I have a question for Calvinists...

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Unsaved man IS capable of doing good or evil. The good they do is
considered "earthly/fleshly good" because, it has no Spiritual value
before God. But, none the less within the confines of this world, it is
good. Unsaved man isn't totally depraved, drooling, murdering zombies.
that's a false belief.

 

[musterion]

Not more so than the op

Back to the OP.

The man who does the rescuing COULD have saved the woman. Instead, as she burns to death he stands outside the house shouting condemnation at her for refusing to let him save her, telling her this is justice and she's getting exactly what her choice deserves.

The truth, however, is that he never intended to save her but secretly planned from the beginning to burn her.

In that case, the woman's evil or relative innocence is totally beside the point. The man would himself be evil: not only was it within his power to save her as he did the others; he LIES when he says she could have been saved but refused.

That is the work of God according to Calvin.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Calvin changes the character and intent of the God of the Bible, in order to
fit his "false doctrine." His followers MUST do the same in order to have
everything fit.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Calvin's "god" is different than the God of the Bible.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Back to the OP.

The man who does the rescuing COULD have saved the woman. Instead, as she burns to death he stands outside the house shouting condemnation at her for refusing to let him save her, telling her this is justice and she's getting exactly what her choice deserves.

The truth, however, is that he never intended to save her.

In that case, the woman's evil or relative innocence is totally beside the point. The man would himself be evil: not only was it within his power to save her as he did the others; he LIES when he says she refused to let him save her.

That is the work of God according to Calvin.

I differ from the Calvinist understanding.

The beginning is wrong, for the op assumes that the man himself set the blaze....this assumes that God is responsible for man's sin.

God foreknew man would sin but He did not foreplan that he would sin.

Man's salvation is based upon God's foreknowledge,

See if I can get this across.

Not only has man sinned and is at enmity with God...hates God, hates His word, hates the people of God. God not only foreknew this but He foreknew that some would never repent, never be sorry or ashamed...some would actually bathe themselves in wickedness...enjoy the suffering and oppression they inflict on others.

God will never save them, He will never acquit them, all the cries of anguish and [misinformed] cries of injustice will never make Him have mercy on them

In the gospel, in the message of the cross He has found a way of separating the people, the poor, the weak, the oppressed, the unjustly accused, those hurt and bruised by sin will identify with the cross. To them when they hear of it it becomes the sweet savour of life.

But to the wicked, the strong oppressor it is the foul stench of death.

Don't you see it is the RULERS of this present dark age who God makes responsible and will call to account the most?

The Pharoah's, the Herods, the Caiphas's, the Hitlers, the Stalins, etc, etc yes and the Judas's

Federal Headship is not just in Christ or in Adam....it involves the rulership over mankind....who enforces the law.

 

[musterion]

The beginning is wrong, for the op assumes that the man himself set the blaze....this assumes that God is responsible for man's sin.

No it does not. That is a red herring distraction and is irrelevant to the real point here.

The issue is, what has God said He will do about our sin, since we can do nothing about it ourselves?

Bible: God gave Christ to die for the sin of all, without exception. There is no one who cannot be saved, apart from their own unbelief.

Calvin: Christ died for the sin only of the Elect. The rest were reprobated to burn from eternity past. Not only can't the reprobates believe and be saved; God never intended for them to do so.

These are two mutually exclusive propositions. They cannot both be true. Which one do you believe?

 

[Clete]

I do. It's what Paul taught.

Alright, you guys are going to have to explain just what you mean then because I don't get it.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Yes the one who sets the blaze is the one who rushes in to save some

That is God pictured...wrongly

He built the house and furnished it and made it comfy and pleasing to the family who would live therein, this is God's good will, He only EVER willed good things for man.

God diligently warned the man, rising up early not to sin, lest ye die.

God's will for man has never changed, He still desires for mankind to dwell in love together, under the shelter of His wing, enjoying His good provision.

But man rebels against it, he wants to be Jack the lad, the women want to be painted jezebels ensnaring their men into all kinds of evil desires.

 

[musterion]

Alright, you guys are going to have to explain just what you mean then because I don't get it.

In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ--who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power...

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Those two passages refute the entirety of Calvinism.

 

[Clete]

Will you please give a real life example of someone doing this. Or if you are unable to give a real life example then maybe you could give a bible example. If you can't do that then give an example from the writings of John Calvin.

“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11)​

 

[Totton Linnet]

No it does not. That is a red herring distraction and is irrelevant to the real point here.

The issue is, what has God said He will do about our sin, since we can do nothing about it ourselves?

Bible: God gave Christ to die for the sin of all, without exception. There is no one who cannot be saved, apart from their own unbelief.

Calvin: Christ died for the sin only of the Elect. The rest were reprobated to burn from eternity past. Not only can't the reprobates believe and be saved; God never intended for them to do so.

These are two mutually exclusive propositions. They cannot both be true. Which one do you believe?

I am not a Calvinist...but I dang sure ain't a freewiller

I never tire of saying that the election is unto blessing, to the body of Christ, to be conformed unto the image of Christ.

Of course we must be saved for that...but it does not exclude others from being saved.

Now you expound the words of Jesus

My sheep hear my voice and they follow Me....ye [those who came up to oppose Him]cannot understand My speech ye are the children of the devil, his lusts ye will do.

I have shown you the doctrine of Paul who says that the cross is the power of God to us who are being saved, but to those who are perishing it is the foul stench of death.

Jesus came with a sword to divide the people. The sheep from the goats.

 

[Clete]

Those two passages refute the entirety of Calvinism.

Look, I don't deny people are going to go to Hell but that wasn't what he said.

 

[musterion]

Look, I don't deny people are going to go to Hell but that wasn't what he said.

Okay. We can disagree on that.

They still refute the entirety of Calvinism.

 

[flintstoned]

The problem with this "Calvinist" response is that it isn't really in line with Classical Calvinism. While I am in fact a Classical Arminian, my profession is philosophy and theology so I have read Calvin as well as much of Calvinist literature.

In Calvinist theology:

1. God determined who the elect were going to be for inscrutable reasons in eternity past (which essentially means "before Creation").
2. Those people that He chose He will draw, through the Holy Spirit, with an irresistible call.
3. When these people are called they are regenerated. This regeneration is necessary for someone to come to saving faith, because of total depravity.
4. Because there is unconditional election, as a logical consequence there is also unconditional reprobation/damnation.

It is this idea that there are people chosen for damnation in eternity past, which the OP is calling into question.

There is no need for God to "choose" anyone for damnation, because we do a pretty good job of damning ourselves through our sin. God doesn't cause us to sin. We do that of our own will. All people.....even the elect.

The only "just" thing really, is for all men to go to hell for their sins! The wages of sin is death. Why would it not be just to be punished for sin? Just because God has decided to extend grace to some, based on his own purposes, in order that they might be spared and brought to salvation.....this somehow makes God unjust? Nobody would be saved if it weren't for God's grace. How would justice be served if God just saved everybody and nobody paid for their sin? If the President, for instance, pardons a criminal and they are spared from having to be imprisoned, does this mean that all criminals should be pardoned? Is it unjust to send criminals to jail, just because a few are blessed with a pardoning?

So why does it even matter? Either way, with God's omniscience, He knows where we will end up before he ever creates us. So, in your belief system, why would he still create those people that he knows will end up in hell? What would be the purpose in that? If it wasn't for God's grace, to determine beforehand that he would save ANY, we would ALL be destined for destruction.

 

[Clete]

There is no need for God to "choose" anyone for damnation, because we do a pretty good job of damning ourselves through our sin. God doesn't cause us to sin. We do that of our own will. All people.....even the elect.

You are not a Calvinist then?

The only "just" thing really, is for all men to go to hell for their sins!

That is not the only just thing.

The wages of sin is death. Why would it not be just to be punished for sin?

It would be but you paying your own sin debt is not the only option. Someone could pay your sin debt for you and justice is still satisfied so long as that someone doesn't have their own debt to pay.

Just because God has decided to extend grace to some, based on his own purposes, in order that they might be spared and brought to salvation.....this somehow makes God unjust?

What? :bang:

God would only be unjust because of grace if grace was arbitrary as Calvin taught and as Calvinists believe.

Arbitrarily rewarding some and punishing others is unjust by definition.

Add to that the Calvinist teaching that those being punished for their sin could not have done otherwise makes their version of God all the more unjust.

Nobody would be saved if it weren't for God's grace. How would justice be served if God just saved everybody and nobody paid for their sin?

Nobody?

Ever heard of Jesus? God the Son. Who died for the sins of the world?

There is no need for anyone to be punished for their own sin. If every human being that exists where to repent they would all be saved and their sin debt would be paid in full by the shed blood of God the Son which is of infinite and inexhaustible value.

If the President, for instance, pardons a criminal and they are spared from having to be imprisoned, does this mean that all criminals should be pardoned?

Such a pardon of a guilty man would be unjust.

Is it unjust to send criminals to jail, just because a few are blessed with a pardoning?

Well, jail is mostly unjust to begin with but that has nothing to do with who is pardoned. All pardons if guilty criminals are unjust.

So why does it even matter? Either way, with God's omniscience, He knows where we will end up before he ever creates us.

God is not omniscient in the way you mean. The Bible record is clear. God knows what He wants to know of what is knowable.

So, in your belief system, why would he still create those people that he knows will end up in hell?

Your argument presupposes that Calvinism is true in order to argue the truth of Calvinism. That's called question begging.

God doesn't know who will end up in Hell and who won't.

What would be the purpose in that? If it wasn't for God's grace, to determine beforehand that he would save ANY, we would ALL be destined for destruction.

There would indeed be no purpose in it if God did in fact know in advance everything that is going to happen. Indeed, there is a whole list of things as long as your arm that don't make sense in the Calvinist worldview. That's how you can know its false. Its all a jumbled mess of self-contradictory nonsense that bares almost no resemblance to the God of scripture.


Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Yes the one who sets the blaze is the one who rushes in to save some

That is God pictured...wrongly

He built the house and furnished it and made it comfy and pleasing to the family who would live therein, this is God's good will, He only EVER willed good things for man.

God diligently warned the man, rising up early not to sin, lest ye die.

God's will for man has never changed, He still desires for mankind to dwell in love together, under the shelter of His wing, enjoying His good provision.

But man rebels against it, he wants to be Jack the lad, the women want to be painted jezebels ensnaring their men into all kinds of evil desires.

It is God pictured wrongly! It is, however, an accurate depiction of the god of Calvin and of Calvinism (and Augustinianism).

You intentionally talk in idiotic riddles because it makes you feel superior. That's fine if that's what trips your trigger but I'm going to give you one single change to answer a straight question with a straight answer and if I get anything other than a yes or no I'll simply add you my ignore list.

Do you believe that God has predestined everything that has or will ever happen?

Do you, for example, believe that God has predestined you to be on my ignore list, or is whether you end up there or not up to me?

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Desert Reign]

Of course anyone can offer an answer but I want to hear from the Calvinists in particular on the following question....


If someone sets your house on fire in the middle of the night and then, once the house is fully engulfed in flames, rushes in to rescue you and your 2nd child but decides to leave your wife and your other ten kids to burn in the fire, do you praise the man as a hero or condemn him as a murderer?

Would your answer be different if you were the wife or one of the other ten children?

Resting in Him,
Clete

He doesn't set your house on fire. He inspires you in such a way that you have no alternative but to want to set the house on fire yourself. And then he blames you for setting the house on fire.

 

[musterion]

Add to that the Calvinist teaching that those being punished for their sin could not have done otherwise makes their version of God all the more unjust.

Not just unjust...blasphemous, because that right there is where the blasphemy comes in. The fundamental fact of the Gospel of grace is that it's open to ALL without any distinctions and with the sole requirement of faith. But Calvinism says it secretly isn't open to all, only to the Elect, and so contradicts the Word of God.

 

[Clete]

He doesn't set your house on fire. He inspires you in such a way that you have no alternative but to want to set the house on fire yourself. And then he blames you for setting the house on fire.

I don't know what the difference is except that the word 'inspires' doesn't seem to fit when you have no alternative.

 

[Nick M]

Not just unjust...blasphemous, because that right there is where the blasphemy comes in. The fundamental fact of the Gospel of grace is that it's open to ALL without any distinctions and with the sole requirement of faith. But Calvinism says it secretly isn't open to all, only to the Elect, and so contradicts the Word of God.

Precisely. It isn't Calvinism vs Open-Theism/Freewill. It is Calvinism vs the gospel of grace. It is every bit of a false gospel as the circumcision tried to put on Paul's early church. Those who promote them(false gospel) are to be accursed.