Why do Calvinists speak like comic book supervillains? Do they teach it in seminary school?

Why do Calvinists speak like comic book supervillains? Do they teach it in seminary school?

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 7 months ago
    Solitaire

    Holier than thou attitude.
    Although I've read some old Orthos who talk the same way, which is even more nonsensical, since they don't even believe in Sola Fide.
    I think believe really have a hard time believe that they deserve HELL, and the only thing saving them is CHRIST's atonement.
    So they start really overdoing it or something to convince themselves.
    Creation will not applaud when someone goes to Hell.
    In fact, God doesn't want* anyone to got Hell.

    TULIP and its consequences have been a disaster for the Baptist race.

    • 7 months ago
      Solitaire

      >I think believe really have a hard time believe that they deserve HELL
      messed up that sentence WOW

      I think people really have a hard time believing that they deserve Hell

    • 7 months ago
      Worker

      >I think believe really have a hard time believe that they deserve HELL
      messed up that sentence WOW

      I think people really have a hard time believing that they deserve Hell

      >Holier than thou attitude.
      >I think believe really have a hard time believe that they deserve HELL
      That doesn't make any sense. The point of Christianity/Calvinism is that humans are absolutely corrupt and undeserving of anything but hell. That is what makes God's mercy in His salvation so amazing and why it should humble the Christian (because there was nothing good in the Christian to merit their salvation). The Christian/Calvinist knows that they deserved nothing but hell, and yet God had mercy on them, despite the Christian being without any merit of their own. That is the opposite of thinking that you don't deserve hell or being holier than someone else.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >I'm not a smug condescending piece of shit because I admit I am one!
        What exactly is the logic here?

        %3D%3D

        • 7 months ago
          Solitaire

          >The Christian/Calvinist knows that they deserved nothing but hell, and yet God had mercy on them, despite the Christian being without any merit of their own.
          Yes yes I AGREE
          but Paul Washer here is going way too far with it.

          He's making it out like God is evil... basically.
          It's one thing to agree that humans deserve Hell and can't merit their own salvation
          It's another to say
          >creation will applaud when you go to Hell
          The Bible says no such thing about applause etc.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Isn't that literally in Revelation? My problem with Calvinism is it leaves no place for creaturely responsibility, compatibilist copes notwithstanding. My own views on hell would actually synthesize calvinistic equal ultimacy with inclusivism and libertarian free will; everyone gets a chance but damnation has a purpose, especially in the case of those who actively reject God.

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            >Isn't that literally in Revelation?
            No.

      • 7 months ago
        Solitaire

        >The Christian/Calvinist knows that they deserved nothing but hell, and yet God had mercy on them, despite the Christian being without any merit of their own.
        Yes yes I AGREE
        but Paul Washer here is going way too far with it.

        • 7 months ago
          Worker

          [...]
          He's making it out like God is evil... basically.
          It's one thing to agree that humans deserve Hell and can't merit their own salvation
          It's another to say
          >creation will applaud when you go to Hell
          The Bible says no such thing about applause etc.

          I think you're confused as to what Washer's point was. He's showing that humans are so entirely evil and corrupted that God is doing a great work of justice by punishing those who did not believe on His Son.

          He's not taking pleasure in the fact that people are going to hell.

          Have you never listened to a Washer sermon? He's spent years evangelising in a war zone; that's hardly someone who doesn't care about the fate of souls.

          We are "elect according to grace"
          But if you were to read the rest of the New Testament, you'd realize that this grace is received when someone, of their own free will, believes on the Lord Jesus Christ and his atonement.
          It's not the ineffable "picking and choosing" which Calvinists say; where God picks you and forces you to believe on Christ. Or he picks you and forces you to NOT believe and go to Hell.

          God elects those that believe.
          God does not* elect people to* believe.

          >Or he picks you and forces you to NOT believe and go to Hell.
          You are very, very confused. That's never what happens. God never prevents someone from coming to Him. Everyone who calls on the name of the Son will be saved.

          I don't want this to turn into some sort of vicious argument, because it at least seems that you are a Church-going Christian, but you do have a very, very flawed understanding of Calvinism.

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            I believe many Calvinists are indeed saved and have the Holy Ghost inside them.
            Because when, in person I show them the scripture they listen, and some of them change their mind.
            Maybe neither of us are explaining very well.
            But Paul Washer IS wrong. Even if you like him.

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            You don't even have a basic understanding of Calvinism though. That's my point. You're attacking some imaginary theology that only exists inside your head.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're adhering to an imaginary theology that only exists inside your head. And that is indeed the problem; the incoherence of your beliefs.

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            Okay.
            What is 'Election" in Calvinism?
            I may be inflammatory with my characterization but I'm pretty sure I "get" it
            Especially with how TULIP works. Irresistible Grace would basically mean that God picks and chooses who goes to Heaven or Hell... since his grace is "irresistible" and people still go to Hell... meaning everyone in Hell didn't have grace shown to them.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >[Cohenist pilpul intensifies]

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            Election is certainly not what you said in this post:

            We are "elect according to grace"
            But if you were to read the rest of the New Testament, you'd realize that this grace is received when someone, of their own free will, believes on the Lord Jesus Christ and his atonement.
            It's not the ineffable "picking and choosing" which Calvinists say; where God picks you and forces you to believe on Christ. Or he picks you and forces you to NOT believe and go to Hell.

            God elects those that believe.
            God does not* elect people to* believe.

            >where God picks you and forces you to believe on Christ. Or he picks you and forces you to NOT believe and go to Hell.

            God NEVER, EVER, EVER forces anyone to not believe. People choose not to believe out of their own free will. And because human nature has been totally corrupted by the Fall, humans will never choose God out of their own volition.

            That is what is being illustrated in Romans 3.

            >10 as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; 11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
            Romans 3:10-11

            But then we can continue by saying...

            >4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
            Ephesians 2:4-9

            So all of humanity is totally corrupted and worthless. And yet God has chosen an elect of humanity to save, giving them the gift of faith, by His grace. There was nothing in the humans to qualify themselves for salvation, but God freely chose to save them due to His mercy. That is grace.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            God doesn't take pleasure in people going to hell, but He still created humans with the knowledge that they would be punished. It might not sound nice to you, but that's what the Bible teaches:

            >21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory
            Romans 9:21-23

            >The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.
            Proverbs 16:4

            >though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—
            Romans 9:11

            Although despite this, God's loving and merciful nature means that He still desires those wicked people to come to Him.

            You don't even have a basic understanding of Calvinism though. That's my point. You're attacking some imaginary theology that only exists inside your head.

            [...]
            I think you're confused as to what Washer's point was. He's showing that humans are so entirely evil and corrupted that God is doing a great work of justice by punishing those who did not believe on His Son.

            He's not taking pleasure in the fact that people are going to hell.

            Have you never listened to a Washer sermon? He's spent years evangelising in a war zone; that's hardly someone who doesn't care about the fate of souls.

            [...]
            >Or he picks you and forces you to NOT believe and go to Hell.
            You are very, very confused. That's never what happens. God never prevents someone from coming to Him. Everyone who calls on the name of the Son will be saved.

            I don't want this to turn into some sort of vicious argument, because it at least seems that you are a Church-going Christian, but you do have a very, very flawed understanding of Calvinism.

            [...]
            >Holier than thou attitude.
            >I think believe really have a hard time believe that they deserve HELL
            That doesn't make any sense. The point of Christianity/Calvinism is that humans are absolutely corrupt and undeserving of anything but hell. That is what makes God's mercy in His salvation so amazing and why it should humble the Christian (because there was nothing good in the Christian to merit their salvation). The Christian/Calvinist knows that they deserved nothing but hell, and yet God had mercy on them, despite the Christian being without any merit of their own. That is the opposite of thinking that you don't deserve hell or being holier than someone else.

            Worst tripgay in the entire history of Oyish

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why? He backs everything with scripture and isn't focused on posturing and identity politics like most other tripfriends

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            >And yet God has chosen an elect of humanity to save, giving them the gift of faith, by His grace.

            And everyone outside of this has no opportunity to be saved?
            Do you see?
            And if I quoted any of the many verses saying "Christ died for every man"
            "Christ died for all" etc. you would just say
            >all doesn't mean all
            I mean that's what "limited atonement" means.

            Also, what a garbage translation
            >chosen by grace
            it's
            >chosen according to grace
            the word is κατά
            "according to"
            i.e.
            "Ευανγγέλιον Κατά Μάρκον"

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            >And everyone outside of this has no opportunity to be saved?
            They have the opportunity to be saved if they call on the name of the Lord. But they don't, because they reject salvation out of their own free will.

            >I mean that's what "limited atonement" means.
            No, limited atonement means that Christ's sacrifice didn't just make salvation potentially possible (for example, what if no one had believed in Christ after He had died? Would His death have been for nothing?) but instead it actually saved the elect.

            You believe that Christ only made salvation possible for a hypothetical group of people by dying and being raised. But I believe that Christ actively saved a known group of people by dying and being raised.

            You believe that Christ went to the cross hoping that His death would be meaningful for possibly saving an unknown group of people. But I believe that Christ went to the cross knowing that His death would absolutely save a known group of people.

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            >You believe that Christ only made salvation possible for a hypothetical group of people by dying and being raised. But I believe that Christ actively saved a known group of people by dying and being raised.
            >You believe that Christ went to the cross hoping that His death would be meaningful for possibly saving an unknown group of people. But I believe that Christ went to the cross knowing that His death would absolutely save a known group of people.

            Seriously what are you talking about?
            I believe that God is omniscient. Jesus Christ "foreknew" everyone who would be saved; while at the same time dying for all men.
            And I believe that all who believe currently ARE saved.
            And you're saying that I* am arguing against an imaginary theology?

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            Oh, so you believe that Christ knew who He would die for, even before the world was created?
            And you believe that Christ actually secured a salvation for those people by His death and resurrection?

            Or, are you saying that Christ didn't know who He would die for, before the world was created? And that His death and salvation didn't actually secure their salvation, but only made it possible?

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            >Oh, so you believe that Christ knew who He would die for, even before the world was created?
            >And you believe that Christ actually secured a salvation for those people by His death and resurrection?

            This, obviously.
            But you seem to be extremely hung up on this "Calvinist" thing. What is "limited atonement" if not "limited atonement"?
            I believe Christ atoned an infinite atonement.
            And man's salvation is predicate on accepting said atonement.

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            Lol, so you believe in Limited Atonement. The term 'Limited Atonement' is misleading, which is why some Calvinists prefer Definite Atonement.

            You might find it interesting to give this article a quick skim-over:
            https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/definite-atonement

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            see this is the thing
            Calvinism is like a spectrum.
            Some people really use limited atonement to mean "limited atonement"
            TULIP, like I said, arose from right doctrines. But phrasing can corrupt them.
            Some Calvinists really aren't "Calvinists" lol
            I mean you want to rename the doctrine.

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            Yeah, that's exactly right. That's why I'm saying that you don't understand Calvinism, and you're instead attacking a totally warped version of hyper-Calvinism, which I would also attack.

            That's why the more you will find out about Calvinism, the more you'll realise that you probably actually agree with pretty much everything that's being said. The problem is that Calvinism is presented as a big, scary bogey-man, but is actually just the result of an honest studying of the Bible.

          • 7 months ago
            Ο Σολιταίρ

            okay, at this point though why do you need to call yourself "Calvinist"?
            I'm pretty sure not even Calvin approved of his followers calling themselves "Calvinists" (correct me if I'm wrong)

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            >okay, at this point though why do you need to call yourself "Calvinist"?
            Because I am a Calvinist, lol. But I don't go around saying, "Hi, everyone, I'm a Calvinist!" I am a Christian. I don't even particularly like the term Calvinist.

            But because I believe that Calvinist theology is what the Bible teaches, I will defend Calvinism when it is attacked. I believe that it is very important for Christians to understand the doctrines of grace. Calvinism is simply what it means to interpret the Bible correctly.

            However, when you take Calvinistic doctrines and stop relying on the Bible, then you begin to develop a twisted understanding of Calvinism, which leads to hyper-Calvinism. I am against hyper-Calvinism as much as I am against Arminianism. Both misunderstand the sovereignty of God and reject the teaching of the Bible.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Actually if you read the Bible honestly, you arrive at a nonbiblical worldview because it clearly is not a magic book deliniating ultimate truth. As for Calvinism, sure the Bible supports it. There are plenty of passages supporting EDD (Exhaustive Divine Determinism). But there are completely different passages you can use to support open theism and dynamic omniscience. Same with works vs faith alone. This is because the Bible is not a self-consistent book and many of ita authors disagree with each other.

          • 7 months ago
            Chud Anon

            >fat frick

            You will know them by their fruits

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            >You will know them by their fruits
            He's widely understood to be one of the greatest preachers to ever live and many thousands were saved through his ministry.

            But I get that you're not saved, and the only reason that you made your post was to take the opportunity to slander a long-dead Christian.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're not saved either Worker. God revealed it to me in a way I can be certain :^)

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Noone is saved. The magic lava isn't real.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Post hand asiatic

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            >meaning everyone in Hell didn't have grace shown to them.
            Everyone in hell was shown grace by God.

            In Matthew 5:45, we find that God shows mercy to the wicked by providing for their earthly needs:
            >...For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
            Matthew 5:45

            In Isaiah 26:10, we find that God has shown kindness to the wicked, but they did not turn from their ways or see the goodness of God.
            >If favor is shown to the wicked, he does not learn righteousness; in the land of uprightness he deals corruptly and does not see the majesty of the LORD.
            Isaiah 26:10

            The wicked will also hear of the Gospel. If the wicked turned to God, then they would be saved. That is more grace that the sinner freely rejects.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        ?si=E1aiyMULyJo68zPL

        Is this good teaching?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      > God doesn't want* anyone to got Hell.
      This
      And it’s the real proof of all then bullshit around this central belief system
      Neither god nor his creation WANTS anyone to go to hell
      The degree to which it will happen is the degree to which creation and it’s God will weep

      • 7 months ago
        Worker

        God doesn't take pleasure in people going to hell, but He still created humans with the knowledge that they would be punished. It might not sound nice to you, but that's what the Bible teaches:

        >21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory
        Romans 9:21-23

        >The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.
        Proverbs 16:4

        >though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—
        Romans 9:11

        Although despite this, God's loving and merciful nature means that He still desires those wicked people to come to Him.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          If he desired the wicked people to come to him, why did he decree in eternity past that they wouldn't?

          • 7 months ago
            Worker

            Paul explained why.

            >19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory
            Romans 9:19-23

            So He chose the elect for mercy, and left the reprobate to their sins, so that they might receive justice.

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            you would say reprobates are billions of people, whereas I differentiate the "lost" from the "reprobate"

  2. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    my favourite is
    >If God is not glorified in your salvation, He will be glorified in your destruction

  3. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >TULIP and its consequences have been a disaster for the Baptist race.
    I find that even so-called "Arminian" Baptists have this idea of once saved, always saved, which is basically just the P of TULIP isolated from what justifies it. Has any Baptist addressed this?

    • 7 months ago
      Solitaire

      Any Baptist that says they're "Arminian" believes that you can "lose your salvation" and they don't adhere to OSAS.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nobody says that or looks like that. The only people who call themselves Arminian are Wesleyans who believe salvation can be forfeited.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      The only Arminian leaning Baptists would be Free Will Baptists and they don't believe in OSAS. They also usually aren't the big names you'll see in Baptist circles.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Any Baptist that says they're "Arminian" believes that you can "lose your salvation" and they don't adhere to OSAS.

        I guess I should have said that there are a lot of Baptists who balk at being called "Calvinist" and even say TULIP is wrong, but then believe everything that's in it for "REASONS OK!?!?!?"

        [...]
        >Holier than thou attitude.
        >I think believe really have a hard time believe that they deserve HELL
        That doesn't make any sense. The point of Christianity/Calvinism is that humans are absolutely corrupt and undeserving of anything but hell. That is what makes God's mercy in His salvation so amazing and why it should humble the Christian (because there was nothing good in the Christian to merit their salvation). The Christian/Calvinist knows that they deserved nothing but hell, and yet God had mercy on them, despite the Christian being without any merit of their own. That is the opposite of thinking that you don't deserve hell or being holier than someone else.

        >oh I did nothing to deserve it, miserable worm that i am... but that guy over there didn't even get it so hahahaha burn fricker burn

        • 7 months ago
          Solitaire

          TULIP takes right doctrines, rephrases them, and then turns them into wrong doctrines.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            How so? For instance, what is the "right doctrine" on election, compared to the wrong version?

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            We are "elect according to grace"
            But if you were to read the rest of the New Testament, you'd realize that this grace is received when someone, of their own free will, believes on the Lord Jesus Christ and his atonement.
            It's not the ineffable "picking and choosing" which Calvinists say; where God picks you and forces you to believe on Christ. Or he picks you and forces you to NOT believe and go to Hell.

            God elects those that believe.
            God does not* elect people to* believe.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Interesting. thank you, I'm in between churches right now (ex-Catholic, haven't been back for about a year) but I might have to check out a Baptist church if i get the chance

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            Choose one that says that they're "Independent Fundamental Baptist"
            It's memed-on on this site, but you may as well see the best of the Baptists if you intend to check it out.
            Sometimes an IFB Church is Calvinist. They're normally upfront about it.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            How do the Primitive Baptists compare to the IFB? I know the former are definitely going to lean Calvinist, but other than that I don't see much of a difference between them and the IFB other than maybe the latter allowing for musical instruments in worship

          • 7 months ago
            Solitaire

            Don't actually know much about "Primitive Baptists"
            That said, not allowing instruments is pants-on-head moronic. IFB don't have rock bands either. Normal instruments. Singing as an entire church from the hymnal.
            Depending on where you are (if you're in the US) there's a Baptist Church under every rock. You may as well visit the IFB Church.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not allowing instruments just came from a bizarre mix of not seeing any New Testament examples of instruments, the Campbellites not using them, and a lot of these congregations just being so poor they couldn't afford instruments and had to do acapella regardless. I think it's a splitting hairs issue but I can respect the Primitive Baptists have unintentionally preserved a lot of the early hymns and hymn singing styles due to this.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Primitive Baptists are going to be way stricter than the IFB in the sense Primitive Baptists are Hyper-Calvinists. That said Primitive Baptists are a bit more relaxed on day to day rules than the IFB can be. Primitive Baptists also don't believe in soul winning or anything like that so they do near zero missionary work outside of some members who take on pet projects on their own dime. I actually rather like them though I imagine some congregations will be more insular than others since most of their membership is going to be multi-generational families.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Most Baptists don't even know their church is Calvinist or some modified form of it. I grew up in a Southern Baptist church and most just thought the only difference between them and the Methodists down the road was how to baptize.

  4. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Protestantism
    Not even once!

  5. 7 months ago
    Dirk

    >NOOO you can't tell me of my sinfulness!

    • 7 months ago
      Ο Σολιταίρ

      The Bible says enough.
      He's going far beyond what is biblical.

      >But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
      >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.
      >But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

      Calvinism cannot be reconciled with this passage
      Why is God longsuffering?
      >He's not willing that any should perish
      What does this mean practically?
      >God is staying the Final Judgment so that all men may have a chance to be saved

      • 7 months ago
        Dirk

        It is appointed for man once to die and after that comes judgment.
        What's your eschatological position?

        • 7 months ago
          Ο Σολιταίρ

          >What's your eschatological position?
          Revelation
          If God ended the world before everyone alive could hear the Gospel, then there are those who would go to Hell who would have believed.
          That's the parable of wheat and tares.
          If God "harvested" at the inopportune time, then there would be those who would* have believed going to Hell.
          Consistent with:
          >And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
          -Matthew 24:14

  6. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Abrahamism is the willful worship of a jealous, schizophrenic, omnipotent god who is the author of all evil in the world, and creates living beings with the intention of throwing them into hell for eternity, which makes him worse than any fictional villain. Calvinists and rabbinical israelites read their books without copes or dishonesty, which is why they come across as legitimately evil. You'd have to be to worship a god like that.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Evil according to whose standard?

    • 7 months ago
      Ο Σολιταίρ

      hell ain't so bad if you werent that bad of a person.
      there's degrees of hell "according to your works"
      Im not sure what the "best Hell" would be but obviously you wouldn't want to go there anyways, it's probably pretty hot.

  7. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >That's how not to good I am
    >But God made me not good and knew I would be not good immediately after I was conceived (which he also knew would happen immediately after creating the universe

    K

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *