Jesus Christ died for the elect

[FreeGrace2]

Did Christ die for those whom He knew would never be saved, and in reality never intended to save?

Please pay attention here. Yes, He did, because the Bible SAYS so.
Heb 2:9
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

The word for "everyone" in the Greek is 'pas'. Here is how 45 English translations rendered that word:

EVERYONE - 25
Common English Bible
Contemporary English Version
Easy-To-Read Version
ESV
ESV Anglicized
Expanded Bible
God’s Word
Good News Translation
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Lexham English Bible
Mounce Reverse Interlinear NT
Names of God Bible
NASB
New Century Version
NET
NIRV
NIV
NKJV
NLT
NRSV
NRSV anglicized
NRSV anglicized Catholic
NRSV Catholic
The Voice
World English Bible

EVERY ONE - 3
RSV
RSV Catholic
Young’s Literal Translation

EVERY MAN - 6
21st Century KJV
ASV
JB Phillips NT
Jubilee Bible 2000
KJV
Authorized KJV

EVERY INDIVIDUAL PERSON - 1
Amplified Bible

ALL HUMANITY - 1
Complete Jewish Bible

EVERY THING - 2
Darby Translation
Douay-Rheims1899 American Ed

ALL MEN - 2
1599 Geneva
Wycliffe

ON BEHALF OF ALL - 2
Knox Bible
Orthodox Jewish Bible

EVERY PERSON’S PLACE - 1
The Message

ALL OF US - 1
New Life Version

EVERY PERSON - 1
Worldwide English NT

Do you really want to argue with that many actual Greek language scholars?

Second, Jesus fully intends to save all who believe.

Please show me any verse that teaches that Jesus didn't die for everyone. If you can.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Ok, so then what do you think this means, what is Paul teaching believers here about being the phrase

Before I answer that, why did you ignore what I posted about the 6 categories of election? Did your "Ok, so then..." mean that you understand and accept it or what?

just as HE chose US in HIM and also mentions

predestined US to adoption as sons?

Hint for posting: when you quote a verse, please include the citation, so I can see what you're posting. Just throwing together phrases from different parts of Scripture isn't helpful. Thanks.

Since you capitalized "us" in both phrases, I guess that's what you want me to comment about. It is obvious that "us" refers to both the speaker and his audience. All of whom are believers. So the first phrase SAYS that God chose believers. The "in Him" is a parenthetical phrase, NOT the purpose clause, as in "God chose people to BE in Him". That is totally different than what Eph 1:4 says. The purpose of that election is clearly stated in v.4, "that we would be holy and blameless". Many Calvinists assume that means to be a believer, but there are many verses commanding believers to be holy and blameless, so that view cannot be correct.

As to the second phrase, again the "us" refers to believers, so the phrase means that believers are predestined to be adopted as sons. How is one adopted as a son? The Bible tells us clearly in Jn 1:12
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name
It's all about believing in Christ. That's who becomes a child of God, or adopted as His children.

And, Gal 3:26 says the same thing:
For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

And scripture says this choosing us in Him, predestining us to be sons is according to His will, meaning He chose us to be

"holy and without blame before Him" which means saved.

You're wrong, as I've just shown.

No one who abides in Him sins. 1 John 3:6

John is speaking about the believer who is "filled with the Holy Spirit" (Eph 5:18) and "walking by means of the Holy Spirit" (Gal 5:16). When we are in fellowship, the thrust of his first epistle (1:3,6,7), we do not sin. But, otoh, when we grieve the Spirit (Eph 4:30) or quench the Spirit (1 Thess 5:19), we DO sin. Got it?

 

[FreeGrace2]

If we both agree on that then why are we disagreeing?

Why don't you tell me? The problem is that you believe, based on your doctrine of election, that God chooses who will believe, ultimately. But you cannot find any teaching on that in Scripture.

We're not sure where you got your views. Is that a non denominational thing?

First, I got my views straight from the Bible.
Second, what does one's denomination or lack thereof have to do with anything? Or, can you not resist the temptation to label everything?

Which of my views can you actually refute? By that, I don't mean to simply disagree. I mean to refute from Scripture. Carry on.

 

[sdowney717]

Before I answer that, why did you ignore what I posted about the 6 categories of election? Did your "Ok, so then..." mean that you understand and accept it or what?


Hint for posting: when you quote a verse, please include the citation, so I can see what you're posting. Just throwing together phrases from different parts of Scripture isn't helpful. Thanks.

Since you capitalized "us" in both phrases, I guess that's what you want me to comment about. It is obvious that "us" refers to both the speaker and his audience. All of whom are believers. So the first phrase SAYS that God chose believers. The "in Him" is a parenthetical phrase, NOT the purpose clause, as in "God chose people to BE in Him". That is totally different than what Eph 1:4 says. The purpose of that election is clearly stated in v.4, "that we would be holy and blameless". Many Calvinists assume that means to be a believer, but there are many verses commanding believers to be holy and blameless, so that view cannot be correct.

As to the second phrase, again the "us" refers to believers, so the phrase means that believers are predestined to be adopted as sons. How is one adopted as a son? The Bible tells us clearly in Jn 1:12
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name
It's all about believing in Christ. That's who becomes a child of God, or adopted as His children.

And, Gal 3:26 says the same thing:
For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.


You're wrong, as I've just shown.


John is speaking about the believer who is "filled with the Holy Spirit" (Eph 5:18) and "walking by means of the Holy Spirit" (Gal 5:16). When we are in fellowship, the thrust of his first epistle (1:3,6,7), we do not sin. But, otoh, when we grieve the Spirit (Eph 4:30) or quench the Spirit (1 Thess 5:19), we DO sin. Got it?

The 'US' is meant to point to individual persons called of God, not believers. If God wanted this understood to be be 'believers' as in a general sense, then that is what He would have said.

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon :: G2248

us = us, we, our.
It does not say believers, your adding in that word to twist the meaning of the scripture.

 

[sdowney717]

Peter speaks of this election very well.
Of course Peter is inspired by the Holy Spirit.

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To God’s elect,
exiles
scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia,
2 who have been chosen
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,
through the sanctifying work of the Spirit,
to be obedient to Jesus Christ and
sprinkled with his blood:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

We are elect of God, so therefore we believe and will beleive.
exiles, this world is not our home
scattered abroad for the proclamation of the gospel
who, individually have been chosen by God
by God's foreknowledge since God knows all things, God also knew us before we were born, just as He said about Jeremiah whom He called as a person.

to be made Holy by the work of the Spirit of God
to be obedient to Christ, that is to follow His commands
sprinkled with His blood, meaning to be saved.


The elect are chosen by foreknowledge of God to be made holy, to be obedient to Jesus, and be sprinkled with blood, therefore forgiven and saved.


God's calling goes out to individuals. He foreknew us as individuals.
God calls those he predestined as individuals.

30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

2 Cor 6

For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will live with them
and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they will be my people.”[c]
17 Therefore,

“Come out from them
and be separate,
says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you.”[d]
18 And,

“I will be a Father to you,
and you will be my sons and daughters,
says the Lord Almighty.”[e]

 

[crimsonleaf]

Why don't you cut the cute and just give your answer, since you insinuate that you actually do have one. Fair enough?

I think it's possible that people like to dangle you for a while due to the way you talk to people. This is the second thread where you've managed to make yourself the centre of attention and your self-obsession is blinding you to a number of truths which you'd be better off understanding rather than continually whining that "I'm not an Arminian", "you don't understand me", "that's not what I believe" etc.

Surprisingly perhaps, no one cares what you THINK you are. You demonstrate what you are by a combination of what you say and the way you say it.

But I'll answer your question just to stop you nagging away with it for any longer.

There are two classes of beneficiary as far as universal preaching goes; the first is the member of the elect; the second is the preacher himself. God has chosen the preaching of the Gospel as the means to reach His elect. We don't know why anymore than you do, as God has not revealed it to us, but no one is unedified in the process.

God doesn't give us a list of people to preach to. He does however, command us to preach to all nations. He also tells us clearly in His word that His thoughts are higher than ours, that we are as clay in His hands, and that He chooses and calls those whom He will, just as He tells us that many are called and few are chosen. We are not privy to His reasoning and nor should we expect to be. It is not a sign of a weak theology to say that we cannot have a definitive answer to God's thought processes, and it's a shame you insist that we should.

Worse though is the fact that you'd rather we were Hyper-Calvinists, who think that if the Elect are chosen by God then the need for preaching the Gospel is redundant. That makes your reasoning as faulty as theirs. Both Hypers and you would do well to follow God's commandments rather than try to find reasons not to.

 

[Hammster]

I think it's possible that people like to dangle you for a while due to the way you talk to people. This is the second thread where you've managed to make yourself the centre of attention and your self-obsession is blinding you to a number of truths which you'd be better off understanding rather than continually whining that "I'm not an Arminian", "you don't understand me", "that's not what I believe" etc.

Surprisingly perhaps, no one cares what you THINK you are. You demonstrate what you are by a combination of what you say and the way you say it.

But I'll answer your question just to stop you nagging away with it for any longer.

There are two classes of beneficiary as far as universal preaching goes; the first is the member of the elect; the second is the preacher himself. God has chosen the preaching of the Gospel as the means to reach His elect. We don't know why anymore than you do, as God has not revealed it to us, but no one is unedified in the process.

God doesn't give us a list of people to preach to. He does however, command us to preach to all nations. He also tells us clearly in His word that His thoughts are higher than ours, that we are as clay in His hands, and that He chooses and calls those whom He will, just as He tells us that many are called and few are chosen. We are not privy to His reasoning and nor should we expect to be. It is not a sign of a weak theology to say that we cannot have a definitive answer to God's thought processes, and it's a shame you insist that we should.

Worse though is the fact that you'd rather we were Hyper-Calvinists, who think that if the Elect are chosen by God then the need for preaching the Gospel is redundant. That makes your reasoning as faulty as theirs. Both Hypers and you would do well to follow God's commandments rather than try to find reasons not to.

I would add that, just as in everything, God is glorified in the preaching of His word. So we proclaim the gospel for His glory. The results are up to Him.

 

[RisingSpirit]

Why don't you tell me? The problem is that you believe, based on your doctrine of election, that God chooses who will believe, ultimately.

"God chooses who will believe" sounds like an action and you're making it not an action. I believe God chooses according to His Own Pleasure anyway He see fit not according to any man, anytime or anywhere.
You're making it sound like God didn't have to make any actions. If no action required as if theres no space and time, you might be right about that. If He chooses before the world was created then that involves time and space and you might be right about that . I think you're trying to make something new out of what we have been saying for 2,000 years and it sound to me like a denominational thing or someone is putting undiscovered-like information in your head and you think it works?

Do you have iGospel now?

 

[RisingSpirit]

Predestination:

You chose hell, God chose heaven.
You chose damnation, God chose salvation.
You chose to run away, he chose to run after you​

 

[FreeGrace2]

The 'US' is meant to point to individual persons called of God, not believers.

Well, that would be your opinion. I understand. But Paul was writing to a body of believers at Ephesus, and you have no evidence that your opinion is correct.

otoh, it is simply clear from what and HOW Paul wrote 1:4 that he meant believers.

If God wanted this understood to be be 'believers' as in a general sense, then that is what He would have said.

Oh, sure. Just like "God wants us to know that Heb 2:9 really says that Jesus tasted death ONLY for the elect". LOL!!

The very meaning of the word "us" includes both the speaker/writer and his/her audience. Sheesh!

us = us, we, our.
It does not say believers, your adding in that word to twist the meaning of the scripture.

For heaven's sake, I never SAID the verse SAYS "believers". I SAID the word "us" refers to believers. The Ephesus believers and Paul, a believer.

Pronouns were covered in elementary school.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Peter speaks of this election very well.
Of course Peter is inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Why have you ignored my post which listed 6 different categories of election, none of which were a choice for salvation?

We are elect of God

We are just 1 group among categories of "the elect".

so therefore we believe and will beleive.

Are you trying to say that because we are 1 of the categories of elect, that we will believe? If so, please prove that claim with clear Scripture that teaches that.

The elect are chosen by foreknowledge of God to be made holy, to be obedient to Jesus, and be sprinkled with blood, therefore forgiven and saved.

Actually, Scripture SAYS that we are saved and forgiven through faith.

Acts 10:43
“Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

You want to argue with Scripture?

Acts 16:31
They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

You want to argue with Scripture?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I think it's possible that people like to dangle you for a while due to the way you talk to people.

So...people don't like to be dealt with in a direct manner, huh? My questions are simple and straightforward. When people "dangle me", (LOL) I become just a bit more direct.

This is the second thread where you've managed to make yourself the centre of attention

Oh, really, now? Can you point to ANY post where I've "made myself the center of attention" as you claim? Please do.

and your self-obsession is blinding you to a number of truths which you'd be better off understanding rather than continually whining that "I'm not an Arminian", "you don't understand me", "that's not what I believe" etc.

Actually, this thread hasn't been plagued by those who continued to misrepresent my views. So far. But when people DO misrepresent my views, and then attack their strawman of what isn't my view, yes, I will call them out on that. And directly. Got it?

Surprisingly perhaps, no one cares what you THINK you are. You demonstrate what you are by a combination of what you say and the way you say it.

Not a one of y'all has proven any of your claims. So I understand why you're a bit cranky today.

Actually, my other thread was "all about Calvinism" and its failure to prove its claims. But I guess you missed that. Oh, well.

But I'll answer your question just to stop you nagging away with it for any longer.

Why, thank you very much. You're so obliging!

There are two classes of beneficiary as far as universal preaching goes; the first is the member of the elect; the second is the preacher himself. God has chosen the preaching of the Gospel as the means to reach His elect. We don't know why anymore than you do, as God has not revealed it to us, but no one is unedified in the process.

Actually, you are wrong again. The "beneficiary" of gospel preaching is to the one being preached to. Please review Rom 10:13-15.

God doesn't give us a list of people to preach to. He does however, command us to preach to all nations.

Well, you are wrong again. He did give us a "list"; we preach to "every creature", per Mark 16:15.

He also tells us clearly in His word that His thoughts are higher than ours, that we are as clay in His hands, and that He chooses and calls those whom He will, just as He tells us that many are called and few are chosen.

Riiiiigggghhhhhttttt! You just gave me 4 "cop-out" answers. Got it.

You see, none of that bears on the command to preach the gospel to every creature. None at all.

We are not privy to His reasoning and nor should we expect to be.

For a Calvinist, I guess not. But those of us who understand what God's Word MEANS, we certainly ARE privy to His reasoning. I would expect nothing less of God. That's exactly why He gave us His Word; so that we CAN understand His reasoning. And here it is: He is a God of love, grace, and mercy, which He has demonstrated to all of His creatures. He created mankind to seek Him, per Acts 17:26-27, which OBVIOUSLY means that man is able and capable of doing so.

But I understand your claim of not being "privy to His reasoning". If you admitted that, you would have answers to my questions. But since you don't, I understand.

It is not a sign of a weak theology to say that we cannot have a definitive answer to God's thought processes, and it's a shame you insist that we should.

Actually, it IS very much a sign of a VERY weak theology. Truth ALWAYS has answers to every question. Yes, I know that God hasn't revealed everything to mankind, but certainly enough to understand His dealing with mankind.

So, it's a shame on you for insisting the opposite.

Worse though is the fact that you'd rather we were Hyper-Calvinists

Well, there you go again; trying to ascribe words (or thoughts) to me that I don't have. I could not care less whether any of y'all are "just" Calvinists, or "hyper"-Calvinists. Makes no difference to me. I have no idea why you think so.

who think that if the Elect are chosen by God then the need for preaching the Gospel is redundant.

But according to your "just" Calvinist theology, He has already chosen, before the foundation of the world, who will believe, right? So, in your own system, preaching really is redundant. But you just don't seem to see that.

That makes your reasoning as faulty as theirs. Both Hypers and you would do well to follow God's commandments rather than try to find reasons not to.

So, now you add to your other erroneous and false claim another one? That I'm "trying to find reasons NOT to follow God's commands???? LOL

Are you omniscient, by any chance? Because only one who is would dare to make such a statement, apart from learning the facts first.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I would add that, just as in everything, God is glorified in the preaching of His word. So we proclaim the gospel for His glory. The results are up to Him.

I've never argued otherwise. Ever. But we just see the mechanics a bit "differently", huh.

 

[FreeGrace2]

"God chooses who will believe" sounds like an action and you're making it not an action.

Your statement here appears quite confused. To choose IS an action, and I've not tried to make it "not an action", as you charge. Maybe you need to re-phrase so as to make some sense. Tnx.

I believe God chooses according to His Own Pleasure anyway He see fit not according to any man, anytime or anywhere.

Sure. I agree. And we know precisely WHO He is pleased to saved, don't we.

1 Cor 1:21
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

Very clear, don'cha think?

You're making it sound like God didn't have to make any actions.

Again, you seem very confused. Because "choosing" IS an action.

Do you have iGospel now?

Never heard of it. Sounds like an app.

 

[RisingSpirit]

I've never argued otherwise. Ever. But we just see the mechanics a bit "differently", huh.

Explain "we"

 

[FreeGrace2]

Explain "we"

Sure; you and me. What did you think "we" meant? I wasn't addressing anyone else.

 

[crimsonleaf]

So...people don't like to be dealt with in a direct manner, huh? My questions are simple and straightforward. When people "dangle me", (LOL) I become just a bit more direct.

There's a difference between direct and obnoxious.

Oh, really, now? Can you point to ANY post where I've "made myself the center of attention" as you claim? Please do.

So now you'd like me to point to another post all about you..?

Actually, this thread hasn't been plagued by those who continued to misrepresent my views. So far. But when people DO misrepresent my views, and then attack their strawman of what isn't my view, yes, I will call them out on that. And directly. Got it?

The term "Got it?" is goading, rude, uncalled for and unchristian. Just so you know.

Not a one of y'all has proven any of your claims. So I understand why you're a bit cranky today.

You've never seen me cranky I promise you.

Actually, you are wrong again. The "beneficiary" of gospel preaching is to the one being preached to. Please review Rom 10:13-15.

You seem glued to words, but have no idea how the fit together to form a concept. never mind.

Well, you are wrong again. He did give us a "list"; we preach to "every creature", per Mark 16:15.

Yes, well I thought you were bright enough to realise I was saying He didn't give us a list of the Elect. I over-estimated your intelligence.

Riiiiigggghhhhhttttt! You just gave me 4 "cop-out" answers. Got it.

Nope.

You see, none of that bears on the command to preach the gospel to every creature. None at all.

I disagree.

For a Calvinist, I guess not. But those of us who understand what God's Word MEANS, we certainly ARE privy to His reasoning.

Are you claiming that God clues you in on His private thoughts?

I would expect nothing less of God. That's exactly why He gave us His Word; so that we CAN understand His reasoning. And here it is: He is a God of love, grace, and mercy, which He has demonstrated to all of His creatures. He created mankind to seek Him, per Acts 17:26-27, which OBVIOUSLY means that man is able and capable of doing so.

But I understand your claim of not being "privy to His reasoning". If you admitted that, you would have answers to my questions. But since you don't, I understand.

More unreasoned and pathetic goading.

Actually, it IS very much a sign of a VERY weak theology. Truth ALWAYS has answers to every question. Yes, I know that God hasn't revealed everything to mankind, but certainly enough to understand His dealing with mankind.

So, it's a shame on you for insisting the opposite.

I'd dig out chapter and verse if it hadn't already been ignored by you.

Well, there you go again; trying to ascribe words (or thoughts) to me that I don't have. I could not care less whether any of y'all are "just" Calvinists, or "hyper"-Calvinists. Makes no difference to me. I have no idea why you think so.


But according to your "just" Calvinist theology, He has already chosen, before the foundation of the world, who will believe, right? So, in your own system, preaching really is redundant. But you just don't seem to see that.

I view it differently, as has been previously explained.

So, now you add to your other erroneous and false claim another one? That I'm "trying to find reasons NOT to follow God's commands???? LOL

Are you omniscient, by any chance? Because only one who is would dare to make such a statement, apart from learning the facts first.

Live with it.

 

[nobdysfool]

Some people just can't accept that no everyone agrees with them. Walking around with a chip on one's shoulder is not going to win anyone over. Explaining it away as being direct is a cop-out, an excuse for bad behavior.

Calvinism is not the source of all evil in the world. In fact, history has shown it to be a bulwark against evil. But non-Calvinists would never accept that fact. Doesn't make it untrue, though....

 

[FreeGrace2]

There's a difference between direct and obnoxious.

Please provide ANY post where you see obnoxious.

[/QUOTESo now you'd like me to point to another post all about you..?[/QUOTE]
How disingenuous of you. So, you CAN'T find any post where I've made myself the "center of attention", so you just get all cute and all. LOL

The term "Got it?" is goading, rude, uncalled for and unchristian. Just so you know.

Well, thanks. My concern is that others understand what I post. That is the most direct way, but if it offends you, I will not use it. Understand?

You seem glued to words, but have no idea how the fit together to form a concept. never mind.

Was this a snarky thing, or are you just cranky?

According to the mods, suggesting that others are "clueless" as you insinuate here is verboten. Understand?

Yes, well I thought you were bright enough to realise I was saying He didn't give us a list of the Elect. I over-estimated your intelligence.

Wow. Yer really rackin' up the snarky thing, huh.

I gave you Scripture that tells us the list; every creature. And you retort with this. LOL

Nope.

You are free to call them whatever you want. I have called them "cop-out" answers.

I disagree.

OK

Are you claiming that God clues you in on His private thoughts?

Who's talking "private thoughts"? I'm talking about His revealed Word, which you can't really say is "private thoughts". Or, I guess you can, but then you'd just be wrong again.

More unreasoned and pathetic goading.

Seriously??

This is what I said, that you snarked with:

I would expect nothing less of God. That's exactly why He gave us His Word; so that we CAN understand His reasoning. And here it is: He is a God of love, grace, and mercy, which He has demonstrated to all of His creatures. He created mankind to seek Him, per Acts 17:26-27, which OBVIOUSLY means that man is able and capable of doing so.

But I understand your claim of not being "privy to His reasoning". If you admitted that, you would have answers to my questions. But since you don't, I understand.

There was nothing unreasoned nor pathetic goading on my part. I said that I understand WHY you said what you did about God's reasoning. How can that be a "pathetic goad"?

I'd dig out chapter and verse if it hadn't already been ignored by you.

Kinda an odd comment for what I posted:

Actually, it IS very much a sign of a VERY weak theology. Truth ALWAYS has answers to every question. Yes, I know that God hasn't revealed everything to mankind, but certainly enough to understand His dealing with mankind.

So, it's a shame on you for insisting the opposite.

What chapter and verse says that truth doesn't always have an answer? I don't understand what you are trying to communicate.

I view it differently, as has been previously explained.

Of course you do. That's why there are these forums.

Live with it.

Uh, live with what, exactly? I asked if you are omniscient, since you keep trying to tell me what I believe, think, and am motivated by, and you basically admit it by your "direct" answer.

Well, I won't "live" with anyone being omniscient, neither you nor anyone else. Only God is omniscient.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Some people just can't accept that no everyone agrees with them.

Are you not familiar with the purpose of this forum? In fact, it's in the "debate a Calvinist" folder. Or, were you referring to yourself here?

Walking around with a chip on one's shoulder is not going to win anyone over.

Ah, a chip, is it? Can you point me to ANY post where you see a "chip" on my shoulder?

Explaining it away as being direct is a cop-out, an excuse for bad behavior.

Again, can you point me to ANY post where you can show me "bad behavior". Maybe you just mean it's "bad behavior" to argue with a Calvinist. Is that what you mean? If not, please point me to ANY post. Thanks.

Calvinism is not the source of all evil in the world.

OK. Who do you know who thinks that? I know some Calvinists who claim that God is the source of sin and evil. Agree or disagree?

In fact, history has shown it to be a bulwark against evil. But non-Calvinists would never accept that fact. Doesn't make it untrue, though....

Hey, wait a minute. I'm NOT a Calvinist, and I accept that fact. In spite of the fact that some Calvinists do claim that God is the source of sin and evil. But that's on another forum.