Opinion of John Calvin?

[A18]

To repeat: the theory is that God set up the initial conditions, knowing how things will turn out. The people still choose for themselves.

But if determinism is false, we are faced with another 'dilemma': salvation is apparently random.

[??????????]

What is your objection to the Limited Atonement element?

Christ died for the sins of the whole world. God rejects no one, only people can reject God.

Plus the double predestination thing means that God creates people already doomed to hell with absolutely no hope of salvation, which is a pretty damn sadistic thing and completely opposed to lots of the principles of Christianity. I'll echo J. J.'s comment there.

Wow, we agree, for once.

This, combined with the fact that Sunderland actually won a game today (well yesterday technically but...) is proof that the End of The World will occur as soon as I post this message.

See, that's why I like you Al. Always a sense of humor.

[Emsworth]

Why does one have to accept it?

Because that seems to be what the remainder of the Bible suggests.

I happen to agree with your broader philosophical argument that determinism is true. I am merely having some difficulty reconciling some verses in the Bible with that philosophy.

[A18]

If one has to accept it, then Christ did not die for the sins of every human being. If he had, the sin of rejecting it would be paid for.

My question regarding 1 John 2:2 is, who is the world? Is it every human being, or is it persons from every tribe, tongue, etc.?

What about John 17:9? "I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours."

And what is to be made of John 6:44? "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day."

[Emsworth]

If he had, the sin of rejecting it would be paid for.

But is failing to believe in Jesus really a sin, in and of itself? Presumably, a non-believer does not go to Hell simply for being a non-believer; rather, he suffers because he (being an imperfect human being) has committed sins for which he has not atoned.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If one refuses to accept that the Bible can be inconsistent, then one might interpret this verse as not referring to salvation.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That merely indicates that salvation is a result of God's grace, rather than man's own deeds. One cannot come up to Heaven on one's own, unless "the Father ... draws him." This is not inconsistent with the idea that this grace is available to everyone.

[A18]

So you're saying there is only potential atonement, and not any atonement at all. That clearly conflicts with the statement that he died for the sins of every human being.

I like my interpretation of 1 John 2:2 better.

It seems to be saying that no one can accept Christ unless God draws him towards Christ.

[Emsworth]

So you're saying there is only potential atonement, and not any atonement at all.

Or rather, that there is atonement offered to the "whole world," which any man may accept or reject as he pleases. I do not believe that this is inconsistent with 1 John 2:2.

However, there is certainly support for the argument that everyone goes to Heaven, even non-believers. After all, 1 Timothy 4:10 says, "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." Thus, God is the Saviour especially of those who believe, not solely of those who believe, according to this verse. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is one plausible interpretation, but there are others. It could very easily be interpreted as saying that man cannot obtain salvation on his own, but must rely on God's grace.

[A18]

That is potential atonement. It doesn't actually save anyone. No one's sins are forgiven, unless they do something.

I don't see how it can be interpreted any other way, since it is Christ speaking, and saying that God the Father has to call you in order for you to come to Christ.

[Bono]

Plus the double predestination thing means that God creates people already doomed to hell with absolutely no hope of salvation, which is a pretty damn sadistic thing and completely opposed to lots of the principles of Christianity.

^^^^^^

I like to call it Hell Without Parole

The theory is that God set up the initial conditions, knowing how things will turn out. The people still choose for themselves.

But if determinism is false, we are faced with another 'dilemma': salvation is apparently random.

No it's not. That's the Wesleyan version.

[A18]

Methodists do not believe in predestination.

EDIT: What I meant to say is not that God saw those who would choose him, and predestined them, but that being omniscient, he had to have known what he was going to do, and what the circumstances would be.