Calvinist Robots

[chestertonrules]

And that would be very wrong. The RCC has no requirement that a member believe that there is going to be a single individual of mankind in the Lake of Fire. It is not a common belief but it IS acceptable.

Technically, you are correct, however...


IV. HELL 1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

 

[DD2008]

So, calling yourself and other people totally depraved IS LOVING THEM? Is this your final answer?



It will do no good to insert scriptures regarding the wicked perishing because I accept them as well, and DO NOT consider my fellow mankind totally depraved.

You see 'wicked' and automatically what that means to you is 'the other guy.'

Yes calling myself and everyone else totally depraved is true. If I didn't love them I would tell them to sin all they want there is no hell to burn in.

So, yes. Telling people that they are totally depraved and in desparate need of Christ for the salvation of their souls is indeed loving them.

Wicked means all of us because we are all fallen. We all need Christ to be saved from sin.

 

[Epiphoskei]

That is not correct. There have been a few exceptions, but none who deny man's responsibility to cooperate with God's grace.

There have not been "a few." Augustinianism has been the position of your church the vast majority of history.

Again, synergism is not the only model which includes human responsibility. You are mistaking presence of responsibility for the notion of cooperation, or synergism. Go read Aquinas and you will find he was not a synergist.
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1023.htm#article6
If you read that and percieve the doctrine of predestination therein to be different from Reformed predestination in any significant degree, you are misunderstanding monergism.

Only if we pick up our cross and follow. Only if we persevere. Only if we press on toward the goal

Which could get into a wonderful discussion about perseverence of the saints, but whether or how "grace is maintained," those who are reconciled will be saved. It is not the teaching of your church that all or any are reconciled to God apart from conversion.

This verse means that we are not dead to Christ. We also read that Jesus is drawing ALL men to Christ. He stands at the door and knocks.

Jesus has given us ALL, EVERY SINGLE HUMAN, sufficient grace for salvation. We must respond to this gift.

This verse doesn't say anything of the kind. "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men." If justification and life for all men does not mean that all men are justified, it can't mean that all men are not dead to Christ.

 

[squint]

Yes calling myself and everyone else totally depraved is true.

That's not what I asked you. I asked you if calling people totally depraved is loving them, and asked you to justify that to the description of love that Paul gave us where LOVE keeps no record of wrongs.

If I didn't love them I would tell them to sin all they want there is no hell to burn in.

In Calvins axiom it would make not one whit of difference if you told them anything as they were slated for the flames in any case IF God decided He didn't want to save them.

So, yes. Telling people that they are totally depraved and in desparate need of Christ for the salvation of their souls is indeed loving them.

If Love keeps no record of wrongs, on what basis are you counting sins against them and also letting yourself off the hook for the same things?

Wicked means all of us because we are all fallen. We all need Christ to be saved from sin.

I don't see where any of us were promised sinless flesh or mind after salvation while here in the body.

So how is it your sins are not counted but the others are?

 

[Thekla]

We all need Christ to be saved from sin.

by all do you mean the "hyperbolic all", where all = the elect ?

 

[Epiphoskei]

In Calvins axiom it would make not one whit of difference if you told them anything as they were slated for the flames in any case IF God decided He didn't want to save them.

Straw man.

 

[squint]

Technically, you are correct, however...


IV. HELL 1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

And I would remind you that your statement above shows that the belief that all mankind COULD go to purgatory and hence salvation is still maintained in the RCC to this day in every service where prayers are offered for ALL MANKIND in that HOPE and that the guarantee of HELL is NOT CERTAIN in RCC doctrine for a SINGLE PERSON. They STILL allow for Over Riding Grace to be dispensed at Gods ELECTION.

And since you have a penchant for dismissing your fellow mankind into hell on the basis of their lack of works of 'faith' I would remind you that you also send the same amount of people to hell as the Calvinist, meaning 'all' UNbelievers. So I really don't know what yer beef with them is.

Every good gift is from ABOVE. Pray to God that those gifts come, and don't bother to blame your fellow man.

 

[squint]

Straw man.

Well, please allow me to rephrase.

In Calvinism IF God chooses NOT TO SAVE THEM, then they are damned. So no, it's no strawman. There is nothing they can do about it nor can you.

 

[PETE_]

In Calvins axiom it would make not one whit of difference if you told them anything as they were slated for the flames in any case IF God decided He didn't want to save them.

you are correct about that

40 He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, qthe very stones would cry out.”http://christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=50787113#_ftn2
S. Lk 19:40

 

[squint]

you are correct about that

Oh, no strawman then?

 

[Epiphoskei]

Well, please allow me to rephrase.

In Calvinism IF God chooses NOT TO SAVE THEM, then they are damned. So no, it's no strawman. There is nothing they can do about it nor can you.

Half straw man. If God chooses to leave a man in his sin, his hard heart prevents him from being saved, the same way all are saved, by faith. He always "can" do something about it. He "can" believe. He just won't. As Luther put, "We can will, but we don't want to will."

 

[chestertonrules]

There have not been "a few." Augustinianism has been the position of your church the vast majority of history.

Augustine does not deny man's responsibility to cooperate with God's grace.

Which could get into a wonderful discussion about perseverence of the saints, but whether or how "grace is maintained," those who are reconciled will be saved. It is not the teaching of your church that all or any are reconciled to God apart from conversion.

True. However, only those who persevere will be saved. Conversion is a process, not an event.

This verse doesn't say anything of the kind. "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men." If justification and life for all men does not mean that all men are justified, it can't mean that all men are not dead to Christ.

It LEADS TO justification and life. It does not assure it.

 

[chestertonrules]

Half straw man. If God chooses to leave a man in his sin, his hard heart prevents him from being saved, the same way all are saved, by faith. He always "can" do something about it. He "can" believe. He just won't. As Luther put, "We can will, but we don't want to will."

You can't have it both ways.

You claim that all men are depraved, but that God saves some of the underserving sinners.

This means he CHOOSES to condemn the rest.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Augustine does not deny man's responsibility to cooperate with God's grace

To operate. Not to cooperate. There is a world of difference.

True. However, only those who persevere will be saved. Conversion is a process, not an event

Which means only those who have finished the process are reconciled, otherwise they would be saved without perseverence. Which means your claim all are reconciled is wrong.

It LEADS TO justification and life. It does not assure it.

Which also means you confess your claim was wrong. This verse doesn't mean all are now alive.

 

[squint]

Half straw man.

sure.

If God chooses to leave a man in his sin, his hard heart prevents him from being saved,

Hmmmm? You mean if God chooses not to save him, there is nothing he or you can do about it?

the same way all are saved, by faith. He always "can" do something about it. He "can" believe. He just won't.

Uh, no, that would not be the case whatsoever per your own statement.

Please don't blame the man for Gods choosing/choice not to save him, thank you.

As Luther put, "We can will, but we don't want to will."

I'm not aware that Luther was a Calvinist.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I'm not aware that Luther was a Calvinist.

Ya mean there is a difference?

 

[DD2008]

That's not what I asked you. I asked you if calling people totally depraved is loving them, and asked you to justify that to the description of love that Paul gave us where LOVE keeps no record of wrongs.

You are quoting from the NIV which is a bad translation. The NASB says does not take into account a wrong suffered. Which means if you love someone you will forgive them if they wrong you.

1 Corinthians 13:5 (New International Version)
5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.


1 Corinthians 13:5 (RSV)
[5] it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;

1 Corinthians 13:5 (King James Version)

5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

1 Corinthians 13:5 (NASB)
5does not act unbecomingly; it (A)does not seek its own, is not provoked, (B)does not take into account a wrong suffered,

1 Corinthians 13:5 (English Standard Version)
5or rude. It(A) does not insist on its own way; it(B) is not irritable or resentful;[a]

In Calvins axiom it would make not one whit of difference if you told them anything as they were slated for the flames in any case IF God decided He didn't want to save them.

You clearly don't understand Calvinism. Just because God knows everything doesn't mean we do nor does it mean we should stop allowing ourselves to be used by God for evalgelization.

If Love keeps no record of wrongs, on what basis are you counting sins against them and also letting yourself off the hook for the same things?

The Elect have the righteousness of Christ imputed to them.

I don't see where any of us were promised sinless flesh or mind after salvation while here in the body.

So how is it your sins are not counted but the others are?

Another misunderstanding. The Elect are not fully sinless until they are in heaven. Here they are given the grace to persevere.

 

[chestertonrules]

To operate. Not to cooperate. There is a world of difference.

Written by Augustine in 427 AD, as part of his retractations:

But since there are some persons who so defend God's grace as to deny man's free will, or who suppose that free will is denied when grace is defended, I have determined to write somewhat on this point...

Now He has revealed to us, through His Holy Scriptures, that there is in a man a free choice of will. But how He has revealed this I do not recount in human language, but in divine. There is, to begin with, the fact that God's precepts themselves would be of no use to a man unless he had free choice of will, so that by performing them he might obtain the promised rewards.

What means the happy man, of whom the Psalmist says that his will has been the law of the Lord? Does he not clearly enough show that a man by his own will takes his stand in the law of God? Then again, there are so many commandments which in some way are expressly adapted to the human will; for instance, there is, Be not overcome of evil, Romans 12:1 and others of similar import, such as, Be not like a horse or a mule, which have no understanding; and, Reject not the counsels of your mother; Proverbs 1:8 and, Be not wise in your own conceit; Proverbs 3:7 and, Despise not the chastening of the Lord; Proverbs 3:11 and, Forget not my law; Proverbs 3:1 and, Forbear not to do good to the poor; Proverbs 3:27 and, Devise not evil against your friend; Proverbs 3:29 and, Give no heed to a worthless woman; Proverbs 5:2 and, He is not inclined to understand how to do good; and, They refused to attend to my counsel; Proverbs 1:30 with numberless other passages of the inspired Scriptures of the Old Testament. And what do they all show us but the free choice of the human will?

Which means only those who have finished the process are reconciled, otherwise they would be saved without perseverence. Which means your claim all are reconciled is wrong.

Only those who finishe the process are saved. Being reconciled is a state. It can change. If I sin against you, we can reconcile. If I do it again, we will no longer be reconciled.

Which also means you confess your claim was wrong. This verse doesn't mean all are now alive.

It means we have been made alive to God.

Do you deny that Jesus changed our relationship to God?

How would you describe this change? Paul describes it as being made alive. Like Adam, we now have the grace to follow. Adam rejected this grace. We also can reject it or accept it thanks to the blood of Jesus.

 

[JacksLadder]

Far as I know God knows everything. Therefore God made Adam knowing he would rebel. Therefore God still decides to make someone who is going to hell.Why, because he can do that.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You are quoting from the NIV which is a bad translation. The NASB says does not take into account a wrong suffered. Which means if you love someone you will forgive them if they wrong you.

So a lot can depend on Translations? Did Calvin and the RCs use different translations? These 2 texts agree it seems.

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

1 Corin 13:5 Not is being uncomely not is seeking the-things of her-self not is being easily-provoked not is accounting the evil

Textus Rec.)
1 Corinthians 13:5 ouk aschmonei ou zhtei ta eauthV ou paroxunetai ou logizetai to kakon

W-H )
1 Corinthians 13:5 ouk aschmonei ou zhtei ta eauthV ou paroxunetai ou logizetai to kakon