For those who argue for the omnibenevolence of God…

[biblelesson]

He could do two things. One, He could take their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh, and they would love Him freely.

Or, do something with them that isn’t hell. The lake of fire doesn’t sound like a place you send someone that you love.

God has given man a new heart, and to also love him freely. However this new heart is manifested in the individual who believe on Christ, as through Christ we receive the Holy Spirit. It is only by the Holy Spirit we are transformed to walk in this new heart. Unbelievers must come to Christ to receive this free gift.

Hell is not at this time part of the lake of fire. It’s the holding place (like jail) for the unbelievers souls that did not accept salvation in Christ Jesus. It is only during the great white throne judgment that hell will “be thrown” into the lake of fire, that is, all of hell’s contents are thrown into the lake of fire.

So one by one all those souls who are in jail/hell, when they are resurrected, their body that cannot die, will be joined to their soul that’s in hell. These are those that will have have to face the Judge on the Great White Throne. This is the second resurrection, which is called the second death - as death will also be thrown in the lake of fire - these will burn forever in spiritual bodies that can never die.

 

[Hammster]

The issue is how God would do this. Are human beings merely puppets in your theology, with no agency of their own?

Nobody seriously think God couldn't do whatever is logically possible, but love would seem to require agency. A puppet is not an agent.

Puppets. Lol. Bye.

 

[John Mullally]

What I’m saying is that your point about John 14 is moot because Jesus was not speaking to the twelve. So I explained that He was speaking to the 11 because they were having doubts. That’s different than the crowd in chapter 10.

OK its the 11 as the Last Supper occurred in John 13. In any case, Jesus taught his "not my sheep" opponents in John 10:37-38, the same lesson he taught his closest disciples in John 14:11. As I said earlier, that shows the topic was difficult for even his closest disciples to grasp.

Based upon your understanding that "not my sheep" are reprobates, why is Jesus pointing to his miracles in an effort to get reprobates to "understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father"? If no good answer can be found to that question, than the "not my sheep" are not reprobate; which in turn shows that your understanding of "my sheep" is incorrect.

 

[bling]

He could do two things. One, He could take their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh, and they would love Him freely.

God does replace our hearts, but that is after we are wanting a replacement. If God changes our will against our will (which is unloving), we are no longer the same person, but if we desire/accepting our wills to change God can change it, yet that desire for change (who we are) remains.
God going against the will of a person to provide them with Godly type Love is not "Loving" on God's part and the "love" transferred would not be Godly type Love, but some robotic type love.

Or, do something with them that isn’t hell. The lake of fire doesn’t sound like a place you send someone that you love.

The going to hell is not for those going to hell, but to help me in making my choices. Do not blame God for those who wind up in hell, since I need that to happen, so you can blame me.

 

[FireDragon76]

God does replace our hearts, but that is after we are wanting a replacement. If God changes our will against our will (which is unloving), we are no longer the same person, but if we desire/accepting our wills to change God can change it, yet that desire for change (who we are) remains.
God going against the will of a person to provide them with Godly type Love is not "Loving" on God's part and the "love" transferred would not be Godly type Love, but some robotic type love.

The going to hell is not for those going to hell, but to help me in making my choices. Do not blame God for those who wind up in hell, since I need that to happen, so you can blame me.

I'm probably not a fan of @Hammster's brand of Calvinism, but I can see holes in your argument. Maybe not being yourself is sort of the point? If people are sinful, flawed and broken, God has to make them new. That may mean they aren't exactly "themselves" anymore. But that fits with the Bible better than the idea that Jesus is just a religious affectation or accessory to the autonomous "self" (Gal 2:20).

 

[John Mullally]

God has given man a new heart, and to also love him freely. However this new heart is manifested in the individual who believe on Christ, as through Christ we receive the Holy Spirit. It is only by the Holy Spirit we are transformed to walk in this new heart. Unbelievers must come to Christ to receive this free gift.

I agree. In the book of Ezekiel 18:30-32, God promises to change the hearts of OT Jews who repent. The order clearly laid out is as follows:

1. "Repent! Turn away ... Rid yourselves ..."
2. "... get a new heart and a new spirit."

Ezekiel 18:30 “Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. 31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!​

​

Why would the order be reversed in the NT, where God must give us a new heart and spirit in order to believe and repent?

 

[FireDragon76]

I agree. In the book of Ezekiel 18:30-32, God promises to change the hearts of OT Jews who repent. The order clearly laid out is as follows:

1. "Repent! Turn away ... Rid yourselves ..."
2. "... get a new heart and a new spirit."

Ezekiel 18:30 “Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. 31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!​

​

Why would the order be reversed in the NT, where God must give us a new heart and spirit in order to believe and repent?

Does a commandment necessarily imply an ability?

It reminds me of what Jaroslav Pelikan once said about the difference between Law and Gospel:

"The Law says "Do this", and it is never done. Grace says "Believe this", and everything is done already."

 

[John Mullally]

Does a commandment necessarily imply an ability?

It reminds me of what Jaroslav Pelikan once said about the difference between Law and Gospel:

"The Law says "Do this", and it is never done. Grace says "Believe this", and everything is done already."

The passage I quoted in Post 406 (v 32) ends with "For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!" so the Lord was pleading with the OT Jews as this was a matter of life and death and expressed an intent that they all repent and live! So unless you believe God is perverse, it is reasonable to believe that the Lord was not withholding the grace needed to repent and thus live! Of course some will resist changing their ways and suffer for it. That passage of Ezekiel 18:30-32 discredits Calvinism almost as well as 1 Timothy 2:1-6, So rejoice in the true grace as God is not unjust and does not predestine any to hell, and the Gospel message is a well meant offer to all humanity and salvation is offered to whosoever will believe in Him (John 3:16)! Glory to God!

 

[FireDragon76]

The passage I quoted in Post 406 (v 32) ends with "For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!" so the Lord was pleading with the OT Jews as this was a matter of life and death and expressed an intent that they all repent and live! So unless you believe God is perverse, it is reasonable to believe that the Lord was not withholding the grace needed to repent and thus live. Of course some will resist changing their ways and suffer for it. That passage Ezekiel 18:30-32 discredits Calvinism almost as much as 1 Timothy 2:1-6, Cheers!

Uh huh, what exactly does that have to do with soteriology, in the sense of an ultimate concern? It seems to me you're dodging the issue I raised, that God doesn't give commandments because we can keep them, necessarily. The law condemns, but it doesn't make us righteous. The law is a restraint on human evil, not a way we earn our grace.

God not taking pleasure in the death of the wicked... I don't know many Calvinists that would disagree with that. God is impassible and doesn't experience pleasure in that way.

 

[John Mullally]

Uh huh, what exactly does that have to do with soteriology, in the sense of an ultimate concern? It seems to me you're dodging the issue I raised, that God doesn't give commandments because we can keep them, necessarily. The law condemns, but it doesn't make us righteous. The law is a restraint on human evil, not a way we earn our grace.

Our sin nature will cause us to eventually slip up and sin (thus breaking the Law). Born-again believers struggle with sin - even Billy Graham admits to that. Ezekiel 18:30-32 promises to give a new nature to his fellow OT Jew who sincerely repent - I can't define what that repent threshold exactly is. The offer from God was sincere as He wants all to repent and live - so He cannot possibly withhold the ability to repent to some without being a liar.

God not taking pleasure in the death of the wicked... I don't know many Calvinists that would disagree with that. God is impassible and doesn't experience pleasure in that way.

Calvin says that God gets glory by predestining some to hell. I realize non-hardcore Calvinists have moved away from that and keep the parts of Calvin's doctrine they like.

“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)​

 

[FireDragon76]

Our sin nature will cause us to eventually slip up and sin (thus breaking the Law). Born-again believers struggle with sin - even Billy Graham admits to that. Ezekiel 18:30-32 promises to give a new nature to his fellow OT Jew who sincerely repent - I can't define what that repent threshold exactly is. The offer from God was sincere as He wants all to repent and live - so He cannot possibly withhold the ability to repent to some without being a liar.

Calvin says that God gets glory by predestining some to hell. I realize non-hardcore Calvinists have moved away from that and keep the parts of Calvin's doctrine they like.

“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)​

Glory and pleasure aren't the same thing. God is perfect and doesn't need glory, so this must refer to something else. Traditionally, Reformed piety has to do with appreciating God's work in creation, and God's justice, and achieving a certain amount of self-transcendence in the process. It isn't primarily about justification of an individual's religious choices, a concern that wouldn't emerge until centuries later in an entirely different religious milieu.

I know it's not fully satisfying. It doesn't really speak to modern felt needs, and the conceptualization of justice is perhaps inadequate, but from a certain perspective, I can appreciate it. It is certainly better than the notion that salvation is all about "me".

 

[Hammster]

OK its the 11 as the Last Supper occurred in John 13. In any case, Jesus taught his "not my sheep" opponents in John 10:37-38, the same lesson he taught his closest disciples in John 14:11. As I said earlier, that shows the topic was difficult for even his closest disciples to grasp.

Based upon your understanding that "not my sheep" are reprobates, why is Jesus pointing to his miracles in an effort to get reprobates to "understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father"

Because throughout all His ministry He glorified His Father to the sheep and the goats.

If no good answer can be found to that question, then the "not my sheep" are not reprobate; which in turn shows that your understanding of "my sheep" is incorrect.

Okay. We can explore this. Is it your understand that we all start as sheep, and if we reject Jesus become goats, or do we start as goats, and if we trust Christ become sheep? Or is it something else?

 

[Hammster]

God does replace our hearts, but that is after we are wanting a replacement. If God changes our will against our will (which is unloving),

Let’s stop here for a moment. Why do you think it’s unloving to save someone?

 

[bling]

I'm probably not a fan of @Hammster's brand of Calvinism, but I can see holes in your argument. Maybe not being yourself is sort of the point? If people are sinful, flawed and broken, God has to make them new. That may mean they aren't exactly "themselves" anymore. But that fits with the Bible better than the idea that Jesus is just a religious affectation or accessory to the autonomous "self" (Gal 2:20).

Prior to becoming a Christian, sinners do not have Godly type Love (this is a huge difference between before and after) plus the Christian will receive the indwelling Holy Spirit.
There is a huge difference between a person who humbles themselves to the point of accepting pure undeserved charity and the person who, for whatever reason, refuses to accept pure undeserved charity as charity, that is a big part of who the person is, but accepting this Love will make them, so much greater (like God who is Love).

 

[bling]

Let’s stop here for a moment. Why do you think it’s unloving to save someone?

If God "saves" and does not punish those who refuse Godly type Love, who does not like it or want it, then why should I humble myself to the point of accepting pure undeserved charity, since there is no downside to remaining proud and macho.

God out of Love for me, provides all He can to help me, to humbly accept His help and fulfill my earthly objective.

On earth we can in our own minds separate ourselves from God for a while, but once God's presence is obvious, how can we be separated from God's Love which the sinner does not like, since God is Love? The unrepentant sinner wants to be saved from God/Love, so where can he go?

 

[John Mullally]

Based upon your understanding that "not my sheep" are reprobates, why is Jesus pointing to his miracles in an effort to get reprobates to "understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father"? If no good answer can be found to that question, than the "not my sheep" are not reprobate; which in turn shows that your understanding of "my sheep" is incorrect.

Because throughout all His ministry He glorified His Father to the sheep and the goats.

Its an interesting tactic that when cornered, Calvinist will commonly dodge by talking about how it gives God glory.

If these "not my sheep" are reprobate, why is Jesus trying to convince them of truths that will lead them to become his followers. If they were truly reprobate, they would be no better than the people Jeremiah was told not to pray for in your opening post.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Calvinism is a busy legal system built by logic and deduction from some verses in scripture. It isn't "the truth". It's an opinion about the "system of doctrine" in the scriptures. I am not one who follows that system, nor one who admires it.

 

[John Mullally]

Okay. We can explore this. Is it your understand that we all start as sheep, and if we reject Jesus become goats, or do we start as goats, and if we trust Christ become sheep? Or is it something else?

Sheep is an idiom. Jesus used it to introduce new concepts and we shouldn't take it beyond what Jesus used it for. I brought up John 10:37-38 to show that by its usage, sheep didn't mean what you say it means. It is better to stick to more direct statements on salvation, such as found in the Bible after the resurrection.

Of note, Jesus only referred to people being "goats" at the judgement which would imply that people are not born reprobate.

 

[Hammster]

If God "saves" and does not punish those who refuse Godly type Love, who does not like it or want it, then why should I humble myself to the point of accepting pure undeserved charity, since there is no downside to remaining proud and macho.

God out of Love for me, provides all He can to help me, to humbly accept His help and fulfill my earthly objective.

On earth we can in our own minds separate ourselves from God for a while, but once God's presence is obvious, how can we be separated from God's Love which the sinner does not like, since God is Love? The unrepentant sinner wants to be saved from God/Love, so where can he go?

That didn’t really answer the question. Why is it unloving to save someone?

 

[Hammster]

Its an interesting tactic that when cornered, Calvinist will commonly dodge by talking about how it gives God glory.

If these "not my sheep" are reprobate, why is Jesus trying to convince them of truths that will lead them to become his followers. If they were truly reprobate, they would be no better than the people Jeremiah was told not to pray for in your opening post.

That’s your assumption that He’s trying to get them to be followers. We obviously disagree.