Calvinism provides an excuse for those in hell

[Hammster]

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.

If they have an excuse, is it fair that they are in hell? I would think not.

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

Well, because it's inaccurate. We have, however, taught you what we do believe. I'm not sure why you don't understand it, though.

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

It didn't prove anything except why some are in Heaven. If question 7 would have been "Are those folks in hell because of their sin?", then this conversation would be over. But you refuse to accept that it's what Calvinists and Biblicists believe.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2, I am now suspecting that you have a basic honesty issue.

Why do you challenge my honesty? Really? This is what I said:

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

Did that question frighten you? Why didn't you just answer it? To answer the question would be honest. To avoid it wouldn't be honest. Maybe you have this "honesty issue".

It is possible that you just simply fail to understand Calvinism so completely that you make such basic and simple mistakes.

Why does everyone say this yet no one actually steps up to the bat and show me HOW and WHY I di not understand Calvinism. Claims are cheap. Anyone can make them. Proof of claims is a completely different thing.

If I misunderstand Calvinism, please just show me HOW and WHY. Fair enough?

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.

Thank you. You actually finally answered my question. And that's your error. In order to have a free choice, one must have options to choose from.

So if you admit that man is free to reject, then it MUST be so that he is just as free to accept. If either isn't available for choosing, then man is NOT FREE because the only choice really isn't one.

It seems Calvinism doesn't understand what options mean, or free choice.

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).

Why do you keep up with the name calling? I've proven I'm not Arminian, any more than I'm a Calvinist. Both have serious flaws in them. It's just that I happen to be posting on a "debate a Calvinist" folder.

Since you deny that man can freely choose to accept, you actually nullify that man is free to reject. When you take away one choice, what's left ain't a choice. It's programming, or pulling strings, or whatever. But not a choice.

So don't tell me that man is "free to reject". If that's all he can do, he ain't free. He's a slave to his nature, which Calvinism also claims.

 

[nobdysfool]

Why does everyone say this yet no one actually steps up to the bat and show me HOW and WHY I di not understand Calvinism. Claims are cheap. Anyone can make them. Proof of claims is a completely different thing.

If I misunderstand Calvinism, please just show me HOW and WHY. Fair enough?

it is clearly demonstrated that such correction would be rejected out of hand. The attitude, and snarky answers all scream that correction would be rejected out of hand. So why should we give it?

Thank you. You actually finally answered my question. And that's your error. In order to have a free choice, one must have options to choose from.

Ah, so we're down to the whole free will question.

So if you admit that man is free to reject, then it MUST be so that he is just as free to accept. If either isn't available for choosing, then man is NOT FREE because the only choice really isn't one.

And of course, fee will is the sine qua non of Christianity in your view, whereas in our view, Jesus Christ is the sine qua non of Christianity.

Houston, I think we have identified the problem....

It seems Calvinism doesn't understand what options mean, or free choice.

Actually it seems it is not us who doesn't realize just how corrupted man is, and that the corruption affects even his will.

Why do you keep up with the name calling? I've proven I'm not Arminian, any more than I'm a Calvinist. Both have serious flaws in them. It's just that I happen to be posting on a "debate a Calvinist" folder.

No, you're trying (and failing) to argue with Calvinists about their theology, which you quite clearly know next to nothing about.

Since you deny that man can freely choose to accept, you actually nullify that man is free to reject. When you take away one choice, what's left ain't a choice. It's programming, or pulling strings, or whatever. But not a choice.

So don't tell me that man is "free to reject". If that's all he can do, he ain't free. He's a slave to his nature, which Calvinism also claims.

More of that free will mumbo-jumbo. And you have identified something you clearly don't believe, that man is NOT free, and IS a slave to his nature. That's Truth, and that's Bible. To the degree you don't accept that, to that same degree you are in error.

 

[FreeGrace2]

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

Go ahead and ask an honest question. And I will answer it.

There is a choice. In Biblicism, you can choose to accept or reject the gospel. The natural man will always freely choose to reject.

If there really is a choice, and you really mean it, they it HAS to go both ways. If man is really free to choose, he has to have at least 2 choices. To either accept or to reject. So don't tell me man is "free to choose" when you add that he will "always choose to reject". Such an admission removes any freedom of choosing to accept. I really don't understand why that obvious fact eludes you.

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.

Hm. So, even though the elect one can't choose to be regenerated, seems you are suggesting that the non-elect can somehow choose to "not stay that way". Really? Please clarify.

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

I haven't. It's you with the problem understanding what true choice is. You only pay lip service to free choice when you claim that man "will only choose to reject".

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.

Then WHY are the elect in heaven? They're just as bad sinners as the non-elect.

So your answer is disingenuous. It isn't because of sin. It's because of WHO God chose in eternity past to save and who NOT to save.

Basically, though you'll bristle at the claim, Calvinism has everyone being born with a ticket in their hand. You just don't want to admit it, that's all.

Fact:
Everyone in your theology that has been chosen is going to heaven.
Everyone in your theology that has not been chosen is going to hell.

That's the only difference between people in your theology.

Can you refute any of this? Please try.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Agree with you? No can do.

Sigh

If you want an answer from me, I told you to make it short and sweet. No long posts, as you are want to do. I said nothing about agreeing with me.

I win!

I'm glad someone is keeping "score".

btw, it ain't about you or me. But you can still keep score, since it gives you such a thrill.

 

[FreeGrace2]

If they have an excuse, is it fair that they are in hell? I would think not.

Who cares? That's not my point. Why are so many of you Calvinists all bristly at my charge? Why does it bother y'all so much, if it's true.

And if it isn't true, why hasn't anyone actually refuted the claim that the only difference between the heaven dwellers and hell dwellers is that Christ died for ONLY the elect?

Well, because it's inaccurate. We have, however, taught you what we do believe. I'm not sure why you don't understand it, though.

How can that be? I asked 6 simple questions, and you said "yes' to all of them.

So, what is it that I still don't understand? Can you explain that to me?

It didn't prove anything except why some are in Heaven.

Exactly! They were "chosen". All the others have an excuse for being in hell, and it ain't sin, as you guys keep claiming. It's that God didn't choose them. But it seems none of y'all are comfortable with saying that.

If question 7 would have been "Are those folks in hell because of their sin?", then this conversation would be over. But you refuse to accept that it's what Calvinists and Biblicists believe.

Well, we can end this conversation any time. Just quit posting. That'll do it for sure. But your question 7 is a no answer because I've already proven the REASON any sinner is in heaven is because they were chosen to be, while all the rest weren't chosen.

So this isn't about sin, though you keep trying to make it such. The issue is all about who God chose. Period. End of conversation.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You clearly demonstrate that you would reject such correction out of hand. Your attitude, and your snarky answers all scream that you would reject correction out of hand. So why should we give it?

Another very common sidestepping smokescreen from one who can't answe my questions. And because of this extremely judgmental snark, there is no reason to continue to respond to you.

When you decide to have a real conversation, then post a question, if you have one. Til then...

 

[Hammster]

Go ahead and ask an honest question. And I will answer it.

I have. You've avoided.

If there really is a choice, and you really mean it, they it HAS to go both ways. If man is really free to choose, he has to have at least 2 choices. To either accept or to reject. So don't tell me man is "free to choose" when you add that he will "always choose to reject". Such an admission removes any freedom of choosing to accept. I really don't understand why that obvious fact eludes you.

If I give you a choice between your favorite food and a bucket of vomit, you'll choose your favorite food every time. Just because you'd never choose vomit doesn't make the choice any less free.

Hm. So, even though the elect one can't choose to be regenerated, seems you are suggesting that the non-elect can somehow choose to "not stay that way". Really? Please clarify.

I have no idea what you are asking, or how you came up with the question based on what I said.

I haven't. It's you with the problem understanding what true choice is. You only pay lip service to free choice when you claim that man "will only choose to reject".

An accusation without evidence. If someone is presented two options, they have a choice.

Then WHY are the elect in heaven? They're just as bad sinners as the non-elect.

Yes, they are. They are there because God was merciful to them.

So your answer is disingenuous. It isn't because of sin. It's because of WHO God chose in eternity past to save and who NOT to save.

No, you keep getting confused on this simple point. People are in heaven because God chose to save them. People are in hell because of sin. I'll keep telling you this until you can understand it.

Basically, though you'll bristle at the claim, Calvinism has everyone being born with a ticket in their hand. You just don't want to admit it, that's all.

I think it's inaccurate as presented. But I can see why you synergists think that way. You'd rather earn your own ticket.

Fact:
Everyone in your theology that has been chosen is going to heaven.
Everyone in your theology that has not been chosen is going to hell.

That's the only difference between people in your theology.

Can you refute any of this? Please try.

This is true. But you left out the reason everyone not chosen goes to hell. It's because they are sinners.

 

[nobdysfool]

Sigh

If you want an answer from me, I told you to make it short and sweet. No long posts, as you are want to do. I said nothing about agreeing with me.

Oh c'mon! That's been the whole reason you've been beating this dead horse for so long. The only thing that will satisfy you is 100% agreement with your take on Calvinism. Otherwise, why argue?

I'm glad someone is keeping "score".

btw, it ain't about you or me. But you can still keep score, since it gives you such a thrill.

LOL! The truth is, I DID win. Not that it makes any real difference, other than bragging rights, should I choose to exercise them, which I probably won't.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

It didn't prove anything except why some are in Heaven. If question 7 would have been "Are those folks in hell because of their sin?", then this conversation would be over. But you refuse to accept that it's what Calvinists and Biblicists believe.

What you fail to say is that you and I are sinners also. Why is it that we will not end up in hell? If it is ONLY on account of sin that people go to hell, then everyone will end up there.

Since everyone is a sinner, why are those folks in hell, and you won't be there?

Did you do something they didn't?

Are you better than they?

Are you privileged and they aren't?

Or, was it nothing man did and God is responsible where man ends up?

 

[Hammster]

Who cares? That's not my point. Why are so many of you Calvinists all bristly at my charge? Why does it bother y'all so much, if it's true.

Its not true. Maybe that's why you think we bristle.

And if it isn't true, why hasn't anyone actually refuted the claim that the only difference between the heaven dwellers and hell dwellers is that Christ died for ONLY the elect?

Because there's nothing to refute. That's the difference. But that doesn't somehow negate the fact that those in hell are there because of their sin.

How can that be? I asked 6 simple questions, and you said "yes' to all of them.

So, what is it that I still don't understand? Can you explain that to me?

I have. Repeatedly. Your problem is that you had already decided the conclusion to your questions. But your conclusion had nothing to do with the answers.

Exactly! They were "chosen". All the others have an excuse for being in hell, and it ain't sin, as you guys keep claiming. It's that God didn't choose them. But it seems none of y'all are comfortable with saying that.

Why are you insisting that because some sinners are in heaven that it gives those in hell an excuse? You keep avoiding that question.

Well, we can end this conversation any time. Just quit posting. That'll do it for sure. But your question 7 is a no answer because I've already proven the REASON any sinner is in heaven is because they were chosen to be, while all the rest weren't chosen.

Yep. But that has nothing to do with those in hell.

So this isn't about sin, though you keep trying to make it such. The issue is all about who God chose. Period. End of conversation.

That's the issue that you want it to be.

In Biblicism and Calvinism, sin deserves punishment. Hopefully you'd agree with that. Also in Biblicism and Calvinism, hell is a punishment for sin. That's a fact.

Can you understand that this is what we believe?

 

[Hammster]

What you fail to say is that you and I are sinners also. Why is it that we will not end up in hell? If it is ONLY on account of sin that people go to hell, then everyone will end up there.

Since everyone is a sinner, why are those folks in hell, and you won't be there?

Did you do something they didn't?

Are you better than they?

Are you privileged and they aren't?

Or, was it nothing man did and God is responsible where man ends up?

God chose to save some. He's God. He can do that.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I have. You've avoided.

I do answer honest questions.

If I give you a choice between your favorite food and a bucket of vomit, you'll choose your favorite food every time. Just because you'd never choose vomit doesn't make the choice any less free.

And this has nothing to do with real choice. And you know it. The problem with your "example" is that a bucket of vomit doesn't qualify as a choice, since no one would choose it.

I have no idea what you are asking, or how you came up with the question based on what I said.

Given how fast these threads grow, I'm not interested in digging back to figure out why you are so confused. So we'll just have to skip it.

An accusation without evidence. If someone is presented two options, they have a choice.

I just de-bunked that idea with your vomit "example". Some choice for sure.

If someone truly has the choice to reject, then they also have the choice to accept. And your claim that having a choice and having the ability to make that choice is invalid, because if one does not have the ability to choose something, then they really don't have the freedom to choose it.

Yes, they are. They are there because God was merciful to them.

Because Christ died for them. Come on, you know better.

No, you keep getting confused on this simple point. People are in heaven because God chose to save them.

Yes, that is precisely my point. They were chosen for heaven while the other sinners weren't, which is WHY they have an excuse. This really isn't that difficult to grasp. But I fully understand why you aren't "grasping" it.

People are in hell because of sin. I'll keep telling you this until you can understand it.

It's a false statement, so nothing to understand. People are in hell ONLY because Christ didn't die for them, which you proved by your 6 "yes" answers.

You acknowledged the ONLY difference between the 2 groups. Yet you won't admit that ONLY difference. Sin has nothing to do with it. Especially since Christ paid for the sins of the one group, which is the ONLY reason they are in heaven, according to limited atonement and election. Why won't you admit that?

I think it's inaccurate as presented. But I can see why you synergists think that way. You'd rather earn your own ticket.

Actually, it's your own comment that is totally inaccurate. I never said anything about "earn", did I. I said "born with a ticket in their hand", which has nothing to do with earning anything. Being given a ticket is a gift. Don't you know that?

This is true. But you left out the reason everyone not chosen goes to hell. It's because they are sinners.

Are you suggesting that the elect are NOT sinners??? Sheesh!

You keep dodging the ONLY reason why the hell dwellers; Christ didn't die for them, which you know is true, but aren't going to admit. Shame on you.

I expected more of you, being a mod and all that.

 

[FreeGrace2]

LOL! The truth is, I DID win.

I'm glad it's all about you. That's so sweet.

Not that it makes any real difference, other than bragging rights, should I choose to exercise them, which I probably won't.

Uh, how many times have you said "I win". How is that not bragging?

You really need a primer on the meaning of words.

 

[FreeGrace2]

What you fail to say is that you and I are sinners also. Why is it that we will not end up in hell? If it is ONLY on account of sin that people go to hell, then everyone will end up there.

Since everyone is a sinner, why are those folks in hell, and you won't be there?

Did you do something they didn't?

Are you better than they?

Are you privileged and they aren't?

Or, was it nothing man did and God is responsible where man ends up?

Nice try, but the hammster ain't about to admit what we all know is the truth.

 

[Hammster]

You keep dodging the ONLY reason why the hell dwellers; Christ didn't die for them, which you know is true, but aren't going to admit. Shame on you.
.

In Biblicism and Calvinism, sin deserves punishment. Hopefully you'd agree with that. Also in Biblicism and Calvinism, hell is a punishment for sin. That's a fact. Can you understand that this is what we believe?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Its not true. Maybe that's why you think we bristle.

Instead of bristling, why hasn't someone pointed out that Calvinism doesn't give the hell dwellers an excuse. And sin ain't one. Because the elect sin just as much. Unless you have other ideas about that. Well?

Because there's nothing to refute. That's the difference. But that doesn't somehow negate the fact that those in hell are there because of their sin.

So why are some in heaven, since they too are just as much sinners? It goes both ways, but you just ain't about to admit what is clear, huh.

I have. Repeatedly. Your problem is that you had already decided the conclusion to your questions.

Why, you yourself gave me the answers that are true. What are you beefing about?

But your conclusion had nothing to do with the answers.

It has everything to do with the answers. y'all just can't admit it.

Why are you insisting that because some sinners are in heaven that it gives those in hell an excuse?

Did Christ die for any in hell? No. That IS an excuse for the hell dwellers.

You keep avoiding that question.
Yep. But that has nothing to do with those in hell.

Just answered it. And it has everything to do with who Christ died for, which you admitted when you answered my 6 questions. You just aren't going to admit it.

In Biblicism and Calvinism, sin deserves punishment. Hopefully you'd agree with that.

I agree that Christ paid the sin debt for the sins of the whole world. The Bible says so, in fact. But Calvinism claims that those for whom Christ didn't die, all go to hell. That is an excuse, whether you close your eyes to it or not.

Also in Biblicism and Calvinism, hell is a punishment for sin. That's a fact.

It's not in the Bible, regardless of what you claim. Rev 10:15 refutes your statement. They are in hell because they didn't receive the free gift of eternal life. Period.

Can you understand that this is what we believe?

If I didn't understand what you believe, how could I have come up with those 6 questions that all demand a "yes" answer? Can you answer that?

My only point for this thread was to show y'all that Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers. And y'all bristle up, deny it, dodge it, etc, etc.

But no one yet has refuted the claim. And sin cannot be the reason anyone is in hell. If that were true, and God doesn't given anyone an excuse, we'd all be there.

In your theology, the only ones in heaven are there strictly because Christ died for their sins. Period. But not so for the hell dwellers. That IS an excuse, whether you recognize that or not. It's sad that you do not. Or maybe just won't admit it. That would be sadder still. And not as honest.

 

[Hammster]

If I didn't understand what you believe, how could I have come up with those 6 questions that all demand a "yes" answer? Can you answer that?

I'll take that as a yes. Thanks. End of discussion.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I'll take that as a yes. Thanks. End of discussion.

Good, so you acknowledge that I do understand Calvinism's points.

 

[Hammster]

Good, so you acknowledge that I do understand Calvinism's points.

You acknowledge that you understand that Calvinists believe that people are in hell because of sin.