What's Wrong with Calvinism?

BR, who says God has to love everyone? Certainly not the Bible. We all deserve damnation, Him choosing to save a certain number unto himself is showing love and compassion. For those few deserved to die too.

 

John 3:16 - "God so LOVED the WORLD that He gave...yes really!"

Your argument is that since all deserve the 2nd death penalty for sin - then God IS being loving and kind to arbitarily select out the "FEW" of Matt 7 to "SO Love"..

Fine - but that is "hardly" the fullfillment of the promise that He "SO LOVED THE WORLD". IF God simply said what Cavlinism needs "God so loved the arbitrarily selected FEW that He Gave and this was kind and just of God SINCE all have sinned so all deserve to die anyway" INSTEAD of saying "God so LOVED the WORLD" you would have a case.

The long awaited "scenario" coming up -- to illustrate the point you have made here.

We all deserve death so God could certainly pick some and not others -- as long as He does not obligate Himself by saying that he has sovereignly chosen instead to "SO LOVE THE WORLD"


In Christ,

Bob

 

If the goal of God was to save the whole world......


and...


If God foreknows (FOREKNOWS used as free-willers use it) who will place their faith in God and who will not...

and....

If man has freewill to choose God or reject God at anytime...

and......

If God was free to save all of mankind at anytime...

then...

If all these cases were true, why did not God save all of mankind before Cain was born? If God had done this above laid out scenario, God would have saved all mankind. Did God know Cain would not have faith in Him? Yet it was God that allowed Cain to be born before redeeming man.

and....it was God that HID from Cain and also God that drove Cain from His presence.

As it turns out, all mankind is not saved. Is this something God overlooked, or was this part of Gods plan?

Maybe in your view God overlooked Cain. Now 7000+ years later..are more people or less people going to hell each year?



In Christ.......James

 

A couple of points here, Jarthur:

1. It is interesting that in the Alexandrian LXX (translated several hundred years before Christ by the Hebrew scholars themselves), Cain is quoted as saying that his sin is too great to be forgiven, not that his punishment is more than he can bear! That is a startling difference and may indicated that the mark God put on Cain was a mark of forgiveness so that no one would try for justice by killing Cain. Just a thought.

2. Jesus gave us the clue regarding the rest of your post when He told us that the two commands to love (God and neighbor) were what all the law and prophets hung on. We were created to love. It really is as simple as that. But love requires freedom of choice. It is not love if there is no freedom to not love. In the same way, it is not really obedience if there is no freedom to disobey. Without the freedom to not love, or not obey, we would simply be a sort of robotic creature, doing what we do without possibility of anything else.

But we were created in the image of God. We have choices. Yes, God knew what those choices would be, but they were still our choices. And they were our choices precisely so that we could be able to love and obey and have it mean something.

It should be said, though, that once one has given oneself up to Christ and then is born again, there is no going back. You cannot be unborn. You can be a difficult child for the Holy Spirit to raise, and thus need more discipline than some others, but you are nevertheless a child of the King once you are born again. It's sort of like choosing to fall off a cliff. There is simply no going back once the decision is made and acted upon.

 

Hello Helen, long time no talk..

Jude 1:11
Woe to them! They have taken the way of Cain.
Let me be clear before I go forward. I would disagree strongly. Having said that, let us give you your point. Lets say Cain was forgiven and in Heaven. Are all men in heaven? Do some reject Gods ways? If so, why did not God redeem before that 1st rejector was born?

We were created in love....ok...maybe.
Love requires freedom? I need a verse please. I loved my girls and laid down the law. They could not play in the street as a child. They had to be home at a given time when older. They had no full freedom. Yet they had all my love. As it turns out God is like this.

We have choices. I agree with this. A complete free will...not so.

God knew...yes. So back to the point I ask and that has not been addressed in this post...

If God knows...and if Gods goal was to save all mankind, why was Cain born before God brought a redeemer?

I agree with this (no going back) though it does damage to your reason.. "love and choice", but lets not get off track. If the goal was to save mankind and God knew Cain had a freechoice not to choose, why did God not bring redeemption before Cain?



In Christ.....James

 

Hello. The fact is that, to say that God loved every person that He ever created knowing that some of them would choose to reject Him & on top of that created hell (eternal fire) for them does not make sense to me. I have heard preachers say that God loves us so much that if we want to go to hell, he will let us! This is inconsistent considering Prov. 16: 4 says: The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. And the psalmist said in Ps. 73: 18 - 19 Surely thou didst set them in slippery places: thou castedst them down into destruction. 19 How are they brought into desolation, as in a moment! they are utterly consumed with terrors.

God casts them into hell & into the lake of fire. So He knowing that those who He loves would rebel, created hell for them to suffer in forever. Does that make sense to you? It does not to me.
Act 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. So God had to know the end result. Hell is not a demonstration of God's love but God's hatred.

 

4 and 5 point Calvinist Future Scenario​

The inner quotes contain “The scenario”. Everything else is my commentary. (Of course the entire thing is my own test scenario for Calvinism)

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

5 and 4 pt Calvinist Future Scenario:

“Showing” the requirement of 4 and 5 point Calvinism to have the “luxury” of a cold disregard for the non-elect “When the non-Elect are finally Known”. (In the perfect Calvinist Utopian future). This scenario simply removes that “luxury” (for a moment) in order to emphasize the point 4-5 Pt Calvinism makes about God Himself – vs the view that “God so Loved the World that He Gave…Really” (something that both Arminians and 3-pt Calvinists seem to Agree on).


When the 4 OR 5-point-Calvinist finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability as the MANY of Matt 7 -- now writhing in the agony of eternal roasting in hell - he may well run to his sovereign lord with the cry

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

And of course the answer will come back that Calvinism so loves to hear – "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to"!

"Hallelujah!" cries out the Calvinist - that IS the Gospel I was proclaiming!! Ahh that blissful eternity with calvinism's God that unfairly saved you but not your precious daughter - and you will be praising through all eternity that YOU were spared though she was not. (For it IS all about the saved/electin the end)

We see Calvinists blessing the fact that He chose You – AND that it was "unfair" as you say - but it was graciously unfair IN YOUR favor - just not your precious daughter's.

So just enjoy! Enjoy! Unjust Mercy - oh the Calvinist bliss.
--------------------

<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.



Calvinist future scenario complete!


Notice the “focus” in that perfect Calvinist utopian future - is always on “you” the one that is arbitrarily selected and then justifying the callous disregard of your precious child under the guise of “Well God does not HAVE to care about ANYONE just be glad YOU made it”.
Fascinating!

 

Michael has argued for arbitrary selection already -- Spurgeon agrees with Michael on this point.

HERE is a direct quote from Charles Haden Spurgeon “Showing” that the arbitrary selection of the elect by God is NOT based on the family status of the lost.

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1148.html#000000


" Now, suppose I should put the following question to any converted man in this hall. Side by side with you there sits an ungodly person; you two have been brought up together, you have lived in the same house[/b], you have enjoyed the same means of grace, [b]you are converted, he is not; will you please to tell me what has made the difference?[/b] Without a solitary exception the answer would be this—"If I am a Christian and he is not, unto God be the honor." Do you suppose for a moment that there is any injustice in God in having given you grace which he did not give to another? I suppose you say, "Injustice, no; God has a right to do as he wills with his own; I could not claim grace, nor could my companions, God chose to give it to me, the other has rejected grace willfully to his own fault, and I should have done the same, but that he gave 'more grace,' whereby my will was constrained." Now, sir, if it is not wrong for God to do the thing, how can it be wrong for God to purpose to do the thing? and what is election, but God's purpose to do what he does do? It is a fact which any man must be a fool who would dare to deny that God does give to one man more grace shall to another; [b]we cannot account for the salvation of one and the non-salvation of another but by believing, that God has worked more effectually in one man's heart than another's—

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1148.html#000000

Unless you choose to give the honor to man, and say it consists in one man's being better than another[/b], and if so I will have no argument with you, because you do not know the gospel at all, or you would know that salvation is not of works but of grace. If, then, you give the honor to God, [b]you are bound to confess that God has done more for the man that is saved than for the man that is not saved[/b]. How, then, can election be unjust, if its effect is not unjust? However, just or unjust as man may choose to think it , God has done it, and the fact stands in man's face, let him reject it as he pleases. God's people are known by their outward mark: they love God, and the secret cause of their loving God is this—God chose them from before the foundation of the world that they should love him, and he sent forth the call of his grace, so that they were called according to his purpose, and were led by grace to love and to fear him. If that is not the meaning of the text I do not understand the English language. "We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."
-Spurgeon

 

Yes God "knows all"

But God is correct when HE says "I am not WILLING FOR ANY TO PERISH but for ALL to come to repentance" He is telling the truth for "GOD SO LOVED the World that He Gave".

It is not a matter of overlooking Lucifer's fall, or Adam's fall, or King Saul's fall or Israel's fall or the fall of Annanias and Saphira - God "knew it all" but God did not command them to fall, or make them fall, NOR did He choose not to love THEM so that they WOULD fall.

Rather it is that old "free will thing again". God Sovereignly chose a creation model that includes it!

in Christ,

Bob

 

Of course you do it allows you to feel you have some say in your life and your salvation. Your life is not yours it is God's and He can do with it as He sees fit for His glory, not yours. Now that may be good in your eyes or bad but the truth of the matter is that it does not matter what you think, for it is not you who is glorified through it all.

 

Hello Bob....long time no talk. I trust the family is well Down there in NC.


Commanding the fall was not the point. Let me ask again...

If the GOAL for God was to save all mankind.....

If man has freewill to choose God at anytime....

If God Knows cain will not have faith in Him....

Why did not God save mankind before Cain, thereby saving all of mankind, thereby saving all from hell?

****************

NOT WILLING FOR ANY TO PERISH......
Found here...2 pet 3

And going back to my point which has not been addressed...

If God foreknows who will be saved, He also foreknows who will go to hell. (Foreknew as used be free-willers)
By God not coming before Cain, does this not show that God did not plan to save all mankind?

Or could we maybe read NOT WILLING FOR ANY TO PERISH in context and see another view?



In Christ...James

 

Do not get me wrong...I was only agreeing with that one line...(no going back). This was only a side track, and I did not want to stray from the path. So.......I agreed with one some point and moved back to the subject at hand, that being Cain and Gods love.


In Christ....James

 

This sounds like it almost borders on the teaching of, who was it, Marcion, who made such a distinction of "the God of the OT" from the NT.
So yes, God may have wrath and have said "do it my way or die", but the whole point of the NT Gospel is that the OT was to establish God's Law and its penalty and illustrate how we fall short, and that now God was showing His compassion instead. That is what we are to compare the grace we have to, not the horrible fate of some hypothetical class of people whom God refused grace to altogether.
That is not what the Good News is about, and that is why the logic that "if God allowed Cain and all those others to go to Hell or foreknew who would be lost, we might as well say God 'hated' them and didn't want to save them to begin with" doesn't work either. It's the motive that is completely different.
Also, passage people use to teach people being "ordained for destruction" are not saying God picks individuals for that "role" and witholds all grace from them to fulfill it. All of us were in that category before we were saved.

 

Hello HP,

And who says that God didn't come to the USA before the white guys found it? One..it's not found in the Bible. We can make up any idea we want, but if its not found in the Bible its wogwash.

This so called paper duck has been flying on this board for awhile. Some claim angels told all the nations. Not based on the Bible...but based on a idea that all men have heard at least one time before they die.




In Christ...James

 

Hello Eric,

Please help me to understand your point. I do not see where this does not work.

Again..help me with this one. Post 1 or 2 verse to backup what I placed in bold.



In Christ...James

 

My point was you all are using God's "hatred and wrath" as well as His foreknowledge and not offering salvation before Cain to prove that part of His plan was to preordain certain individuals (most of mankind, in fact) to Hell by withholding the grace given to those who ended up saved.
It's obviuos that the reason God did not guarantee every single man who ever lived would be spared Hell is something that we cannot completely answer. But that does not mean we go and assign individuals' fate in Hell as a specfic intent of God's plan (explained by some as being for our enjoyment in Heaven, even!) Are we really supposed to look foward to seeing Cain roast in Hell, or some tribesman who never heard, and we have never seen in this life?