Calvinism provides an excuse for those in hell

[guuila]

Hey Jimbob

You are sad but amusing.

Amusing cuz you have given so much opportunity for those who know what they are talking about to post it.

Amusing but also knda sad to see you throw sticks and stone EVERY time you lose a point ( debating point that is).

But wonderful to hear a huge amount of gospel from your opponent.

And yes it is amusing to see you blown away, like a fly being swatted. Maybe amusing is the wrong word - satisfying.

Why satisfying ? I guess we like seeing the gospel succeed and here it is in glories action.

Keep throwing the duds Jimbob.

You are so smart.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Wait. Calvinists? I thought you said we need to stop the name calling?

Sure. If you are offended by being called a Calvinist, I understand and will not call you that.

Is that what you were looking for?

 

[FreeGrace2]

So, you're of the opinion that if you claim that no one refuted what you say, you must be right?

Thanks for the opportunity to correct the errors of Calvinists. No, that's not my opinion at all. My opinion, like yours, doesn't count for much.

What does count very much is Scripture that SAYS what you claim or believe. I have done that. Where are the verses that back up what you claim? I haven't seen any evidence of such.

I believe that Christ died for everyone. Heb 2:9 SAYS exactly that.

Do you have any verses to refute my belief and SAYS that Christ didn't die for everyone, or that He died ONLY for some?

I believe that God chooses who He will save. 1 Cor 1:21 SAYS that God is well pleased (that would be a choice) to save those who believe.

Do you have any verses to refute my belief and SAYS that God chooses who will believe?

I have, and if you can't, well then, who's right?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I'm still waiting for a refutation of 571. Your claims of refuting ring hollow.

Why did you think I was trying to refute 571? I did comment on your post; but only to clarify, not refute anything.

Sorry you thought otherwise. But it's always a pleasure for the opportunity to correct any error of Calvinists. Thanks.

 

[Hammster]

Why did you think I was trying to refute 571? I did comment on your post; but only to clarify, not refute anything.

Sorry you thought otherwise. But it's always a pleasure for the opportunity to correct any error of Calvinists. Thanks.

I know you didn't refute it. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[guuila]

Sure. If you are offended by being called a Calvinist, I understand and will not call you that.

Is that what you were looking for?

Yes. Please do not call me a Calvinist. I'm a Biblicist.

 

[crimsonleaf]

I challenged Calvinists to show how Calvinism doesn't provide an excuse for the hell dwellers. And all you guys could come up with is "sin is the reason" they are in hell. Yet, since God ONLY chose some, and Christ ONLY died for that some, that in itself IS an excuse for the hell dwellers. Yet not one Calvinist was able to undersand, or admit it.

We all understand your premise, but we all disagree with you. Men are in hell for what they did do, not what God didn't.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

We all understand your premise, but we all disagree with you. Men are in hell for what they did do, not what God didn't.

I have heard enough on here to know you believe Jesus DID NOT die for them. How can they escape hell if Jesus didn't die for them?

 

[Hammster]

I have heard enough on here to know you believe Jesus DID NOT die for them. How can they escape hell if Jesus didn't die for them?

They can't.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

They can't.

Then I believe the OP is confirmed. Your doctrine provides an excuse for them.

 

[Hammster]

Then I believe the OP is confirmed. Your doctrine provides an excuse for them.

Why is that an excuse? They are in hell for sinning.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

Why is that an excuse? They are in hell for sinning.

Here again, your explanation (what little you gave) falls short. According to your doctrine, they are in hell because of Adam sinning. Once again, the OP is confirmed.

Now let's see, If I tell a second-grader that Jesus dying for sinners is the way to heaven, but yet He didn't die for everyone, he would have the logical reasoning to see that those He didn't die for would have an excuse for not getting to heaven.

 

[Hammster]

Here again, your explanation (what little you gave) falls short. According to your doctrine, they are in hell because of Adam sinning. Once again, the OP is confirmed.

Now let's see, If I tell a second-grader that Jesus dying for sinners is the way to heaven, but yet He didn't die for everyone, he would have the logical reasoning to see that those He didn't die for would have an excuse for not getting to heaven.

They are in hell because they sin.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

They are in hell because they sin.

You sin, why will you not end up in hell?

 

[RisingSpirit]

So, Acts 16:30 and 31 is just a "story" to you?

Acts 16:30-31
'He then brought
them out and asked,
'Sirs, what must I
do to be saved?'
They replied,
'Believe in the
Lord Jesus, and
you will be saved
—you and your
household'."



Yeah, THAT's a ~proclamation~.

What is necessary for salvation ?
Belief in Jesus Christ.

Just as long as in our proclamation
it's clear there's no "decision"
in this.

People tend to equate "believe"
= "decide". The verse DON'T say
that !

During the time, and in the culture,
of Acts there wasn't this problem.
But today in our culture everything
is a decision we make.

Hence in our Gospel presentation
we must be very careful avoiding
expressing it in terms people
will interpret as Decisionalism.

 

[Hammster]

You sin, why will you not end up in hell?

Because I'm saved.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

Because I'm saved.

Who decided to save you, and not those in hell?

 

[Hammster]

Who decided to save you, and not those in hell?

Really? You don't know? It was God.

 

[guuila]

Really? You don't know? It was God.

Soli deo Gloria!

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes. Please do not call me a Calvinist. I'm a Biblicist.

And I'd appreciate the same from you. I'm a Biblicist.