Featured Calvinism and the Love of God

It seems the old 'inflammatory post' indictment has gone on vacation within the anti-Calvinist camp. This indictment must then be reserved for Calvinists. A huge percentage of his posts are meant to inflame. :thumbsup:

 

I have learned my lesson on how to word posts concerning him. There will be no more references to his national origin or ethnic group, although he lets everyone know regularly what it is. At the same time, I think all posters, Calvinist and non-Calvinist, must call him on his posts that are for no other purpose than provoking. He will eventually go away.

 

Perhaps we should all remember that inflammatory posts come from all sides of the spectrum.

For some, there isn't any other way to communicate their view, and also there is the thinking that putting down someone's view somehow exalts the authority, truthfulness, righteousness... of their view.

In this thread, the OP would consider separating the Calvinistic from the ability to express the attributes of a loving God.

Unfortunate for the OP that just is as inaccurate and inflammatory as one might state that the typical Non-cal Arminian cannot teach eternal security.

Of course there are numerous folks of the non-cal view that do NOT teach eternal security, rather personal preservation is necessary or one will end up in hell.

Isn't it strange that the typical non-cal will harp on some aspect of Calvin, or what Calvin stated as if that discredits the whole, and yet not apply the same standard to that of Arminius?

Inflammatory posts do have their place, and can at times be used in an attempt to prod a believer into being a bit sharper.

However, no matter the view point, when one of uses inflammatory posting as the most pervasive, even to the point of almost exclusion of any other posting, then that would (to me) indicate a problem of Christlike attitude and character.

We ALL have our off times, and embarrassingly pitiful posts, even sometimes over exuberance can be hurtful. But that isn't what the above statement is attending.

 

Just like hemorrhoids

 

Shhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!! agedman has rushed in with a Tucks Pad to defend Ach! :thumbsup:

 

Absolutely. Anyone who acknowledges God's omniscience and omnipotence MUST affirm that God could've created a world in which ALL his creatures were saved.

 

What a guy! :laugh:

 

How dare you even attempt to suggest the unthinkable...shame on you Jon.! :smilewinkgrin:

 

Your imposing your presuppositions on the claims of Calvinism (at least as your average "reformed" baptist holds it). It should read:

1. Only those who are elect WILL actually accept the offer of salvation
2. Not all are elect
3. Not all WILL actually accept the offer of salvation and be saved.

God does indeed make a genuine offer in the sense that, if they would accept, what is offered would be theirs.

 

Nah, Tucks pads don't help.

Slathering on the "h" cream and wearing "Depends" is what I recommend.

 

Now you're on the right track.

I appreciate your attempt at peace, but in so doing you malign others who don't act like ach as if they do.

:thumbsup: :wavey:

 

Bingo!....

 

Brother 12Strings hit on the very thing I have been thinking all even......


Even in the non-cal theology, they are confronted with a connundrum as well. God, via exhaustive foreknowledge, knows each and everyone's destination even before He created them. He knew those who died lost would die lost, and yet He created them anyways. Despite all the gospel pleas, the calls of reconciliation, all the witnesses sent their way, etc., they went to hell after He gave them a bona fide offer(s) to be saved. And yet, eventhough He knew they were gonna be tormented for eternity through their own failure to believe, He made them anyway. Now, by using human reasoning, how is that not cruel, but Him passing over some and choosing others is?

Both sides have things that can't be explained easily. Things will cause us to worry, because we have no way of thinking the way He does. His ways are above our ways as far as heaven is the earth. His thoughts are not our thoughts, either.

So, how is God passing over some w/o a bona fide offer cruel, and Him creating someone who He knew would go to hell regardless how many times He offered them salvation isn't. Either way, He knew those who will end up in hell, and made them anyways. Explain THAT.

 

Dogs love the treat call "Milkbones" correct? Now, put on a pair of underwear made out of them and wear them in front of a bunch of rabid dogs and see what happens to you. That's the way I feel on here sometimes. People want to chew me out, instead of debating with me, iow.

 

"People want to chew me out, instead of debating with me, iow."

Please, not you, surely you're not going to play a victim also, surely.

 

Nope What I mean, is that instead of engaging my posts, they engage me. We are to debate the topic at hand, and not the poster.......but that's what goes on in here......

 

Convicted is a brother in Christ, is quite well versed in Scripture, and is anything but stupid. I deeply resent this and am offended this post more than any of the other hit and run posts you have produced. There is not one shred of evidence of the fruits of the Holy Spirit in your words.

 

Another of his inflammatory posts. The problem with ach is he is well fed on here.

 

He didn't say Willis is stupid, you are not reading with comprehension. Read again;

Dr Ach is saying that the Reformed/Calvinist view of God makes God cruel, as he creates billions of men without the ability to believe, but makes an insincere offer to save them if they will do what God already knows they cannot possibly do. I agree, this would be to mock men for their inability.

Dr Ach contrasts this to the non-Cal view that men have the ability to believe if they so choose, so God offering to save them if they believe is legit and bona fide, but if a man who is able to believe chooses not to do so, then he is stupid. I agree.

Pro 1:22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
23 Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.
24 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
25 But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
27 When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
28 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:
30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.
31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.
32 For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.
33 But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.

God himself calls people who will not listen and turn to him "simple" and "fools". It is not because they cannot listen and turn, but because they hated knowledge and despised God's reproof, and did not CHOOSE the fear of the Lord.

And this is exactly what Dr Ach was saying as well, he was not saying anything about Willis.