Since I have been called to a discussion in a somewhat less cynical tone, I reply quick-handedly to the post. :
Calvi-nuts 7 --- the Calvinist hallucinations on "world" and "whole"
ttps://spirithismouth.blogspot.com/2025/08/calvi-nuts-7-calvinist-hallucinations.html
>............................
If that governor would say that he saved the WHOLE community (or the "world") of dead walking men in the state prison, because he saved only ONE (or just only few of them), that governor should be at least impeached because affected by a serious mental disturbance and unable to carry on his duty as representative of the people's will.
Much worse would it be for the governor to boast that he has saved all, to the last person, in a literal sense and then left 99% of their comatose or on the other hand resisting bodies on the ground at the last step of the building, saying they made their decision to stay and die. Considering he has men strong enough to carry their bodies or even pick them up if they are unwilling and resisting. That is the pinnacle of cynicism and hypocrisy. But, as a man's god is, so is he. Hence the hypocrisy of Billy Graham, Hal Lindsey etc free will preachers who led very different lives to what they presented. Trust me, I know it from someone in the kitchen.
The god of the arminians is a hypocrite, being all powerful and claiming to have saved and to wish to save everyone, while not doing it. Wile the God of the calvinists is accused of.... unfairness for sending people to hell for their sins (and not giving them "a chance"). Well, their attitude towards the gospel shows that even if there was such a thing as universal salvation, they would reject it. But election is the most uncomfortable truth for the flesh. Perhaps this discomfort it gives free willers causes them to be so cynical and scornful.
Running away from the ethnic context is futile. God's election from an unimaginably increased scope - the multitude of nations outside of Israel - was already a miracle and a huge scandal, even before talking about numbers. Remember that the Jews were scandalized by the fact that God visited the Gentiles and that only Naaman and the widow of Sarepta were helped at the time of Elijah. We are talking about a handful of people here.
Therefore God predestinated some to be saved the most to be damned just only because He isn't able to bring the Gospel to the Inuit in the age of emperor Nero ? But God is not unfair like the Calvinist God, he provided EVERYONE a means of salvation and he shut the mouth of the predestinationist with:
This
Italian loves his Roman Catholicism so much! I wouldn't be surprised that in a year or two he sings mass and deletes his blog. Other ways to heaven
outside of Jesus Christ? Almost sounds like pope Francis' atheists going
to heaven. In reality, there is never a hint in Scripture of God owing humanity or any sinner a chance of salvation. That is taking the side of sinful flesh and saying hell by itself is unfair. It is also patently false that anyone can be saved apart from faith in Christ or the promises related to him. Those without Christ will never see life. Peter makes it clear the OT saints were saved by the grace of God and that there is no other way to heaven under heaven outside of the name (salvation) of Jesus Christ. And since God kept his word in motion only in Israel for over 1400 years, it is foolish to argue that there was no elective purpose. God definitely isn't a regional deity, but his purposes were and are very particular. Romans 2 is about regenerated persons. Unregenerated flesh means sin and breaking of the law. Or we must admit a better nature in some sinners contra Romans 1-3 and Ephesians 1-2.
This is for all the people who never heard the Gospel. Do you think God is so stupid just in order to fit the Calvinist nut-dreams ?
"EXCLUDED": And then, why not ? Isn't God a predestinationist ? [by hypothesis] .... If He has decided the majority of the world population is lost without hope, why to send to them the Gospel ?
The author asks why would God send the gospel to those who are already saved. Well, isn't it fair to ask why would he send the gospel to these law abiding gentiles, if they are already being saved by their law keeping? (if we assume like dispensationalists they are unregenerate yet saving themselves in the first place). Isn't it much worse, considering how many actually reject it?
But the gospel is exactly the revelation of eternal life/salvation etc to the elect. It doesn't care about reprobates. The ones who excused themselves from the supper, were left without hope. The others were compelled and without the compulsion of God's drawing love, nobody would come to know. Know what? Our life, hidden in Christ before the foundation of the world. To see our names, written in heaven. To the non elect the gospel is a stench of death, a closed door, a perpetural rejection, a final doom. Same way temptation is the unveiling of already present realities. I realize this takes out the excitement of unexpected twists and turns, but we have the WWE wrestling or Soap Operas for that. In the mind of God all is already done. Jesus was a stumblingblock for Israel, to reveal what was already in their hearts and pronounce the corresponding juidgment which included a hardening that made them totally intolerant of him and his doctrine.
The knowledge of salvation is knowing your personal salvation which must be already there. Anything else is airy universalism and of no use. One can trump a universal salvation all day, without a man seeing his own share/interest, he will never get saved. But the free willer methods seek to convince people they are saved when they were never born again or been elrected. By giving them something to do on their part. But, you see how God removes any human agency and influence by placing salvation in eternity past:
Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
Now, why rather not say: "Given the world before the world began"? It would be a beautiful, emphatic sentence. Because here the world is used in the absolute sense and it would be a contradiction and absurdity to affirm that salvation has been given to the entire world. It was only given to us, the elect. Like in 2 Peter 3:9. Like in John 17.
Unfortunately, after the pattern of all IFBS and especially Ruckmanites, Edoardo thinks bombastically paradoxical, emotionally loaded statements are truths. But they are fitting for orators and politicians.We should stick to Scripture.
