In Calvinism why are the sinners God made responsible for what God has made them?

[Fastfredy0]

I don’t have my “own theology”.

I read and believe what the scriptures say.

That doesn't make sense. Theology according to the dictionary is "religious beliefs and theory when systematically developed."
So you are either saying you have no beliefs or idea of how to put it all together or you follow whatever someone tells you. You are not making sense. To not have your own theology is to not believe in God basically, for theology means "the study of God". You always confuse me.

If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. John 15:6
Here is how we are instructed to remain in Christ —

Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us. 1 John 3:24

Do you believe this?
Does Calvinism teach this principle?

Yes, both Calvinists and I believe this. Almost every Christian of any denomination believes the entire Bible.

Aside: Now there is a difference between 'abiding' and 'communion' with God, but you don't have your own theology so I won't go off on a useless tangent.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Ezekiel 18:20

It doesn't get any clearer than this.

Context, context, context.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son...
in Exodus 34:7b visiting (avenging) the iniquity (sin, guilt) of the fathers upon the children and the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations [that is, calling the children to account for the sins of their fathers].”

Seems you have a scriptural contradiction. When you figure it out you will find your verse is irrelevant. Good Luck.

 

[JLB]

That doesn't make sense. Theology according to the dictionary is "religious beliefs and theory when systematically developed."

I don’t have any religious beliefs because I don’t belong to any religion.

I don’t have any theories which were systematically developed.


Maybe you can look at a dictionary to find out what religious beliefs and systematic theology that Abraham had.


Please, let me know what you find out because my salvation hangs in the balance of what your dictionary says.





JLB

 

[hawkman]

I don’t have any religious beliefs because I don’t belong to any religion.

I don’t have any theories which were systematically developed.


Maybe you can look at a dictionary to find out what religious beliefs and systematic theology that Abraham had.


Please, let me know what you find out because my salvation hangs in the balance of what your dictionary says.





JLB

You are not held captive by an "ism" . I had an idea that was what you meant .

 

[JLB]

You are not held captive by an "ism" . I had an idea that was what you meant .

Neither Communism, Calvinism, or Brainwashism!

 

[hawkman]

Thanks for posting this Fastfredy0 ,I found this link about theology .

Theology according to the dictionary is "religious beliefs and theory when systematically developed."

From the link here , theology .
"theology, Study of the nature of God and the relationship of the human and divine. The term was first used in the works of Plato and other Greek philosophers to refer to the teaching of myth, but the discipline expanded within Christianity and has found application in all theistic religions (see theism). It examines doctrines concerning such subjects as sin, faith, and grace and considers the terms of God’s covenant with humankind in matters such as salvation and eschatology. Theology typically takes for granted the authority of a religious teacher or the validity of a religious experience. It is distinguished from philosophy in being concerned with justifying and explicating a faith, rather than questioning the underlying assumptions of such faith, but it often employs quasi-philosophical methods."

Read the rest at the link when time permits .

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Context, context, context.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son...
in Exodus 34:7b visiting (avenging) the iniquity (sin, guilt) of the fathers upon the children and the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations [that is, calling the children to account for the sins of their fathers].”

Seems you have a scriptural contradiction. When you figure it out you will find your verse is irrelevant. Good Luck.

No irrelevance here.

You haven't properly distinguished between suffering the consequences of your father's sin, and actually being assigned the guilt of your father's sins. A person may suffer the natural and unavoidable consequences of their father's sin, but they will not ever be held spiritually accountable for the sins their father commits unless they do those sins themselves.

 

[Fastfredy0]

I don’t have any religious beliefs because I don’t belong to any religion.

So, you claim to not have any belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers, regarded as creating and governing the universe.
Aside: I am not putting words in your mouth as this is the dictionary definition of religious beliefs. You sure make a lot of religious comments for someone who does believe. I think you are confused or you are confusing me.

Neither Communism, Calvinism, or Brainwashism!

Just JLBism (a distinctive doctrine, system, or theory) and because you assert that your ideas of God are unique you don't see it as an "ISM". Your religion system seems to rely on the wisdom of one whereas Reform theology has many, many adherents. (Proverbs 15:22)

I don’t have any theories which were systematically developed.

So you are stating that when the bible speaks of a particular topic in let's say for example twenty different places then you never have developed ideas as to how all the pieces fit together such that there is no contradiction.
So, for example, when God states ""I the Lord do not change" and in another spot states "And the Lord relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people"; which is a apparent contradiction as in one place He says He does not change and in another God implies He has changed His mind .... you have never systematically solved that riddle. Interesting.

Maybe you can look at a dictionary to find out what religious beliefs and systematic theology that Abraham had.

Can't do that as the purpose of a dictionary is to define words so people can communicate with command understanding. A dictionary is not biographical which would be more in line with your request.

Please, let me know what you find out because my salvation hangs in the balance of what your dictionary says.

Again, the purpose of a dictionary is to define words so people can communicate with command understanding. Your believing your salvation hangs in upon what a dictionary says is "another gospel".

 

[Fastfredy0]

You are not held captive by an "ism" . I had an idea that was what you meant .

We are all held captive by our particular beliefs. To escape ones belief one must change his mind and then one is now held captive by his new belief. Proverbs 15:22

Christianity is system of thought summarized and contained in a series of doctrines that are arranged and considered in what we call “systematic theology”. These doctrines are biblically and logically related such that any topic can be, and often must be, discussed in relation to other topics. In fact, one way for a believer to comprehend truth and to guard against error is to do precisely that –that is, to learn each biblical doctrine itself as well as its relation to all other doctrines. Then, since they are related in such a manner that the central principles necessitate or authenticate all the others, and that all of them affirm or justify one another, as a result of grasping these doctrines as a system, each one gains greater depth and security in the Christian's thinking.

Therefore, “systematic theology” is paramount –not just beneficial, but essential and necessary –to spiritual development and church operation. “Systematic theology” is just a formal term to denote a comprehensive, interrelated, and coherent understanding of biblical doctrines. Vincent Cheung – Commentary on Colossians

..... a non-system of bible study is called: Confusion and Ignorance where Confusion and Ignorance are proportional one's study methods and one's source of truth.

 

[JLB]

So, you claim to not have any belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers, regarded as creating and governing the universe.

More dictionary terms?


Please refer to the post where I… claim to not have any belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers, regarded as creating and governing the universe.


I said I don’t have any religious beliefs, because I don’t belong to a religion.




JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

So, you claim to not have any belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers, regarded as creating and governing the universe.
Aside: I am not putting words in your mouth as this is the dictionary definition of religious beliefs. You sure make a lot of religious comments for someone who does believe. I think you are confused or you are confusing me.



Just JLBism (a distinctive doctrine, system, or theory) and because you assert that your ideas of God are unique you don't see it as an "ISM". Your religion system seems to rely on the wisdom of one whereas Reform theology has many, many adherents. (Proverbs 15:22)


So you are stating that when the bible speaks of a particular topic in let's say for example twenty different places then you never have developed ideas as to how all the pieces fit together such that there is no contradiction.
So, for example, when God states ""I the Lord do not change" and in another spot states "And the Lord relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people"; which is a apparent contradiction as in one place He says He does not change and in another God implies He has changed His mind .... you have never systematically solved that riddle. Interesting.



Can't do that as the purpose of a dictionary is to define words so people can communicate with command understanding. A dictionary is not biographical which would be more in line with your request.


Again, the purpose of a dictionary is to define words so people can communicate with command understanding. Your believing your salvation hangs in upon what a dictionary says is "another gospel".

When discussing the bible, we use terms according to how the bible uses them.
You are putting words into the mouth of the other member.

This is a flagrant use of this thread to irritate other members.
And breaks TOS no. 1.1 and 1.4

 

[JLB]

Christianity is system of thought summarized and contained in a series of doctrines that are arranged and considered in what we call “systematic theology”. These doctrines are biblically and logically related such that any topic can be, and often must be, discussed in relation to other topics. In fact, one way for a believer to comprehend truth and to guard against error is to do precisely that –that is, to learn each biblical doctrine itself as well as its relation to all other doctrines.

, to learn each biblical doctrine itself as well as its relation to all other doctrines.

Are you saying that you have a theology based on biblical doctrines and all other doctrines?


This is exactly what Jesus warned the Pharisee’s about.

Making the word of God of no effect, by teaching as doctrine the commandments of men.

He answered and said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
Mark 7:6-7


The teachings of Calvinism or Catholicism are the the mixing of the doctrine of men and biblical doctrine.


If we are Christians, then we should follow the doctrine of Christ, which is the truth.

Calvinist’s follow the teachings (doctrine) of Calvinism.

Catholics follow the teachings (doctrine) of Catholicism.

Christians follow the teachings (doctrine) of Christ.


Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 2 John 9




JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

Disagreeing with John Calvin can be deadly ! Should we be worried Jethro Bodine , wondering ?
The Sad Story of Michael Servetus and John Calvin

Michael Servetus

"At his trial, Servetus was condemned on two counts for spreading and preaching Nontrinitarianism, specifically, Modalistic Monarchianism (or Sabellianism) and anti-paedobaptism (anti-infant baptism).[32] Of paedobaptism Servetus had said, "It is an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity for the destruction of all Christianity."

Michael Servetus, burned at the stake on top of a pyre of his own books .

I know this story Hawk.
Every denomination has done evil to mankind.
I do believe Calvin was a very austere and hard person.
But this should not be the reason we don't like his teachings.
There are very good pastors today that teach calvinism...
but the teachings are still the same...they still don't properly portray
the God of the NT.
How the man is should be irrelevant to us.
You know, we call those that follow a PERSON as being in a cult.
Isn't reformed theology following a man?

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't think that the issue is that God determines who will be saved and who won't (predestination) but that God knows who will respond to the offer of the sacrifice of His son and who will not. It is still up to the individual person to accept Jesus' death on their behalf.

Let me clarify.
The second part of your post is what every denomination believes:
This:

It is still up to the individual person to accept Jesus' death on their behalf.

The REFORMED position is your beginning sentence:
This:

I don't think that the issue is that God determines who will be saved and who won't (predestination)

To clarify, yes, the reformed position is the above.
Calvinism teaches that it is GOD who chooses who will be saved and who will be damned
based on nothing at all except His good pleasure.

 

[jaybo]

I will just correct this misunderstanding. Jesus had to die for the same reason as you believe. There can be no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood, regardless of whether or not God chooses. The means of salvation does not change. Jesus died to atone for the sins of those who will be saved. If God predestined some to be saved, that does not negate the need for atonement.

Jesus died to atone for everyone's sins, not just those who will be saved. Salvation is, in part, accepting one's guilt and accepting that Jesus has paid the price for those sins.

 

[hawkman]

Christianity is system of thought summarized and contained in a series of doctrines that are arranged and considered in what we call “systematic theology”. These doctrines are biblically and logically related such that any topic can be, and often must be, discussed in relation to other topics. In fact, one way for a believer to comprehend truth and to guard against error is to do precisely that –that is, to learn each biblical doctrine itself as well as its relation to all other doctrines. Then, since they are related in such a manner that the central principles necessitate or authenticate all the others, and that all of them affirm or justify one another, as a result of grasping these doctrines as a system, each one gains greater depth and security in the Christian's thinking.

Therefore, “systematic theology” is paramount –not just beneficial, but essential and necessary –to spiritual development and church operation. “Systematic theology” is just a formal term to denote a comprehensive, interrelated, and coherent understanding of biblical doctrines. Vincent Cheung – Commentary on Colossians

Interesting , I need a link from where you got this, it is written by Vincent Cheung just as we see it now , correct ?

 

[Fastfredy0]

I said I don’t have any religious beliefs, because I don’t belong to a religion.

Not much sense responding as you do not assign meanings to words per the standards of a common dictionary. I.E. you say "A" as defined by a dictionary, but you mean "B". When I point out what you said using a dictionary you don't accept the definition.

Making the word of God of no effect, by teaching as doctrine the commandments of men.

Well, where we disagree it is evidence that at least one of us or possibly both are making the word of God of no effect. Whereas, you often don't assign meaning to words as found in the dictionary it would seem that in said case it is you the is making the word of God of no effect.
Whereas, you derive your understanding of scripture from yourself and I derive my understanding from myself using the scholarship of many of God's people one would tend to think it is I that is more likely to be correct if one believed Solomon, the wisest man of earth who said: "Proverbs 15:22 Without counsel [that would be JLB] purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors [that would be me] they are established.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Interesting , I need a link from where you got this, it is written by Vincent Cheung just as we see it now , correct ?

https://www.vincentcheung.com/books/Commentary%20on%20Colossians.pdf

Page 34 .....it's free .. he has lots of interesting stuff IMO

 

[Fastfredy0]

Calvinist’s follow the teachings (doctrine) of Calvinism.

Catholics follow the teachings (doctrine) of Catholicism.

Christians follow the teachings (doctrine) of Christ.

Educated and intelligent Christians guided by the Spirit follow the teachings (doctrines) of Christ. Reformed theology, though fallible, follow the teachings of Christ better than any other denomination of individual Christian who is arrogant enough to imagine his understanding is superior to the thousands of theologians whom the Spirit has given the gift of teaching to aid the church to better understand God's word.

 

[Free]

Try this, and then I really have to leave.
We believe the JWs are anti-Christian.
This is not mean.
Anti just means that they are not.
And you'd have to agree.

"Anti" means against, which JWs are as well. But, yes, I agree that they are not Christians.

There's a lot of writing and talking, etc. about the reformed faith.
Some theologians believe they are teaching a different gospel.
Some believe they are not really Christian because they only thing we have in common is Jesus.

What about the Trinity, the creation of everything by God, that humans are made in the image of God, man's rebellion against God and need for a saviour, penal substitution, the resurrection, etc? In fact, I can all but guarantee there is far more in common than different.

And we must define the gospel. Is it not that man rebelled against God, becoming deserving of his wrath, but he sent his own Son to die in our place, the death we deserve and raised him to life, so that we can be justified and reconciled to God and become new creatures in Christ? Do you believe that? I'm fairly certain the Reformed faith teaches this.

The JWs also believe in Jesus - just not like Christians do.

They believe in an entirely different Jesus, which means an entirely different God, unlike Reformed theology.

So I'm not being mean.
Just stating what the thinking is.
I mean, I can't think of anything we agree on !
Please reply .. don't know if I'll be able to answer tonight.

We agree on much.