But God Is Love!

[Reformed1689]

It is a complaint against supposing the Calvinist view of the lost makes God out to be an unloving God. Since.my view of particular redemption is the purpose of the general redemption, that supposed problem cannot exist. Without the general redemption it is impossible for anyone to know Christ died for anyone beyond those mentioned in the Bible.

Oh right, that view, yeah that is not what I want discussed in this thread. Thanks.

 

[Reformed1689]

The issue seems to be one of a human sense of “fair”. Humans believe that God should offer ‘equal opportunity’ for salvation to all … “that is only fair.” It requires a change in human thinking to realize that God SHOULD damn all because all are guilty … mercy is owed by God to none, GRACE is given to whom God chooses to give it. That is a divine prerogative.

Yes, I too see this as the ultimate crux of the issue.

 

[Campion]

But in this analogy, the “loving” God still puts them in an ocean where most of them drown. He gives them “a chance”, by putting a lighthouse on the rock, but still leaves their fate completely up to them as to whether they will be able to swim to the lighthouse or drown in the attempt.

That seems just as “cruel” as the accusations against reformed theology that God created mankind knowing they would drown in a sea of sin, but chose to save some and passing over all others.

Let me ask this. Does God know who will be saved? He is omniscient, so yes, He knows everything.

How is the “God of Love” not acting with cruelty
if He throws people into the water, puts a lighthouse in place to draw them, knowing that most will drown in sin?

Isn’t that a false declaration of hope? Isn’t that a false offer of salvation? God knows they will drown in their sins, and yet, He bids them follow the lighthouse and swim to the rock.

peace to you

Isn't the Christian message that the lighthouse in your analogy is Jesus Christ?

Thus the good news of Christianity is that God offers salvation to ALL through Jesus Christ.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

 

[canadyjd]

Isn't the Christian message that the lighthouse in your analogy is Jesus Christ?

Thus the good news Christianity is that God offers salvation to ALL through Jesus Christ.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

First, it’s not my analogy. I was commenting on what someone else posted.

Let me ask you this. Do you believe the gospel is a “sincere” offer to all who hear it?

peace to you

 

[Silverhair]

It's a quandry.
If God has lovingly ransomed all sinners at the cross, having atoned for their sins, how do you avoid universalism?
Even if a person, by free will, rejects Jesus as Lord, does that rejection annul the atonement and ransom paid? If rejection of Jesus as Lord annuls the atonement, does that not limit the atonement and therefore remove the universal all that is claimed by free will proponents? There seems to be glaring inconsistencies that free will proponents want to smooth over by ignoring the issue.

But on the other hand calvinists would never cover over anything right. You calvinists insist that God decrees everything that happens and yet He does not decree that people end up in hell. Your theology is full of holes and you are to blind to see them or you just ignore them.

As far as Christ Jesus paying for all sins at the cross, I am surprised that you calvinists have not figured this one out. Man has a God given free will so if someone goes to hell it is because they rejected salvation. God in His sovereignty looks at man and says "thy will be done".

I know it will be a bit hard for you to grasp because of the calvinist blinders you have on but keep trying to understand scripture and I am sure you will find the truth.

 

[Silverhair]

A loving God who is willing to show His wrath and to make His power known?
His love has a context, my friends, as does His wrath.

He loves some and is patient towards them, and hates others and is angry and wrathful towards them...
He is merciful and compassionate towards His people, and the opposite towards those that are not.

Please see Exodus 33:19, Romans 9:14-18.


Also, please see Ephesians 1, Ephesians 2, etc. to see who He loves, and Psalms 5, Psalms 11 etc for those whom He hates.

Wow your view of God is to say the least astounding. He say that He wants all to be saved but then according to you that's not true because He just arbitrarily grabs a bunch of people and throws them into hell for no other reason then He can.

That is the sovereign God that you hold to, the one that decrees all things including sin and then condemns people when they do what He has decreed for them to do. You guys have a warped view of God and it sure is not biblical.

 

[Campion]

First, it’s not my analogy. I was commenting on what someone else posted.

Let me ask you this. Do you believe the gospel is a “sincere” offer to all who hear it?

peace to you

Yes, I believe it is a sincere offer. As opposed to what? An insincere or disingenuous one?

 

[Silverhair]

But in this analogy, the “loving” God still puts them in an ocean where most of them drown. He gives them “a chance”, by putting a lighthouse on the rock, but still leaves their fate completely up to them as to whether they will be able to swim to the lighthouse or drown in the attempt.

That seems just as “cruel” as the accusations against reformed theology that God created mankind knowing they would drown in a sea of sin, but chose to save some and passing over all others.

Let me ask this. Does God know who will be saved? He is omniscient, so yes, He knows everything.

How is the “God of Love” not acting with cruelty
if He throws people into the water, puts a lighthouse in place to draw them, knowing that most will drown in sin?

Isn’t that a false declaration of hope? Isn’t that a false offer of salvation? God knows they will drown in their sins, and yet, He bids them follow the lighthouse and swim to the rock.

peace to you

Can you not see the difference between man choosing to reject God and God decreeing that they will reject God? That in a nut shell is the difference between calvinism and real free will.

 

[Silverhair]

The alternative to men being in the ocean drowning is PELAGIANISM. The people can swim to the rock without needing any help from God at all ... we can save ourselves. The ocean acknowledges the scripture that we are all slaves to sin in need of a savior, dead in our sins in need of God to give us life. The issue is:

• Does God half-save all?
• Does God fully save some?
• (if God fully saves all, you have universalism)

The question is why does God fully saves some?

1] Because He has given them the real choice to trust in His son for salvation (free will)
2] Because He picked some out and condemned the rest because He could. (determinism)

 

[Revmitchell]

I took both questions as loaded questions. I take loaded questions as being accusatory.

thats because that is what is in your heart to do

 

[Silverhair]

I guess I’m trying to ask if there is really any difference in the positions of those critical of the doctrines of grace.

God is omniscient. He knows who will come to Him for salvation from the foundation of the world.

How is “they are unable because of sin” different from “they are unable because God has already seen they will not come”?

How is “they are children of God because God has chosen them and gave them faith to believe” different from “they are children of God because God has seen from the foundation of the world they would believe”

In both cases, the people are doomed or saved and their fate cannot be altered. It is certain.

peace to you

You answered your own question. It is the difference between free will and determinism. If ones decides to reject God that is on them if one is forced to reject God then that is on God.

 

[Silverhair]

No, I don't.
How is Augustinian soteriology, gnostic?
How is the wretchedness of man gnostic?

Have you ever read and history of what augustine came out of. He pulled much of what he came to teach from his early learning in gnostic teachings of manichaeism. When he and pelagius had their disagreement, instead of staying where he was theologically, more in the center, augustine ran to the far end of the logic pool and dove back into gnosticism.

Do a bit of reading about augustine, learn about him yourself.

 

[canadyjd]

Can you not see the difference between man choosing to reject God and God decreeing that they will reject God? That in a nut shell is the difference between calvinism and real free will.

Your caricature of Reformed theology is not accurate.

According to scripture, there is no “real free will”. Paul uses several chapters in Romans explaining that very fact.

All mankind has already rejected God, according to scripture. That God has chosen to intervene in the lives of those He has chosen is a testimony of His grace and love.

There is no one seeking God absent His intervention.

peace to you

 

[Silverhair]

The issue for those that Calvinism rubs the wrong way, imho, is placing the blame on God. If men have free will and CHOOSE, then the fault for those that land in Hell is not with God that offered salvation to all, but with the individuals that rejected “so great a salvation”. If men are all powerless and those damned are damned rather than saved because God chose not to save them, then the “blame” for their damnation rests on God (an unacceptable thought).

The issue seems to be one of a human sense of “fair”. Humans believe that God should offer ‘equal opportunity’ for salvation to all … “that is only fair.” It requires a change in human thinking to realize that God SHOULD damn all because all are guilty … mercy is owed by God to none, GRACE is given to whom God chooses to give it. That is a divine prerogative.

I have heard non-Calvinists say that it is hubris for us to think that we are “the elect”, that Calvinism makes us think we are better than other sinners. I cannot speak for other ‘Calvinists’, but the knowledge that God saved me “just because” and I fully deserved eternal damnation is both terrifying and humbling and fills me with confused awe. There was so much lower-hanging fruit … why would God pass by those so much closer to choose me? No, pride is the last thing that I feel.

Actually it is not the fairness of God rather it is the justice of God. The bible does not say God is fair and the justifier, rather it says " that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

 

[Silverhair]

Your caricature of Reformed theology is not accurate.

According to scripture, there is no “real free will”. Paul uses several chapters in Romans explaining that very fact.

All mankind has already rejected God, according to scripture. That God has chosen to intervene in the lives of those He has chosen is a testimony of His grace and love.

There is no one seeking God absent His intervention.

peace to you

Why call it a caricature of Reformed theology, I just use your own words to describe it.

Paul says they do not but he does not say the can not. If your view were true then why the gospel message? Remember we are all sinners and, according to calvinism, if none seek or can understand the gospel then that means none. So what you are putting forward is just what you calvinists say is not true. God picks all those that will end up in hell by not picking them when He could have done so. His choice and since He is sovereign who would we be to argue with Him.

That is why God gave man a real free will so that where man ends up is their responsibility. Does God draw people sure but what He does not do is force people to be saved. Only calvinism does that.

 

[canadyjd]

Why call it a caricature of Reformed theology, I just use your own words to describe it.

Paul says they do not but he does not say the can not. If your view were true then why the gospel message? Remember we are all sinners and, according to calvinism, if none seek or can understand the gospel then that means none. So what you are putting forward is just what you calvinists say is not true. God picks all those that will end up in hell by not picking them when He could have done so. His choice and since He is sovereign who would we be to argue with Him.

That is why God gave man a real free will so that where man ends up is their responsibility. Does God draw people sure but what He does not do is force people to be saved. Only calvinism does that.

Firstly, Paul most certainly says the soul that sins is a slave of sin. Paul personified sin as a master controlling the lives of sinners. They have no “free will”. They do the will of the “sin master”. That is his point in Roman’s.

Second, I believe the “elect” are as unable as any other person when it comes to seeking God. The difference is, God intervenes in the lives of the elect and supernaturally empowers them (regeneration) to be able to overcome sin, understand the truth of Jesus Christ and Him crucified and respond with saving faith.

All men are already responsible for their actions in rejecting God.

peace to you

 

[Silverhair]

Firstly, Paul most certainly says the soul that sins is a slave of sin. Paul personified sin as a master controlling the lives of sinners. They have no “free will”. They do the will of the “sin master”. That is his point in Roman’s.

Second, I believe the “elect” are as unable as any other person when it comes to seeking God. The difference is, God intervenes in the lives of the elect and supernaturally empowers them (regeneration) to be able to overcome sin, understand the truth of Jesus Christ and Him crucified and respond with saving faith.

All men are already responsible for their actions in rejecting God.

peace to you

I have to think that you never heard of salves that were freed by their masters or of slaves that ran away from their masters.

I am saddened that you would think so little of God that you believe that He would hold out salvation to those that have no chance of getting it.

This is the same God that went to the cross, the same God that draws all to Himself, the same God that said, I am the way, the truth and the light. The same God that said, come to me and I will give your rest.

For you, God is the one that condemns billions to an eternity in hell for no other reason than He can. That may be your God but he is assuredly not mine.

 

[5 point Gillinist]

In the last few weeks I have seen an increase in the argument that Calvinism must be wrong because God is a loving God. The argument, as I understand it, is God cannot predestine people to Hell because he is love. He must give them absolute free will because he is love. My question is this, how does the anti-Calvinistic free will position solve the problem without adhering to universalism? If people are still going to Hell, and they are not elect because God knew that they would not accept Him and they go to Hell but he created them anyway. How, in the opposing view does this support your view of a loving God without going deep into universalism?

It has been said that Calvinism is inconsistent, but this seems like a GLARING inconsistency in the opposing view to me.

The "God is love" argument is a bit of a slippery slope, and one I most often hear from liberals (usually in regards to their pet sin i.e. sodomy or abortion). Anyone can argue "God is love, therefore how can He do/not do X, Y, or Z?" What they really mean is that if God is love then He needs to conform to their own subjective (and corrupt) standards of what love is.

 

[atpollard]

But on the other hand calvinists would never cover over anything right. You calvinists insist that God decrees everything that happens and yet He does not decree that people end up in hell. Your theology is full of holes and you are to blind to see them or you just ignore them.

That is a "humanist" perspective ... you are calling God to answer for how things appear from a human point of view. Job did the same thing and God called him on it.

You are operating from the flawed initial assumption that everyone deserves to be saved, when the reality is that NOBODY should be saved ... damnation for all is JUSTICE. The guilty get punished. From THAT starting point, God's is free to "HAVE MERCY ON WHOMEVER I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL SHOW COMPASSION TO WHOMEVER I SHOW COMPASSION.” (Romans 9:15) as His divine right.

 

[Brightfame52]

God is love, however His Love is discriminate and only in Christ Rom 9:13

13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Rom 8:39

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

In the greek the definite article goes before the love of God which is in Christ Jesus, so that indicates that its Gods only distinct Love, it must be only to those He views in Christ Jesus, hence all others God does not love, but hates justly as esaus !