Rebuttal of the dreadful doctrine of reprobation

[Cross Reference]

Romans 4:25
He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

The Calvinist cites such a verse in defence of LA but ignores the fact that Paul preached belief in that very resurrection to unbelievers. Only if Christ's resurrection is for all men could Paul do so.

His resurrection, as it equates with redemption, is the truth for all to accept or reject. By one's faith in believing for the reasons why is one saved, i.e., redemption procured, made effective.

 

[Sonnet]

Clearly, Calvinists are unable to rebut the OP.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

You lie. Proof? I am a Christian and, without cause except I am not of Calvin, you ALL have nothing but distain for me.

Show where he has that you are not using your trumpt up accusations against him as you have done against me?!! He has had more scriptural sensibilities about him than any ten of you people. Why this legalism YOU demand except to shut him down?

Get real. It's because of your heretical Christology.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

And I should take heed from someone who promotes the idea that Christ did not die for all? You seem to be totally oblivious to the destruction the doctrines you espouse undoubted wreak upon the very Gospel you claim to proclaim. Calvinists cannot point to but one scripture that explicitly teaches limited atonement - and yet you still promulgate it.

Cavil? The extent of Christ's provision is a weighty matter rather.

Your pretext for not even attempting a response to a blindingly obvious flaw in your theology is because you have no explanation.

Put up or be silent.

YOU put up or be silent. Either hear and believe and repent, as you say you can, or shut up.

There are millions who haven't had 1% OF 1% of what you've been privileged to have to access to in the Word.

Calvinism "caused you to fall away"? Poor baby. Amazing how you proclaim Synergism, and then blame Monergism for your apostasy (or whatever it is). And you, like most, don't even understand Calvinism and Monergism.

Furthermore, AMR is an Infralapsarian, not a Supralapsarian; so your taunting is misplaced. He doesn't promote Election and Reprobation in the manner you presume.

Fine. What's keeping you from Synergistically cooperating for your salvation?

Poo or get off the pot, hypocrite. Today is the day of salvation. You don't deserve one more breath if you still can't accept Christ when you're convinced of Synergism.

(And your challenges were answered... Christ died for the SIN of the whole world, not the individuals. But since you dismiss Monergism, that shouldn't even be an issue.)

 

[Sonnet]

YOU put up or be silent. Either hear and believe and repent, as you say you can, or shut up.

There are millions who haven't had 1% OF 1% of what you've been privileged to have to access to in the Word.

Calvinism "caused you to fall away"? Poor baby. Amazing how you proclaim Synergism, and then blame Monergism for your apostasy (or whatever it is). And you, like most, don't even understand Calvinism and Monergism.

Furthermore, AMR is an Infralapsarian, not a Supralapsarian; so your taunting is misplaced. He doesn't promote Election and Reprobation in the manner you presume.

Fine. What's keeping you from Synergistically cooperating for your salvation?

Poo or get off the pot, hypocrite. Today is the day of salvation. You don't deserve one more breath if you still can't accept Christ when you're convinced of Synergism.

(And your challenges were answered... Christ died for the SIN of the whole world, not the individuals. But since you dismiss Monergism, that shouldn't even be an issue.)

Since you aren't here for debate then there is no point responding to this. I made it clear that only those who genuinely want to debate should post here.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Since your aren't here for debate then there is not point responding to this. I made it clear that only those who genuinely want to debate should post here.

Whatevs. Put up or shut up, hypocrite. You're using borrowed air while you frustrate grace. Millions would give anything to have what you've had access to and spit on. You're without excuse.

Ciao.

 

[Sonnet]

Whatevs. Put up or shut up, hypocrite. You're using borrowed air while you frustrate grace. Millions would give anything to have what you've had access to and spit on. You're without excuse.

Ciao.

'Christian' hatred...

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

'Christian' hatred...

LOL. On the contrary... It's love (agape); which is the benevolent disposition and directive of the will to give someone what is best for them and what they need, rather than what they desire.

I know what you need and is best for you... SALVATION... and that's what I spent much time giving to you, including kicking you in the butt now to poo or get off the pot.

Somebody has to love you enough to kick you in the teeth, if necessary. Sorry you have to wrongly interpret it as hate. I'd break your arm to save your life. This is the same thing, so I'm calling you on your BS.

Synergistically cooperate with God for your salvation or shutchermouf, pretender.

 

[patrick jane]

I know what you need and is best for you.. kicking you in the butt now to poo or get off the pot.
, so I'm calling you on your BS.

.

poop fetish ?

 

[Sonnet]

OP anyone?

 

[Cross Reference]

Get real. It's because of your heretical Christology.

Which YOU have NEVER, with the 'proper' use of scripture, supported.. NOTHING but your puffed up opinion do you rest in do make your accusations as one "ever learning and never able to come into the knowledge of the truth". You have no insight. Your lord is the law of your own flesh which seeks for agrandisement from your mouth.. and he loves you for your thoughtless exchanges.

 

[Cross Reference]

His resurrection, as it equates with redemption, is the truth for all to accept or reject. By one's faith in believing for the reasons why, is one saved, i.e., redemption procured, made effective.

 

[Cross Reference]

LOL. On the contrary... It's love (agape); which is the benevolent disposition and directive of the will to give someone what is best for them and what they need, rather than what they desire.

I know what you need and is best for you... SALVATION... and that's what I spent much time giving to you, including kicking you in the butt now to poo or get off the pot.

Somebody has to love you enough to kick you in the teeth, if necessary. Sorry you have to wrongly interpret it as hate. I'd break your arm to save your life. This is the same thing, so I'm calling you on your BS.

Synergistically cooperate with God for your salvation or shutchermouf, pretender.

Who are you? Better yet, what are you? Benevelant agape love, you say? With such a smell of verbal death permeating from you? Surely you jest? You need to fold your hand and crawl away from the table. You've been had.

 

[nikolai_42]

The doctrine of unconditional election and reprobation would seem to be the most awful case of discrimination we as humans could ever conceive of. God predetermines who will be saved and who will be passed by and Man has absolutely no say in the matter. It's dreadfulness needs no further explanation.

However, by focusing absolutely on the depravity of man then the Calvinist appears to extricate the doctrine from such a charge. "The man deserves nothing," he retorts - that God determined to save anyone is something that we should be grateful for they say.

Seemingly, the doctrine is thus extricated.

But here's the rub:

Romans 10:1-13
Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness of God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

Moses writes this about the righteousness that is by the law: “The person who does these things will live by them.” But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ down) “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’ ” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Paul holds out the offer of salvation to his kinsman through belief. Only a disingenuous person would speak so whilst holding to the doctrine of reprobation.

I hereby challenge any Calvinist to explain why they yet remain believing such a doctrine despite Paul's words.

If I may just make 2 points here :

1. It is a bit of an irony that the passage you quoted concerns Israel - which is called (many times in scripture) God's elect. And most of the Christian world that does not hold Calvinism will at the same time hold that ALL of Israel is elect to salvation (Romans 11:25-26). So those who will reject predestination (at least for Gentiles) will wholeheartedly accept the idea that it will hold for Israel. God, then, can do what He wants with Israel but not with the Gentiles? So which does Paul believe (more...?), that it's up to Israel if they want to believe or not (the chapter you cited) or that they all will be saved per Romans 11 (whether they like it or not?)...
For the record, I don't use that to place undue stress on one or the other passage - just to realize that the arguments against Reformed predestination often seem to be more emotional than biblical. The matter is complex and I don't believe our words can properly do the whole thing justice.

2. The second point is one you are no doubt familiar with - the Calvinist doesn't disagree that belief is a necessary component of salvation. And would also say (I suppose) that Paul didn't know who was to be saved or not. Even Jesus spoke what He did first of all out of obedience to the Father, but also hoping the Pharisees "might be saved" (John 5:34). Were they? The Calvinist would say that God alone knows...so Paul's approach wouldn't be inconsistent with a Calvinistic theology (as I understand it, anyway).

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

If I may just make 2 points here :

1. It is a bit of an irony that the passage you quoted concerns Israel - which is called (many times in scripture) God's elect. And most of the Christian world that does not hold Calvinism will at the same time hold that ALL of Israel is elect to salvation (Romans 11:25-26). So those who will reject predestination (at least for Gentiles) will wholeheartedly accept the idea that it will hold for Israel. God, then, can do what He wants with Israel but not with the Gentiles? So which does Paul believe (more...?), that it's up to Israel if they want to believe or not (the chapter you cited) or that they all will be saved per Romans 11 (whether they like it or not?)...
For the record, I don't use that to place undue stress on one or the other passage - just to realize that the arguments against Reformed predestination often seem to be more emotional than biblical. The matter is complex and I don't believe our words can properly do the whole thing justice.

2. The second point is one you are no doubt familiar with - the Calvinist doesn't disagree that belief is a necessary component of salvation. And would also say (I suppose) that Paul didn't know who was to be saved or not. Even Jesus spoke what He did first of all out of obedience to the Father, but also hoping the Pharisees "might be saved" (John 5:34). Were they? The Calvinist would say that God alone knows...so Paul's approach wouldn't be inconsistent with a Calvinistic theology (as I understand it, anyway).

Yes, this is like the age-old demand of "don't judge me". Yet it's a demand for judgment. They want to be judged as saved. They just don't want to be judged as unsaved.

Likewise, these have no problem with God saving anyone and everyone, but not just someone. And then they depict election as some kind of lottery.

As long as God includes everyone, nobody has an issue. But when God is God and knows the end before the beginning, then everyone gets all bent.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Who are you? Better yet, what are you? Benevelant agape love, you say? With such a smell of verbal death permeating from you? Surely you jest? You need to fold your hand and crawl away from the table. You've been had.

You're just mad because I loved you enough to tell you the truth instead of coddling you about your heretical Christology.

You hate me for loving you. I'm fine with that. You don't know what love is. Maybe you will learn. I pray you do.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Which YOU have NEVER, with the 'proper' use of scripture, supported.. NOTHING but your puffed up opinion do you rest in do make your accusations as one "ever learning and never able to come into the knowledge of the truth". You have no insight. Your lord is the law of your own flesh which seeks for agrandisement from your mouth.. and he loves you for your thoughtless exchanges.

You are without excuse. Historical Christology of the Faith has been settled for many centuries by men of God much greater than I (and you, for sure). You don't get to validly innovate, any more than the Third Wave Charismatic antichrists get to innovate.

Extreme Kenoticism has been anathema for centuries. And if you knew the reasons why, you'd cringe at yourself and your peers. You just can't get there from here. Sad.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

OP anyone?

I'd be willing to give an educated guess that this topic is one of the three or four most tired topics on all Christian forums.

Most are just trying to prove themselves right, and have no intention whatsoever of ever seeking truth beyond their presuppositions.

You're "that guy".

 

[Lon]

I dutifully declare that I am not a Christian.

Probably the wrong section for you. It is 'exclusively' Christian for posting here. Some exceptions but check with a mod.

 

[Cross Reference]

You're just mad because I loved you enough to tell you the truth instead of coddling you about your heretical Christology.

You hate me for loving you. I'm fine with that. You don't know what love is. Maybe you will learn. I pray you do.

Wrong again! I pity you. The "self" giants in your mind must torment you to sleeplessness to be what you must be in order to satisfy them. Sad that there are humans who don't realize they can get out from under their boot. Ergo, my pity to you.