformed doctrine:

If somebody calls upon the name of the Lord and continues therein, but is not chosen by God, will that person still go to heaven?

Those who God has chosen will call on the Name of the LORD in truest repentance and continue down the path of righteousness.

There are many who make a false confession. They may be zealous for a while, but if they so not continue in righteousness then surley they are not elect.

All who call out in truth to Christ and repent are the children of God. These are the proofs of their election.

John 10
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

 

[puriteen18]

Please tell me one sin that Edwards, Wesley, Finney, Savonarola, Fenelon, Guyon, or Bunyan committed after their conversion.

Well, I don't no any personal sins, but you named two Calvinists in that list that would agrue that they continued to sin after conversion: Edwards and Bunyun.

We are not made perfect at salvation; however, we do hate our sin and strive to please God. But we will continue to sin until Christ shall call us home and make us perfect.

I do know that Edwards made Seventy resolution between 1722 and 1723. These show that he too sought improvement.

 

[puriteen18]

Let me teach you a lesson sir: I am NEVER trapped by Calvinistic twisting of Romans 9. Remember that from now on before you ever again decide to post in such a condescending manner with me.

My first question to you is for you to show me where in that passage you cite or any other part of Romans 9 that Paul is dealing with the subject of salvation, especially as pertaining to INDIVIDUALS? Basically, show me where that passage even HINTS at the lie that God would elect one to salvation and **** another?

Second, you (as Calvinists often do) failed to address those passages in my last post that clearly show that God is an IMPARTIAL God - not one who shows FAVORITISM as Calvinism preaches. I would also encourage you sir, to tell me how you reconcile your misapplication of Romans 9 with the following passages that plainly state that salvation is available to all of God's creation:

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)
"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:4)
"Who (speaking of Christ) gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." (1 Timothy 2:6)
"For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: (2 Corinthians 5:14)
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to very creature." (Mark 16:15)
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)
"And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:" (Acts 17:30)
"Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (Romans 5:18)
"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." (Hebrews 2:9)

Keep in mind that God's Word does NOT contradict itself. Either you are misapplying Scripture sir, or I am. I seriously doubt that it's me. But you are welcome to prove me wrong.


You are doing nothing more than giving convoluted philosophy sir, one that cannot be reconciled with Scripture. There is not one place in the Bible that teaches that God is HATE. It only says that God is LOVE!!! Now, of course God hates SIN, which is a natural consequence of His holiness. However, nothing says that God is HATE and LOVE at the same time. I love my children but they do sometimes do things that I hate.

I did not get my wife pregnant, let her go through all of that labor, bear me children for the express purpose of loving some of them and hating the rest. This evil teaching of God creating mankind for the express purpose of hating some and loving others is a wicked and evil invention direct from the Father of lies himself.

The Bible clearly expresses God's love for the entire world (John 3:16) and His desire that the entire world be saved (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9). Any twisting of words, misinterpretation and misaaplication of Scripture does nothing to dissolve this eternal truth. Men go to hell, not because God has elected their damnation, but because they reject His offer of salvation.

I give you my word, I meant not to be condescending. If you were to perhaps hear my tone of voice instead of just reading what I wrote you would see that I truly, truly am not one to speak rudely. I am only accustomed to saying "sir", but shall try to refrain when speaking to or of you.
___________________________________________

I believe also I was misunderstood in the rest of what I said.

I did not mean to say that God is hate, but to point out that why He is inded all Love and the source of it, He does hate.

God hated Esau, even before he was born, before he did any good or evil, that election might stand. Not of Esau's works, but of God's Grace.

 

[puriteen18]

I did not get my wife pregnant, let her go through all of that labor, bear me children for the express purpose of loving some of them and hating the rest. This evil teaching of God creating mankind for the express purpose of hating some and loving others is a wicked and evil invention direct from the Father of lies himself.

Neither did Christ bear every single man's sin so that they would just go to hell.

Christ burdened Himself with the sins of His sheep. Those He saved.

Christ makes clear that only His chosen ones hear His voice and follow it.

John 10
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

John 8
42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.


Those that never repent are the children of Satan. Those that repent are the children of God, not because they repent, but they repent because they are of God. Just as many do never repent because they are the children of Satan.

The children of Satan are deaf to the Truth, yet God will cause His children to hear when He would have them repent.

 

[puriteen18]

It's funny you mentioned legalism, because most Calvinists would call me a legalist because I believe obedience to the Gospel of Jesus Christ through faith is legalism!

Here is an example of what I meant from the Cambridge Dictionary

Calvinist
2 having severe moral standards and considering pleasure to be wrong or not neccessary:

Another example, from personal experience:

Two years ago I attended a youth conference with my church's yout group. My church is not Calvinistic.

One of the preachers (the only preacher really, the others were mainly entertainers.) at the conference was a Calvinist. He preached that true Christians do not live in sin, but that they flee sin. He preached against ungodly attire, laziness in our religious lives, and false worship. All of my youth group was in a heated debate on the way home. Two of us were on the side of this minister the rest called him "legalistic".

 

[G4m]

Neither did Christ bear every single man's sin so that they would just go to hell.

Christ burdened Himself with the sins of His sheep. Those He saved.

Christ makes clear that only His chosen ones hear His voice and follow it.

If so why would He bother drawing all men to Himself?

John 12
32But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself."

Election, God's mercy is the only way to be saved. So its only up to God! Problem with only some being elected is that it cuts against what God wants:

1 Timothy 2
3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

 

[oworm]

That's a great verse, but I wanted to know what practical applications of that verse have you done in the past three years concerning the active evangelism of the lost.

Once a week i seek the lost in a drugs recovery group,Why do you ask that?