Quick-and-Dirty Calvinism

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Monergist, Jun 2, 2005.

  1. Monergist

    Monergist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    0
    Phil Johnson says:
    READ IT HERE
     
  2. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Thanks - what a great place to post the "Calvinist future scenario".

    <You see the problem when the Calvinist model is not “allowed the luxury" of disregarding the fate of the lost - as in the case above?>

    Here we see Calvinism’s view of God who (arbitrarily from the POV of human eyes) selects out the FEW of Matt 7 and loves THEM alone - and then represents that to Calvinists as "So Loving the World". Oh the pure joy that thought must cause the Calvinist mind.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Calvinist future scenario complete!

    --- Blog site updated

    Thanks again.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  3. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob,

    A Serious Question.

    How does the Fate of the Eternally Lost play out in your own theology?

    What is the response of the Arminian Dad in Heaven who sees his precious Daughter in the Same condition as in your Calvinistic Fable?
     
  4. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    First of all I find it "interesting" that even though BOTH sides have to admit that there ARE going to be parents in heaven - that are missing children - the Calvinists here want to call any treatment of that obvious fact "fable and false".

    Surely you have to admit that they are insecure at best when approaching this obvious scenario.

    (I could not resist pointing that out).

    As for the "Arminian Future Scenario" where the Arminian is confronted WITH EXACTLY the same problem as the Calvinist (you know - so we can really compare models) -- here it is...

    </font>[/QUOTE]Oh what wonderful Grace! What unbiased impartial Love! What sacrifice lavished upon both the saved AND the Lost!

    Of course the Calvinist may say of the Arminian God that we see pictured here "OH how TERRIBLE! How AWFUL" that God would "ALLOW selfless concern for our lost children EVEN for a moment once we are in heaven" (as some have said)... or that "God would LOVE our lost children" (As others have said) -- But I know that "not many" will do so - even among Calvinists because the comparison is obvious - blatant and clear.

    </font>[/QUOTE]See? The same unpleasant future scenario - but with the principles of Arminianism determining the response "expected" from God.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  5. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    And exactly where in Scripture do you find any support for a Heavenly Scenario that deals with the Fate of the Eternally Lost that is anywhere remotely connected to the emotion of human sorrow?

    I would think that would be essential for your scenario on either side of the coin to have any validity.

    So far all I see is meaningless speculation and purely human reasoning.
     
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    The scenario begins with this fact

    Your response does not challenge GOD's caustic cold response in the Calvinist future Scenario -- it challenges the LOVE of the Parent!!

    You want to know about a text that says we actually WILL be loving of our own children!!!

    Notice that in the Arminian scenario I make mention of just such a complaint from Calvinists where I say --

    I find it "instructive" that in your response the first thing you would do is validate that expected response from Calvinists.

    However to your credit you are the ONLY one to actually pick up a detail in the scenario and question it. Others simply do a lot of hand waiving and "detail-glossing-over" to say "all details are in some unstated way - wrong".

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    As for God expressing actually SORROW over the lost -- (a point that must be made when dealing with Calvinists but everybody else seems to get it right off the bat)--

     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Now you have to admit Hardsheller - it is "easy" to understand how a parent would naturally feel loss and love toward a missing child.

    It is EASY to see how God would express grief over just such a loss as we see the texts above.

    One has to "argue themselves" into the cold diregard for the suffering of the lost family member (once the lost are in fact suffering in fiery hell) - to be a Calvinist it is NOT a natural place they would go otherwise.

    The natural inborn love and selfless concern for our precious children is hard to give up just to defend Calvinism in that future scenario. And that is the point.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  9. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    And "hence" the opening statement in the Calvinist future scenario ---

    Now you claim to "cling to the luxury" anyway - but I doubt you can be very successfull at it.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  10. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    You sure quoted a lot that I "claim", which I don't remember "claiming".

    I simply believe your scenario is ill gotten because the Bible teaches there will be no sorrow or tears in Heaven.

    I don't think Calvinistic or Arminian Christians in Heaven will grieve over their unsaved children.

    Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

    I don't question and have never questioned the sorrow of God over his creation. But to suggest that God is grieving in Heaven for all eternity like a parent in heaven grieving over a lost child is simply not supported by scripture.
     
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    #1. The CFS scenario clearly mentions that Calvinists will object to God "allowing the Parent" to be concerned over their child.

    That much is easy to read.

    #2. The "no more tears" and sorrow statement does not apply until Rev 21 (where we actually find it). That is AFTER the 1000 years and AFTER the GWTJ and AFTER the Lake of Fire and AFTER the New Earth is created.

    Why would "sorrow for the child" END then??

    Hint: In Rev 14:10 we are told that the COMPLETE TORMENT of the child takes place IN the very PRESENCE of the LAMB AND of His Holy ones (the Parents in this scenario!!)

    Of course you don't - you are Calvinist!


    Notice what we find AFTER the 1000 years and
    AFTER the GWTJ and
    AFTER the Lake of Fire and
    AFTER the New Earth is created...

    Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

    So yeah - there comes a time AFTER those events are passed when every tear is gone!!

    But DURING those events we find that Rev 14:10 tells us that ALLLLLLL the Torment will be taking place IN the very PRESENCE of the Lamb AND of His Holy Ones

    I never said that. I said He Grieves WHILE the lost suffer as do "the parents" (in the scenario). And I ALSO say that the SUFFERING takes place IN THE PRESENCE of the Lamb AND of all His Holy Ones!!

    (Actually God's Word says it - but I agree with it!)

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Harsheller -

    I detect a change in your tone of your posting. Is that shell softening??

    IN Christ,

    Bob
     
  13. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Negative Bob,

    I'm just softened by the compassion I feel when you completely twist the scriptures to support your thesis.

    The idea that God would permit Parents to grieve in Heaven other their unsaved children is pure speculation on your part.

    And where do you get that the Parents are the Holy Ones in Rev 14:10?

    I stand amazed and speechless in the presence of such an imagination.
     
  14. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Now there's the old Hardsheller! Welcome back!


    #1. I gave the Bible texts SHOWING that GOD grieves over the lost. (You seem to ignore that inconvenient fact. How interesting!)

    #2. I SHOW in the Arminian Future Scenario (AFS) that we should EXPECT Calvinists to complain about parents being allowed to love and care for their children by a Calvinist God once they are in heaven! (It is just another nasty ugly side on the underbelly of Calvinism that gets exposed when reviewing responses to the scenario).

    #3. I SHOW that the text you appeal to in Rev 21 IS AFTER the LAKE of fire event and AFTER the New EArth is created. (You ignore that inconvenient fact as well. How unnexpected)

    It is "obvious" though in your "all-for-calvinism" defense you may want to ignore the obvious whenever you can get by with it.

    But in this case -- 1Thess 4 says of the saints (at the rapture) and Christ "SO SHALL WE ever be WITH the Lord"

    IN John 14 Christ's promise to His church regarding the 2nd coming is "So that WHERE I am there you may be ALSO"

    IN Rev 14 the saints - the 144,000 are with Christ "Wherever He goes".

    I suppose you could possibly "strain, twist and wrench" scripture until you got the saints far enough away from Christ so that they would be enabled to ignore the suffering of their precious children (a point some Calvinists may want to pursue in a blind all-for-Calvinism no-matter-what defense).

    Go ahead and have at it if you really want to crawl out on that limb.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  15. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob,

    Do you really believe that Christians in Heaven will feel grief over the lost regardless of whether they are their own children or not?

    #1 The fact that God Grieves over the lost does not demand that He allows his children in Heaven to grieve over the lost. There is no scripture that says this.

    #2 The operative word here is SCENARIO. The invisible adjective that precedes it is IMAGINED. The words CONTRIVED and CONCOCTED should also be applied. You're operating in the far reaches of your fertile mind - not in the clear boundaries of the teachings of the Biblical Text.

    #3 Simply because the Bible teaches that the Dead in Christ will be With Christ forever does not mean they will feel sorrow over the lost or even be aware of who the lost are. If you think you're going to be in heaven and feel sorry for your lost children then I think you have read into the scriptures more than you can actually find there.

    IF God were to allow either an Arminian or a Calvinist parent to see a lost child suffering in Hell the strain and horror would be too much to bear for either parent. The very idea that a Christian parent in that position could ever utter a coherent thought or ask a reasonable question of God is utterly ridiculous and a denial of the "agape" love with which they were infused.

    Your "god" who would permit such mental and emotional suffering in heaven is scarier than the hyper-Calvinistic "god" you rail against.
     
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Since God "is love" and not "heartlessly cold indifference for the suffering of others" I suppose you could make that case that if we are like HIM - then we too will grieve as HE says HE does.

    But I think that our suffering and anxiety over our own precious loved one will be even greater than our sorrow for a stranger.

    That notion that "God is love but those who are like him - are not" is simply a defensive "corner" that Calvinism needs in this case - you have to admit it is not something that you would find in the Bible.

    You must be kidding! No scripture that says God is love and that commands us to LOVE? No scripture that tells us that God pours out his blessing on the just and the unjust so we should love our neighbor AS OURSELVES EVEN if our neighbor is not "elect"???

    What kind of Bible are you using? May I suggest the NASB or KJV or NKJV??

    Is that your way of saying that it is really off the wall for me to think that actual Christians will "love their neighbor as themselves" in REAL life and that this would be expected to include their OWN CHILDREN!!

    You are calling that "far fetched and imaginative"???

    Yours is a "Calvinism-no-matter-what-the-cost defense" sir.

    That is pure fantasy on your part.

    I want to thank you for being willing to come right out and give me that quote!

    In the mean time - "God really IS Love" and we "Really ARE" to love our Neighbor AS OURSELVES such that we might even LOVE OUR PRECIOUS LITTLE CHILD!!!

    (What a stretch for a Calvinist - eh?!!)

    Is this where you quote Rev 14:10 that says THEY ARE in the presence of the LAMB SUFFERING - or is this where you say "IF REv 14:10 IS TRUE THEN..." (Calvinism always reseves the right to declare scripture false I guess).

    NOW WE ARE TALKING!! Welcome back to the human side of the fence my brother!!

    And so given that Rev 14:10 IS REALLY TRUE as are the texts SHOWING that the saints are WITH CHRIST IN HIS PRESENCE -- we have the CSF with the PArent RUSHING to Christ with an URGENT QUESTION and PLEA so obvious so blatant so clear that even you have to admit that it is the most RELIABLE point in that scnario!!!


    So you object that the Parent's question is perfectly logical????

    I never saw that one coming...

    Is that MY GOD - because I WROTE Rev 14:10???? SAying that ALL This takes PLACE IN THE PRESENCE of the LAMB (and of His Holy ones)???

    IS that MY GOD Because I AM the one that wrote 1Thess 4 saying that WE WILL EVER be WITH the LORD???

    OR is it "MY GOD" because I will ACCEPT AND BELIEVE that scripture and not YOUR God since you found a way to ignore/reject scripture???

    ==========================================

    Having said all of that -- it is "obvious" that whatever tears have come PRIOR to the statement in Rev 21 about sorrow ending (AFTER the New Earth is created and the LAKE of FIRE event) -- they can not end -- unless some kind of change takes place in that horrific Rev 14:10 scenario where our precious children suffer IN THE PRESENCE of the LAMB (and yes that means in the PRESENCE of His HOLY ONES as well).

    If one is to believe ALL the Bible then not only is Arminianism correct so also are some other fine points about the Lake of Fire.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  17. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hardsheller -

    Sorry for giving you a hard time. But many others have looked at this and decided that the ONLY way to cling to Calvinism "anyway" is simply not let themselves THINK ABOUT the obvious future that Calvinism predicts.

    In your case - you are actually looking at the clear, blatant and obvious details and that is to your credit. (Credit in a 'debate board' kind of context of course).

    This is the "Nuke" of the Calvinist position for which there IS no response other than choosing to accept the Bible's Arminian views and aLSO taking a hard look at Rev 14:10 and the lake of fire to see what is REALLY going on there. OBviously eternal writhing in agony of our precious loved one IN OUR PRESENCE is going to be a tough conclusion and we would need to verify EACH and every aspect of that idea to be sure the Bible teaches it.

    Think about it - is it any less cruel to the precious little girl if the parent can have their brain pithed like a frog so they can not love or care for their child any more?? IS the scenario any less monsterous??

    (IF it is BETTER then it is only better in a "all about ME ME ME" kind of argument - - obviously).

    And that has NEVER been God's command to the saints in all of scripture!

    Look at the facts --

    #1. The child is lost - nothing will change that.

    #2. The parent is saved - nothing will change that.

    #3. The TORMENT itself takes place IN THE presence of the LAMB and HIS HOly ones. That is not going to change no matter how much eisegesis one wants to do so that the "ALL about ME ME ME" solution can be introduced.

    #4. The LAKE of FIRE event DOES involve the TORMENT that Rev 14 describes. Nothing will change that either.

    But there is some good news that is being left out.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  18. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    72
    Why not look at a couple other angles?

    Perspective 1:

    "Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child??"

    "Yes, I could have, and I did. Your child would not accept what I had done for her, so I thought I should let her realize the gravity of her sin. After she is punished for a while, I'll let her come into heaven with you."

    "Well, I suppose that's fair."

    Perspective 2:

    ""Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child??"

    "Calm down. She isn't being punished. That's just our heavenly thrill ride. Don't you know that I let everyone into heaven regardless of how they lived, what they believed, or anything? "

    "Great!"

    -------------

    I'm sorry, but if we're using this kind of argument, the universalists have us all beat.
     
  19. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob,

    In all seriousness - If the Heaven you portray is the only Heaven there is with Mothers and Fathers hanging over the balconies mourning and weeping over their lost children in Hell - then I don't want to go there because it certainly would not be a place where I'd want to spend even a day much less a thousand years.

    I think you have boxed yourself into your "nuke" (little "n" non-hazardous "nuke") argument and have no way out except to make God an ogre.

    Sure Christians grieve over lost children here on this earth. But if in the presence of Almighty God after death He can't take away that grief and pain then what's the point of being with Him?

    Your different stages of heavenly existence where we will feel pain and emotional stress for a season after death and then all tears and sorrow will be eventually wiped away is a new twist to the Revelation that I haven't run across in years of study.

    Maybe this is some hybrid Catholic/Adventist view that is not familiar to this old Baptist? Perhaps you could point me to the extra-Biblical source of this teaching?
     
  20. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    I need to correct myself in that last post - you AND John P are the TWO who have addressed the details of the CFS.


    JohnP's solution was "God is despot, author of sin, author of all Satanic words and deeds" all-for-Calvinism! His solution is a valid alternative to sticking with scripture and the fact that we ARE to have selfless love for others AND we are NOT to embrace a teaching that portrays God as a monster instead of "LOVE" and yet a JUST God. Basically JohnP's solution is to kill his inner Arminian.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     

Share This Page

Loading...