An anti-Calvinist conundrum

Hi, then what did Jesus mean in John chapter 5?

"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life" (verses 39-40)

He was most certainly NOT here spaeking to the "elect". Note, that He says that they were "unwilling" to "come to me in order that you may have eternal life". This is not something that was done by some external power, but of themselves they chose not to follow Jseus. We see from the chapter, that it was the Jews who were trying to murder Jesus, that Jesus addresses these words to, and yet He speaks of them being able/unable to come to Him for eternal life.

 

No. Not if God chooses to stop the action. Yes if God chooses to allow us to live with those consequences.

Yes. God gives each man free will to accept or reject the free gift of salvation.

God allowed David to kill Uriah and impregnate Bathsheba but then killed David's newborn son as punishment.

A Calvinist might say God made David kill Uriah, the God made David sin with Bathsheba and then God killed an innocent baby because of God's preordained actions/ sins.

God gave Solomon great wisdom and Solomon made a bunch of stupid decisions. After all, he had 1,000 mother in laws. </font>[/QUOTE]Your answers are inconsistant. That's all I meant to show.

As for a Calvinist supposedly saying God 'made' David sin- could you please cite any Calvinist (ANY) that says such a thing? Could you cite 1 single source where a Calvinist claims that God makes any man sin? You misunderstand Calvinism at a fundamental level so of course you hate it. Maybe someday you will stop impressing what you THINK Calvinism states upon us. </font>[/QUOTE]Hey Whetstone, we are not here guessing what Calvinists "think", as you are no doubt aware. We come back to that issue that Calvinists (I read this in Dabney, C Hodge, A Hodge, L Bottener, Machen, etc) hold to, that God has preordained all things that come to pass. This is something that you have to face up to, and deal with, and stop making excuses to what the meaning of "preordain" means, as we all have access to good dictionaries that are very claer as to what it does mean.

I pulled an article off the Net a few months back by Wayne Grudem, which is 36 pages long. But here is a quotation from it:

"In spite of all our foregoing statements, we have to come to the point where we confess that we do not understand how it is that god can ordain that we carry out evil deeds, and yet hold us accountable for them and not be blames Himself"

Lets make no mistake here. It is very much Calvinistic dogma, that God "ordains" that we sin. The Random House Dictionary says that "ordain" means "to decree". If this does not make God the author of sin, then the meaning of the word "ordains" has been changed by Calvinists.

 

Both Calvinists and non-Calvinists have irreconcilable mysteries in their theologies.
They just put the mystery in a different spot.

For Calvinists, it is "How can God ordain all things but not be responsible for evil."

For non-Calvinists it is "How can God foreknow all things without foreordaining all things."

(Of course, the second is truly a mystery while the first is just nonsense.)

 

Based on your reasoning, the God of Calvinism is a wimp.

Which God is more sovereign and powerful: the one who must ordain all things, including evil? Or the one who does not have to ordain evil yet is still able to work all things for good?

I think "my God" is all powerful, all holy and most of all, ALL LOVING!

 

It is you that said "Arminians are unwilling to give due credit to God's power and attempt to justify His motives by limiting His power."

Though not an Arminian, I took that to mean that that you think that I limit God's power. My point was not childish crowing, but rather than to point out that it is Calvinists, not non-Calvinists who limit the power of God.

 

And then you close with wild speculation. Deism? Open theism? C'mon dude, now you're getting silly.

For my part, I never accuse Calvinists of theistic determinism or fatalism.

 

But see, YOUR concept of God is 'kill that sparrow, keep that one there', 'abort that baby, save that one over there', 'let that man run off on his wife and ruin a ministry but let that fella do okay'. Keep us from going astray? Man what planet are you living on? We go astray every day!

Creating and then condemning people to hell without even a chance of redemption is just downright mean. Show me the love!

If your concept is right, Calvin's concept, then God must wish he had 'do overs'.

Explain this: Why the 10 Commandments since God preordained us breaking them? Why even send Jesus if God had already chosen who He was taking for His own and who He was sending to hell? Sounds pretty cruel to me to punish your son for the sins you preordained!

 

Simple. God does not foreordain all things in the sense of being the First Cause.

Well, there went another conundrum down the proverbial drain! </font>[/QUOTE]I don't believe you can prove that statement!

 

TCassidy,

If God is the not the first cause, who or what takes precedence over Him? And if someone or something precedes God, how could God be sovereign?

And why is what Diane said wrong? If God ordains all sin, does that not include every murder, rape, child abduction, molestation, abortion, holocaust, etc etc?

 

Sorry, TCassidy,
I forgot that you are the "non-calvinistic," particular baptist who does not believe that God ordained all things. I am having a hard time keeping track of everyones favorite flavor on this board.

 

So even the Calvinites can't agree on what they believe?

We have had some Reformed Baptists on this board who have openly posted that God preordains ALL things.