Latin, why are you quoting something you have no understanding of?  I know God didn't say that in the old testament, He said it in the new one, thanks for the observation.  If you dont understand the bible, then why do you quote it?  Our Mediator, Jesus Christ, who is God, can do what He wants, because the Father has given Him these rights.  You dont get that, dont try.  What you need to see if you can digest, is that Christ died for sinners.  Since you claim to have no sin, I guess He didn't die for you.  But I cant make that judgment now.  For all I know you could be a believer tommorow.

God didn't say a lot of things He said in the OT, in the NT.  You just answered your own question, God was speaking to the elected nation of Israel(the Jews) at that time, like you said, telling them, that God is near all of them that call unto Him.  Now Jesus says, He has come to lay down His life for His sheep.  For the Jews first, and the gentiles.  I have a bible, which is Gods word to His people, you can get the audio version at a Christian bookstore though.

Actually again, your wrong, i do understand the bible, and I quoted the OT, which is also the torah, which is what I am quoting. Thank you very much, which I have also studied. To be specific, I studied the bible with a catholic theologist and an Anglican priest (part of a course I took in my late teens) as well I studied the Torah with 2 rabbi friends of my family (oddly enough my immediate family are atheists however we do know why we don't believe, yet still try to study why others believe, which includes understanding their holy books). However I have been an atheist my entire life.

Oh boy yet again, god sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself......boy you really never bothred to understand the torah which is the OT, you never studied it, and never understood the massive contradiction that this is, I am going to take it that as a good jesus believer, you believe in the trinity, which again, if you bothered with the Torah and everything else that goes with it, which the bible is based on and then added too, you would see this contradiction of a statement. 

    Let me give you a few more statements that are accredited to god in the Torah/OT.

 Revere only the L-rd your G-d and worship Him alone and swear only by his name.(Dt 6:13) Jesus is not his name, there is only one god, not three as per this statement. 

  O L-rd our G-d! Lords other than you have posses us, but only Your name shall we utter(Is. 26:13)  Only one name, jesus again is not it.

    O L-rd of hosts, enthroned on the cherubim! You alone are G-d of all the kingdom of the earth.(Is 37:16) again 1 god, not 1 in 3 or 3 in 1 however you want to look at it, something the christian faith is great at trying to wiggle out of but never truely explaining the contradiction in this belief of the trinity and jesus being god sacraficing himself to himself to save us from himself.

  Before me no god was formed, and after me none shall exist. None but Me, the L-rd, besides Me none can grant triumph. I alone foretold the triumph . . . (Is 43:10-12) wow, jesus existed as god? wait this is a contradiction of this statement right here....but as a good christian....your will ignore this.

    And besides me there is no G-d(Is 44:6) again jesus comes well after this statement claiming he is god, when in fact he isn't because I mean god wouldn't contradict himself right?....oh boy, please go study your bible, study it's origins and study it correctly.

    Beatz, "WE ATHEISTS LOVE YOU MORE" 

 Come on show me your Xian love,

bet ya bet ya .... My love is stronger ..... wantta bet ?     

That would be a poor assumption, given the age of the earth is probably much closer to 4.5 billion years. 

Can't be trillions first and foremost, the evidence indicates that the earth was formed some 4 billion years ago, the universe....about 13.5 to 14 billion years ago.....still about 982 billion years short for the first trillion (again come on stop being ignorant here) second gensis states the universe, our planet and life was created in 6 days (even if you take some theologiests idea that 1 days to god is a thousand years....we are still talking about 6 thousand years) which contradicts all the evidence, it was 14 billion years ago the universe was created and not till about 10 billion years later our solar system was formed....and our planet about the same time or 500 million years later. to which it took about most of that time to have life evolve to human form and most of it's present day animals to evolve to, actually life doesn't even show up for another billion years or so.

Brian, why are you angry with me, because God might not have chose you?

Latin, ok, the earth is 4.5 billion years old, your missing the point, the bible, doesn't deny that, actually it supports it.  It does not say in the beginning, God created the universe, it says the heavens and the earth.  You dont know when that beginning was, maybe it was 4.5 billion years ago, we cant know for shore.

and your wrong, genesis says the earth was REFORMED in 6 days, please understand your reading a translation first of all, and your reading it wrong second of all, you said you knew a guy who knows hebrew, well, I dont have time to sit down and teach you Hebrew, but please stop quoting, if you have a question because you dont understand then ask, dont quote it wrong.  God told Adam to replenish the earth, the hebrew there means to re-fill.  It was a re-make, did you miss the second verse, the earth was without form and void.  

Once again, in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, we dont know when that beginning was.  Theres a period(.), then it says the earth was without form and void.  He did not create the earth without form and void, there is a lapse there, then it goes onto to talk about the re-forming of the earth.    

Well since you know so much, explain to me what Let Us means, and angels had nothing to do with creation.  Also, explain the plural form of Eloah to me, which is Elohim.  Explain Judges 13:21-22 which talk about The Angel of the Lord, and call Him God. 

    Sorry it's late, but let me try here, Gensis 1:26 the let us is believed to be one of 2 forms, one in a majestic form, as a king would address his court, in the plural form, 2, as many biblical scholars would say god is address the angels to help him create man. But so many christians have abandoned this arguement, only those that don't bother to study it continue with this arguement.

    Eloah and Elohim, well they are both used many times throughout the bible Elohim many times in when it speaks in the singular form of God such as in Exodux 3:4, it is also used as the plural form of Eloah in Exodus 20:3, see the plural form is bar'u and the singular form bara yet both are translated as Elohim, it really depends on how it is being used, some of it meaning singual form others as plural. But you should know this already right?

    As for judges 13:21 But the angel of the LORD did no more appear to Manoah or to his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the LORD. and 22 And Manoah said unto his wife: 'We shall surely die, because we have seen God. So Manoah see the angel appointed by god to represent him on earth....this is nog god in angelic form on earth, this the angel OF THE lord not the lord as an angel or god as an angel, but an angel that is being the representative of god on earth. Huge difference, no where here does it state that it was god himself.

Does this answer it for you?

Hey Beatz, Jesus just called, he said you MUST take your god damned medication and shut the hell up. He also said give it up, no matter how much you try to suck his cock, the decision is final, you ain't on the list, biatch!!!!

I mean I'm sorry (to everyone else) for the languaje, but I give it as I see fit, and the kind of mentality you have showed so far is, to say the least, a detriment to the entire species. 

I won't comment on most of what you said because I don't respond to rants, but one thing you said struck me as interesting: 

Let's get existential for a moment and assume that life, with all it's potential, both wondrous AND woeful, has no real meaning or purpose, this is, it's devoid of any intrinsic purpose except perhaps life's own self replication and proliferation in and endless, but ultimetly meaningless, cicle.

When confronted with this possibility, we are left with two alternatives, either to grant life an extrinsic (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/extrinsic) meaning and/or purpose or, as you so eloquently put it, to blast ourselves. Finding/granting meaning, sense and purpose to both our life and life itself, is among our first and longest ongoing endeavours since recorded history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_of_life) and, easily presumable, even before that, so I think is fair to say it could be considered as an intrinsic part of our nature as conscious beings (the two needlesly highlighted words were particulary chosen for a reason).

Now here's the thing, you managed to merge the two alternatives mentioned before and found meaning in your life by rendering it meaningless. You pulled a deus ex machina called Heaven, making this life as little more than an annoyance while you wait and see if you were "pre-ornainly" chosen to after-live there. That's pretty much like putting all your money on a unicorn at the race tracks. The funny thing is, the straw man you called "the empty lifestyle" we atheist chose to live is nothing more than life itself, we choose to LIVE, each in our own particular way, some drawing the meaning of our lives from our work, our hobbies, our loved ones, yes, some even from hedonistic pleasures, but regardless, we LIVE.

Granted, you could argue that also pulled our own sense and reason to live out of "thin air" but, guess what, there isn't gonna be any other, and even if there is a truly intrinsic purpose to life, we definetly haven't found it yet, and I don't think we will, so we're stuck with what we can muster by ourselves, and to me, pulling a sense to life from "thin air" is a lot better than pulling it from "a tyranic being that existed before any air, indeed, before anything at all did". 

I really don't see why Pascal's Wager is an argument for religion, if anything is a strong argument against it. You want proof of this? Let's take another look at the race tracks: we put our money on a horse WE CAN PROVE IT EXISTS, and thus know it's running, you betted on the unicorn NO ONE CAN PROVE IT EXISTS.

 Wanna know how the race went down:

"Little Atheist Rascal's speeding up on the curve, followed by Godsy the Unicorn. Godsy's leading, Little Atheist gaining up. Faster, and Faster they go into the last strech. Little Atheist's now leading, now Godsy, now Atheist, it's gonna be a photograph finale folks and.....GODSY THE UNICORN WINS BY A NOSE....Oh wait, wait, Godsy's cracking in two halves??? OH, Ladies and Gentlemen, Godsy the Unicorn wasn't even a unicorn, it's two guys on a Unicorn Costume, and what are those needles?? They were on steroids too!!!..."

 And what did Godsy's manager had to say?: "Pay no attention to the two guys behind the Unicorn Costume".

Let me see if I understand wht you've said here, Beatz...

First, regarding God:

1)God has prordained an 'elect' few for salvation, and everyone else gets to burn.

Also, you're using the term in its original meaning of 'chosen, superior, specifically singled out for their greatness' sense, not in the 'bunch of people get together and vote' sense, to clarify for Brian.

2)Those whom God has predestined for Salvation will be Saved, and those whom God has predestined for the pit will burn, regardless of their actions/faith/repentence.

3)What each of us does in this life has been pre-ordained by God.

4)God doesn't love everyone, only his elect. God can do this because God is God, and God is big enough and powerful enough to tell the world to go to hell.

At this point, I would like to say, "How very Calvinist of you."

Next, regarding the Bible:

1)Those who study the Bible, and do so in the true grace of God, cannot help but agree with your interpretation. Those who do so without the true grace of God are doomed to an incomplete and mistaken understanding.

2)The Old Testament's use of a plural term for God is a subtle reference to the existence of Jesus (and, presumably, the Spirit) before the events of the New Testament took place.

3)When asked for an actual audio recording of Christ to substantiate certain things as actually his words, and not the creation of the author(s) of the original form(s) of the gospel(s), you suggested going to the book store to pick up a 'books on tape' version.

At this point, I feel I must add, "and witty, too."

Next, your views on athiests:

1)We are all materialists, hedonists, or thugs.

2)We are terrorists attempting to scare people.

3)We are sinners. We are all sinners, and all responsible for our sins, because Adam sinned.

4)We seek to live in some kind of 'natural rights of man' anarchy where anything goes and the strong survive and thrive on the backs of the weak.

How Hobbesian.

However, as much as I appreciate your attempts to bring it all together, summon the power of Bill Watterson, and return us all to the halcyon days of Calvin & Hobbes, I have to say, you're on crack.

Let me begin by saying: You give Adam a bum rap.

Adam, you say, is responsible for his sin. We are all responsible for our actions. That's cool with me, in fact, it's how I feel. I'd be more than happy to agree with you that we are all responsible for our own actions. Except you toss in that whole 'predestination' doctrine of John Calvin's, and that's where you start contradicting yourself.

See, here's the thing: If God predestined Adam to Fall, then how is Adam responsible? That's like saying that if I throw a rock and hit you in the head, it's the rock's fault. The rock had no choice: I set events in motion. Similarly, Adam had no choice: God decided in advance what Adam would do, and Adam could only do as God decided.

You also completely invalidate any concept of Free Will, but that's ok. The really, really fun part of Calvinism is that despite how well the preachers all love to go Fire & Brimstone, real 'Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God' stuff, Calvinism pretty well eviscerates the entire concept of "sin".

Sin is a transgression against God.

If predestination is correct, and far, far more certainly if your assertion that 'God has preordained everything we do' is correct, there can be no sin.

You cannot transgress against God if you are doing what God created you to do.

Thus, Adam could not have been sinning. None of us can. In fact, because from a theological perspective, "good" is defined as "in accordance with God", there can be no evil, because God has ordained all that will occur. Everything happens because God actively wills it to happen.

Papal heresy? God's Will, no sin. Adam eats an apple? God's Will. David Berkowitz commits multiple murders as the "Son of Sam" killer in New York City in 1978? Not his fault, God actively caused it to happen.

So really, I'd have to say you are the one encouraging people into an immoral lifestyle. Let's review:

No matter what you do, if you are going to Heaven, you are going to Heaven. Rape farm animals while you feed babies to hungry sharks? If you're one of the Elect, that's no problem.

No matter what you do, if you're not going to Heaven, you can't get a change of sentence. Not even if you're the most virtuous person in the world.

Now, commonly, predestination doctrines hold that the Elect will be so filled with God's Grace that they will naturally behave as shining examples to the rest of us, living good and holy lives without really thinking about it.

Of course, that means that those of us who aren't automatically living good and holy lives without thinking about it, well, we can probably count on hellfire. But wait! Paul was Saved! By a BIG FURKING LIGHT!

We'll ignore for the moment that Paul relates the story of his conversion multiple times, and each time, he changes the details, and so is probably lying his ass off the whole time...

This means that no matter how bad you are, if you're one of the Elect, eventually God will intervene. So until you actively feel the direct hand of God upon your head (even if only as a transcendent experience while someone's talking to you about faith... I'm not saying the Calvinists believe there will be a Paul-esque blinding light for everyone), don't worry about it. If you're Saved, then one day it'll happen.

Until then, be bad. Be selfish. Be a total drunken slut drugmonkey. After all, you're Saved! and if you're not, well, nothing you can do to GET saved... so why not enjoy it while you can?

That is the endpoint of the 'predestination' doctrine. That is one of the great evils of religion: If you're saved, it doesn't matter how bad you are, you're saved. If you're not saved, it doesn't matter how bad you are, you were already screwed. So basically, predestination means: It doesn't matter how bad you are. Besides, none of it's really your fault. God's pulling the strings. You're not responsible.

And you say we're the immoral ones for telling people that we think they should live a moral life because it's moral, and not in the hopes of getting a lollipop from the Death Fairy?

(P.S.: Really, tossing in that suggestion that someone study 'Reformed Theology', that was pretty un-subtle, given that 'Reformed Theology' is directly and specificly Calvinism. You should've just said you're a Calvinist.)

Sigh. Statements like this come from arrogance not insight. And according to your theology, pride comes before a fall. 

What I always like about this Calvinistic claptrap is that those who swear allegiance to it actually believe that they are among the elect.

In fact, they're just hoping as hard as any other Christian that they have the winning Heaven lottery numbers. 

Awesome post BMcD...( nothing to add from me )...just kudos for a good job at exposing the internal conflicts of Calvanistic theology.

I second that...especially loved the Watterson ref

Why the catholics did.  duh.

I was raised Southern Baptist personally.

Maybe you should graduate now to atheism.

IMHO there are some theists / Christian members here who, when they present their arguments, are articulate, patient, intelligent, friendly, etc .....but beatz isn't one of them.

I don't think I could tolerate this beatz person even if he/she were an atheist. The A-hole factor is just too hard to ignore.

I wonder how old he is.

you ever notice how if somebody is bad they are automatically an atheist, I find this beatz guy just to be a joke, idiot. 

Wavefreak, I'm not trying to be prideful, i'm sure we all have a little pride in us, if you dont, thats fine.  The point I was getting accross is that I dont know who God has chosen, Brian37 could be one of them, but i was asking, why is he mad with me, if God might not have chosen him.  Brian37 might get saved in the future, I dont know. 

Brian37, you fulfill a lot of bible prophecy, especially when Jesus said blessed are you when they revile, and persecute you for My name's sake, the more you chastise Christians, your doing them big favors.  We pray for our enemies.  Atheist do a great service to Christians in helping them become Christlike.

Albedo_00, I like your style, belligerent, yet subtle, eloquence and insanity, i'll keep those notes for my attributes of an atheist book.  I usually have a tough time reading through cuss words, and most the time just pass over it, i'm not trying to be rude, I really wanna conversate with you(all jokes aside).

Latin, if you dont believe the bible, ok.  I do, you dont have to explain it to me, I'm the ones who believes its Gods word.

And last but not least, MR. BMcD.  I'm sorry your little crash course on calvinism you took has a couple issues that need to be tweaked. 

First the elect have nothing in them, and there is nothing about them that makes them special from any other human being.  I'm a sinner just like you brother, so there is no forseen merit in the individual, hence the words, Unconditional Election.

Umm. Freewill, well, my finite mind can comprehend this, so i'm sure yours can.  In short, the WILL serves the mind, and the mind is subject to influences, you have a flesh, that you desire to please, thats just one of the many influences.  To say you have a freewill is to say you make actions without cause and effect, if you had a freewill, there would be no cause for anything you do.  If you had a free will, you would be able to believe in God, or the devil, or nothing at all, by your own choice, but since none of us have free will, and everything is preordained, that x's all that out.  God didn't ask anyone if they wanted to be born, so there goes your freewill.  God makes all the choices here.  

In response to your throwing rock analogy, i'm sorry, it breaks down from the beginning, doesn't matter if it was ordained, your still the one who threw the rock, not God, you.

I believe my brother Author Pink can answer your question about Adam who had more of a freewill then any of us. 

 Now, strictly speaking, there are only two men who have ever walked this earth which were endowed with full and unimpaired responsibility, and they were the first and last Adam's. The responsibility of each of the rational descendants of Adam, while real, and sufficient to establish them accountable to their Creator is, nevertheless, limited in degree, limited because impaired through the effects of the Fall.

 Not only is the responsibility of each descendant of Adam sufficient to constitute him, personally an accountable creature (that is, as one so constituted that he ought to do right and ought not to do wrong), but originally every one of us was also endowed, judicially, with full and unimpaired responsibility, not in ourselves, but, in Adam. It should ever be borne in mind that not only was Adam the father of the human race seminally, but he was also the head of the race legally. When Adam was placed in Eden he stood there as our representative, so that what he did is reckoned to the account of each for whom he acted.

It is beside our present purpose to enter here into a lengthy discussion of the Federal Headship of Adam {a}, suffice it now to refer the reader to Rom. 5:12-19 where this truth is dealt with by the Holy Spirit. In the heart of this most important passaGen. we are told that Adam was "the figure of him that was to come" (Rom. 5:14), that is, of Christ. In what sense, then, was Adam "the figure" of Christ? The answer must be, In that he was a Federal Head; in that he acted on the behalf of a race of men; in that he was one who has legally, as well as vitally, affected all connected with him. It is for this reason that the Lord Jesus is in 1 Cor. 15:45 denominated "the last Adam", that is, the Head of the new creation, as the first Adam was the Head of the old creation.

In Adam, then, each of us stood. As the representative of the human race the first man acted. As then Adam was created with full and unimpaired responsibility, unimpaired because there was no evil nature within him; and as we were all "in Adam", it necessarily follows that all of us, originally, were also endowed with full and unimpaired responsibility. Therefore, in Eden, it was not merely the responsibility of Adam as a single person that was tested, but it was human responsibility, the responsibility of the race, as a whole and in part, which was on trial.

Webster defines responsibility first, as "liable to account"; second, as "able to discharGen. an obligation". perhaps. the meaning and scope of the term responsibility might be expressed and summed up in the one word oughtness. God-wards, responsibility respects that which is due the Creator from the creature, and which the creature is under moral obligations to render.

In the light of the above definition it is at once apparent that responsibility is something that must be placed on trial. And as a fact, this is, as we learn from the inspired record, exactly what transpired in Eden. Adam was placed on probation. His obligations to God were put to the test. His loyalty to the creator was tried out. The test consisted of obedience to his maker's command. Of a certain tree he was forbidden to eat.

But right here a very formidable difficulty confronts us. From God's standpoint the result of Adam's probation was not left in uncertainty. Before he formed him out of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, God knew exactly how the appointed test would terminate. With this statement every Christian reader must be in accord, for, to deny God's foreknowledGen. is to deny his omniscience, and this is to repudiate one of the fundamental attributes of Deity. But we must go further: not only had God a perfect foreknowledGen. of the outcome of Adam's trial, not only did his omniscient eye see Adam eating of the forbidden fruit, but he decreed beforehand that he should do so. This is evident not only from the general fact that nothing happens save that which the Creator and Governor of the universe has eternally purposed, but also from the express declaration of Scripture that Christ as a Lamb "verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world" (1Pe 1:20). If, then, God had foreordained before the foundation of the world that Christ should, in due time, be offered as a sacrifice for sin, then it is unmistakably evident that God had also foreordained sin should enter the world, and if so, that Adam should transgress and fall. In full harmony with this, God himself placed in Eden the tree of the knowledGen. of good and evil, and also allowed the Serpent to enter and deceive Eve.

Here then is the difficulty: If God has eternally decreed that Adam should eat of the tree, how could he be held responsible not to eat of it? Formidable as the problem appears, nevertheless, it is capable of a solution, a solution, moreover, which can be grasped even by the finite mind. The solution is to be found in the distinction between God's secret will and his revealed will. As stated in Appendix A 1411, human responsibility is measured by our knowledGen. of God's revealed will; what God has told us, not what he has not told us, is the definer of our duty. So it was with Adam.

That God had decreed sin should enter this world through the disobedience of our first parents was a secret hid in his own breast. Of this Adam knew nothing, and that made all the difference so far as his responsibility was concerned. Adam was quite unacquainted with the Creator's hidden counsels. What concerned him was God's revealed will. And that was plain! God had forbidden him to eat of the tree, and that was enough. But God went further: he even warned Adam of the dire consequences which would follow should he disobey — death would be the penalty. Transgression, then, on the part of Adam was entirely without excuse. Created with no evil nature in him, with a will in perfect equipoise, placed in the fairest environment, given dominion over all the lower creation, allowed full liberty with only a single restriction upon him, plainly warned of what would follow an act of insubordination to God, there was every possible inducement for Adam to preserve his innocence; and, should he fail and fall, then by every principle of righteousness his blood must lie upon his own head, and his guilt be imputed to all in whose behalf he acted.

Had God disclosed to Adam his purpose that sin would enter this world, and that he had decreed Adam should eat of the forbidden fruit, it is obvious that Adam could not have been held responsible for the eating of it. But in that God withheld the knowledGen. of his counsels from Adam, his accountability was not interfered with.

Again; had God created Adam with a bias toward evil, then human responsibility had been impaired and man's probation merely one in name. But inasmuch as Adam was included among that which God, at the end of the sixth day, pronounced "Very good", and, inasmuch as man was made "upright" (Ec 7:29), then every mouth must be stopped and the whole world must acknowledGen. itself "guilty before God" (Rom. 3:19).

Once more, it needs to be carefully borne in mind that God did not decree that Adam should sin and then inject into Adam an inclination to evil, in order that his decree might be carried out. No; "God cannot be tempted, neither tempteth he any man" (Jas 1:13). Instead, when the Serpent came to tempt Eve, God caused her to remember his command forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledGen. of good and evil and of the penalty attached to disobedience! Thus, though God had decreed the Fall, in no sense was he the Author of Adam's sin, and at no point was Adam's responsibility impaired. Thus may we admire and adore the "manifold wisdom of God", in devising a way whereby his eternal decree should be accomplished, and yet the responsibility of his creatures be preserved intact.

Perhaps. a further word should be added concerning the decretive will of God, particularly in its relation to evil. First of all we take the high ground that, whatever things God does or permits, are right, just, and good, simply because God does or permits them. When Luther gave answer to the question, "Whence it was that Adam was permitted to fall, and corrupt his whole posterity; when God could have prevented him from falling, etc", he said, "God is a Being whose will acknowledges no cause: neither is it for us to prescribe rules to his sovereign pleasure, or call him to account for what he does. He has neither superior nor equal; and his will is the rule of all things. He did not thus will such and such things because they were right, and he was bound to will them; but they are therefore equitable and right because he wills them. The will of man, indeed, may be influenced and moved; but God's will never can. To assert the contrary is to undeify him" (De Servo, Arb. c/ 153).

To affirm that God decreed the entrance of sin into his universe, and that he foreordained all its fruits and activities, is to say that which, at first may shock the reader; but reflection should show that it is far more shocking to insist that sin has invaded his dominions against his will, and that its exercise is outside his jurisdiction: for in such a case where would be his omnipotency? No; to recognise that God has foreordained all the activities of evil, is to see that he is the Governor of sin: his will determines its exercise, his power regulates its bounds (Psa. 76:10). He is neither the Inspirer nor the Infuser of sin in any of his creatures, but he is its Master, by which we mean God's management of the wicked is so entire that, they can do nothing save that which his hand and counsel, from everlasting, determined should be done.

Though nothing contrary to holiness and righteousness can ever emanate from God, yet he has, for his own wise ends, ordained his creatures to fall into sin. Had sin never been permitted, how could the justice of God have been displayed in punishing it? How could the wisdom of God have been manifested in so wondrously overruling it? How could the grace of God have been exhibited in pardoning it? How could the power of God have been exercised in subduing it? A very solemn and striking proof of Christ's acknowledgment of God's decretal of sin is seen in his treatment of Judas. The Saviour knew full well that Judas would betray him, yet we never read that he expostulated with him! Instead, he said to him, "That thou doest, do quickly" (John 13:27)! Yet, mark this was said after he had received the sop and Satan had taken possession of his heart. Judas was already prepared for and determined on his traitorous work, therefore did Christ permissively (bowing to his Father's ordination) bid him go forth to his awful work.

Thus, though God is not the author of sin, and though sin is contrary to his holy nature, yet the existence and operations of it are not contrary to his will, but subservient to it. God never tempts man to sin, but he has, by his eternal counsels (which he is now executing), determined its course. Moreover, as we have shown in 1388, though God has decreed man's sins, yet is man responsible not to commit them, and blameable because he does. Strikingly were these two sides of this awful subject brought together by Christ in that statement of his: "Woe unto the world because of offences! For it must needs be that offences come (because God has foreordained them); but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh" (Mt 18:7). So, too, though all which took place at Calvary was by the "determinate counsel and foreknowledGen. of God" (Acts 2:23), nevertheless, "wicked hands" crucified the Lord of glory, and, in consequence, his blood has righteously rested upon them and on their children. High mysteries are these, yet it is both our happy privileGen. and bounden duty to humbly receive whatsoever God has been pleased to reveal concerning them in His Word of Truth.

None of you will ever be wise as God, just give it up.  Bow down to your MASTER!!  I do, greatfully.

Calvinism - if only one could appreciate what license that gives a person.

You can be the worst bastard to walk the earth - you could even be an atheist - but because God chose you to be on his good boy list, you're in.

or

You can be the most moral, Bible believing being that existed but because God put you on his "express train to Hell" list, you burn.

Since no Calvinist really knows what list he/she is on, it doesn't matter how he/she lives.

Must be nice to not be bound by the rules of a functioning society like us evil atheists. 

Well the rest of you guys can keep talking to this nitwit but I'm out.

I don't care to waste my time with someone who's only retort boils down to "Well I believe.  So there!"

I hope all you guys win gods little afterlife lottery.  Since our actions don't matter why even worry about god at all?  I'm not.

 To LosingStreak06

You know LosingStreak, sometimes when I think about how you and Wave and Pinnaple annoy me (and I am sure the feeling is mutual), somebody like Beatz comes along and makes you guys look sane.

Remind me to be more gentle with you three(not that I will comply in every single case) but sometimes I dont realize how good I have it, with you three. 

At a minimum, between you three, you guys at least realize that my fangs are nothing personal. 

BEATZ! FOR THE LOVE OF THOR OR OSIRUS, STOP PREACHING! 

Beatz needs a clue.  I'm sure if he runs down to his local Wal Mart he could find one cheap.

Really? Do tell.

Exactly. Nothing you do will change your eventual fate. No matter how much you tell people what you feel to be true, it doesn't matter. In the end, by your own belief structure... you're probably going to hell.

Why? Because by your belief structure, a)most people are going to hell, and b)you have no way of knowing who is or isn't. Telling yourself 'I'm one of the Elect' doesn't make it so. All it does is prove that you're both in denial about your odds, and an incredible egotist, imagining that you are saved while others are not. So much for 'Blessed are the meek', eh? Such hubris, to imagine yourself specially blessed by God 'just because'.

Excellent! Perfect, in fact!

But wait! God makes all the choices here.

Just as the rock doesn't commit assault, I commit assault by using the rock, humanity doesn't peform the deed, God performs the deed through Man, and so, bears the responsibility.

And the stuff you put up next... agrees with me.

To say that Adam had more free will than we do would mean that God did not actually predestine anything until Adam died, because if Adam has free will, then he can then do things God does not already have him ordained to do, and so can make things occur that God has not ordained. And yet, John Calvin's doctrine of Predestination holds that everything that will ever happen has been ordained and decreed by God since before the cosmos was made.

Except that Adam had no greater choice than any of the rest of us under Predestination, because before Adam was ever made, God had already ordained that Jesus Christ would die upon the cross to atone for the sins of Man. So if that was already determined, then it was already a given that Adam would Fall, that Adam must Fall... because the Fall of Man was the Will of God. If the Fall were not the Will of God, then it could not happen.

If you truly believe that principle, then have you apologized to all of the people your ancestors have harmed? Are you not, then, responsible to answer for all of the crimes of your ancestors? Did they not stand in for you in the society of the day?

And then follows a couple of paragraphs that basically serve to say that in Eden, we were all being tested, despite there being no actual test, as the outcome was not only known beforehand, but mandated by God.

Or perhaps, the meaning and scope of the term responsibility might be expressed and summed up in the one word responsibility, and when a definition is needed, you use the damn definition, and stop trying to redefine words in order to muddy the waters and justify the pollution of minds with what is so obviously utter bullshit.

But now we get to the fun part!

Wait for it...

It's good to see he notices this, but then he abandons any sense of, well, sense.

Unfortunately, this a)cites an unprovided source, and so that citation can be largely tossed out, but more importantly, b)is absolutely moronic.

Working within your belief structure, God created humanity, and did so to his own specifications... specifications that included 'would eat the damned apple'. And so the responsbility for the incompleteness of Adamn's awareness once again lies... with God.

But wait! What was "death"? How can a punishment that Adam has no concept of be considered reasonable? And more importantly, so what if Adam didn't know that God had already ordained that Adam must disobey? God bears the responsibility for Adam's actions. Not only did God decree that such actions must be taken, but he is the one who limited Adam's awareness, and moreso, he's the one who made Adam in such a way as to make it impossible for him not to Fall.

Nonsense. It was, in fact, the intended result.

But wait! Evil is disobedience to God's Will, and God's Will was that Adam would eat of the fruit, no matter what he was told. So how is that evil?

Nonsense. Adam's accountability was abrogated completely by God specifically creating Adam in such a way as to make the 'disobedience' inevitable.

Except that since 'evil' is disobedience to the Will of God, and God has ordained all that happens, then there can be no true disobedience to the Will of God, and thus: there is no evil.

No, God hardwired that action into Adam. That specific action, and every other action Adam undertook. God decreed every last one of them. What's more, there is no sin, as sin is, again, disobedience to God, and predestination means that nothing occurs but that which God specifically has decreed will happen.

And this? This is patent nonsense that serves to say 'Even though every single aspect of this event was tailor-made and set into motion [i]by God for the express purpose of causing this event, it's not God's fault. He didn't pull the trigger. That was Adam. God only designed the gun, the bullet, the guncotton in the bullet, the laws of physics that would make the shot fatal, the surroundings, the target, and the shooter all in such a way as to make the murder inevitable, in effect programming Adam to pull the trigger... but Adam's the one who actually did it..'

And that's a load of utter nonsense.

And again, more patent nonsense. God "foreordained all the activities of evil" and "is the Governor of sin", but is not the "Inspirer"? He is the DIRECT CAUSE, and more, because it is his Will, these actions are not evil.

And the rest of this continues in the same vein, attempting to justify and excuse God for His behavior, while disavowing His responsibility and ultimate authorship of evil. If God is the arbiter of all that happens, then he is irrefutably responsible for all the "evil" in the world.

Period.

I'm glad you bow down to your MASTER. I am my own master, and though I do not believe in any deity or any afterlife, I will say this once, clearly for you:

I would rather spend an eternity in Hell than to become the thrall of such a deity as you espouse.

Your deity is a perverse, twisted, and sadistic tyrant, and were he real, I would dedicate my life to striving to find a way to utterly destroy him. However, he does not exist, and so I seem to have the edge there. And certainly I seem to have the edge over your pedantic and insipid "Author Pink".