Featured Actuality vs Potentiality?

Ach, you need to take a break. You dont even believe what you just typed. Calvinists dont believe you have to repent. That's false and you know it. Defeating the calvinism you've created may get you some hearty attaboys from some here, but it's of little value beyond that.

 

...For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ 1 Cor 5:7

Which points us to the type; on that dreadful night in Egypt it was the father who shed the blood and applied it to the doorpost and lintel, the firstborn was totally passive. The firstborn's faith had nothing to do with whether the blood did what God had promised or not, however his faith had everything to do with the temporal benefit of how he rested that night.

 

I disagree with the idea that God created men to just die lost. God created man and gave them ample opportunity to be saved.

Its not cruel - God is not slack concerning His promise and desires all men to be saved. 2 Pet 3:9

This is then different - They saught their own lusts and rejected the God that gave them life. Then they have sinned against an infinitely Holy God and deserve Infinite punishment - now justice makes sense. Justice does not make sense if God creates man - selects some to be saved and then damns the rest. Thats not Justice at all, that is some form of dictatorship.

If God is fully just and fully loving - and all of a sudden was willing to elect some... in His love why wouldnt He elect all? -- Calvinism isnt consistant in this case because a calvinist doesnt want to be a universalist when in all reality if a calvinist was consistant and decided to "pass over some" if He is willing to do that and 2 Pet 3:9 is true then He would just save all...

Again coming back to my first point - He created all men and gave them all they needed to be saved - Thus their punishment is Just.

 

That God would WANT and DESIRE the damnation of the unsaved, instead of judgment being a RESULT of man's free rebellion is the death-knell of Calvinism that shows a fundamentally gross caricature of the nature of God's love. This is why you never see any major discussions about the love of God from the Calvinist camp.

Something else to think about is one of the arguments that an apologist uses with atheists is called the "axiological" argument. It is the argument that the presence and existence of morality proves that there is an ultimate and absolute moral Cause. One of those moral issues is the universal disdain for cruelty. For man to have a good innate desire to cringe at the thought of useless torture is evidence that such a moral quality was derived from an absolute standard of morality. Man could not have such a DESIRE like that, and that desire is a GOOD desire, unless there was a quality in God that also disdains the arbitrary abuse of His creation.

The Bible demonstrates this in Jeremiah 32:35 which the Calvinists consistenly ignore, either but not addressing the issue AT ALL, or by resorting to "proof texts" and basically act like Jeremiah 32:35 is not in the Bible (as evidence of this claim, watch how many respond to this by quoting a Calvinist proof text for determinism).

"And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

God clearly says he did not cause Judah to sin, and not only that, He did not DESIRE that they do so. Yet the Calvinist creeds that God determines ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER COME TO PASS, and that God actually WANTS the results of the evil that occurs.

The Calvinist argues "but God sends rain on the just AND the unjust". Yet if God WANTS them to suffer an eternal torment by predestinating them to hell, then why put off the inevitable? Why even give them rain at all? "I love enough to give you some rain for your corn, but I don't love you enough to impose my grace upon you". Which brings up another problem for the Calvinist which I am going to address in a new post!!

 

Ach

If correctly understood ...particular redemption is the only biblical solution to all the verses.

ACH, you and others wrongly assume that because I and others use confessions of faith,and catechisms that we cannot answer scripturally.In this you are quite mistaken.because several detractors suggest we cannot answer or maintain a solid biblical framework is clearly error.
In fact from what I have seen...a person studying with the use of such tools has scripture first and foremost, and then the additional blessing of the collective wisdom of multitudes of saints that have studied and also used scripture as the only rule of faith and practice.
Most are way to lazy to consider ,study and work through these works at all. I can write and speak my own thoughts all night.....but when more gifted persons enter and teach I back off and learn as the Spirit ministers through them.
Why would I offer my thoughts when others have been gifted by God to articulate and teach me....
Luke 6:40
The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

The elect were sanctified before the world was...set apart for God's Holy Purpose....After being drawn to salvation by the Spirit.....they begin to be progressively sanctified in real time by the Spirit and the word ...EFFECTUALLY WORKING IN THEM...which you claimed the other day was not biblical teaching.....looks like it is however-

12 That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.

13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

ACH...they are not "called" by a telemarketing service, but by God, because they were elected unto it.

This is another absurd statement. Why is it an absurdity?

many words and teachings are not mentioned.The trinity is not mentioned , being born from above is not mentioned, etc....but does that mean the teaching somehow vanishes? Does God have to mention every teaching in every verse?
Are you saying there is no Decree???? get serious ACH!
Jn 3:3-11 does not mention the Covenant, but the case can be made that since God deals with mankind by Covenant the teaching is linked.

To fragment scriptures is to miss the blessing of how God has revealed truth to His church.

Cal theology teaches regeneration results in a saving response to God in the gospel, an obedience of faith.....your statement again is not the actual teaching of any biblical cal.

Wrong again...God has ordained to save sinners in Jesus,and once saved God continues to work in them to will and to do of His good pleasure

6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

As Brother Willis pointed out Jesus is the Author and finisher of our faith, we are the blessed recipients of that mercy and grace.:thumbsup:

Wrong..there is always a joyful response and obedience.

"
Wrong again.I have been taught and have taught the pre-mill position early on, but have seen another way that these things come about.I am still working on kingdom realities although I now see the clear errors of dispensational thought. I used to have a Johnny mac, dallas seminary type idea...that does provide a system and answers,,,,but i find many of those answers not to be so now.:wavey:

 

I agree the God of the bible doesn't - thus im not a Calvinist

I dont know you tell me as a Calvinist - What justice is creating something to kill it?

Im assuming your saying im committing idolatry? I guess I would say the same for a calvinist so we can agree to disagree.

Your right God doesn't fail - we do. I'm not sure how this is so difficult.

"if you say a lie loud enough and long enough the people will believe it"

I agree that Election is Biblical, but not the Calvinistic view of it.

Amen to that - but that is the Calvinistic view. Thats the problem - Im sorry you dont appreciate the hard language but im finding Calvinism more and more foolish the more I read reply's and study it out.

Riddle me this Icon

A women has a child - but doesn't want it - so she kills it and we call that abortion.

a god creates man -but only wants some to come to him - and we call that Calvinism? and that makes god just and holy and pure? Im not so certain.

 

And here's the new thread with the conundrum! http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2005661#post2005661

 

JG, his do you handle Romans 9?

 

If 2 Peter 3:9 is referring to ONLY believers, and all of the believers are predestinated, they will be saved no matter what, THEN WHY WOULD GOD BE CONCERNED ABOUT ANY OF THEM PERISHING? And furthermore, if this is speaking of ONLY current believers, then why would He be concerned about their repentance? Think about it this way and see if it makes sense,

"God is not willing that the ELECT should perish, but that the ELECT SHOULD come to repentance".

That is an absurd rendition of the verse. If this verse is addressing ONLY believers, then THEY'VE ALREADY COME TO REPENTANCE.

Also notice the hypothetical statement "SHOULD perish". This phrase, apollymi, is used 5 times in the Bible (Jer 27:10, Matt 5:29-30, Matt 18:14 and 2 Peter 3:9). It is in the second aortist active infinitive which means it is a hypothetical matter on which depends on another condition being fulfilled one way or another.

If this was referring to ONLY elect, then Peter could not say that God is concerned over whether or not any SHOULD perish, because if they were elected, according to Calvinism, they WOULDN'T perish.

The verse makes it clear that God is not willing that ANY should perish, not just the elect. In Matthew 18:14, Jesus said He it was not the will of His Father that ANY of "these little ones" should perish, and yet in Matthew 23:39, Jesus said "how often WOULD I HAVE gathered your children...but ye WOULD NOT".

Just because God knew ahead of time that man would sin doesn't make God cruel for creating anyway, that's why He provided a REMEDY. What IS CRUEL is if He knew ahead of time that they would sin, created them anyway, AND LEFT ONLY A REMEDY FOR SOME and WANTED to condemn an arbitrary list of sinners to hell. The only thing that eliminates the arbitrariness of God and the cruelty is if that remedy is offered to ALL, not just the "elect"

 

Ach,

It is the same as when Paul says I endure all things for the ELECTS sake;

10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

2 pet 3:9 is only speaking of the elect being saved.....those who are not saved yet, but are elected unto salvation....

God is not willing that any of them perish....and they will not.Everyone that peter is speaking of here is going to be saved,God is longsuffering with this wicked world until all the elect are saved.

To pervert the passage as you and others do here is to miss it completely....

 

God looking through the tunnel of time knows all things yes.

He knows who will come to him ok...

Ok...

Ok Does God know the end yes. Does this change that during our life time we need to decide whom we will serve? no, all men have to make a choice - God does not make a vase to destroy it, God through the tunnel of time knows who will be saved - Yes ; Did God provide a plan by which all men could be saved Yes! Nothing surprises God - we still have our own choice to make

Ok - but again for the 100x time, He didnt create them with no chance of being saved, having full knowledge of what will happen and predetermining how it will happen are different things.

is this for real? Im asking you this question. If God creates man to damn them -> Thats cruel and that is Calvinism 101. If God creates man - offers ALL OF THEM NOT JUST 'THE ELECT' BUT ALL OF THEM salvation and they reject it -> hell is then just; If God can see that through the tunnel of time - it is still their sin to reject God. Not God rejecting them and then sending them to hell - As that makes 0 sense.

Honestly that just sounds like a cop out in this regard -

here are the two views simplified.

1) God created all men - gave us a choice to serve Him - Through the tunnel of time He sees who will respond however ALL MEN were given the opportunity.

This is not cruelty, this shows God is all powerful, all knowing and desires the souls of all men, but we choose not to serve Him and thus deserve hell.

2) God Created all men - but they did not have a choice - God created some that He elected and saved ; and some he decided he wouldn't save and thus they die in their sins.

Cruel. if you want to say "we cant understand God" to some how blanket it and soften the blow... I cant fix that for you.

sigh.

The word "Any"
tis
An enclitic indefinite pronoun; some or any person or object: - a (kind of), any (man, thing, thing at all), certain (thing), divers, he (every) man, one (X thing), ought, + partly, some (man, -body, -thing, -what), (+ that no-) thing, what (-soever), X wherewith, whom [-soever], whose ([-soever]).

Yes Peter is writing to a church - but He is talking about Gods attribute ; specifically that He doesnt want "any" to perish. Calvinists sure do enjoy changing "all" to mean elect and "whosoever" to mean "specific people".. You could write your own dictionary lemme tell ya.

Right - however your saying that God calls some to repentance and just allows the others to die. This God then doesn't love all people - but only the elect and thus doesn't care about the rest and made them just because He can.

He creates people with the ability to be saved but they say no - this is just ; God using his foreknowledge to know the outcome doesnt change they had the ability to be saved - not cruel

God creating people and setting aside a few to be saved and just not allowing the others to be saved and burning them forever - cruel.

Please see my previous post and do some self reflection on your view.

Right and your saying as a calvinist that God has 8 Kids saves 2 and kills 6 because the 6 just didnt make the cut. - Spiritual abortion. You are shooting yourself repeatidly in the foot with this argument.

God has foreknowledge YES - but God offers full restoration if they so take it - MAN CHOOSES not to ; therefore they made a choice and justice must be served. God didnt force their hand. God knows in the fullness of time what is going to happen but man had full ample opertunity to make a decision. God wants people to enjoy him forever so he created all man to do so.

God has had children ... and decided to not have the ones that wont be saved? So then your a universalist?

Or do you mean God has had some knowing that they all wont make it. Ok.. But has He given the opportunity for all to come to repentance?

Calvinism says Nope
Bible says Yes.

Done and done.

 

You are getting into a very bad habit of ascribing beliefs to people they don't adhere to.

Here is an article I wrote on my website "HELL! Would A Loving God Send Anyone There"
Now you read that and then come back and tell me that I think God is all about passing out candy canes to sinners.

That's definitely the first time I've heard anyone accuse an independent fundamental Baptist (IFB) of wanting "cupcakes". We normally get accused of legalism. Go figure.

 

Then why doesn't Peter just use ELECT instead of ANY. "God is not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL SHOULD COME to repentance". I see you skipped right over THAT part where I showed all 5 uses of this term in the Bible, NONE of which fit the Calvie interpretation of 2 Peter 3:9

 

Fantastic now your asking a good question.

"God didnt have to create them, but yet He did"

So then - When He created them - in their lifetime did they have the ability to be saved?

If He did -then its not cruel - as they had a choice. Foreknowledge does not imply predetermined.

If he didn't - then its monstrous. - God created billions to fall into fire and sulfur without any choice or action. They were handed their sins at conception and damned without a chance. Nice guy.

 

to be honest.. A cupcake sounds AMAZING right now...