Calvinism provides an excuse for those in hell

[FreeGrace2]

Wow, such a question shows a huge failure to understand Calvinism. Anyone who knows Calvinism would know how a Calvinist would answer this one. This one makes me marvel.

There is no difference between the elect and the non-elect, the difference is in the potters sovereign hands.

Your answer fails to acknowledge one very simple and BASIC point: Christ died ONLY for the elect, or do you disagree with that statement?

Since your theology DOES claim that Christ died ONLY for the elect, all for whom He didn't die HAVE an excuse for being a hell dweller.

One thing is clear: my OP has stirred up the camp. I suggest those of you who are bothered by my charge to mull over and figure out why it bothers you so much, from the "tone" of all the posts of the campers.

And, it should bother you. Very much.

 

[Hammster]

And, so, all the non-elect HAVE an excuse for being hell dwellers. Thanks for making my point!

No they don't. If both deserve Hell, just because one isn't there doesn't mean the other one is there unfairly.

Nice try, though.

 

[Don Maurer]

Oh, really? Can you demonstrate this "ignorance" of mine from the 6 questions that hammster had no trouble answering?

I look forward to your answer.

The questions are only about one small tiny part of Calvinism. The claim that you understand Calvinism because of those questions is making all the real Calvinists smirk and laugh. It is too obvious to all of us that you do not understand it.

I would demonstrate that, but how can I demonstrate ignorance? I ask questions to demonstrate it and you ignore the questions. You have yet to answer where you disagree with the Remonstrance. Why is that? Should I explain what the Remonstrance was?

By the way, I answered the 6 painfully obvious questions. I did embed then right in with your questions. Since you do not read much closely, they probably went right past you.

 

[Don Maurer]

Your answer fails to acknowledge one very simple and BASIC point: Christ died ONLY for the elect, or do you disagree with that statement?

Since your theology DOES claim that Christ died ONLY for the elect, all for whom He didn't die HAVE an excuse for being a hell dweller.

One thing is clear: my OP has stirred up the camp. I suggest those of you who are bothered by my charge to mull over and figure out why it bothers you so much, from the "tone" of all the posts of the campers.

And, it should bother you. Very much.

I do not feel I have to answer non-sequitur replies.

 

[Don Maurer]

Really? Really??? In your own system, God already chose who He would save without any reason whatsoever, and had His Son die ONLY for them, which is a ticket straight to heaven.

In your theology, there isn't really a free choice to either accept or reject the gospel, since God made the choice of who to save from eternity past.

Straw man alert!!!! Calvinists would agree we have the free will to reject the gospel.

We can choose any path of sin and rebellion we want to.

So your question is disingenuous.

And my OP stands; Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers.

Well, you might have the Pharaoh on your team in your objections, but Paul would give a good answer to both Pharaoh's objections and yours.[/quote]

otoh, my view is that there is NO excuse, for human beings really do have the freedom to either accept or reject the free gift of eternal life.

We believe there is no excuse also, even to the Pharaoh and your complaints.

 

[FreeGrace2]

No they don't. If both deserve Hell, just because one isn't there doesn't mean the other one is there unfairly.

Why are you bringing up "fairly"? I never mentioned it. All I have done is point out that Calvinism gives the hell dwellers an excuse for being there.

Why does my charge bother so many of you?

Nice try, though.

I proved my OP. And, yes, it was.

 

[Hammster]

Really? Really??? In your own system, God already chose who He would save without any reason whatsoever, and had His Son die ONLY for them, which is a ticket straight to heaven.

Who said that He didn't have a reason? Not I.

In your theology, there isn't really a free choice to either accept or reject the gospel, since God made the choice of who to save from eternity past.

Really? I'm justified by faith. Are you trying to say that I'm not?

So your question is disingenuous.

No it's not. You just don't have an answer for it.

And my OP stands; Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers.

otoh, my view is that there is NO excuse, for human beings really do have the freedom to either accept or reject the free gift of eternal life.

Biblicism states that we have a choice. It's just that unless God regenerates us, we will always reject Him freely. And that's why people in Hell have no excuse.

 

[Hammster]

Why are you bringing up "fairly"? I never mentioned it. All I have done is point out that Calvinism gives the hell dwellers an excuse for being there.

Your non-reply has been noted. Your whole premise has been about fairness. Why are you backpedalling now?

Why does my charge bother so many of you?

You mean your inaccurate charge? Gee, I wonder.

I proved my OP. And, yes, it was.

Yes, you proved your OP. Too bad it didn't reflect reality, though.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The questions are only about one small tiny part of Calvinism. The claim that you understand Calvinism because of those questions is making all the real Calvinists smirk and laugh. It is too obvious to all of us that you do not understand it.

[
And to think that I really was expecting you to show my how my understanding of Calvinism is so "off".

I would demonstrate that, but how can I demonstrate ignorance?

You mean you really are ignorant of how to demonstrate it? Really? Well, I'll help you, so that you can educate me. Fair enough?

Here is how you demonstrate my ignorance of Calvinism:
#1 find a statement of mine that misrepresents Calvinism.
#2 explain to me HOW and WHY it misrepresents Calvinism.
#3 repeat #1, and 2 for every statement of mine that misrepresents Calvinism.

That should do it.

I ask questions to demonstrate it and you ignore the questions. You have yet to answer where you disagree with the Remonstrance. Why is that? Should I explain what the Remonstrance was?

Actually, I don't remember such a question. I disagree with conditional security strongly. It is as unbiblical as limited atonement.

But, why about explaining to me why my view on unlimited atonement AND eternal security are incompatible, since I get that alot from y'all.

By the way, I answered the 6 painfully obvious questions. I did embed then right in with your questions. Since you do not read much closely, they probably went right past you.

All I was looking for was either of 2 short words: yes or no. When I see an "explanation", I know that the poster is just waffling in their answer.

So, I'll give you another chance: 6 questions: did you answer with 6 yes's, or what?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I do not feel I have to answer non-sequitur replies.

Actually, you do not have to do anything. Or even respond to my posts.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Straw man alert!!!! Calvinists would agree we have the free will to reject the gospel.

Sure. Let's do a straw man alert. Would Calvinists agree that men have the free will to accept the gospel? Hm?

We can choose any path of sin and rebellion we want to.

But Calvinism denies that man is free to accept the gospel. Right?

Well, you might have the Pharaoh on your team in your objections, but Paul would give a good answer to both Pharaoh's objections and yours.

Actually, it was Paul's writing where I learned that no one has any excuse. Rom 1:20. But I have shown that Calvinism provides (just doesn't admit) an excuse for the hell dwellers.

We believe there is no excuse also, even to the Pharaoh and your complaints.

You are confused, because I've shown that the hell dwellers are there simply for no other reason than Christ didn't die for their sins, like He did for the lucky ones, I mean, the chosen ones.

You can claim whatever you want regarding your "beliefs", but Calvinism DOES provide an excuse, even though you won't admit it.

The elect were born with a ticket to heaven in their hand. Thanks to election.
The non-elect were born with a ticket to hell in their hand. Thanks to non-election.

According to Calvinism.

 

[nobdysfool]

Gimme a break! LOL Since you never address who yer talking to, how could I know?

It wasn't that hard. It just requires following the thread.

OK, so 6 simple questions are a "game" to you, huh. I think you know the outcome of those questions, and you don't like it, huh.

Nothing but baiting and goading.

Interesting. 6 simple questions that require only a yes or no answer, and you can only come up with one "yes" and 5 "explainations". What's wrong with either a yes or no to #1-5? Were any of them not clear enough for you? Hammster didn't have any problem answering all 6 of them with a "yes".

Seeing that you seem to have a functional inability to answer "yes or no" questions with "yes" or "no", I don't see where you have much to complain about here. Or are you just upset because I didn't follow your instructions?

How 'bout that! And Paul was speaking to crowds of those who had never heard the Name of Christ (Rom 15:20) when he reminded the Corinthian church of what he had preachED to them and they had believED. What did he preach to crowds of unbelievers: "Christ died for OUR sins". He WASN'T addressing any believers when he came to preach in Corinth.

So? I quoted from Ephesians. he was addressing those who had already been made alive in Christ.

Istead of more whining, why didn't you just point out what you consider to be a misconception "embedded" in my questions. Again, hammster had no problem giving me straight answers.

I gave you straight answers too. Just with a little bit of detail showing why I believe as I do. So what's yer problem?

What does "luck" have to do with anything?

I guess the irony of that little rhetorical phrase totally flew over your head.

The answers to my question PROVE that Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers. The ONLY reason there are hell dwellers is because Christ DIDN'T die for them, because according to Calvinism, all for whom Christ did die, go to heaven.

An excuse that makes no difference is no difference. You see an excuse because that's what you want to see. As the little kid said to Neo in the Matrix, the secret is "there is no spoon". The secret here is, "there is no excuse".

Plain and simple. If Christ died for you, you have a ticket to heaven. If He didn't, you don't.

And your problem with that would be.....?

It is clear that my charge against Calvinist bothers you very much. I suggest you mull that over and figure out why it bothers you so much.

btw, it should bother you very much.

Actually it doesn't bother me at all because I know it's just a manifestation of your abysmal lack of understanding of what Calvinism teaches. My concern is for those who read but don't post here, who might be led astray by your fatally flawed interpretation (can't even call it understanding, because it isn't) of Calvinism, which you insist on spamming this forum with.

It doesn't bother me because what you say isn't true. There. Mulled it over.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Who said that He didn't have a reason? Not I.

Ok, what was God's reason to choose you over some other sinner? And don't tell me "for His glory". Don't give yourself so much credit.

Really? I'm justified by faith. Are you trying to say that I'm not?

The Bible says anyone who is justified was justified by faith.

No it's not. You just don't have an answer for it.

There is no answer for a disingenuous question.

Biblicism states that we have a choice. It's just that unless God regenerates us, we will always reject Him freely. And that's why people in Hell have no excuse.

It's that "unless God..." part that changes the rules. So don't go and claim "we have a a choice", since in reality, there are no choices in Calvinism.

If God doesn't choose to regenerate someone, they CAN'T believe, right? So much for man's free will that you only pay lip service to.

In your theology, only God's choice is the issue. Which give the hell dwellers an excuse for being there.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Your non-reply has been noted. Your whole premise has been about fairness. Why are you backpedalling now?

I challenge you to show me which in which post did I bring up the issue of fairness. My whole premise is that Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers, and no one has yet to refute that claim. I see that it has gotten under the skin of y'all, though.

You mean your inaccurate charge? Gee, I wonder.

You are free to call it whatever you want. But since no one has refuted that charge, I wonder why?

Yes, you proved your OP. Too bad it didn't reflect reality, though.

Are you kidding? Your 6 "yes" answers proved my OP. And you didn'tg even realize it. LOL

 

[FreeGrace2]

Actually it doesn't bother me at all because I know it's just a manifestation of your abysmal lack of understanding of what Calvinism teaches.

Since most of your post wasn't worth responding to, I'll only respond to this comment here. If my view of Calvinism manifests such an "abysmal lack of understanding", why haven't you dont a thing to correct it? All you do is whine about my posts, questions, and OP.

 

[nobdysfool]

Since most of your post wasn't worth responding to, I'll only respond to this comment here. If my view of Calvinism manifests such an "abysmal lack of understanding", why haven't you dont a thing to correct it? All you do is whine about my posts, questions, and OP.

LOL! "wasn't worth responding to"? Or was it really, "I can't figure out how to respond to that post, because i can't get any leverage...."

I win.

 

[Don Maurer]

Sure. Let's do a straw man alert. Would Calvinists agree that men have the free will to accept the gospel? Hm?

FreeGrace2, I am now suspecting that you have a basic honesty issue. It is possible that you just simply fail to understand Calvinism so completely that you make such basic and simple mistakes. I do not know which to believe. It is astonishing that you are here to correct Calvinists, and yet you continually and persistently make the same basic mistakes over and over again. Let me try it once again.

Calvinist believe man has the free will to choose sin. Man can choose any path of sin he desires. We do not believe man has the free will to choose Christ. Several Scriptures speak of man resisting God. We have no problem with that concept. It is our nature to rebel and resist. When it comes to accepting the gospel, man does not have the free will to accept the gospel, it is our nature to rebel. That is why there are texts like john 6:44 which says "no man can come to me." (you might need a page number for that verse, it seems hard for Arminians like you to find).

But Calvinism denies that man is free to accept the gospel. Right?


Actually, it was Paul's writing where I learned that no one has any excuse. Rom 1:20. But I have shown that Calvinism provides (just doesn't admit) an excuse for the hell dwellers.


You are confused, because I've shown that the hell dwellers are there simply for no other reason than Christ didn't die for their sins, like He did for the lucky ones, I mean, the chosen ones.

You can claim whatever you want regarding your "beliefs", but Calvinism DOES provide an excuse, even though you won't admit it.

The elect were born with a ticket to heaven in their hand. Thanks to election.
The non-elect were born with a ticket to hell in their hand. Thanks to non-election.

According to Calvinism.

Only in your imagination.

 

[Hammster]

Ok, what was God's reason to choose you over some other sinner? And don't tell me "for His glory". Don't give yourself so much credit.

also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, (Ephesians 1:11 NASB)

The Bible says anyone who is justified was justified by faith.

I know. Even us Biblicists.

There is no answer for a disingenuous question.

True. But you've found a way to avoid answering an honest one.

It's that "unless God..." part that changes the rules. So don't go and claim "we have a a choice", since in reality, there are no choices in Calvinism.

There is a choice. In Biblicism, you can choose to accept or reject the gospel. The natural man will always freely choose to reject. The only way your claim against Calvinism (I'm not a Calvinist any more. I'm a Biblicist. Please make a note) is true is if Calvinism taught that that the unbeliever was forced to stay that way. Biblicism makes no such claim.

If God doesn't choose to regenerate someone, they CAN'T believe, right? So much for man's free will that you only pay lip service to.

Wrong. They can believe. They just choose not to. Don't confuse ability with willingness.

In your theology, only God's choice is the issue. Which give the hell dwellers an excuse for being there.

That would only be true if God's not saving them was the reason they are there. It's not. It's because of sin.

 

[FreeGrace2]

LOL! "wasn't worth responding to"? Or was it really, "I can't figure out how to respond to that post, because i can't get any leverage...."

It really was "not worth responding to". I told you what to do if you want a response from me. Will you? Can you?

 

[nobdysfool]

It really was "not worth responding to". I told you what to do if you want a response from me. Will you? Can you?

Agree with you? No can do.

I win!