If Calvinism is true...

[npetreley]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Sure,

Let's just tell that grieving mother who just lost her 2 day old infant that her child may or may not be burning in hell right now.

That sure doesn't sound like love to me at all.

You're right. We believers in election get a sadistic morbid pleasure from telling grieving mothers things like that. I've told at least a half dozen grieving mothers that just this week. You have no idea how great it made me feel to see them scream in emotional agony when I broke the news that their child could very probably be in hell. I have no Biblical support for assuming they're in hell, but it's just one of those traits we believers in election have -- we love to see the weak and emotionally fragile people keel over in pain. It really makes our day if we can break at least one heart.

Face it, we just have a different purpose in life than you do. You throw out 90% of the Bible so you can lie to people in order to make people feel good. We throw out the other 10% of the Bible so we can tell people only 90% of the truth so we can make people's lives miserable.

What can we say? You pegged us. The truth is out now. We believers in election are nothing but a bunch of sadists.

 

[johnp.]

Hello Brother Bob.

So you have stooped to calling me a liar.

...and one of your own just quoted that you are taught it by your teachers so you stepped your foot in your own mouth.

I never said our teachers teach it. I said I've heard Calvinistic preachers teach it. Is this in keeping with twisting words around to suit yourself. I did not say I rejoice at the thought of babies going to Hell, what I said was that if this is so then praise the Lord. We don't need to stoop do we?

I said "My God" and He is My God.

No you didn't, you said, "My God man..." But I preach to a preacher. If you don't understand blasphemy then it is not my place to correct you.

So you have the patience of job, sorry but I just can't accept that...

You are now calling me a liar. I put up with you don't I? HaHa! It's not true that I said I have the patience of Job but I said: He will give us the patience of Job when we need the patience of Job. Don't be so quick in future to call a man a liar.

And if you don't even comprehend that the little child were the way he wanted his adults to be, then you are lacking.

And again I say that you have been a preacher for 33 years, some preacher, but you just might be a closet Calvinist as adults are like little children. Since He wanted the adults to be like the kids He made the kids sinners from conception: PS 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Answer the scripture preacher man.

Wouldn't want you around any of my little children for you may decide it was time for their exit.

You are a disgrace to preacherhood I'm thinking. I am not a child killer. What are you on? What are you trying for? I'm sure a chap like you wouldn't dare say this nose to nose with any man, but as I might have implied, I am a patient chap and I am on duty at the moment, more than can be said for you.

And you think little children are already condemned to Hell before they come to know the "Law" then you are reading a different Bible than I.

Yes we probably are reading different books. Rom 9:11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad--in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

Ok? Now tell me children are not. You don't believe the scriptures mate.

As Paul said he was once alive without the Law, but when commandments came, sin revived and he died.

Explain yourself please. I read that as: if Paul had not heard the law he would not have been guilty and he would have gone straight to Heaven. Is that so? You should be teaching me, once Paul was not conscious of his guilt before the law. Far from being alive he was, as we all are, conceived dead in transgressions and sins. Eph 2:1.

(send children to Hell so election might stand) shame on you.

The greater shame on you, your bread and butter is scripture yet you deny it? Strange how God condemned Esau before he had done good or bad, stranger hearing an expert not understanding but denying it. I expect more than opinion from teachers why don't you answer the scriptures.

I didn't put the chapters and verses here but am sure you will know what I am talking about and it does come from the Bible.

And the boast at the end, "I could have done better but didn't bother." As if.

john.

 

[webdog]

No contradiction. No problem. Helen is full of hot air.

...or Ransom, Calvibaptist, nptreley, rippon, whatever are!

 

[Helen]

No baby ever goes to hell. Jesus died for all sins, known and unknown. All babies are covered by His blood.

for Calvinism to teach that even SOME babies might go to hell is in direct opposition to Jesus' statements in Matthew 18 and 19:14.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Helen:
No baby ever goes to hell. Jesus died for all sins, known and unknown. All babies are covered by His blood.

for Calvinism to teach that even SOME babies might go to hell is in direct opposition to Jesus' statements in Matthew 18 and 19:14.

Matthew 18 and 19:14 are talking about little children, not babies.

But what scripture says doesn't matter (certainly not to you).

But you caught us, anyway, Helen. What can I say? We're guilty. That's our favorite topic, how some babies might be in hell. We believers in election love to preach from the rooftops that some babies might be in hell. That's our favorite topic. Read the sermons of Spurgeon, for example. All of them are about how some babies are probably going to hell.

Nothing pleases us more than ripping the hearts out of the people who listen to us. We don't care about God's Glory, or what's true. We just want people to suffer.

 

[webdog]

Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Helen:
No baby ever goes to hell. Jesus died for all sins, known and unknown. All babies are covered by His blood.

for Calvinism to teach that even SOME babies might go to hell is in direct opposition to Jesus' statements in Matthew 18 and 19:14.

Matthew 18 and 19:14 are talking about little children, not babies.

But what scripture says doesn't matter (certainly not to you).

But you caught us, anyway, Helen. What can I say? We're guilty. That's our favorite topic, how some babies might be in hell. We believers in election love to preach from the rooftops that some babies might be in hell. That's our favorite topic. Read the sermons of Spurgeon, for example. All of them are about how some babies are probably going to hell.

Nothing pleases us more than ripping the hearts out of the people who listen to us. We don't care about God's Glory, or what's true. We just want people to suffer. </font>[/QUOTE]OK, so little children are safe, but not babies? What warped theology! It amazes me that any believer would think that babies would be in hell, even the "prince of preachers". For all of the arguments that calvinsts use stating "we don't believe man is created for hell, man chooses only sin", what choice did a premature baby make? An infant shaken by their father? Calvinism turns more sickening by the minute.

 

[johnp.]

What can we say? You pegged us. The truth is out now. We believers in election are nothing but a bunch of sadists.(npetreley)

Cool man. I've just been called infanticidal. That must put me in the lead.

How about David's son? when he died he went to heaven. David was sure of this. We can be sure that our infant children are in heaven as well. standingfirmin

David's son was saved as are all the children of the children of God, to a thousand generations.

No baby ever goes to hell. Helen

I don't believe babies go to Hell either but you have no right to teach it as a truth because God saw fit not to reveal it to us. It is just our opinion. I thought free will was important? How come babies get in for free? An interference with their will? They do not choose. Condemnation is based on Adam's act not a sin from us.
So you preach that children are saved by grace, their guilt is assured, PS 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me, and translated into the Kingdom of God against their will? HaHa! Where have I heard that before?

john.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by webdog:
OK, so little children are safe, but not babies? What warped theology!

It is warped theology but it isn't mine. Helen is the one who quoted those verses to prove the subject of those verses were "safe". I was just pointing out the truth that they weren't babies but little children. So Helen was reading into passages about little children the conclusion that all babies are saved.

That's how you should read the Bible. Take any part of it, and extrapolate the verses to mean something that makes you feel good. Forget about truth. Truth doesn't matter. Only what makes you feel good matters.

 

[Karen]

Originally posted by webdog:
............[/qb]

OK, so little children are safe, but not babies? What warped theology! It amazes me that any believer would think that babies would be in hell, even the "prince of preachers". For all of the arguments that calvinsts use stating "we don't believe man is created for hell, man chooses only sin", what choice did a premature baby make? An infant shaken by their father? Calvinism turns more sickening by the minute. [/QB][/QUOTE]

I'm not a Calvinist because I am only a 3.5 to 4 pointer, and therefore I don't qualify, in the eyes of real Calvinists. LOL
But please be aware that Calvinists really do come in all varieties and degrees.
The "prince of preachers" Spurgeon, contrary to your assumption, was quite clear in his belief that all babies go to Heaven. So is Al Mohler,Jr. I have posted these links many times before.
Also, yes, indeed, there are some Calvinists that say it is POSSIBLE that infants go to hell. But if pressed, they would generally say that those infants do not experience hell as an INFANT.
In other words, you seem to be mis-reading several satirical posts as real, and evidence for your position against Calvinism.

My main objection to Calvinism is that it is only an intellectual system that too often is a grid overlaid on the Bible rather than letting the Bible speak for itself. It doesn't explain everything. Too many seem to think that it IS the Gospel.
Too many Calvinists, in my opinion, study what the Puritans said about a passage, almost to the exclusion of studying the passage.
And while, in my opinion, a great deal of Calvinism is true, its popular DEFENSE SO stresses God's sovereignty and power that they are stripped away in a vacuum from all of God's other attributes such as His mercy, love, holiness, justice.

Karen

 

[Ransom]

You know all those gross dead baby jokes?

Calvinists invented 'em.

Babies make Calvinists angry. I mean, angrier than usual.

We like to kick puppies, too. It's fun.

 

[webdog]

Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by webdog:
OK, so little children are safe, but not babies? What warped theology!

It is warped theology but it isn't mine. Helen is the one who quoted those verses to prove the subject of those verses were "safe". I was just pointing out the truth that they weren't babies but little children. So Helen was reading into passages about little children the conclusion that all babies are saved.

That's how you should read the Bible. Take any part of it, and extrapolate the verses to mean something that makes you feel good. Forget about truth. Truth doesn't matter. Only what makes you feel good matters. </font>[/QUOTE]Don't you DARE tell me that only what "makes me feel good" matters, and "truth" (as you define it) doesn't matter to me! Who are you to make that statement? An open apology is in order!

 

[Karen]

I wish I knew how to quote more than one post at a time. Because two of the posts right above my prior one are priceless in showing how it is often hard to have a discussion with "true" Calvinists. Because what one "true" Calvinist considers clear, the other does not.
Hey, this sounds like ALL of us Christians.

Anyway, johnp says babies don't go to hell but there is no right to teach that idea is true.

npetrely says it is warped theology to say babies go to hell. (actually he is not really clear what he means - but a case could be made that he is implying babies don't go to hell)

OK, babies don't go to hell. That would be warped theology. But we can't teach against warped theology.
It does get confusing talking in a group. LOL

Karen

 

[Me4Him]

Originally posted by johnp.:
I don't believe babies go to Hell either but you have no right to teach it as a truth because God saw fit not to reveal it to us. It is just our opinion. I thought free will was important? How come babies get in for free? An interference with their will? They do not choose. Condemnation is based on Adam's act not a sin from us.


So you preach that children are saved by grace, their guilt is assured, PS 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me, and translated into the Kingdom of God against their will? HaHa! Where have I heard that before?

john.

"Knowledge/understanding", of the scriptures make it "right" to teach that babies don't go to hell.

Evidently you don't know the difference between a "Soul of Righteousness" in a "Body of sin".

Ro 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

I've yet to see a post by a "calvinist" that shows an understanding of the "deep things" of scripture, and to me that only says one thing,

Calvin can only prey on a simple mind.

Ps 119:130 The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.

Pr 8:5 O ye simple, understand wisdom: and, ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart.

 

[Karen]

double post, my computer is acting up

 

[Helen]

I think the mockery of the Calvinists above is speaking for itself.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Me4Him:
Calvin can only prey on a simple mind.

A good example of that is Spurgeon. He wrote 135 volumes on theology, and his personal library consisted of 12,000 books, all of which he read. He published 3,500 sermons. Only a simpleton would waste his life doing all that.

 

[johnp.]

Hello Karen nice to meet you.

its popular DEFENSE SO stresses God's sovereignty and power that they are stripped away in a vacuum from all of God's other attributes such as His mercy, love, holiness, justice.

That is not possible as we magnify God's Sovereignty in His mercy, love, holiness, justice. How can we detract by stressing Sovereignty?

Anyway, johnp says babies don't go to hell but there is no right to teach that idea is true.

I said nothing of the sort. I said I don't believe they go to Hell. See the difference 1.5 points makes?

Some where suffering double posts last night Karen, hold off with the screwdriver.

john.

 

[johnp.]

Hello Me4Him.

"Knowledge/understanding", of the scriptures make it "right" to teach that babies don't go to hell.

Where is this fabled scripture then? As I see it the scriptures say one must have faith to be saved, don't you believe in free will anymore? Exceptional. You say that babies are elected to Heaven? Yes or no? Why be sad at the death of a child if you believe they go to Heaven?

So you preach that children are saved by grace and translated into the Kingdom of God against their will Helen, answer me please? Yes or no?

john.

 

[Calvibaptist]

Here is what the Bible teaches about the future of babies - NOTHING. We don't know.

The passage about David said he was comforted because he would go to be with his child when he died. He said his child was in sheol. That is not heaven, it is the grave. David was just saying that he would be in the place of the dead like his son one day.

All infants are born with a sin nature. The evidence? Some die. Death is a result of being born in sin. This is what Romans 5 says.

Does this mean that all babies that die go to hell? Not necessarily. The Bible doesn't say, so for me to give comfort to a grieving mother because her child is in heaven when the Bible doesn't say would be a lie.

Where do you free-willers get off talking about all infants going to heaven? I though you had to believe of your own free will to get saved. How does an infant exercise free will? In your system all infants WOULD go to hell because they didn't have the opportunity to exercise their wills.

And if you can't see the sarcasm of the posts from my fellow calvinists about you going down this road, then you really don't know how to read.

 

[Helen]

That's a false question, john. Jesus said the little children (and I am bold enough to presume that includes babies) are His. I'll take Him at His Word. If you want to think it is against their will, I'll leave you to that bit of nonsense, too.