Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yes it is. Even if Biblicist mentions something about it, Moriah will assume much more than Biblicist said, and will put words into his mouth that he never said. That is one of the problems here.Are does being either calvinist or not, I wonder, figure into how just Moriah knows that calvinist would have God destining all infants, challanged etc to hell?
isn't that question seperate and distinct from how we view the cal/non cal issue?
Yes it is. Even if Biblicist mentions something about it, Moriah will assume much more than Biblicist said, and will put words into his mouth that he never said. That is one of the problems here.
Actually, ALL people will perish regardless, for IF the Lord just let everyone exercise their natural wills, NONE would get saved!
So God is honoring the wills/requests of the Lord to stay lost and away from him, while he saves out a group for His own good pleasure and Will!
Winman, are you taking the position that every person that comes to death has had the gospel given to them, and they have made a conscious decision to either reject or accept it?
Calvinists are very careful and selective with the words they use. Note that Biblicist says God "chooses" the elect, but "allows" the non-elect to perish. By using the word "allows", Biblicist can claim that God never "chooses" to damn anyone.
You are totally misrepresenting what I both said and meant. Look at my explanation again and you will see that I make it very clear that election follows rather than proceeds the fall of man in logical order in Romans 9:18-24. That is, those represented by the clay are already fallen into sin because the elect are regarded as vessels of "MERCY"! Do you know the implication of "mercy"?
Mercy necesarrily implies that you are not getting what you deserve justly but God is restraining just wrath. Those in the analogy of the potter - the clay - are presented as already in a fallen condition and election is "to salvation."
The fact that Paul says they are "chosen TO salvation" necessarily infers they already were in a lost and fallen condition or there is no need to chose them "TO" salvation. In regard to election there is no need to choose anyone to hell because election presupposes all have already fallen into sin and that choice has already been made not by God but by fallen mankind.
Hence, the fall is attributed to the will of man but election "TO" salvation is attributed to the will of God and purely upon the basis of MERCY not JUSTICE!
OK, let's say Billy and Joey want to die and have drank poison and will die in an hour. You have mercy on Billy and convince him he should live, and that you have a hypodermic needle with the antidote to the poison. You ask him if he wants to live and he says yes, so you administer the antidote and he quickly recovers.
You are not particularly concerned with Joey, but you tell him you have the needle with the antidote to save him. You ask him if he wants to live and he says no. So you simply walk away and allow him to die.
Have you made a choice? Yes, you have allowed Joey to die when you could have saved him. You could have stuck the needle in him and administered the antidote if you wanted to. It does not matter if he desired to die or not.
Again, if this happened in real life would you be found responsible for Joey's death?
Does God "owe" salvation to all people?
Does he "owe' that all have exact same thing between Him and them happen"
is it a problem with God not being "fair?"
Since God allows the unsaved to have what they want really, freedom from him, is that not showing love towards them?
Does God "owe" salvation to all people?
Does he "owe' that all have exact same thing between Him and them happen"
is it a problem with God not being "fair?"
Since God allows the unsaved to have what they want really, freedom from him, is that not showing love towards them?
Serbia
In Serbia, a citizen is required by law to provide help to anyone in need (after for example a major car accident) as long as providing help does not endanger him personally. Serbian criminal code Articles 126 and 127 state that should one abandon a helpless person and/or does not provide aid to a person in need, one could receive a prison sentence of up to one year. If the person dies of injuries due to no aid provided by the bystander, one can receive a sentence of up to 8 years in prison.
Calvinists are very careful and selective with the words they use. Note that Biblicist says God "chooses" the elect, but "allows" the non-elect to perish. By using the word "allows", Biblicist can claim that God never "chooses" to damn anyone.
...............
GE:
God neither 'allows' or 'chooses'. Both words suppose force to act in response. God never is forced to 'choose' between two evils. If He 'allowed' it would imply weakness just as to 'choose' means to respond to options left some helpless victim.
No; God WILLS.
Can it be imagined God WILLED not to destroy the wicked with their sin with the instigator of their sin without mercy?! What God would that be?
If anyone wants God to choose them, they should get Jesus’ teachings and obey them.
The problem with this is that unbelievers do not WANT God. They do not WANT to obey Jesus' teachings, and they do not have the POWER to obey them even if they did want God.
A blind man is blind until God opens his eyes. We do not unblind ourselves.
There ARE people on the side of truth, see John 18:37. That is what Jesus says! Not everyone loves darkness instead of light.