Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

[Rosenritter]

1. The doctrinal teachings of Jacobus Arminius or his followers, especially the doctrine that Christ died for all people and not only for the elect.

2. Jesus died for "many" not "all."

3. Robert Pate is an Arminian and that is what he defends on these boards. I was responding to his post #2989 in this thread.

1. Christians throughout the ages have taught that Christ died for all men and the whole world.
2. Haven't seen you show anyplace yet that says that Christ did not die for certain people.
3. I fail to see how Arminianism is relevant.

 

[Rosenritter]

Not that AMR needs any help from me, but he refute Pate's oft repeated claim that "world" has but one meaning. If one wishes to argue that in any specific case that it does mean "all humanity" go for it. Make a cogent argument, not just state something as fact when it is certainly not obvious to all.

Given the typical meaning and scope of the word means "inclusive" and "everything" it is rather incumbent upon AMR or anyone who wishes to prove that the word has a meaning of exclusion.

And presupposing the Holy Precepts of Calvin​ does not count as proof.

 

[patrick jane]

Not that AMR needs any help from me, but he refute Pate's oft repeated claim that "world" has but one meaning. If one wishes to argue that in any specific case that it does mean "all humanity" go for it. Make a cogent argument, not just state something as fact when it is certainly not obvious to all.

Nobody needs your help. I can't see how somebody could not understand that "Whole World" means exactly that.

1 John 2:2 KJV - not the "elect" only

 

[beloved57]

rose

You said that "world" cannot mean "all men.

I said theres no scripture that says that-[world means all men]. And its not, and you have not showed one !

 

[beloved57]

Nobody needs your help. I can't see how somebody could not understand that "Whole World" means exactly that.

1 John 2:2 KJV - not the "elect" only

The whole world in Christ !

 

[theophilus]

In the Old Testament as well as the New Testament the world was that part of the earth that was inhabited by humanity. Any fool knows that.

Humanity wasn't limited to the geographical sphere of the middle east. There were humans in South America and they didn't have the O.T. Same with Hawaii and Greenland.

Let's look at John 12:19 So the Pharisees said to one another, “You see that you are not doing any good; look, the world has gone after Him.”

The world?

Couldn't be the whole world because no one on any other continent knew He was alive at the time. So they couldn't have meant "the world."

More world:

TWA - Trans World Airlines: they didn't fly into Easter Island or the North Pole or even Bali. So they didn't fly all over the world.

World War 1 didn't involve the world.

World War 2 didn't either.

World of Warcraft isn't played by the world.

World Market doesn't have stores all over the world. Not even in Death Valley, California.

The languages the bible was written in were far more expressive then the languages we have it in now.

Sometimes the world means a certain group of people, i.e. Wayne's World, Golf World, Digital World, World Bazzar.

Sometimes it meant a limited geographic area or even a local area, i.e. the world of a child or the world of Chess.

The World Cup isn't a race for everybody but you can watch it if you have tv or the internet.

World Diabetes Day doesn't cater to rocket scientists (unless they have diabetes).

Think about it.

We both love John 3:16. The world God loved was the world of believers. All humanity may be called but all don't want to believe or have anything to do with God and our Lord. The world in this verse means the world of true believers.

Think about it another way:

If I am NOT a believer then I will pay my own sin debt and Jesus won't. I am invited to lay that debt upon Him, by the gospel, but I don't have to.

Jesus OR every individual will pay the penalty of their sin. He died so that those who believe wouldn't have to. He took their penalty for them. He took the wrath of God upon Himself FOR those who would believe and follow Him.

For those who won't believe and follow Him, they're on their own.

Conversely, "go into all the world and make disciples" means the world and nothing less than the whole world.

Make sense?

 

[beloved57]

Moving goalposts. You said that "world" cannot mean "all men." Now when it is proved that "world" means "all men" beyond any shadow of arguing in other instances, you expect us to believe that the word is being used in a sense that means "only a few select scattered" in other places?

No matter what the Bible would say in relation to salvation being offered to all, that Christ died for "all men" or Christ died for "the world" you would twist it and demand that Calvinism be the measure to judge the words of the Bible, not that the other way around.

Romans 5:18 KJV
(18) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.


1 Timothy 2:3-4 KJV
(3) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
(4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.


1 Timothy 4:10 KJV
(10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.


Titus 2:11 KJV
(11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,


2 Peter 3:9 KJV(9) The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

John 3:16 KJV
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.



I have no idea how you can be so hard headed and so devoid of heart and head understanding. God loved the world, it says. And then from that world there is a subset, "whosoever believeth in him." If "world" and "whosover believeth in him" were the same it would say that "that the world should not perish but have everlasting life."

Not one of those scriptures say that all or every means all mankind. The word world has a limited meaning, its the greek word kosmos and means:

1. an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government
   
2. ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3
   
3. the world, the universe
   
4. the circle of the earth, the earth
   
5. the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family
   
6. the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ
   
7. world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly
   
   1. the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ
8. any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort
   
   1. the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)
      
      Any collection of particulars is a world !
      
      All Gods Sheep is a World. The Church that Christ loved and gave Himself is a World Eph 5:25
      
      ²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
      
      The Church is the World God Loved !

 

[Robert Pate]

Not one of those scriptures say that all or every means all mankind. The word world has a limited meaning, its the greek word kosmos and means:

1. an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government
   
2. ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3
   
3. the world, the universe
   
4. the circle of the earth, the earth
   
5. the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family
   
6. the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ
   
7. world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly
   
   1. the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ
8. any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort
   
   1. the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)
      
      Any collection of particulars is a world !
      
      All Gods Sheep is a World. The Church that Christ loved and gave Himself is a World Eph 5:25
      
      ²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
      
      The Church is the World God Loved !

You like to lie to Forum members and yourself.

If Jesus has atoned for the sins of everyone, Hebrews 2:9. Then the world is all of humanity.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I am not a Protestant, I am not an Aminian, I do not belong to any church, nor am I a member of any denomination.

What I am is a blood bought member of Christ's church. I believe that salvation is by, Christ alone, faith alone and that all isms and religions are of the devil.

Yes you are a Protestant with very clear Arminian views, despite your protestations and self-righteous assumptions you are so unique no commonly understood labels may be affixed to you.

Take a simple test:
http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=christiandenom

Be sure to move the slider below the Agree, Disagree, No Preference boxes after you choose one of the boxes, too. Let us know what comes out afterwards.

There are also plenty of things you are not, Robert, including denial of the inerrancy of Scripture:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...edestination&p=4402162&viewfull=1#post4402162

There is also the matter of how you improperly interpret the Scripture:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...e-God-Unjust&p=4826175&viewfull=1#post4826175

Is it no wonder why you are confused? You have no idea what is error and what is not, given your view that Scripture contains errors. That is, unless you are your own Pope, with some special means of separating out error from truth within an error-laden book. :AMR1:

AMR

 

[marhig]

1. You failed to address the clear positive statements. Substituting your own reasoning that "the God of Jesus was in heaven" warrants a different conclusion is just that, substituting your own reasoning. Your reasoning is obviously mistaken.

2. Your bias is coloring your ability to interpret other passages fairly. When Jesus said "Why do you call me good? There is one that is good, that is, God" he didn't say that he was not good. He didn't say that he was not rightly God... That's something you read into the passage because of your bias. Read it again. If anything, he created the implication of what it would mean if he were truly good.

How can you say that Jesus does not qualify as good?

John 1:29 KJV
(29) The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Hebrews 4:15 KJV
(15) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.


God chose to relate to us on a face-to-face level, among us, as one of of us. As such certain references become necessary so we can simply relate. When he speaks to us in Revelation he comes clean out and uses the names and titles of God, he says he shall be our God. You haven't answered this, you haven't addressed this, you have only attempted to dismiss this.

This is aside from numerous other places besides, I pick Revelation because it is so obvious, because it is a book called "the Revelation of Jesus Christ" where Jesus Christ is revealed.

I never said Jesus wasn't good, I only quoted what Jesus said. He wasn't just good, he was sinless!

I have shown verse after verse why I believe that Jesus isn't God. It's very clear to me that God is also the God of Jesus, with evidence right through the new testament.

And everything that is said through revelation comes from God through Christ and is signified by his angel as John clearly says.

It says right at the beginning that the revelation of Jesus Christ was from God who gave it to him, so they must be separate and God must be his God too, it doesn't say that the father gave him the revelation, but God, clearly separating Christ and God, and this happened after Jesus has been exhalted by God to his right hand. So if he was God, then John would have said so, and Jesus would not have had to receive revelation from God because he would have been God.

 

[marhig]

It doesnt need to be answered. Does that scripture say, where Jesus commanded that, that the world means all humanity ? Yes or No ?

I've agreed with you that the word world has various meanings, but to go throughout the world and preach the gospel to every creature/all creation means all humanity. What do you think every creature means if it doesn't mean all humanity?

 

[beloved57]

I've agreed with you that the word world has various meanings, but to go throughout the world and preach the gospel to every creature/all creation means all humanity. What do you think every creature means if it doesn't mean all humanity?

That is what you say, so it's invalid!

 

[Robert Pate]

Yes you are a Protestant with very clear Arminian views, despite your protestations and self-righteous assumptions you are so unique no commonly understood labels may be affixed to you.

Take a simple test:
http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=christiandenom

Be sure to move the slider below the Agree, Disagree, No Preference boxes after you choose one of the boxes, too. Let us know what comes out afterwards.

There are also plenty of things you are not, Robert, including denial of the inerrancy of Scripture:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...edestination&p=4402162&viewfull=1#post4402162

There is also the matter of how you improperly interpret the Scripture:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...e-God-Unjust&p=4826175&viewfull=1#post4826175

Is it no wonder why you are confused? You have no idea what is error and what is not, given your view that Scripture contains errors. That is, unless you are your own Pope, with some special means of separating out error from truth within an error-laden book. :AMR1:

AMR

Anyone that would name themselves Mr Religion is very religious and holds men's person in admiration. This is what religious people do. I don't care for names and titles. The early believers were called Christians. Not Calvinist, Catholic, or whatever. The only book that I follow is the Bible. If it is not according to the Bible scrap it. I accept all of the Bible as the word of God. Even the scriptures that Calvinist quote. They just don't have the correct interpretation. All scripture should be interpreted in the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and not according to what some heretic wrote back in the 1500's.

 

[TulipBee]

The Nonsense Of Arminianism:

Someone recently had an OP asking "HOW can anyone believe Jesus did not die for the world?"
------
The answer is BECAUSE of the way the same scriptures so regularly employ synecdoche/hyperbole. In NONE of the passages below is there an anecdote by the writer saying "Alert! Synecdoche present"*?
But NONE of the following are, nor can be slavishly literal. The exact same is true of the so called "universal passages". When compared to the ones which EXPRESSLY qualify the extent of the Atonement (Acts 20:28; Eph 5:25 Jn 11:51-52; Jn 17:2 etc), there is ONLY ONE legitimate interpretation. As soon as one understands HOW routinely the writers of scripture employed hyperbole/synecdoche, then ALL the apparent tension between the so called "universal" and particular passages instantly dissolves.

EXAMPLES OF SYNECDOCHE IN SCRIPTURE

I. "ALL things are possible with God" (Matt 19:16)
- Can God sin? Fail to accomplish something He desires to do?*
The Arminian, laudably will say no to the first and yes to the second. God CAN and does fail to achieve that which He stretches forth His hand to accomplish. "He can't violate free will" we hear so often. Wah, wah, way. Tell it to Nebuchadzezzar!*
Besides, He does not have to "violate" it. He ONLY needs to possess the power of influence! Just look up the meaning of that word n the light of His omnipotence.

II. "Ask ANYTHING in My name and I will do it" (Jn 14:14; 16:23-24)
- Does Jesus literally do anything or everything we ask in prayer?

III. "If we ask ANYTHING according to His will, He hears us" (1 Jn 5:14)
- Is God willing that none perish? So then pray according to His will, and ask Him to save everyone.

IV. "ALL Jerusalem and Judea went to see John to be baptized of him" (Mk 1:4)
- Lit. every man, woman, boy and girl, infant did so?
Every Pharisee, Roman, Gentile?

V. "EVERYONE in Asia has deserted me" (2 Tim 1:15-16)
- Lit. Every single believer? The next verse mentions an immediate exception.

VI. "If their (Israel) rejection means life for THE WORLD, then what will their acceptance be but life from the dead" (Rom 11:15)
- Israel is here clearly held up as distinct from 'the world'. Thus showing conclusively that 'the world' was used to refer to other nations than Israel.

VII. "You are our epistle, known and read of ALL men" (2 Cor 3:2)
- PauL literally meant every person on planet earth knew of the believers in Corinth?

VIII. "Look, the WHOLE WORLD has gone after Him!" (Jn 12:19)
- The Pharisee's meant this literally?

IX. "I am innocent of the blood of ALL men" (Acts 20:26)
- Paul was personally sent to, or responsible for lit. ALL humanity?*
He was the apostle to the Gentiles...so yet again, "all men", as used by him here, could not possibly be literal. It was obvious synecdoche/hyperbole.

X. "So then ALL Israel will be saved" (Rom 11:25-26)
- This means lit. every single Jew?
Why then does Paul say elsewhere "Though the number of Israel is as the sand of the sea, ONLY THE REMNANT will saved"? (Rom 9:27)

XI. "He went about doing good, healing ALL who were oppressed of the devil" (Acts 10: 38)
- So Jesus healed lit, every sick person, everywhere?*
He literally healed every sick person in every physical place He went?
But scripture says in some places "He could not many miracles there" (Matt 13:58)

XII. "There is NONE righteous, no not one. NONE who understand, do good or seek God" (Rom 3:10-11)
- Watch how Arminian's DO argue this is hyperbole!*?*In order to try and refute total depravity (Gen 6:8; 8:6; Ecc 7:20; Ps 53:1-3)


In EACH of these examples (more could be cited), the terms "ALL", "EVERYONE", "the whole world", "the world" did not and could not be understood in slavishly literal terms.
The exact same is true regarding the so called "universal passages" of the atonement, when considered in the light of the numerous passages which expressly qualify it to and for the church.

The next time an Arminian asks or challenges, or demands "HOW can anyone believe Jesus did not die FOR all humanity"?*
The principles clearly revealed above are a solid and SCRIPTURAL place to start!

May God give light

 

[Robert Pate]

I agree with your post by A.W. Pink.

Everyone that was saved in the New Testament were saved by hearing and believing the Gospel.

"So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God (which is the Gospel) Romans 10:17.

"For unto us was the Gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it" Hebrews 4:2.

"Then they gladly received his word (Peter's Gospel) and were baptized: and the same day there was added unto them (the Church) about 3000 souls" Acts 2:41.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Anyone that would name themselves Mr Religion is very religious and holds men's person in admiration. This is what religious people do. I don't care for names and titles. The early believers were called Christians. Not Calvinist, Catholic, or whatever. The only book that I follow is the Bible. If it is not according to the Bible scrap it. I accept all of the Bible as the word of God. Even the scriptures that Calvinist quote. They just don't have the correct interpretation. All scripture should be interpreted in the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and not according to what some heretic wrote back in the 1500's.

After you finished with the usual condemnations, how about actually answering the questions implied in my response concerning your woodenly literal conception of the word "world"?

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...e-God-Unjust&p=4826175&viewfull=1#post4826175

You write: "I accept all of the Bible as the word of God."

Yet you have denied this:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...edestination&p=4402162&viewfull=1#post4402162

Have you changed your views since stating this:
"The bible is not a perfect book. It was written by men."

??

AMR

 

[Robert Pate]

After you finished with the usual condemnations, how about actually answering the questions implied in my response concerning your woodenly literal conception of the word "world"?

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...e-God-Unjust&p=4826175&viewfull=1#post4826175

You write: "I accept all of the Bible as the word of God."

Yet you have denied this:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...edestination&p=4402162&viewfull=1#post4402162

Have you changed your views since stating this:
"The bible is not a perfect book. It was written by men."

??

AMR

I haven't changed my views about anything.

I still interpret everything in the light of the "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ.

While you interpret everything in the light of Calvinism, which is really darkness.

I know what Jesus meant when he said, "God so loved the WORLD that he gave his only begotten Son" John 3:16.

You don't. You want to change it to, "God only loves some of us special people" and not you bunch of unworthy sinners.

 

[patrick jane]

It said I was a free will baptist

But the questions asked are so general.

Maybe if it asked other ones like

Do you believe you're sinless? Yes
DO you believe jesus baptism took away the worlds sin? Yes

Then suddenly Im thrust far away from their result XD

But it was Christ's death that took away the sins of the world

 

[beloved57]

Anyone that would name themselves Mr Religion is very religious and holds men's person in admiration. This is what religious people do. I don't care for names and titles. The early believers were called Christians. Not Calvinist, Catholic, or whatever. The only book that I follow is the Bible. If it is not according to the Bible scrap it. I accept all of the Bible as the word of God. Even the scriptures that Calvinist quote. They just don't have the correct interpretation. All scripture should be interpreted in the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and not according to what some heretic wrote back in the 1500's.

You follow Jacob Arminius!

 

[beloved57]

I haven't changed my views about anything.

I still interpret everything in the light of the "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ.

While you interpret everything in the light of Calvinism, which is really darkness.

I know what Jesus meant when he said, "God so loved the WORLD that he gave his only begotten Son" John 3:16.

You don't. You want to change it to, "God only loves some of us special people" and not you bunch of unworthy sinners.

You teach that sinners Christ died for are going to perish in their sins anyways, that is unbelief and heresy!