I do not want to pick on you. You are obviously well read. You clearly know your stuff. I am going to disagree though, sorry. Spurgeon stated : "You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text"
I guess you are an old Calvinist but I can believe that this, and what follows does not apply to you. It does apply to a lot of Calvinist today though.
You mentioned in a post above about God being fair. Sure, many Christians argue about this, they may be Arminian, they may not have a clue what Armianism is.
I think the problem is this: There are people like yourself who know what you are talking about. You call yourself Calvinist. There are a lot of people who do not know what they are talking about but, they also call themselves Calvinist. Note - I am not claiming the 'other side' are any better.
Calvinism has done a lot of damage to me. I have since found it has done a lot of damage to many others. People like me major on man actually being responsible for his own actions. I personally believe God can handle mans free will, randomness and so forth, in a blink of his eye, which makes him truly mighty.
No one disputes we are responsible for our sin. We are self-determined moral agents. Review the discussion above carefully. You are given over to wild assertions with no ...
It is late now so I am going to have to quit. Please get back to me some time on the cherry-pick of your post. I believe this is near the core of disagreement between Calvinists and the rest. I could quote Calvin himself...
I think you are asking me who the most are who are not Calvinist. Please correct if Iv'e got that wrong.
Orthodox; Eastern, Russion Egyptian... all of them. They never accepted the teaching of Augustine way back in 385BC based on his Latin translation. Instead they had authentic Greek Texts.
Catholics: Obviously not Protestant and opposed to Reformers.
Your quote below concerns "most calvinists" do not know about this to which I asked for clarification. How is your response above related to Calvinists specifically? :idunno:
While there is much in what you said I have no axe to grind with, I do not think you are correct on the 'wills' of God. Not that I claim this is a Calvinist only phenomena. The problem I have had with many Calvinists is that they seem to only know of the decretive will. Every thing, they say, is decreed by God, even every evil. No, cannot agree, ever. That God can handle a bit of random free will makes, to me, a much bigger God than the one who has had to pre-set every event (reminds me of Deism).
A Calvinist should rightly affirm that all that happens was encompassed by the decree of God. I assume you read my provided link in my post describing the decree in detail. Therein you will find that the decree establishes the spontaneous liberty of the moral creature, free will. In other words God ordains that very free will. The decree encompasses the secondary causes of these free will choices. God is the antecedent cause of all things, but the proximate cause lies with the moral agent, mankind.
That you assume there is some autonomy in God's moral creatures necessarily assumes God is not sovereign over His creation, nor continuing to uphold creation. How exactly can anything be autonomous from its Maker? This view gives rise to notions of chance and randomness, contrary to Proverbs 16:33 and elsewhere. Can we honestly claim that there is true randomness outside the purview of God? Can we say that there are things happening that God is not informed about, that is, genuinely knows (not predicts as open theists will claim) beforehand? Unless one wants to buy in to open theist heterodoxies, we must affirm that God does not learn. God does not accrete new knowledge. Knowledge is based upon truths, and God is the Truth Maker. What we claim to know, is but what we have discovered. We are not inventing some new knowledge from God's frame of reference. It is new to us, but not to God.
For example, we might say,
"I, God, decree that AMR will write what he just wrote herein per the free will liberty that I, God, have established in him. That is to say, per My decree, AMR will write what he just wrote according to his greatest inclinations at the time he so writes. This is the free will I, God, have established in all moral creatures. Moreover, My decree, does no violence to the will of AMR."
Unfortunately, what tickles the itching ears of not a few is exactly how God pulls off His sovereignty and man's responsibility. No answer is given in Scripture (Deut. 29:29). When God shuts His mouth, so should we. Rather that making terrible attempts to let God off the hook, as it were, say for evil acts of moral creatures, we should rest satisfied that the God who merely spoke and creation sprang into existence is quite capable of retaining His wholly sovereign rule over what He created, while also holding His creatures accountable for their actions.
“There is no attribute of God more comforting to his children than the doctrine of Divine Sovereignty. Under the most adverse circumstances, in the most severe troubles, they believe that Sovereignty has ordained their afflictions, that Sovereignty overrules them, and that Sovereignty will sanctify them all.
There is nothing for which the children of God ought more earnestly to contend than the dominion of their Master over all creation—the kingship of God over all the works of his own hands—the throne of God, and his right to sit upon that throne.
On the other hand, there is no doctrine more hated by worldlings, no truth of which they have made such a football, as the great, stupendous, but yet most certain doctrine of the Sovereignty of the infinite Jehovah. Men will allow God to be everywhere except on his throne.
They will allow him to be in his workshop to fashion worlds and to make stars. They will allow him to be in his almonry to dispense his alms and bestow his bounties. They will allow him to sustain the earth and bear up the pillars thereof, or light the lamps of heaven, or rule the waves of the ever-moving ocean;
but when God ascends his throne, his creatures then gnash their teeth; and when we proclaim an enthroned God, and his right to do as he wills with his own, to dispose of his creatures as he thinks well, without consulting them in the matter, then it is that we are hissed and execrated, and then it is that men turn a deaf ear to us, for God on his throne is not the God they love.
They love him anywhere better than they do when he sits with his sceptre in his hand and his crown upon his head.”
Catholics: Obviously not Protestant and opposed to Reformers.
Your quote above concerns most calvinists do not know about this. How is that related to your above? :idunno:
A Calvinist should rightly affirm that all that happens was encompassed by the decree of God. I assume you read my provided link in my post describing the decree in detail. Therein you will find that the decree establishes the spontaneous liberty of the moral creature, free will. In other words God ordains that very free will. The decree encompasses the secondary causes of these free will choices. God is the antecedent cause of all things, but the proximate cause lies with the moral agent, mankind.
That you assume there is some autonomy in God's moral creatures necessarily assumes God is not sovereign over His creation, nor continuing to uphold creation. How exactly can anything be autonomous from its Maker? This view gives rise to notions of chance and randomness, contrary to Proverbs 16:33 and elsewhere. Can we honestly claim that there is true randomness outside the purview of God? Can we say that there are things happening that God is not informed about, that is, genuinely knows beforehand? Unless one wants to buy in to open theist heterodoxies, we must affirm that God does not learn. God does not accrete new knowledge. Knowledge is based upon truths, and God is the Truth Maker. What we claim to know, is but what we have discovered. We are not inventing some new knowledge from God's frame of reference. It is new to us, but not to God.
For example, we might say,
"I, God, decree that AMR will write what he just wrote herein per the free will liberty that I, God, have established in him. That is to decree AMR will write what he just wrote according to his greatest inclinations at the time he so writes. This is the free will I, God, have established in all moral creatures. Moreover, My decree, does no violence to the will of AMR."
Unfortunately, what tickles the itching ears of not a few is exactly how God pulls off His sovereignty and man's responsibility. No answer is given in Scripture (Deut. 29:29). When God shuts His mouth, so should we. Rather that making terrible attempts to let God off the hook, as it were, say for evil acts of moral creatures, we should rest satisfied that the God who merely spoke and creation sprang into existence is quite capable of retaining His wholly sovereign rule over what He created, while also holding His creatures accountable for their actions.
“There is no attribute of God more comforting to his children than the doctrine of Divine Sovereignty. Under the most adverse circumstances, in the most severe troubles, they believe that Sovereignty has ordained their afflictions, that Sovereignty overrules them, and that Sovereignty will sanctify them all.
There is nothing for which the children of God ought more earnestly to contend than the dominion of their Master over all creation—the kingship of God over all the works of his own hands—the throne of God, and his right to sit upon that throne.
On the other hand, there is no doctrine more hated by worldlings, no truth of which they have made such a football, as the great, stupendous, but yet most certain doctrine of the Sovereignty of the infinite Jehovah. Men will allow God to be everywhere except on his throne.
They will allow him to be in his workshop to fashion worlds and to make stars. They will allow him to be in his almonry to dispense his alms and bestow his bounties. They will allow him to sustain the earth and bear up the pillars thereof, or light the lamps of heaven, or rule the waves of the ever-moving ocean;
but when God ascends his throne, his creatures then gnash their teeth; and when we proclaim an enthroned God, and his right to do as he wills with his own, to dispose of his creatures as he thinks well, without consulting them in the matter, then it is that we are hissed and execrated, and then it is that men turn a deaf ear to us, for God on his throne is not the God they love.
They love him anywhere better than they do when he sits with his sceptre in his hand and his crown upon his head.”
I think the problem is this: There are people like yourself who know what you are talking about. You call yourself Calvinist. There are a lot of people who do not know what they are talking about but, they also call themselves Calvinist. Note - I am not claiming the 'other side' are any better.
I have no doubt what you say is true. Calvinist or anti-Calvinist alike are a mixed breed of folks, all differing in the current walk of faith, and maturing in the knowledge of what they claim. But that should not let a few bad apples, if you will, spoil the entire barrel.
This is why bouncing around the internet and into discussion forums, blogs, etc., is not a solid means of understanding those that differ with our views. One needs to go to the sources, the historic Confessions, the writings of those that have come before us, to gain a firmer grounding in what this or that person's label (Calvinist, Presbyterian, Arminian, Romanist, Lutheran, etc.) really encompasses. Unfortunately, not a few believers have no solid grounding in what they claim. Rather they parrot others and are satisfied with an often self-righteous Just Me and My Bible mentality. This is a Solo Scriptura view, contrary to Sola Scriptura. What a difference a vowel makes. (<--these colored text items are links if you have not picked up on this in past posts)
Calvinism has done a lot of damage to me. I have since found it has done a lot of damage to many others. People like me major on man actually being responsible for his own actions. I personally believe God can handle mans free will, randomness and so forth, in a blink of his eye, which makes him truly mighty.
I am truly sorry to hear that damage has been done. I have no idea what that damage was or how you let it overwhelm you. I am confident that I can provide real and accurate answers to sincerely asked questions about what Reformed theology entails. If I cannot I am not ashamed to say I just have no answer or that there is no answer. No one at this site can claim I have refused to give an answer to a question that was asked in sincerity, versus the often laying in wait "Gotcha!" or mocking motives that we will find at discussion sites.
One of your earlier posts mistook me for Tulipbee (she sometimes posts here at TOL) and you made a CF reference to the same. I assume you now know this is not the case. Since you mentioned CF, I will offer that I am a Chaplain at CF and you can feel free to ask me questions in the Ask A Chaplain Forum in the Private area where posts are not seen by anyone but us Chaplains. Or, you could just PM me here.
Lastly, I also do not assign those that are not Reformed or Calvinist to eternal perdition as do others here and elsewhere. I consider the Trinitarian professing believer a brother or sister in the faith. While I may claim he or she is a wee bit confused, and they do the same in my direction, you won't find me claiming, barring prima facie evidence to the contrary, that they are all lost, hell-bound, and sin bent.
It is late now so I am going to have to quit. Please get back to me some time on the cherry-pick of your post. I believe this is near the core of disagreement between Calvinists and the rest. I could quote Calvin himself...
I am quite studied on what Mssr. Calvin has written, so do not hesitate to quote and seek greater clarity. His views matured with time, as his Institutes entailed writes and re-writes spanned the years 1536 (when he was but 27 yrs old) to 1560 (a mature 51 year old Calvin).
Despite what some believe, Calvin (or Augustine) is not the Calvinist's regula fidei. Rather the regula fidei for us all should be Holy Writ first, and various subordinate standards such as the historic confessions of the faith as far as they are accurate representations of the teachings of Scripture. It is bemusing to watch the anti-Calvinist who has stumbled across something Calvin wrote, did, or did not do, and claim they have found the nail in the coffin in their Quixotic mission to overthrow Calvinism. It is a rookie mistake in substantive discussions that we all should avoid.
I do appreciate the more irenic tone of your last few posts directed my way. As I hope you will find, I have given them the attention they are due without a dial up of rhetoric, given your approach.
The will and wisdom of the traditional churches god (made with hands) is believed to be the divine channel of truth dispensed out to the converts, their creeds and traditions are set in stone like the Roman church who believed only they had the ability to read the scripture and dictate who could hear the voice of God.
The reformed mind no matter how brilliant or wise according to the men that want to stand behind its superior claim to divine wisdom, is still the same mind no matter the reputation or prestige they have walled themselves in from the great unwashed who might question their interpretational skills handed down to them from Rome, who owns their person/persona as they do all dual citizens.
Most are sincere, well educated, loyal etc. Liberty for all isn't a teaching one will receive from attending the reformed minds sanctuary who are stoic, rational, good manners, degreed professionals, all man could want in a "man" or any other doctrine built on secular history veiled from truth by good and evils image of separation, that is only seen by a dual mind judging by appearances.
When you secularize allegory the Eternal message will stay buried, even the best Matt 11:11 theologian in duality is till blinded by that mistake Galatians 4:24, 2Cor 3:6, Luke 17:20-21, Only one good news and it applies to all Life that can only come from GOOD/GOD/ who made no mistakes, the rest is image creation manifesting by what a man thinketh he will reflect a god made in that image/shadow, the spiritual mind sleeps at rest, the image of god that man reflects is a distorted shadow with no substance, the well of traditions where they draw their teaching of condemnation for a lost phantom.
I have no doubt what you say is true. Calvinist or anti-Calvinist alike are a mixed breed of folks, all differing in the current walk of faith, and maturing in the knowledge of what they claim. But that should not let a few bad apples, if you will, spoil the entire barrel......Unfortunately, not a few believers have no solid grounding in what they claim. Rather they parrot others....
I would question 'maturing' and 'few bad apples', not just on the Calvinist side of things, but all sides. Most Calvinists I know do class Charismatics as Arminian. All Charismatics I know have no idea about Arminianism or its evolution.
4. While God has decreed all events, it is vitally important to note that while God’s decree includes the ends, His decree also encompasses the means, the causes as well as the effects, the conditions as well as the instrumentalities, for all events that will depend upon the same.
5. While the decree of God determines the certainty of future events, the decree of God neither directly effects or causes no event. (Please read that statement one more time!) But…hang on now…in every case the decree of God provides that these events are rendered certain by causesthat are acting in such a manner that is perfectly consistent with the nature of these events in question.
I have hi-lighted some bits in colour. I have never understood this in any rendition from any Calvinist. I think this is the source of all debate and disagreement between Calvinists and the rest, on or off the internet. Even in Augustin's time, his supporters (not Pelagius) had major issues with this kind of thinking.
I also believe that in the age of Science - from around 1550 - this kind of rational has taken hit upon hit. You mentioned in a previous post about God's Sovereignty vs Randomness. I believe randomness (quantum physics, electron wave etc) shows how great God is - far greater than a deterministic God.
I am truly sorry to hear that damage has been done. I have no idea what that damage was or how you let it overwhelm you. .....If I cannot I am not ashamed to say I just have no answer or that there is no
I am confused how under Calvinism I could let 'it overwhelm' me, what happened to predestination?
Though having no formal theological education, God has given me a knowledge in debating with and critiqing Calvinism (in person, on-line is a bad place) E.g:
The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies (Psalm 58:3).
This was used by my ex-pastor who is a die-hard Calvinist. "Yes he said, I spoke evil just like you from birth. This proves Total Depravity." I explained that at birth I had a job just saying "goo goo", let alone speaking real words. The conversation ended in acrimony.
A visiting speaker named-dropped Spurgeon a few time and then announced "The word 'all' does not mean 'all' all the time , you do known that don't you." Made me smile. I introduced him to my favourite sermon and we remain NOT friends to this day.
Just about every debate with (with real humans, not on the internet) has led to the Calvinst saying what I am alleging is Hyper-Calvinism. I asked them what the difference is and they don't know. Just about always I get told that I refuse to be taught, or some other put down. How I can refuse predestination? Beats me.
One of your earlier posts mistook me for Tulipbee (she sometimes posts here at TOL) and you made a CF reference to the same. ....
There seems to be a herd on these forums waiting to play the 'gotcha' game.
Lastly, I also do not assign those that are not Reformed or Calvinist to eternal perdition as do others here and elsewhere. I consider the Trinitarian professing believer a brother or sister in the faith. While I may claim he or she is a wee bit confused, and they do the same in my direction, you won't find me claiming, barring prima facie evidence to the contrary, that they are all lost, hell-bound, and sin bent.
AMEN to that. I wish my ex-pastor ( and his cronies) would read this.
Post 1179. Exactly how does one come to the knowledge of Truth described in this sermon? Spurgeon makes it clear: “ hat we are not to be regenerated by our own actions, but are regenerated by the Holy Spirit who comes to us".
I believe even Jacob Arminius held exactly the same. I guess the big issue is, is the initial believing, giving-in, or submitting - a work or not a work. I cannot see this ever being resolved.
Post 1197 No one disputes we are responsible for our sin. We are self-determined moral agents. Review the discussion above carefully. If there were "calvinists" of his day that claimed God made them sin, they were in the minority and in gross error, as all hyper-Calvinists are today and were yesterday. So seeking to use some genetic fallacy to impute this nonsense upon all Calvinists is the wrong tactic.
I have to disagree. My main experience with Calvinists is just that: "We were born obnoxious and odious", "The first sin we ever commit is to draw breath", "Speaking lies from birth" and so on.
My ex-pastor said that we were there with Adam when he fell. I asked him what clothes he wore at the time, what what the weather like, how old was he now or had he been re-incarnated. There is an astronomic amount I do not know; As Spurgeon said, there are two truths which to us humans are a paradox.
No one at this site can claim I have refused to give an answer to a question that was asked in sincerity,
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Folks this Gospel of ones Salvation cant be for a lost person, but for a saved person only because its the Gospel or Good News of their Salvation being brought to them in power by the Holy Spirit, making their Salvation known to them. Paul said it was the Gospel of YOUR Salvation. The word your there is a genitive possessive pronoun, meaning your Salvation you are in possession of. That cant be said of a lost person !
So one must be and is in possession of Salvation when they believe/Trust. Thats why they hear it, because they had been given Spiritual ears to hear. Jesus says He that is of God heareth Gods words Jn 8:47
47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
See the Gospel of ones Salvation is Gods Words to them, else Faith couldn't be the result Rom 10:17. The Gospel of ones Salvation cant be unto a lost person, because a lost person doesn't possess Salvation !
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Folks this Gospel of ones Salvation cant be for a lost person, but for a saved person only because its the Gospel or Good News of their Salvation being brought to them in power by the Holy Spirit, making their Salvation known to them. Paul said it was the Gospel of YOUR Salvation. The word your there is a genitive possessive pronoun, meaning your Salvation you are in possession of. That cant be said of a lost person !
So one must be and is in possession of Salvation when they believe/Trust. Thats why they hear it, because they had been given Spiritual ears to hear. Jesus says He that is of God heareth Gods words Jn 8:47
47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
See the Gospel of ones Salvation is Gods Words to them, else Faith couldn't be the result Rom 10:17. The Gospel of ones Salvation cant be unto a lost person, because a lost person doesn't possess Salvation !
A Lost person cannot believe the Gospel because its hid them that are lost 2 Cor 4:3-4
3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: [FONT="] [/FONT]4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
We cant believe the Gospel with a blinded mind, and as long as we are lost, the mind is blinded !
Verse 4 tells us why. A lost persons mind is blinded by the god of this world, the prince of this world satan.
A Lost person cannot believe the Gospel because its hid them that are lost 2 Cor 4:3-4
[FONT=&]3 [/FONT]But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: [FONT="] [/FONT][FONT=&]4 [/FONT]In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
We cant believe the Gospel with a blinded mind, and as long as we are lost, the mind is blinded !
Verse 4 tells us why. A lost persons mind is blinded by the god of this world, the prince of this world satan.
Amen Brother, and that includes even God's very Elect, His vessels of Mercy Rom. 9:23 who are born into this world in a lost state Eph. 2:2-3; Rom. 11:32. But because they were already Saved in the Purpose of God by His Grace given them before the world began 2 Tim. 1:9, and reconciled to God while being His enemies and unbelievers Rom. 5:10, it's imperative that every one of them without exception, shall be quickened / made spiritually Alive in new birth Eph. 2:4-5 and given Faith Gal. 5:22 to Believe in Him Phil. 1:29 with their New Mind Ezek. 11:19; 1 Cor. 2:16.
Therefore, God's Elect, or Christ's Sheep, could never be one of these spoken of in John 3:18; 8:24.
Amen Brother, and that includes even God's very Elect, His vessels of Mercy Rom. 9:23 who are born into this world in a lost state Eph. 2:2-3; Rom. 11:32.
Agreed ! Yes and only in that sense are the Elect ever lost. Much like the prodigal son who was once lost Lk 15:24
[FONT="]For this my [/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#000000]son[/COLOR][COLOR=#000000][FONT="] was dead, and is alive again; he was [/FONT]lost[FONT="], and is found. And they began to be merry.
But the non elect lost will continue in a permanent lost state and blind ![/FONT]
The Gospel when its concerning Salvation is the instrumental means by which God calls the Elect unto Faith, because they have been set apart for it by the Spirit. 2 Thess 2:13-14
13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you[The Beloved Chosen to Salvation] by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
No one disputes we are responsible for our sin. We are self-determined moral agents. Review the discussion above carefully. If there were "calvinists" of his day that claimed God made them sin, they were in the minority and in gross error, as all hyper-Calvinists are today and were yesterday. So seeking to use some genetic fallacy to impute this nonsense upon all Calvinists is the wrong tactic.
Calvinists say man CANNOT believe and obey Him without a special enabling.
You don't throw me off the focus when you twist and turn the argument as you do.
Calvinism is FALSE.
It says that humans cannot hear, believe, and obey God until after God enables them; and that God chooses not to enable some people so that they could just go to Hell.
No. The Calvinist readily affirms that the self-determination of the creature is established by the decree of God. That is we choose according to our greatest desires and the moment we so choose.
If you want to draw arguments about what Calvinism believes, then draw upon the formal statements of our beliefs (see above), summarizing the teachings of Scripture. They are available for all to review, unlike what passes for non-Calvinism today.
Spoiler
From my post here (<--viewable by paid subscriber's only):
Simply put, free will is that by which the mind chooses any thing. That sounds reasonable, does it not? Before one can choose to do anything, he must first have some idea of what he is choosing. Our mind must first accept or reject a notion before we can choose. The mind shapes our inclinations and desires, just as the reader’s mind shaped his or her desire to read this post. To put it another way, free will is the ability to choose for ourselves—according to our strongest desire at the moment. In fact, we must always choose what we most strongly desire in order to choose at all. Every choice we make, therefore, is the result of the greatest inclination at that precise moment. Again, the very fact that anyone is reading this letter is an example that their desire to read this letter was greater than their desire not to read this letter. Their choice was not spontaneous but was in fact a deliberate act following their greatest urge when the opportunity presented itself.
Now some might object and insist that we can be coerced against our wills in some extreme instances. But I think even this is going too far. I offer, for example, the outrageous scenario of a thief who wields a gun and demands your money or your life. Now granted, your options have been severely restricted, but his instrument of persuasion still cannot coerce your will. You still maintain the freedom to deliver your money to him or to stubbornly refuse, risking loss of your life. If you give over your money then your strongest inclination at that moment is to live, but you still retain the freedom to refuse and risk losing your life. This, of course, is an extreme example but it illustrates the point that we always make a choice according the strongest inclination at the moment—even in unlikely cases. Now compare this to our daily struggles against sin. The same principle applies. We as Christians have a love for God but yet when we commit sin, it is because the desire to please ourselves is greater than our love and obedience to God at that moment. How can it be otherwise? If it were so, then we would be able to claim we were forced to sin. “The Devil made me do it!” Naturally, we know this is not the case.
Every decision you and I make is made for a reason without coercion from anyone else or from God. Not even almighty God, once he has given me this faculty of choice, can make me, coerce me, force me to choose. If God forced the will it would no longer be a will. Just as if God squared the circle it would no longer be a circle.
All in Adam are born deceitful and desperately sick (Jer. 17:9), full of evil (Mark 7:21-23), not able to come to Jesus unless given to by God (Eph. 2:2), must be quickened by God (Eph. 2:4-5), cannot choose righteousness until regenerated (Titus 3:5), loves darkness rather than light (John 3:19), is unrighteous, does not understand, does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12), is helpless and ungodly (Rom. 5:6), is dead in his trespasses and sins (Eph. 2-1), is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2-3), cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor 2:14), and is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:15-20). Your issue is not with me, but with what Scripture teaches us about the dire state of the unbeliever. We are born sinners, not morally neutral, only to become sinners when we sin. You can make emotional appeals to dead infants all day long. That may incite the mob, but it is not dealing with the teachings of Scripture. We may hope all infants that die in infancy are elect infants, but we may not demand.
Indeed the answer received was the bracing of Job to marvel at the sovereignty of God over all His creation, leaving Job speechless as he should be when it comes to foolishness like your own.
No one disputes we are responsible for our sin. We are self-determined moral agents. Review the discussion above carefully. If there were "calvinists" of his day that claimed God made them sin, they were in the minority and in gross error, as all hyper-Calvinists are today and were yesterday. So seeking to use some genetic fallacy to impute this nonsense upon all Calvinists is the wrong tactic.
You have cobbled a few snippets here and there and presume you now understand the man's full corpus of beliefs. Nothing in what Spurgeon stated in the sermon in question is disagreeable to me or to the orthodox Calvinist.
What is that righteousness of God revealed in the Gospel ?
Rom 1:16
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
17 For therein[The Gospel of Christ] is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Its the same Righteousness of God Paul mentions here also Rom 10 that many jews did not submit to Rom 10:3
For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
Now what is it ? This righteousness of God is the complete and faultless mediatorial/suretyship obedience, unto death of the Lord Jesus Christ. Its that being made righteous by the obedience of one Rom 5:19
19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one[Christ the sinners surety] shall many be made righteous.
This righteousness because it satisfied the Justice of Gods Government of the Law both preceptively and retributively it Justifies and makes righteous all the elect sinners Christ lived and died for ! Its this righeousness of God that is revealed in the Gospel !
The Gospel when its concerning Salvation is the instrumental means by which God calls the Elect unto Faith, because they have been set apart for it by the Spirit. 2 Thess 2:13-14
13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you[The Beloved Chosen to Salvation] by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Amen! Sanctification of the Spirit and Belief of the Truth, which is the Gospel of God's Grace, the Word of Truth Eph. 1:13, is the result and evidence of having been Chosen to Salvation Eph. 1:3-4, according to God's own Purpose and Grace which was given them in Christ Jesus before the world began.
2 Tim. 1:8-10
8 Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God;
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
So all of God's Elect were Sanctified by God the Father in the Covenant of Grace, or Everlasting Covenant 2 Sam. 23:5; set apart from the rest of the world to be His peculiar people.
1 Pet. 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
"them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:" Jude 1:1.
Rather that making terrible attempts to let God off the hook, as it were, say for evil acts of moral creatures, we should rest satisfied that the God who merely spoke and creation sprang into existence is quite capable of retaining His wholly sovereign rule over what He created, while also holding His creatures accountable for their actions.
