Questions for Calvinists!

**+Donny** · 09-13-2001, 09:19 PM

"Would you answer the question...is God sovereign? Pick one, yes or no. I'm not going to let you sidestep this."

i already told u, YES

"Tou're using the question "why doesn't God save everyone" as an argument. And the answer is that it's none of our business/"

fine, if u have no answer, then u obvisouly have a hole in your belief

"They can't do it--they don't possess the desire to do it, but that does not make the oppertunity any less real."

so they dont have a chance without God electing them? then its not their fault they didnt get elected

"Works is something that you do. It's as simple as that. "

not so sure

"The promise as bring referred to here was the promise of the coming Messiah, which none of them got to see temporally (Moses during the Transfiguration doesn't count...he was already dead)."

okay, thnx

"That's a scary thought in of itself."

whats the NRSV?

Luke · 09-13-2001, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Donny
"Would you answer the question...is God sovereign? Pick one, yes or no. I'm not going to let you sidestep this."

i already told u, YES

So, if God really wanted everybody to come to Christ, then everybody would, wouldn't they?

Quote:

"Tou're using the question "why doesn't God save everyone" as an argument. And the answer is that it's none of our business/"

fine, if u have no answer, then u obvisouly have a hole in your belief

No, you just aren't listening.

God didn't tell us why He didn't save everyone (beyond what He said in Romans 9:22-23), and He isn't obligated to! God doesn't save everyone because He chose not to save everyone...why does there need to be more than that?

All He said regarding that subject was that He does it the way He wants to do it and we shouldn't question that...read Romans 9.

Quote:

"They can't do it--they don't possess the desire to do it, but that does not make the oppertunity any less real."

so they dont have a chance without God electing them? then its not their fault they didnt get elected

Is it their fault that they're sinful? Because that's the basis on which one is ****ed.

Quote:

"That's a scary thought in of itself."

whats the NRSV?

A translation that's basically just really, really bad. It's full of bias and it's gender neutral, among other things. It's just bad.

sillybob98 · 09-13-2001, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lukesneeringer
The key point to see in verse 8 is that the verse is being written to believers. "But do not let this one face escape your notice, beloved..." Verse 9 also says, immediately before the phrase in question, that the Lord "is patient toward you".

Therefore, I do not see any kind of contradiction in saying that "any" and "all" actually mean "any of you" and "all of you".

"Any of you" believers and "all of you" believers? That doesn't make any sense. Peter talks about how God does not wish for any to perish for all to come to repentance. These infinitive forms of the verbs designate future tense. Easily, the to perish one could be perceived as the perishing that will come at the end of time. But if this statement is to be interpreted as you say, then why would God need to be patient towards the believers so that they could come to the repentance that keeps them from perishing? They've already done so.

Luke · 09-13-2001, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sillybob98
"Any of you" believers and "all of you" believers? That doesn't make any sense. Peter talks about how God does not wish for any to perish for all to come to repentance. These infinitive forms of the verbs designate future tense. Easily, the to perish one could be perceived as the perishing that will come at the end of time. But if this statement is to be interpreted as you say, then why would God need to be patient towards the believers so that they could come to the repentance that keeps them from perishing? They've already done so.

Not all of them. For example, you weren't even born at the time that 2 Peter was written.

The verse was addressed to the "beloved". Not all of the "beloved" had accepted yet--after all, it's 2001 now and people are still coming to repentance.

Blindman · 09-14-2001, 02:40 PM

I've shied away from these Calvinist debates for the most, part, but this question struck me today so I'll bring it up:

Calvinism states that there is no such thing as free will. God has decided who will be saved and who will not. The implication of this is that those who are not "saved" are not saved because that was not God's will for them.

The evil in this world is done by those who are "slaves to sin rather than slaves of righteousness," and thus the existence of evil is a direct result of the existence of unrepentant sinners.

But the existence of unrepentant sinners is a result of God's will that those people not repent and find salvation, and thus the evil in the world happens because it was God's will. And since there is no free will, all evil in this world comes directly from God.

That is the logical conclusion of the assumption that there is no free will in the world: that God causes evil. But now take the opposite view: that all human beings have free will.

God wants all of humanity to be saved. (Isaiah 45:23, Genesis 18:18, Isaiah 49:6, Matthew 28:19-20, Philippians 2:10-11, Revelation 7:9) But He also wants people to turn freely to Him, and so he created human beings with free will. If there were no free will, we would just be puppets doing whatever God made us do, but because of free will we have the ability to sin, that is, to do something other than God's will. After all, if we are made in God's image, doesn't that imply that we have the ability to oppose God, if we decide to?

And thus, the evil in the world is not a result of God's willing it but of God trusting human beings, and giving them choices which they sometimes do not handle well. God _willed_ that Adam and Eve live with Him in the garden forever, but God _knew_ that they would sin and must be driven out. God did not cause their sin, but he allowed it because to stop them would be to take away their free will. God knew about all the evil things that would exist in this world, but he nonetheless gave us free will because without free will, everything that we do, whatever joy we find in His creation, and whatever praise or glory we offer up to Him, would be meaningless.

**Chrysostom** · 09-14-2001, 02:51 PM

Correction: the Calvinists believe that no free will exists *as far as salvation is concerned* Sorry

john

**+Donny** · 09-15-2001, 04:51 PM

"So, if God really wanted everybody to come to Christ, then everybody would, wouldn't they?"

because he gave us free will, he wants everyone to come through their own will, and I also ask you this, he doesnt want us to sin, so why is there sin?

"No, you just aren't listening.

God didn't tell us why He didn't save everyone (beyond what He said in Romans 9:22-23), and He isn't obligated to! God doesn't save everyone because He chose not to save everyone...why does there need to be more than that?

All He said regarding that subject was that He does it the way He wants to do it and we shouldn't question that...read Romans 9."

i should question it if im not sure if thats the way he does it, if one theory proposes God's action with reason, and yours doesnt, im more likely to choose the former

"Is it their fault that they're sinful? Because that's the basis on which one is ****ed."

yes, its their fault, BUT, they didnt have a chance to come to God

Luke · 09-15-2001, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Donny
"So, if God really wanted everybody to come to Christ, then everybody would, wouldn't they?"

because he gave us free will, he wants everyone to come through their own will, and I also ask you this, he doesnt want us to sin, so why is there sin?

We'll discuss the problem of evil later (although I have discussed it here before). That's going really far off the subject. But there is a Scriptural answer.

Quote:

because he gave us free will, he wants everyone to come through their own will"

So God really isn't sovereign, then.

Quote:

"No, you just aren't listening.

God didn't tell us why He didn't save everyone (beyond what He said in Romans 9:22-23), and He isn't obligated to! God doesn't save everyone because He chose not to save everyone...why does there need to be more than that?

All He said regarding that subject was that He does it the way He wants to do it and we shouldn't question that...read Romans 9."

i should question it if im not sure if thats the way he does it, if one theory proposes God's action with reason, and yours doesnt, im more likely to choose the former

But the question you asked was not if He does it that way, the question was "why", to which no answer is necessary.

One theory (Arminianism) proposes action with reason, and one (Calvinism) does not. This is technically untrue, but I will ignore it. What is a more important distinction betgween the two is that one theory (Arminianism) is based on philosophy and one (Calvinism) on Scripture. You still haven't even bothered to deal with that problem.

All that said, one idea that you might consider a reason for why God doesn't save everyone is Romans 9:22-23.

Quote:

"Is it their fault that they're sinful? Because that's the basis on which one is ****ed."

yes, its their fault, BUT, they didnt have a chance to come to God

But that isn't why they're reprobate.

Luke · 09-15-2001, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mustbenothing
Correction: the Calvinists believe that no free will exists *as far as salvation is concerned* Sorry

Depends on how you define free will. If it's one autonomous from God's purposes, sin nature, etc., I deny it completely as do most Calvinists.

Luke · 09-15-2001, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Blindman
Calvinism states that there is no such thing as free will. God has decided who will be saved and who will not. The implication of this is that those who are not "saved" are not saved because that was not God's will for them.

The evil in this world is done by those who are "slaves to sin rather than slaves of righteousness," and thus the existence of evil is a direct result of the existence of unrepentant sinners.

But the existence of unrepentant sinners is a result of God's will that those people not repent and find salvation, and thus the evil in the world happens because it was God's will. And since there is no free will, all evil in this world comes directly from God.

That is the logical conclusion of the assumption that there is no free will in the world: that God causes evil.

Very good!

"The One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all these." (Isaiah 45:7, NASB)

Before explaining the problem of evil (which Donny also asked for, he'll get an answer after all), this verse should be looked at, especailly the phrase "creating calamity" as ascribed to God. The word for calamity here is ra, which is what the OT normally translates evil. This should be noted when considering what I say below.

The problem of evil is a problem that every worldview from atheism to Christian Arminianism struggles with--atheists raise it as an objection and most Christians have no answer. Norman Geisler's entire book on the subject I find useless because it doesn't answer the question. As a Calvinist, however, I do have an answer to the problem of evil.

The problem of evil comprises three statements:

God is omnipotent.
God is good.
Evil exists.

Any Christian can readily see that this is a difficult problem for their worldview. They seem contradictory. Either God is malevolent or He is impotent, says the atheist. And neither of these fit the God of Scripture.

So, how does Christianity solve this problem. Arminians attempt to answer it using the free will answer, that God will not override the autonomous will of a creature. Therefore, if you're hit by a drunk driver tomorrow, this happened because God could not (or would not, doesn't matter) override the drunk's autonomous will.

Even the casual skeptic of this idea can quickly see the fault. If God had wanted to prevent this or any other evil from occuring, He could have easily done so without overriding autonomous will. In this senario, one of the cars could have gotten a flat tire, for example. In the Garden of Evil example, He could have made an elephant trample over the serpent long before God even created Eve, or at least before the serpent found Eve. Eve then would not have sinned as no inclination to do so would have existed. So this does not work either.

I would submit that God is the indirect author of evil in three ways:

He created a world in which evil would occur.
He sustains a world in which evil does occur.
He does not actively stop all evil from occuring.

Few will part with me on this. But notice that I said that He is indirectly the author of evil. But He did not author sin. He created us, and we are responsible (answerable) for sin because we are the ones sinning. God is the ethical standard and we are breaking it. But is God evil for creating beings that are evil? By no means, for it was His will to create us, and goodness is defined in terms of God's will. All this is to glorify Himself--which is the ultimate good, by the way.

This is the answer to the problem of evil. God is not evil because God is the standard of good. He created beings who are rebellious against Him, thus they are evil. God created them and thus it can be said that He indirectly created evil, but He is not answerable for it. (This is especially obvious because He cannot be answerable to anyone.)

Thus I affirm that God is both omnipotent and good and yet evil exists. Did that make any sense (I hope)?

**+Donny** · 09-16-2001, 02:45 PM

"We'll discuss the problem of evil later (although I have discussed it here before). That's going really far off the subject. But there is a Scriptural answer."

not off THIS subject, you cant use this aginast me unless u can defend when I use it against you

"So God really isn't sovereign, then."

when did I say that?

"But the question you asked was not if He does it that way, the question was "why", to which no answer is necessary.

One theory (Arminianism) proposes action with reason, and one (Calvinism) does not. This is technically untrue, but I will ignore it. What is a more important distinction betgween the two is that one theory (Arminianism) is based on philosophy and one (Calvinism) on Scripture. You still haven't even bothered to deal with that problem.

All that said, one idea that you might consider a reason for why God doesn't save everyone is Romans 9:22-23."

that above post is pretty offensive, because there are scriptures supporting arminianism

"But that isn't why they're reprobate."

they iddnt have a chance though, which is against scripture

Sola Gratia · 09-16-2001, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Donny
"But the question you asked was not if He does it that way, the question was "why", to which no answer is necessary.

One theory (Arminianism) proposes action with reason, and one (Calvinism) does not. This is technically untrue, but I will ignore it. What is a more important distinction betgween the two is that one theory (Arminianism) is based on philosophy and one (Calvinism) on Scripture. You still haven't even bothered to deal with that problem.

All that said, one idea that you might consider a reason for why God doesn't save everyone is Romans 9:22-23."

that above post is pretty offensive, because there are scriptures supporting arminianism

Where?

Quote:

"But that isn't why they're reprobate."

they iddnt have a chance though, which is against scripture [/QUOTE]

How? Where? If you're going to say something goes against Scripture you should explain where and how it goes against Scripture.

**+Donny** · 09-16-2001, 06:55 PM

"Where?"

i have given them, you havent been able to refute them very well

"How? Where? If you're going to say something goes against Scripture you should explain where and how it goes against Scripture."

okay, EVERYWHERE it says ANYONE who does these things, thats ANYONE

ChrisHarbison · 09-16-2001, 08:49 PM

Quote:

God wants all of humanity to be saved. (Isaiah 45:23, Genesis 18:18, Isaiah 49:6, Matthew 28:19-20, Philippians 2:10-11, Revelation 7:9) But He also wants people to turn freely to Him, and so he created human beings with free will.

I'm encouraged that you used scripture to show God's desire for the salvaition of man. Although I personally believe that ultimately, it's God's will that only the elect should turn to Him is irrelevant in this particular post. Here's the reason I'm posting:

You've give scripture to show God's will for man's salvation, that is good, now please give scripture to support the last half of your statement I quoted above stating God created us with freewill please...assuming it's actually possible to find it

.

**+Donny** · 09-16-2001, 08:52 PM

"I'm encouraged that you used scripture to show God's desire for the salvaition of man. Although I personally believe that ultimately, it's God's will that only the elect should turn to Him is irrelevant in this particular post. Here's the reason I'm posting:

You've give scripture to show God's will for man's salvation, that is good, now please give scripture to support the last half of your statement I quoted above stating God created us with freewill please...assuming it's actually possible to find it ."

was this to me, im confused