Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
As Christians it is not our place to admonish such, but to attempt to help and guide and give of the fruits of the Word of GOD.

fishers of men
making apostles...

not by calling any dumb and fearful. We must show error without casting out those who seek to be found pleasing, or any for that matter, upon the last day.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
I was a little harsh and made a broad sweeping statement because I get frustrated by all the folks who pass over Paul's epistles, which in my opinion are the most important books of the Bible. Churches don't preach the gospel of our salvation 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV and
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV - and the rest of Paul's letters -
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
You are arguing against fatalism, not Calvinism. You are not factoring in that Reformers believe in secondary causes and/or moral human responsibility/accountability . . which is a big piece of the puzzle you attempt to figure out.
So, you give lip service to moral responsibility and call the fact that it conflicts with your core doctrines an "antinomy" and that's supposed to make it alright?
The fact that your doctrine is intentionally self-contradictory is only more reason to reject it!

The spiritual principle you are omitting, and which real Calvinists teach, is Genesis 50:20 and Romans 8:28.

Man only falls short; God always works good.
Man falls precisely as short as your god himself predestined that they would fall, Nang!

I remind you again of AMR's statement that if something is accomplished it was your god's will that it be so. There is no event, no good deed, no sin, no help and no harm that your god did not predestine to happen before he created the first second of time. That is what Calvinism teaches and it is what you believe and teach!

That is the substance of God's decrees, as well as the reality of human history.
The reality of human history existed in the mind of god before time began according to your doctrine! How can you not see the blatant and constant and continuous contradictions in every sentence that you speak? I mean every sentence contradicts itself and the sentence that came before and the sentence that comes after. It is literally the most completely irrational jumble of stupidity that the religious world has ever devised! Taoism is more rationally consistent that Calvinism is. Calvinism just basically has a list of things it says it believes and anything that doesn't fit together is called a mystery or antinomy and one's willingness to accept it in spite of it not making sense is the measure of their faith and piety. Like I said before, I don't even really understand why you bother opening the bible in the first place. It makes no difference what it says or how blatantly it contradicts your doctrine because that contradiction is also chalked up as an antinomic mystery that cannot be understood by us mere mortals. If such treatment of the scripture is allowable, one wonders why the bible exists at all, nevermind why one might bother to read it.

Resting in Him,
Clete


P.S. For those reading this exchange, I would point out how Nang does not deny believing the things I quoted in my last post. Notice how she ignores them and deflects the discussion away from such clear statements of what Calvinism does teach and what she DOES believe.
 
Last edited:

popsthebuilder

New member
I was a little harsh and made a broad sweeping statement because I get frustrated by all the folks who pass over Paul's epistles, which in my opinion are the most important books of the Bible. Churches don't preach the gospel of our salvation 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV and
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV - and the rest of Paul's letters -
I agree that the writings attributed to Paul are quite significant.

I am too bothered in relation to the writings of Paul. But it is that most read it as if justification for wallowing in sin all while willfully ignorant to the fact that they are in sin, as if the self sacrifice of the Christ which was for the sake of all, was so all could happily continue in knowing sin.

But to me, the writing do not in any way attest to faith without works. One must read it in its entirety and be able to comprehend what is said as a whole.

It is that righteous works are a product of utter and true Faith in GOD.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
I agree that the writings attributed to Paul are quite significant.

I am too bothered in relation to the writings of Paul. But it is that most read it as if justification for wallowing in sin all while willfully ignorant to the fact that they are in sin, as if the self sacrifice of the Christ which was for the sake of all, was so all could happily continue in knowing sin.

But to me, the writing do not in any way attest to faith without works. One must read it in its entirety and be able to comprehend what is said as a whole.

It is that righteous works are a product of utter and true Faith in GOD.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

MADists are Antinomianists.

Paul was not.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
What the heck is an antinomianist?

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

"Definition of antinomian. 1 : one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. 2 : one who rejects a socially established morality.
Antinomian

| Definition of Antinomian by Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antinomianMerriam‑Webster"

Such leads to the practice of lawlessness
. . .
 

popsthebuilder

New member
"Definition of antinomian. 1 : one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. 2 : one who rejects a socially established morality.
Antinomian

| Definition of Antinomian by Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antinomianMerriam‑Webster"

Such leads to the practice of lawlessness
. . .
Woe! That's no bueno.


Thanks for the unbiased clarification.



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 

popsthebuilder

New member
I was a little harsh and made a broad sweeping statement because I get frustrated by all the folks who pass over Paul's epistles, which in my opinion are the most important books of the Bible. Churches don't preach the gospel of our salvation 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV and
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV - and the rest of Paul's letters -
Retrospect is a great tool. It's hard for some to use though. And even when one sees their own mistakes, even harder to admit them and change from them.

It's a good thing to not be heedless for sure. ?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
So, you give lip service to moral responsibility and call the fact that it conflicts with your core doctrines an "antinomy" and that's supposed to make it alright?

I do not call any part of Truth (Holy Scripture) to be antinomy, paradox, or contradiction. I am a "Clarkian," remember. . .
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
"Definition of antinomian. 1 : one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation. 2 : one who rejects a socially established morality.
Antinomian

| Definition of Antinomian by Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antinomianMerriam‑Webster"

Such leads to the practice of lawlessness
. . .



Is that YOUR professional opinion or is it from the Scriptures? Do the Scriptures tell us that the Grace Gospel, as preached by the Apostle Paul, winds up in LAWLESSNESS? Please, show us less fortunate as yourself, proof THAT is "Gospel Truth." Otherwise, go back to fixing Breakfast or whatever you were doing.
 

musterion

Well-known member

You can decide based on the usual signs: Failure to directly address legitimate points. "Pretend" replies -- wordiness that goes nowhere, on purpose. Posting rabbit trail questions to avoid answering questions. Evasiveness/ignoring/silence. Positional inconsistency over time (hardest to catch but the biggest tell, imo). One, some or all may be visible from time to time.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
I agree that the writings attributed to Paul are quite significant.

I am too bothered in relation to the writings of Paul. But it is that most read it as if justification for wallowing in sin all while willfully ignorant to the fact that they are in sin, as if the self sacrifice of the Christ which was for the sake of all, was so all could happily continue in knowing sin.

But to me, the writing do not in any way attest to faith without works. One must read it in its entirety and be able to comprehend what is said as a whole.

It is that righteous works are a product of utter and true Faith in GOD.

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

I give you credit for one thing. At least you make an ATTEMPT to sound like you know what you're talking about. Some succeed, where you fail, but, at least you try.
 

Rosenritter

New member
Pretty sure Calvinist follow scripture, not some dead guy.



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

Why do Calvinists show such admiration for the "brothers that went before" and post the pictures of dead Calvinists in their signatures? Calvinism has a tendency towards near ancestor-worship in that fashion.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
So, you give lip service to moral responsibility and call the fact that it conflicts with your core doctrines an "antinomy" and that's supposed to make it alright?
The fact that your doctrine is intentionally self-contradictory is only more reason to reject it!

Typycal Calvinistic M.O. on Nangster's side.
 
Top