Calvinism provides an excuse for those in hell

[Hammster]

OK, flip side. Why are sinners in hell? I know you'll default to "because they are sinners", totally ignoring the FACT that the ones in heaven are also sinners.

So, the flip side of your answer to why sinners are in heaven being why are sinners in hell is because God doesn't love them.

Calvinism claims there is nothing intrinsic within the elect for God to love them; He just does. So, same principle for the hell dwellers; God just doesn't love them. Which is why He didn't choose them.

There is EXCUSE all over your theology, yet you simply close your eyes to it and deny it.

God not loving them didn't make them sin. If it did, then they would have an excuse.

So, we will continue to wait for a logical reason.

 

[crimsonleaf]

Well, thanks again for the pleasurable opportunity to be able to correct errors from the Calvinists.

You're correcting nothing.

I've never said that anyone was lucky enough to believe, since everyone knows that what is believes can NEVER be by luck.

Luck becomes the issue ONLY in Calvinism where it's "eeny meeno miny mo" as to who gets chosen. Now, THAT is luck.

So your mentioning "luck" is quite funny.

You're right, there's no such thing as luck. Nor do I believe people believe because they're lucky. I know they believe because they were chosen, and if you read and understood a single verse about the sheep so would you.

I've told you many times why anyone is in hell. They didn't receive the free gift of eternal life that was available to them.

They didn't receive it because they didn't believe it. The gift of faith (the verb) wasn't given to them. If you disagree then I'll ask you to name one thing which you currently disbelieve and which you could change your mind on without further evidence. Just one. You can't do it and you won't try, because all you can do is put up the shields and stick to your own error-ridden doctrine.

And you have no excuse for your disingenuous and silly claim.

I have every reason for my claim.

Really? How would you know? LOL

I know it for a fact because, unlike you, I've lived it. Always a good idea to read a post first before replying to parts of it, although I realise that's how synergists create their theologies, one unrelated verse after another.

Your unbiblical doctrines of election and limited atonement are ALL ABOUT excuses. So don't tell me what not to talk about.

I'll tell you what I want, and I'll do it without seeking your permission. My experience is true. What's yours? Did you wake up one day and decide to be a Christian, or were you conditioned by your parents? And if you did it alone, why did you when so many others didn't?

Ya got a verse on that, bro?

Yup, it's right next to the one about the Trinity.

 

[RisingSpirit]

Anti-Calvinism At It's Worst


Every Calvinist who has spent any time trying to witness to others the truth of the doctrines of grace has experienced what can only be called "anti-Calvinism". Anti-Calvinism can be characterized by sheer hatred of the doctrines of grace and the willingness to attack them by any means necessary. Every logical fallacy from ad hominem to outright dishonesty can and will be employed by anti-Calvinists in order to gain any perceived ground in their holy war against what is so plainly taught in scripture. The single most shameful fact in this is that the typical anti-Calvinist is a professing Christian. These professing Christians will drop every standard of holiness, civility, and honesty in order to paint Calvinism in the worst light possible. Nothing can be more saddening than to watch a brother act like a trial lawyer, skilfully sowing the seeds of doubt to get his guilty client off the hook.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

I do believe in "all that 'election' stuff" and that God chose some for salvation and some for damnation. Why wouldn't I when that's how God has revealed he has and continues to deal with his creatures in Holy Writ

If this is the case, sin is irrelevant. In fact, everything in life is irrelevant. God would only use sin as an excuse to put the blame elsewhere. If God chose some for damnation, it would not matter if sin is present or not; the same is true for those chosen for salvation.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I know that you think a claim is an explanation. We've tried to inform you that it's not.

But we will wait.

You are waiting for nothing. It's really revealing how y'all keep dodging the "election" issue. For a theology with the CENTERPIECE being election, y'all sure want to distance yourselves from it now. LOL

Both your doctrines of election and limited atonement provide an excuse for hell dwellers. Period.

All your denials are meaningless.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Thanks for agreeing with me finally. Now will you tell us HOW it's an excuse?

Sure. For the umpteenth time. There weren't chosen. Simple as that.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Thanks for agreeing with me finally. Now will you tell us HOW it's an excuse?

Sure. For the umpteenth time. They weren't chosen.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

Have fun, brother. He doesn't believe that any of Paul's writings are inspired.

The ironic thing is, you MUST believe Paul's writings are inspired, or your salvation, no, your WHOLE theology and belief system is hanging on the line.

This prevents you from testing any of Paul's writings to see if they are true. You must accept them, whether false or true. You must take Paul's words as truth, even though Paul called himself a liar and a deceiver.

Thus, Paul keeps you in bondage to his gospel.

 

[FreeGrace2]

God not loving them didn't make them sin. If it did, then they would have an excuse.

What a silly argument! God loving the elect didn't make them NOT sin either.

Goes both ways, you know.

Sinners in heaven were chosen. Sinners in hell weren't chosen.

So, we will continue to wait for a logical reason.

As soon as y'all become logical, the reason will just POP out at you.

But, go ahead and continue to throw your doctrines of election and limited atonement under the bus. LOL

 

[FreeGrace2]

You're correcting nothing.

And your opinion means.....what?

You're right, there's no such thing as luck.

Of course I'm right.

Nor do I believe people believe because they're lucky. I know they believe because they were chosen

And thank you for affirming the OP.

They didn't receive it because they didn't believe it. The gift of faith (the verb) wasn't given to them.

Your so-called "gift of faith" is only your fantasy. The Bible speaks of eternal life as the gift.

If you disagree then I'll ask you to name one thing which you currently disbelieve and which you could change your mind on without further evidence. Just one.

This is just a really lame request. No one "willfully" changes their belief system. Which again proves my claim that I have made before. All belief is based on some kind of information, whether true or false. But in order to change one's mind, MORE evidence must be given. Always. And that is the point of preaching the gospel; to give people MORE evidence regarding sin, eternity and their need for God's salvation.

You can't do it and you won't try, because all you can do is put up the shields and stick to your own error-ridden doctrine.

LOL. Just read the above. And thanks again for the wonderful opportunity to correct the error of Calvinists.

I have every reason for my claim.

Sure. And every reason is disingenuous.

I'll tell you what I want, and I'll do it without seeking your permission. My experience is true. What's yours? Did you wake up one day and decide to be a Christian, or were you conditioned by your parents? And if you did it alone, why did you when so many others didn't?

Really lame questions, don'tcha think? My parents were Christians and they evangelized me. Do you know what that is? Luke 16:15. They preached the gospel to me, and I believed it.

Yup, it's right next to the one about the Trinity.

Why didn't you back up your claim here with at least a citation? Hm. Maybe you really don't, after all.

 

[Keachian]

If this is the case, sin is irrelevant. In fact, everything in life is irrelevant. God would only use sin as an excuse to put the blame elsewhere. If God chose some for damnation, it would not matter if sin is present or not; the same is true for those chosen for salvation.

Except God by his Holiness and our sinfulness makes it an issue, one which he answers through the Cross. The prophet Isaiah emphatically lays the foundation upon which it is improper for the Creature (in this case you) to claim that God is doing wrong by differentiating based on his own whims when he talks of the clay answering back to the potter saying "your work has no handles," that is after all what you are doing when you say that God uses sin as an excuse.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Every Calvinist who has spent any time trying to witness to others the truth of the doctrines of grace has experienced what can only be called "anti-Calvinism".

Because it's "anti-Bible" is why.

Anti-Calvinism can be characterized by sheer hatred of the doctrines of grace and the willingness to attack them by any means necessary.

No, it's because of hatred of false doctrine, clearly.

Every logical fallacy from ad hominem to outright dishonesty can and will be employed by anti-Calvinists in order to gain any perceived ground in their holy war against what is so plainly taught in scripture.

Can't speak for the anti-calvinists, because I'm only a non-calvinist who enjoys debating with Calvinists and pointing out their errors.

But, since this barb seems pointed at me, can you actually back up your words with proof or evidence of "outright dishonesty" from me? You know the drill, post # and quote.

The single most shameful fact in this is that the typical anti-Calvinist is a professing Christian. These professing Christians will drop every standard of holiness, civility, and honesty in order to paint Calvinism in the worst light possible. Nothing can be more saddening than to watch a brother act like a trial lawyer, skilfully sowing the seeds of doubt to get his guilty client off the hook.

Sadly, these kinds of forum debates ALWAYS end up that way, and from both sides. So, kettle, quit calling the pot black. OK?

What has become crystal clear from this thread is that the OP has struck a very raw nerve among Calvinists. The centerpiece of your theology is election and limited atonement, yet you guys are distancing yourselves as far as possible away from it in this challenge I've posed to you.

Very interesting.

 

[Keachian]

As soon as y'all become logical, the reason will just POP out at you.

I am a Logician and I disagree with you.

 

[Keachian]

The ironic thing is, you MUST believe Paul's writings are inspired, or your salvation, no, your WHOLE theology and belief system is hanging on the line.

I can disprove your position without needing Paul, people just find it easier to deal with Paul because he's pretty no-nonsense about dealing with everything. I'd still like to see a list of the books you see as canonical so I know just how to address you.

 

[guuila]

Luck becomes the issue ONLY in Calvinism where it's "eeny meeno miny mo" as to who gets chosen. Now, THAT is luck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O0jO8OPErY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[Hammster]

You are waiting for nothing.

Thanks for finally admitting that.

It's really revealing how y'all keep dodging the "election" issue. For a theology with the CENTERPIECE being election, y'all sure want to distance yourselves from it now. LOL

i don't see where anyone has dodged it. And I don't know why you think it's the centerpiece. The only time I ever discuss it, in most cases, is when it's brought up by non-reformed folk who think they have a "gotcha" argument. And the, as well as you, fall flat.

Both your doctrines of election and limited atonement provide an excuse for hell dwellers. Period.

All your denials are meaningless.

And....we are still waiting for a reason as to why it's an excuse.

 

[guuila]

Sure. For the umpteenth time. There weren't chosen. Simple as that.

They weren't chosen in Molinism either. So how is it they only have an excuse in Calvinism?

 

[Hammster]

Sure. For the umpteenth time. There weren't chosen. Simple as that.

And you still fail to explain, for the umpteenth time, why that would be an excuse.

 

[Hammster]

The ironic thing is, you MUST believe Paul's writings are inspired, or your salvation, no, your WHOLE theology and belief system is hanging on the line.

This prevents you from testing any of Paul's writings to see if they are true. You must accept them, whether false or true. You must take Paul's words as truth, even though Paul called himself a liar and a deceiver.

Thus, Paul keeps you in bondage to his gospel.

I'm in good company. And just because you don't understand Paul's rhetoric, it doesn't make him a liar.

 

[Hammster]

What a silly argument! God loving the elect didn't make them NOT sin either.

Goes both ways, you know.

Sinners in heaven were chosen. Sinners in hell weren't chosen.


As soon as y'all become logical, the reason will just POP out at you.

But, go ahead and continue to throw your doctrines of election and limited atonement under the bus. LOL

So, you still cannot provide a reason. Fair enough.