One Question Calvinists Can't Answer

[smaller]

It's kind of hard to insult a dead man... ; )

Don't you find it a tad disturbing that nearly everything that has ever lived is going to be eternally annihilated?

Was there some point in all of this God???

Maybe so. Hope speaks well.

[seer]

Don't you find it a tad disturbing that nearly everything that has ever lived is going to be eternally annihilated?

Was there some point in all of this God???

Maybe so. Hope speaks well.

Things die Eel. You don't believe that all the animals that ever live will be raised again - do you. It's a great and sad lesson that will be with us through out eternity. This is what life looked like without God, this is what life looks like with God.

[smaller]

Things die Eel. You don't believe that all the animals that ever live will be raised again - do you. It's a great and sad lesson that will be with us through out eternity. This is what life looked like without God, this is what life looks like with God.

Hope speaks to me in this way my friend:

"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. For we are saved by hope-"

All from Romans 8 of course and NO j, I don't believe in your formation of eternal death via annihilation to nearly all of mankind and for probably ALL of creation to boot, AND it makes me rather ill inside, spiritually speaking, to hear of such things that pass themselves off as hope.

I don't know why or how you bear with such things and try to justify/link that to faith, hope and Divine Love in Christ.

God has hope for us and we have our hope in Him and that Hope will not be disappointing.

Romans 15:4
For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Has The Word given you hope j? Or despair and death to nearly all things?

If the later then I do say you are certainly a walking deadman that is nearly devoid of HOPE except for perhaps himself. What good is that hope?

I'll stop now.

enjoy!

smaller

[Nang]

Why did God pick you

According to His great grace, love, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure. (Ephesians 1:3-10)

and not your non-elect neighbor?

I have no way of knowing whether my unbelieving neighbors are reprobate or not. Do you think you know the eternal fate of your neighbors?

If God takes nothing about the man into account, what logically distinguishes you from your neighbor?

Faith . . .which I received by the grace, love, wisdom, purpose and good pleasure of God. (Ephesians 1:3-10)

Look at it this way - you have two idenical lumps of clay in front of you - you want to make a lovely pot and a common pot - how do you choose which lump for which purpose?

You are not asking "how." The "how" is easy . . .God chooses by Sovereign right.

You are trolling in an effort to challenge "why" God chooses one lump for honor and another lump for dishonor, while ignoring the Holy Scripture that clearly and seriously warns against questioning the grace, love, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure of God. (Ephesians 1:3-20, plus Romans 9:20)

You do not impress God Almighty with your posts.

Nang

[yxboom]

You are trolling in an effort to challenge "why" God chooses one lump for honor and another lump for dishonor, while ignoring the Holy Scripture that clearly and seriously warns against questioning the grace, love, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure of God. (Ephesians 1:3-20, plus Romans 9:20)

You do not impress God Almighty with your posts.

Nang

fear and trembling....fear and trembling!

[john-philip]

You do not impress God Almighty with your posts.

Good thing God's press secretary came to inform you of this, Seer. Apparently the non-calvinists aren't allowed to speak to Him directly.

[john-philip]

According to His great grace, love, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure. (Ephesians 1:3-10)

So God had to choose you in order for Him to be most wise, good, pleasured, and loving? God could not have been equally wise, good, pleasured, and loving with choosing some non-elect rather than you? If your answer to these questions is 'no', then you haven't answered the OP question.

[Nang]

So God had to choose you in order for Him to be most wise, good, pleasured, and loving?

Huh?

Did I say anything close to this?

God could not have been equally wise, good, pleasured, and loving with choosing some non-elect rather than you?

If God had chosen "some non-elect," they would be elect . . .which has nothing to do with me at all.

If your answer to these questions is 'no', then you haven't answered the OP question.

I answered the OP question, and I did so biblically.

You just don't like my answer.

That's undoubtedly a grave spiritual problem for you.

Nang

[john-philip]

Huh?

Did I say anything close to this?

No, but I did have a point behind it, which you were unwilling to consider: If God could have been equally wise, loving, and pleasured with electing some other individual than you, then what was His reason for electing you over that other individual? If God would not have been equally wise, loving, and pleasured with electing another individual then you have made your election necessary for God to be most wise, loving, and pleasured. IOW, God's state of being most wise would be contigent on your election!

I answered the OP question, and I did so biblically.

You just don't like my answer.

That's undoubtedly a grave spiritual problem for you.

Nang

Tell me, Nang, do you understand what the purpose of a theological disccusion forum is? Do you know what the difference is between a logical argument and a dogmatic assertion? What led you to the conclusion I don't like your answer? Can you give an argument showing how my response necessitates that I must not like your answer and that I have a grave spiritual problem? If not, then your statement was irrelevant and an ad hom at best, and divisive, arrogant and fallacious, at worst. If you can I'd love to hear it, though I suspect it will be more unfounded dogmatic assertion.

[yxboom]

Good thing God's press secretary came to inform you of this, Seer. Apparently the non-calvinists aren't allowed to speak to Him directly.

All of nang's posts are written on God's letterhead. if you look close enough you can make out the watermark.

[Nang]

No, but I did have a point behind it, which you were unwilling to consider:

You will find me very unwilling to debate arguments that have been put in my mouth.

If God could have been equally wise, loving, and pleasured with electing some other individual than you, then what was His reason for electing you over that other individual?

Again, I have already answered this, but you do not like my (biblical) answer.

I will say this however, in addition: God did not elect me in Jesus Christ over any other person because of any virtue or worthiness within me, or because of any effort on my part, let alone merit earned. I was totally hateful towards God, thoroughly depraved, and completely undeserving of His grace.

IOW, God's state of being most wise would be contigent on your election!

My election was contingent upon God's love, grace, wisdom, purpose and good pleasure. (Ephesians 1:3-10)

Tell me, Nang, do you understand what the purpose of a theological disccusion forum is?

I am here to witness to the absolute truth of God, according to His Holy Word, which reveals the good news of Jesus Christ. Theological enough for you?

Do you know what the difference is between a logical argument and a dogmatic assertion?

My "dogma" is Biblical; thus also logical.

Nang

[john-philip]

You will find me very unwilling to debate arguments that have been put in my mouth.

Where did I put an argument in your mouth? I simply asked a follow up question to your answer. Seeing as this is a discussion forum, I see nothing wrong with that.

Again, I have already answered this, but you do not like my (biblical) answer.

You haven't answered my question at all which is this: If God could have been equally wise, loving, and pleasured with electing some other individual than you, then what was His reason for electing you over that other individual?

I will say this however, in addition: God did not elect me in Jesus Christ over any other person because of any virtue or worthiness within me, or because of any effort on my part, let alone merit earned. I was totally hateful towards God, thoroughly depraved, and completely undeserving of His grace.

Yes, I understand all this. It's fine for answering the OP, we agree. But I'm asking you to answer my question now, which you haven't even touched.

My election was contingent upon God's love, grace, wisdom, purpose and good pleasure. (Ephesians 1:3-10)

Was God's love, grace, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure contigent upon your election? Because this is what your argument leads to, logically. Your defense of arguing by assertion, which is logically fallacious, is tiring.

I am here to witness to the absolute truth of God, according to His Holy Word, which reveals the good news of Jesus Christ. Theological enough for you?

Doesn't seem like that's what you want to do. What you are showing me is that you want to be lazy and unthoughtful and dogmatically assert your position in defending it. You will continue to beg the question and say "it's not my position, but the Bible's" which adds to your logically fallacious arguments as well as circularly leads us back to the starting point: defending your position that this is what the Bible claims.

My "dogma" is Biblical; thus also logical.

Nang, you can assert something correct but argue it by logically fallacious means. For instance, I can give the following assertion: triangles have three sides. Let's say, then, my argument goes like this:

Squares have four sides
Triangles are not squares
Therefore, traingles have three sides.

Clearly my argument is a non sequitor, even if the conclusion is correct. If I were to merely retort to "but triangles do have three sides, so clearly you have a problem with logic" rather than reevaluating my argument, you would probably find me quit obnoxious and tiring. Because my argument then begs the question. Which is exactly what your statement does.

You have not answered my follow up question, and depending on how you do answer it, your origingal answer may not answer the OP. If all you have to respond with is "but my position is Biblical" than you have only argued by assertion, leaving your argument logically fallacious.

[john-philip]

All of nang's posts are written on God's letterhead. if you look close enough you can make out the watermark.

Well, He must have gotten your permission to watermark it, since you're a site owner.

[seer]

According to His great grace, love, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure. (Ephesians 1:3-10)





I have no way of knowing whether my unbelieving neighbors are reprobate or not. Do you think you know the eternal fate of your neighbors?





Faith . . .which I received by the grace, love, wisdom, purpose and good pleasure of God. (Ephesians 1:3-10)



You are not asking "how." The "how" is easy . . .God chooses by Sovereign right.

You are trolling in an effort to challenge "why" God chooses one lump for honor and another lump for dishonor, while ignoring the Holy Scripture that clearly and seriously warns against questioning the grace, love, wisdom, purpose, and good pleasure of God. (Ephesians 1:3-20, plus Romans 9:20)

You do not impress God Almighty with your posts.

Nang

You did not answer the question Nang. I asked why you and not one who is lost. What about you if different than the one who is lost? And if there is no difference then God's choice was arbitrary - God loved you by a mere flip of the coin...

[Mal-Intent]

I don't know, apparently it just might be me, but I was raised with the belief in a God who is loving and open towards all of his creation, and merciful to any who should decide to follow him.

To me, a God who creates a being with the purpose of him being damned to eternal torture is not loving or merciful at all, it is cruel and sadistic.