Does Calvinism Make God Unjust?

[Ask Mr. Religion]

There are some errors in the Bible, but they are minor errors.

As I have repeatedly stated:

@Robert Pate

How would you know this, Robert?

You confirm you believe the Bible is not a perfect book. So how do you go about determining when you have encountered imperfections (errors) in the Bible? Please explain your methodology so we can understand how words like "world" mean what you think they mean.

Given that you do not think God knows who will actually believe, you believe God is absent from earth, and you advocate psychopannychia (soul-sleep), understanding how you separate truth from the imperfections you see in Scripture is important.

So, again, I ask how you are able to determine truth from the errors you apparently see in Scripture? What exactly are these errors?

The infallible reporting of corrections made to a person in Scripture is not error in Scripture. The Bible has plenty of accounts of the bad acts of persons, saints and not. These accounts are not errors in the infallible words of God. As to the James' book, are you saying that it is mistakenly included in Scripture?

AMR

 

[Crucible]

You're either lying or ignorant of Calvin's history. Which is it?

Neither :idunno:

Why don't you delve a bit into what was going on in those times: The Renaissance, King Henry VIII declaring himself the Pope, the Spanish Inquisitions, and, of course, the Reformation.

There were circumstances which you do not comprehend because you are a spoiled, modern person who takes all for granted :wave2:

I'll just keep restating that until it sinks in- your brand of persecution is taking Christmas decorations off of coffee cups.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

What? First; I'm not trying to poison anything but purify and unify it.

Secondly; what empirical evidence are you talking about?

Pretty sure the topic in general is faith and as such; empirical evidence has little to do with it, but please do explain this evidence and it's contexts for us simpletons.

So my opinion went from being of no worth to haughty and sanctimonious to evil and poison and then back to worthless and then you were just jesting and now it's understood to be poison again.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Oh yeah; you seemed to say that my results on the quiz weren't worth discussing either because they weren't contrary to your perception of me or they weren't contrary to your own beliefs and faith?

How was my naive hope that you might give an honest humble opinion on a very real topic which you supplied the medium for poisoning the well.

Your old scare tactics may work to frighten some from the truth, but only temporarily, and only for your own loss.

Poisoning the well; more like throwing out the old dirty water.

I have no opinion on the results you received. They are for you and you alone. If you do not like the results examine yourself, not me.

The discussion is about labels commonly assigned to one's system of beliefs. A simple survey of one's beliefs will always result in a label, as the one you took plainly evidences. That you do not like the label does not mean the label is not appropriate for the given set of questions asked and answered. When receiving the label and then to go off criticizing the method with silly complaints is poisoning the well of the the discussion at hand. Rather than dealing with the label assigned, you prefer to cavil against the very instrument such that you can divorce yourself from its conclusions and be the cause that no one else will take the instrument under consideration. That is the very definition of what poisoning the well means.

Get it now?

This continued back and forth only validates my previous suggestion that you take the time to actually write down what you believe about the many doctrinal matters found in Scripture. When you do so, a picture will emerge of the systematic views you hold. If you share that with another I am quite confident a label can be affixed to it, too.

Scripture contains various categories of doctrine:

1) Theology proper (doctrine of God, the Trinity—my specialty)
2) Revelation (general and special)
3) Creation, Providence
4) Anthropology (man)
5) Hamartiology (sin)
6) Soteriology (salvation)
7) Ecclesiology (the church)
8) Eschatology (last things)
9) Ethics
10) Apologetics

Knowing what and why one believes about each of these categories serves to strengthen one's walk of faith.

AMR

 

[popsthebuilder]

I have no opinion on the results you received. They are for you and you alone. If you do not like the results examine yourself, not me.

The discussion is about labels commonly assigned to one's system of beliefs. A simple survey of one's beliefs will always result in a label, as the one you took plainly evidences. That you do not like the label does not mean the label is not appropriate for the given set of questions asked and answered. When receiving the label and then to go off criticizing the method with silly complaints is poisoning the well of the the discussion at hand. Rather than dealing with the label assigned, you prefer to cavil against the very instrument such that you can divorce yourself from its conclusions and be the cause that no one else will take the instrument under consideration. That is the very definition of what poisoning the well means.

Get it now?

This continued back and forth only validates my previous suggestion that you take the time to actually write down what you believe about the many doctrinal matters found in Scripture. When you do so, a picture will emerge of the systematic views you hold. If you share that with another I am quite confident a label can be affixed to it, too.

Scripture contains various categories of doctrine:

1) Theology proper (doctrine of God, the Trinity—my specialty)
2) Revelation (general and special)
3) Creation, Providence
4) Anthropology (man)
5) Hamartiology (sin)
6) Soteriology (salvation)
7) Ecclesiology (the church)
8) Eschatology (last things)
9) Ethics
10) Apologetics

Knowing what and why one believes about each of these categories serves to strengthen one's walk of faith.

AMR

I appreciate the more leveled response.

I never said I didn't like the results.

I nearly pointed out that it was not too accurate because it labeled me as an and though I do agree with a lot of what the sda stand for it only asked about women and Saturday.

That's all. The test or quiz was indeed devised by a person based on their own preconceptions. This is without a doubt.

I took all the tests and neglected to share the other results, but the answers provided by the divisor of the tests are quite obviously, in some cases, based on indoctrination by man and not from unbiased reading of scripture.

I search myself and my motives daily.

I will go over the list you just posted and attempt to make heads or tails of it.

If I have questions would it be naive of me to even come to you for unbiased answers or would I be better off using Google?

Peace

Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[marhig]

Servetus was a criminal, as heresy was a crime.
It was punishable by anything from probation to death.

Religious mutiny is a constant danger in a world ruled by religion.

Anyone who has it in their heart to want to see another murdered and puts their hand to that murder doesn't have the heart of Christ.

John Calvin

The strongest recorded statement from Calvin on the Servetus affair is a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre, in which he says intolerantly:

"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

Jesus Christ

Matthew 5

Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God

Also in Matthew 5

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Luke 3

And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.

Matthew 22

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

God is love, and if we have the love of God in our hearts then we wouldn't will the death of anyone. But we would care for others, even those who hate us and persecute us.

 

[marhig]

The inquisitions in Geneva were necessary to ensure neither the Catholic or English Church, who were offing each other, didn't take advantage of any religious mutiny there.
The people put to death were very aware of the other lives they were potentially putting at stake in bringing their heresies and sins to where he was.

But don't mind any of that. Be a self-righteous idiot, like those atheists

I read this online

From 1541 to 1546, John Calvin caused 58 people to be executed and seventy six were exiled. His victims ranged in age from 16 to 80. The most common capital offense was the opposition to infant baptism.....

I think that if Jesus had of entered into Geneva at that time he would have been executed seeing that he taught very differently to John Calvin! Also he would have been seen as a heretic as he was baptised at the age of 30 and never ever taught that babies are to be baptised!

Acts 2:38

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

How can a baby repent?

 

[marhig]

As a preface, none of this is said with any ill will. And I didn't say you ignored all scripture, I meant you ignored some scripture. The way you are understanding currently absorbs some scripture but ignores other parts, so the picture you have is going to be a bit different. If you absorbed the other parts you put aside, it would cause a conflict with your current understanding.

With respect, I could say exactly the same thing to you!

 

[Crucible]

I read this online

From 1541 to 1546, John Calvin caused 58 people to be executed and seventy six were exiled. His victims ranged in age from 16 to 80. The most common capital offense was the opposition to infant baptism.....

I think that if Jesus had of entered into Geneva at that time he would have been executed seeing that he taught very differently to John Calvin! Also he would have been seen as a heretic as he was baptised at the age of 30 and never ever taught that babies are to be baptised!

Acts 2:38

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

How can a baby repent?

Baptism is an instrument, not an inner change in one's soul, which brings one into church communion and out of Original Sin. It absolves one of past sins as well, but here's what you fundamentalists fail to grasp:
Jesus never sinned, so why was he baptized?

Therein, you see why infant baptism is appropriate, and you can begin to understand why Calvin sought out those who opposed it- they were hijacking the Reformation for their own heresies.

 

[marhig]

[/B] Remember, "God" is not a name. It is not a person. It is a title and position.

Can you tell me what you believe that Paul meant when he said this? And in which title or position is Christ in, in relation to God according Paul?

1 Corinthians 11:3

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is.the man; and the head of Christ is God.

 

[marhig]

Baptism is an instrument, not an inner change in one's soul, which brings one into church communion and out of Original Sin. It absolves one of past sins as well, but here's what you fundamentalists fail to grasp:
Jesus never sinned, so why was he baptized?

Therein, you see why infant baptism is appropriate, and you can begin to understand why Calvin sought out those who opposed it- they were hijacking the Reformation.

It's not the baptism of water that brings us out of sin, it's true repentance, faith and the baptism of the holy spirit. When John baptised people, they had to first repent, and once they repented they were saved from their past sins. The holy spirit within works on our heart, putting our flesh to death and saves us from sinning every day. Without the holy spirit we are not alive in God, Christ should be manifest in us and through us, God wants to see the life of Christ lived out in his people every day. We can talk the right talk all day long, but it means nothing if we're not living right before God and walking the walk!

And if we have the holy spirit, we wouldn't will the death of anyone. We would care for others and help them. Regardless of who they are!

It wasn't for Calvin to seek out people who opposed infant baptism or who opposed any of his beliefs. If he was a true man of God, he would have left God to judge others and his main aim would have been to bring Christ to others and preach the gospel showing love compassion to others, not hatred, malice and murder!

Also, a baby may well be in sinful flesh, but a baby has never sinned and is innocent. How can a baby be baptised seeing as it hasn't yet sinned? Also, how can a child who doesn't yet understand sin, repent?

 

[Crucible]

I'm almost convinced it is impossible for some of you to understand a single thing.

It's as if you didn't even read the damn post.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I'm almost convinced it is impossible for some of you to understand a single thing.

It's as if you didn't even read the damn post.

Face reality, you're not anywhere near as smart as any of the "MADs" on TOL. Just get used to it and life will be easier for ya. Okay, pal?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Baptism is an instrument, not an inner change in one's soul, which brings one into church communion and out of Original Sin. It absolves one of past sins as well, but here's what you fundamentalists fail to grasp:
Jesus never sinned, so why was he baptized?

Therein, you see why infant baptism is appropriate, and you can begin to understand why Calvin sought out those who opposed it- they were hijacking the Reformation for their own heresies.

I believe you're 1/2 Catholic and 1/2 Calvinist. That's why you're so confused.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Cruc, you haven't got what it takes to debate anyone around these parts. Ya just don't have the smarts, buddy.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Besides Cruc, I can see you're starting to fall apart at the seams. If ya get my drift? You're losing it, fella.

 

[marhig]

I'm almost convinced it is impossible for some of you to understand a single thing.

It's as if you didn't even read the damn post.

Reading some of your posts about Calvin, I'm starting to think that you don't understand Jesus! I can't believe that you can't see that what Calvin did was wrong. He murdered and persecuted many many people, how is that Christ-like?

Regardless of how much civil unrest there was and regardless of what was going on, Calvin if he was a true man of God, wouldn't have persecuted anyone, And he would have been more interested in preaching the gospel and bringing the love of Christ to all those around him.

Surely you can see what he did was wrong before God?

I can imagine some people here holding Calvin's coat as he killed and persecuted many who belonged to God!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Reading some of your posts about Calvin, I'm starting to think that you don't understand Jesus! I can't believe that you can't see that what Calvin did was wrong. He murdered and persecuted many many people, how is that Christ-like?

Regardless of how much civil unrest there was and regardless of what was going on, Calvin if he was a true man of God, wouldn't have persecuted anyone, And he would have been more interested in preaching the gospel and bringing the love of Christ to all those around him.

Surely you can see what he did was wrong before God?

I can imagine some people here holding Calvin's coat as he killed and persecuted many who belonged to God!

Good post. Crucible believes Calvin cannot do any wrong.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Calvin was involved in the "Murder executions" of about 55 or more human beings. Does that sound like a "godly man" or a serial killer?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

There's something wrong with Crucible. I highly doubt he's a member of the Body of Christ.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

History exposes Calvin as a murderous, bloodthirsty, and sadistic tyrant. He has been called "The Pope of Geneva." Calvin was not a guy you could disagree with and live.