Not outside of sin. God has not predetermined to torture them for all eternity just because he is mean. these people that are in hell go there because they are sinners. They deserve hell.
-
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!
Can you really BLAME them?
- Thread starter Skandelon
- Start date
Not outside of sin. God has not predetermined to torture them for all eternity just because he is mean. these people that are in hell go there because they are sinners. They deserve hell.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Did I say that was the reason?
So do you and I. Did I ever deny that?
You guys are avoiding the question because I think you know the answer. You can't blame them for hating a God who first hated them.
Just like you can't credit a man for loving a God who is first loved by God, you can't blame a man for hating a God who is first hated by God. Why is that incorrect? OR is it?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Many of God's saints did worse. What he did has nothing to do with it. After all, they were chosen before doing anything good or evil, right? Surely you don't need a scripture reference for that. It is all very clear. :laugh:
Most non elect...do not even know about God, election, and predestination.
They just like darkness. if you tell them, they do not believe it anyway,they just love sin.
When they are in hell, they will know why they are there, and they will still hate God and love sin.
This so called sensitive reprobate does not exist except here on Bb.
Tom Butler
New Member
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Again, you are avoiding the question being posed. Did I ever say that they knew about Calvinism (though certainly some do), or did I say they didn't love sin? Did I say they wouldn't know why they are in hell or that they would still hate God while in hell?
And why are you talking about 'sensitive reprobates?' Did I call them sensitive? Did I even imply that they were?
NOOOO. I asked if you could blame them for hating a God who first hated them? Can you? Wouldn't you?
Yes I would. They live and breathe God's air.They should be thankful,and obedient...they are not. Before the judgement...men do not know if God loves them , or hates them...as the gospel proclaims God loves sinners in Christ. they have no valid reason to hate God, no valid excuse.
They will all bow the knee to him who reigns....when sinners see the holiness of God, and they remain in an unclean state...they will not repent, but will seek to avoid Him....
[QUOTE15And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
16And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
][/QUOTE]
You either don't know the Scripture to which I alluded, or worse, you're interpreting it in your usual framework of misapprehension.
Esau is the non-elect, and he is judged for his sin. It's all very clear. Jacob was chosen to be redeemed, Esau was rejected, and this not because of anything either did or would do, nor because of the character of either, which were equally iniquitous, (Jacob was a liar and a thief), but solely on the basis of God's purposes according to election.
Your objection ever and anon will be, Why doth He yet find fault, for who hath resisted His will? All your noble purpose/judicial hardening/enabling constructions are an attempt to make God into an image that will fit into the framework of a carnal sense of justice.
But God will not yield to that. He has given His answer. One either accepts it or rejects it.
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
I know the verse you are addressing, but I also know the other verse which Calvinists typically have tattooed on their chests.
All of us would sell our birthrights. We are all self-fish evil sinners. You know that. So, to say that about Esau means nothing because his being unchosen had nothing to do with his evil deeds. Isn't that what 'unconditional' is all about in your worldview?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Why not? Because God hates them and made them that way from birth. A reason worthy of hatred, right?
Oh, I see, so because HIDES the truth from them they have no excuse? Really? Wow.
So, according to your view God deceives these poor saps by pretending to love them, but secretly hates them, thus they should love him back? Really????????
seekingthetruth
New Member
It's a wonder that more Calvinists are not politicians because they are so good at double speak.
How can we say that non-elect "should be thankful and obedient to God" in one breath, and that they are incapable of obedience in the next?
Which is it? Either they are capable of obedience to God and refuse to be, or, they are not even given the ability to repent and it is not their fault.
Calvinism is like a father saying that he will never give his son the tools to do the right things in life, by not teaching him morals and good behavior. But then holding the child responsible and punishing him when he turns out bad. Whose fault is it that the kid is bad? The kid's fault, or the non-caring father?
(And yes, I know you Cals will respond with "We are all bad kids". I am referring to problem kid's that go beyond the norm, like drugs and stealing.)
Bottom line is this: If man is denied the ability to repent, then he is not responsible for his unrepentence.
The fact that God punishes unrepentent sinners is proof that they do indeed have the ability to repent.
Skan is completely correct in his observations in the OP.
John
How can we say that non-elect "should be thankful and obedient to God" in one breath, and that they are incapable of obedience in the next?
Which is it? Either they are capable of obedience to God and refuse to be, or, they are not even given the ability to repent and it is not their fault.
Calvinism is like a father saying that he will never give his son the tools to do the right things in life, by not teaching him morals and good behavior. But then holding the child responsible and punishing him when he turns out bad. Whose fault is it that the kid is bad? The kid's fault, or the non-caring father?
(And yes, I know you Cals will respond with "We are all bad kids". I am referring to problem kid's that go beyond the norm, like drugs and stealing.)
Bottom line is this: If man is denied the ability to repent, then he is not responsible for his unrepentence.
The fact that God punishes unrepentent sinners is proof that they do indeed have the ability to repent.
Skan is completely correct in his observations in the OP.
John
Looky here at Icon speaking of "valid" reasoning! Are you trying to philosophize Icon?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Amen. Now let's discuss the nature of that Grace which you continue to avoid. I think we all know why you avoid that issue.
Of course they are individuals, but to ignore the bigger picture, as you do, is short-sighted to put it nicely: "The LORD said to her, "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger."
And since Esau never served Jacob individually, it is clear that this was meant to reflect on God's choice of one nation over another to bring about Redemption to the rest of the world. That is what Israel was chosen to do which is why God chooses its prophets and apostles from Israel. Anyone from any nation who believes in God is saved (i.e. Rahab), but God is not going to choose just anyone from any nation as a prophet because He prophesied that the message of redemption would come from Israel.
Last edited by a moderator:
The question has nothing to do with “elect vs. non-elect.” The elect were in a state of rebellion regardless of their “being chosen,” otherwise there would be no need of atonement and redemption. So the question should include – can you also blame the elect for being in a state of rebellion and sinning if they were not capable of themselves of doing otherwise? (I believe the answer would be “yes,” mankind is responsible for their actions and choices).
So, what you are saying is that Calvinism presents the non-elect as being born exactly the same as the elect, the only difference being that God chose to save out of this wicked and depraved a group of people who could not do any good of themselves in order to demonstrate His mercy and not choose a group in order to demonstrate His justice.
Are you saying that Calvinism presents God as causing the wickedness of men or that God is to blame because He created men with the ability to do wickedness? Or do you believe that Calvinism teaches that the elect are born sinless and without blame?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
And why were they and the non-elect in a state of rebellion from birth? Whose choice was it to punish all mankind with Total Depravity because of Adam's sin?
So, your argument is that because the elect were also blameworthy for their inevitable and inborn nature of rebellion, the non-elect are likewise blameworthy for theirs? Ignoring the obvious distinction between the elect and non-elect, where at least for the elect God effectually undoes by regeneration what he effectually did by his punishment of Total Depravity, how does this make those who hate God any more blameworthy for hating someone who hates them from birth and has guaranteed their eternal condemnation?
The Answer
First, it does not matter whether we humans blame other humans, what matters is if God punishes humans for sinning, if God created them so that they could only choose to sin.
Why muddy these waters with the silly traditions of men?
First, it does not matter whether we humans blame other humans, what matters is if God punishes humans for sinning, if God created them so that they could only choose to sin.
1. God does not punish anyone other than Adam for the sin of Adam. But sin has consequences, and the consequence of Adam sinning is that the many were made sinners, condemned to a state of separation from God. Thus as a consequence of Adam's sin, the many must believe in His Son or face eternity in a separated from God state, where they will be punished with torment for their volitional sins.
2. God loved fallen mankind in this way, He gave His Son so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.
3. Anyone who hears and understands the Gospel of Christ has been granted the opportunity to be saved. However, some do not make a full blown commitment to Christ, rather they make a lip service commitment, a all gain and no pain commitment. Others try to fit Christ into their hearts, but leave conflicting and inhibiting desires in their hearts as well. But some, hear, understand, and trust in God and Christ from their heart, and rather than make Christ their highest priority, them make Christ their only priority, where anything that inhibits their full devotion to Christ is tossed as rubbish.
4. God predetermined that those whose faith He credits as righteousness will be put spiritually in Christ, regenerated, forgiven, be spiritually born again, conformed to the image of His Son and at His second coming, resurrected in glorified bodies, meeting Christ in the air.
2. God loved fallen mankind in this way, He gave His Son so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.
3. Anyone who hears and understands the Gospel of Christ has been granted the opportunity to be saved. However, some do not make a full blown commitment to Christ, rather they make a lip service commitment, a all gain and no pain commitment. Others try to fit Christ into their hearts, but leave conflicting and inhibiting desires in their hearts as well. But some, hear, understand, and trust in God and Christ from their heart, and rather than make Christ their highest priority, them make Christ their only priority, where anything that inhibits their full devotion to Christ is tossed as rubbish.
4. God predetermined that those whose faith He credits as righteousness will be put spiritually in Christ, regenerated, forgiven, be spiritually born again, conformed to the image of His Son and at His second coming, resurrected in glorified bodies, meeting Christ in the air.
Why muddy these waters with the silly traditions of men?
You're ignoring Paul's application, which is one was made a vessel of wrath, and one was made a vessel of mercy. The elect are represented by Jacob, and the nonelect by Esau.
The elect are a holy nation, a royal priesthood. The nonelect are a profane and unholy nation that God will destroy.
You need to learn to stop judging God's words according to your own notions of a concept. Esau did serve Jacob, though not willingly. He was made a servant. His rebellion served God's immediate and long-term interests for Jacob.
Once you learn that God's ways are not your ways, you will see that God's justice doesn not conform to your own carnal sense thereof, and you will see that your objection is invalid. More than invalid, proud, vain and presumptuous. You get an Apostolic slap on mouth, "O man, who art thou?"