Questions For A Calvinist Father

I believe there will be more people in heaven than in hell, as do some other Calvinists as well. Jesus has the preeminence.

Ken
A Spurgeonite

 

"AMEN... AMEN... AMEN!... BROTHER!"... Brother Glen

 

I believe there will be more people in heaven than in hell, as do some other Calvinists as well. Jesus has the preeminence.

Ken
A Spurgeonite </font>[/QUOTE]Another attempt to pat God on the back and say, it's ok God. This is the only way that we can pretty up election. The bible says that narrow is the gate. and it is the few that find it...

Matt 20:16
16So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

[ October 26, 2002, 12:47 AM: Message edited by: Chappie ]

 

No, election is "pretty" already because God didn't leave us all to what we deserve - Hell.

Rev. G

 

You're right..he just left those who aren't of the Calvinist "elected" to burn in hell. (according to limited atonement and unconditional election)

 

Nope. Simply stating what I believe. God doesn't need my help to be the righteous, holy, loving, sovereign God of the universe that He is.

I see that the anti-Calvinists are still bucking at the idea that more people may be saved than lost. I thank God that they don't have the ability to decide how many people are saved.

Ken
A Spurgeonite

 

Yes I have - and I believe you have too as have most Christians calvinist or not.

I don't know of a nice way to say this - but --- you are dodging the question.

The premise of the question is obviously 'not" that Calvinists do not care for their children - But RATHER that their concern is in direct opposition to their Calvinism. It is the inconsistent self-conflicted problem that is being "exposed" and that you are dodging.

The question is a "problem" precisely BECAUSE the Calvinist can NOT simply proclaim a callous disregard for the salvation of their own child.

It is "easy" to observe that Calvinists like all Christians DO love their children. It is "hard" to show in the case above how Calvinism itself can survive the scenario.

So I would ask that you address the point rather than avoid it.

Again you are addressing the straw man instead of the point. It is becaue you DO care and that you CAN't respond with the classic calvinist callous response "Well we ALL deserve hell - why should God be obligated to do anything at all" as you normally would when the subject of fairness and the lost typically comes up.

The scenario is "designed" to stop you from taking that classic Calvinist back-door to the subject. It insists that you go through 'the front door'.

When the Calvinist response is given to the loving father 'Why Certainly I Could have done something to spare your precious daughter the agnonies of torment she suffers in hell - IF I had Cared too" - what will be your answer??

Will it really be "What Grace! What Love! God Spared ME!!" AS ou Claim it is today when trying to rework the "arbitrary selection" model out to be "Gods Gracious Loving Choice"??

Pick up the challenge - Take your classic responses and show how they work with a lost person that we all know you HAVE to care about. This is the obvious point - why pretend that you don't notice it??

In Christ,

Bob

[ October 26, 2002, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

Bob,

If it wasn't for the doctrines of Unconditional Election, Definite Atonement, Effectual Grace, and Preservaton of the Saints, no one would be saved. You should thank God for these doctrines that result in salvation for the majority of mankind instead of kicking against them.

A person can be saved and never understand these great doctrines of the Bible correctly, but he will understand these doctrines to be true in heaven.

Ken
A Spurgeonite

 

Actually, there are also "elected" Arminians who will be in heaven - but at that point they cease to be Arminian.

Bob:

If I have wept, and other Calvinists have wept for the lost, then how am I setting up a straw man? They aren't crocodile tears. I don't understand why you are saying that I'm dodging the question.

My concern for my children, and for the lost, is NOT in direct opposition to "Calvinism." Rather, it is in direct alignment with it! As a "Calvnist" I hold to "Sola Scriptura." The Bible alone is our authority for faith and life. We are bound to believe all of it and to subject ourselves to all that God has revealed about Himself, His purposes and His ways. He commands that we love our brothers and sisters in Christ, our neighbors, our enemies, and the lost. So, I'm being consistent. I'm not dodging anything.

Because I am bound to believe the whole of Scripture I cannot show a callous disregard for either my children or for the lost. I believe this does address the point.

To say that we all deserve Hell is not a callous response, it is the truth. Or don't you really believe that? Do you think you, or anyone else, is "owed" salvation? Or "owed" a "chance" at salvation?

"Shall not the Judge of the whole earth do right? Blessed be His holy name!"

I have. Let me go even further. When my great-grandfather died I knew that He went to a graceless eternity. It was not God's fault. My great-grandfather was a sinner. He rebelled against God and refused to turn from his sins and embrace Christ, although he had heard the Gospel and knew that Christ invited him to salvation. He refused. I wept like a baby when he died. My only comfort in the situation was that I knew that God is just.

By the way, that was when I was an "Arminian."

What will be your comfort when people are in Hell, Bob? That you were somehow wiser, smarter, more spiritual, more tender-hearted towards Christ than those who perished? What makes you to differ from those in Hell?

Rev. G

"For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?" - 1 Corinthians 4:7