I have a sincere question about Calvinism - (please no fighting)...

[Aaron]

Scarlett,

If someone where to ask you, "Did God love Jacob and hate Esau before either were born?" Ask them what Jesus meant when he taught, "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple." and if that contradicts his command to honor your parents and love others as yourself?

Ask him if God hatred for Esau and love for Jacob might simply reflect God's choice of one for noble purposes (being the head of the nation that brought us Christ), and the other for common use (being the head of Edom)?

Just in case...

And the answer would be that God chose one to be a child of faith, and the other not, long before either could harden himself according to Skandelon's false teachings.

Just nevermind. Skandelon hit the nail on the head when he identified the primary objection to Calvinism, and it isn't one's view of God, it's one's view of man. Boil down all of Skandelon's arguments, and it comes out to this, God saves those on the basis of an inherent quality. One chooses God because he was good enough to choose God, and one doesn't because he wasn't.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You are not in the majority. Ask any pastor how many people get saved in their old age.

OK, in what part of the country?

 

[Aaron]

And the problem with using this as an example of Calvinistic teachings...is because everyone knows, Pharoah wasn't saved; and letting Israel go wouldn't have saved him either. Instead, God used the opportunity to further show His glory.

When the subject is salvation, stick to examples that show God prevented someone from salvation.

Did God send a prophet to Sodom and Gomorrah? Tyre? Sidon? Christ said plainly that they would have repented if the works done in Judea had been done in them.

 

[quantumfaith]

And the problem with using this as an example of Calvinistic teachings...is because everyone knows, Pharoah wasn't saved; and letting Israel go wouldn't have saved him either. Instead, God used the opportunity to further show His glory.

When the subject is salvation, stick to examples that show God prevented someone from salvation.

Don,

Honest question, does God do that? Actually prevent someone from being "saved"?

 

[pinoybaptist]

just do the best you can to snatch them from those flesh eating Calvinists. God will reward you.

 

[Skandelon]

And the answer would be that God chose one to be a child of faith, and the other not,

The scripture never says this. It only indicates that one (and his posterity) is chosen for "noble purposes" while the other (and his posterity) is chosen for "common use." Nothing is mentioned about one being saved and the other condemned to hell.

Just nevermind. Skandelon hit the nail on the head when he identified the primary objection to Calvinism

Thank you. :wavey:

Boil down all of Skandelon's arguments, and it comes out to this, God saves those on the basis of an inherent quality. One chooses God because he was good enough to choose God, and one doesn't because he wasn't.

Actually, that is not an accurate description of what we believe, but I think that is probably apparent to any objective reader.

 

[psalms109:31]

Good enough

If we was good enough and better than everyone else, there will be no need to come to Jesus for salvation. When we come to Jesus we come to Him just as we are not worthy, but still calls us to come to Him to have life.

 

[quantumfaith]

The scripture never says this. It only indicates that one (and his posterity) is chosen for "noble purposes" while the other (and his posterity) is chosen for "common use." Nothing is mentioned about one being saved and the other condemned to hell.

Thank you. :wavey:


Actually, that is not an accurate description of what we believe, but I think that is probably apparent to any objective reader.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Aaron]

Actually, that is not an accurate description of what we believe, but I think that is probably apparent to any objective reader.

Then answer this question:

All other things being equal, why does one choose Christ, and another doesn't?

 

[Skandelon]

Did God send a prophet to Sodom and Gomorrah? Tyre? Sidon? Christ said plainly that they would have repented if the works done in Judea had been done in them.

Which seems to contradict the idea of Total Depravity because it indicates that an outward sign would have brought them to faith, something that would be impossible if they were born totally unable to willingly believe due to their depraved nature.

 

[Jerome]

Re: God hated Esau

FWIW, the same word is used of Jacob's attitude toward Leah in contrast to Rachel.

 

[Don]

Don,

Honest question, does God do that? Actually prevent someone from being "saved"?

If one says that God hardened Pharoah's heart, and uses it as an example in a discusson about salvation, then one has to be saying that God prevented Pharoah from being saved.

Do I believe God does that? No. Do I see any scripture that says that? No. But it's a conclusion that's easily reached by the extreme hyper-Calvinist.

 

[Aaron]

Which seems to contradict the idea of Total Depravity because it indicates that an outward sign would have brought them to faith, something that would be impossible if they were born totally unable to willingly believe due to their depraved nature.

And so, Christ's disciples were better men than the Pharisees. Not quite as depraved.

 

[Aaron]

Re: God hated Esau

FWIW, the same word is used of Jacob's attitude toward Leah in contrast to Rachel.

That's right. Jacob didn't love Leah, and he didn't choose her.

 

[Aaron]

If one says that God hardened Pharoah's heart, and uses it as an example in a discusson about salvation, then one has to be saying that God prevented Pharoah from being saved.

That's an arbitrary stipulation. God prevented Pharoah from doing good. The ulitmate result was his destruction.

 

[Skandelon]

Then answer this question:

All other things being equal, why does one choose Christ, and another doesn't?

Because one chose to believe and other chose to reject. What you need to realize is that the drive to explain a truly free choice in this manner is really just a game of question begging because it assumes that a deterministic explaination is required. The choice between available options is what free will is all about and it is finally mysterious, beyond full explanation, for full explanations presuppose the very determinism the libertarian rejects.

Now, lest you rebuke me for appealing to mystery just jump on over to the other thread where several Calvinists appeal to mystery with regard to the origin of sinful intent. We all appeal to mystery at some point in the debate, whether in regard to divine culpability, divine freedom, or human will.

 

[Don]

Did God send a prophet to Sodom and Gomorrah? Tyre? Sidon? Christ said plainly that they would have repented if the works done in Judea had been done in them.

How are you correlating this to the hardening of Pharoah's heart?

 

[Don]

That's an arbitrary stipulation. God prevented Pharoah from doing good. The ulitmate result was his destruction.

Abritrary stipulation or not, the result is the same: in a discussion about salvation, Pharoah wasn't allowed to be saved.

Is that your viewpoint?

 

[Aaron]

Because one chose to believe and other chose to reject. What you need to realize is that the drive to explain a truly free choice in this manner is really just a game of question begging because it assumes that a deterministic explaination is required. The choice between available options is what free will is all about and it is finally mysterious, beyond full explanation, for full explanations presuppose the very determinism the libertarian rejects.

Look at what you're saying. One is saved because he did a good work. He chose to believe.

 

[Aaron]

Abritrary stipulation or not, the result is the same: in a discussion about salvation, Pharoah wasn't allowed to be saved.

Is that your viewpoint?

That's exactly right.