God loves his elect and hates his non-elect

[VALIS]

God elected two groups of people before the beginning of time, one group he would love, one he would hate. One group predestined for evil and reprobation and one predestined to be saved and elected to paradise.

[PoleCat]

I really did try to watch that video but unfortunately the talking head there broke my gaydar and I had to stop to fix it....

[Benji]

conspiraceeee !!!!!!!!!!!111

[Avendiel]

Santa Claus hates the naughty and loves the nice:

[Gromovnik]

Santa Claus hates the naughty and loves the nice:

He has no idea what he's missing...

[IrishHitman]

Right back at you, God.

[Tuor]

I was content with the video until he said that there are only two types of people: believers and unbelievers. I'm unsure. Does that mean that I don't believe? No. It's possible (in my opinion) for God to exist and for him to not exist. He ruined his argument right then and there.

[Tankbuster]

Well, that's predestination, folks...
Sure, it looks harsh, but that's what they believe.

I was content with the video until he said that there are only two types of people: believers and unbelievers. I'm unsure. Does that mean that I don't believe? No. It's possible (in my opinion) for God to exist and for him to not exist. He ruined his argument right then and there.

If you're unsure, then you don't believe. That seems to be an axiom.

[A pimp named Slickback]

God elected two groups of people before the beginning of time, one group he would love, one he would hate. One group predestined for evil and reprobation and one predestined to be saved and elected to paradise.

What a rotten individual.

[Ummon]

It is more like the elects of God love Him, His non-elects hate Him. Which is what results in their damnation.

[VALIS]

It is more like the elects of God love Him, His non-elects hate Him. Which is what results in their damnation.

God selected the elects and the non-elects in eternity before they had the ability to love anyone. He brings them to him, he makes them love him as he selected them before they were born. His non-elects were never designed to love him so naturally don't.

[My Favorite Martian]

I think the last successfull attempts to lend from Metaphysic specialis before Rationalism came from Barth and Ratzinger. We need to consider that these attempts as well as those of the 16th and 17th century are children of their time and show signs of development and change within their topics. It is the problem of systematic projects that they can explain issues to a point, not much beyond. The Metaphysic specialis before Rationalism reaches this point in the time of the Thirty Year's War. To speak about election and designed to love becomes difficult then - at that moment.



We may express with Berthold Brecht the wish that those born later will one day look back on our days and judge mildly.

[Cluny the Scourge]

God elected two groups of people before the beginning of time, one group he would love, one he would hate. One group predestined for evil and reprobation and one predestined to be saved and elected to paradise.

God selected the elects and the non-elects in eternity before they had the ability to love anyone. He brings them to him, he makes them love him as he selected them before they were born. His non-elects were never designed to love him so naturally don't.

Makes perfect sense to me. Since God is omniscient, when he created Man he must have been aware of every human being who was ever going to come into existence, and whether or not they would ever be persuaded of his existence - meaning he knew as he created Man that he was condemning otherwise good and noble people to eternal torment. This is an extension of that point. It queries - why would he do that? The theory of predestination and the selection of the elect fits the bill perfectly.

This emphasises just how monstrously perverted and absolutely evil the God of Christianity is - and hence why Christianity must be false.

[basics]

" This emphasises just how monstrously perverted and absolutely evil the God of Christianity is - and hence why Christianity must be false."

Cluny the Scourge,

How does it emphasise that God is as you say and therefore makes Christianity false. I mean there isn't another word of God so what is it that is true since the above is false?

You're falling into one of the categories that he speaks of if only because you won't accept God's word. He didn't make it up. It was delivered to us over many centuries and authenticated by Jesus Himself, never mind Peter and others, as being the word of God.

The men who wrote the New were only corroborating what was already written by earlier witnesses in the Old and all of them were inspired to do so, if not commanded. But as the guy says don't start calling God names over it for who knows that you yourself might well be one of the elect whose time for rebirth has not yet arrived.

[VALIS]

Makes perfect sense to me. Since God is omniscient, when he created Man he must have been aware of every human being who was ever going to come into existence, and whether or not they would ever be persuaded of his existence - meaning he knew as he created Man that he was condemning otherwise good and noble people to eternal torment. This is an extension of that point. It queries - why would he do that? The theory of predestination and the selection of the elect fits the bill perfectly.

This emphasises just how monstrously perverted and absolutely evil the God of Christianity is - and hence why Christianity must be false.

You are mistaken, God purposely created the reprobate not to believe in him, for his own glory. God did not look into the future and saw that they would not believe and then "non-elected" them. They do not believe because they were intended and designed not to believe.
Read Romans 9.

[Caledonian Rhyfelwyr]

You are mistaken, God purposely created the reprobate not to believe in him, for his own glory. God did not look into the future and saw that they would not believe and then "non-elected" them. They do not believe because they were intended and designed not to believe.
Read Romans 9.

It's not quite that cut and dried even within Calvinism. Some Calvinists believe that God preordained the elect to salvation before the fall of man, others believe that the elect were chosen after all humanity was plunged into a state of sin. And so we have the supralapsarian v infralapsarian controversy. Calvin's exact beliefs on this matter are currently a subject of debate, however in Britain at least, the people held mostly to infralapsarian views, most notably the English Puritans and Scottish Presbyterians.

At least with the infralapsarian view, you can't really call God evil. According to that version of events, Adam was created good, and had the free will to choose either to continue to be good and follow God, or to reject Him and choose evil (as a side note, there is no doubt that Calvin himself believes this). And in choosing sin, Adam, and all his seed which would have done exactly the same, are cast forever into a state of sin. The only reason any are saved is because Christ was our substitute upon the cross. And because Christ is God in the flesh, in a way God is sacrificing Himself for us, hence His mercy.

So according to the infralapsarian viewpoint, it was only after that humanity chose a sinful nature that God chose to leave them as such, and yet to use them various ways for His own glory. God is not evil, the reprobate get what they chose according to their nature.

[Ummon]

This means that you don't believe you will graduate: after all you are not sure. You also don't believe the sun will rise tomorrow: who knows what could happen instead.

Being sure means acknowledging 100% probability of an event. That never happens.

[Tankbuster]

Those are the meanings in theory. In practice, it's different.

In practice, being sure of the outcome means that you deem the probability to be either very high or very low. I'm sure that the Sun will come up tomorrow. Of course I'm not saying that there could not possibly be a cosmic explosion that will reduce our solar system to ash
It's just not very likely, which is why I'm sure that said explosion won't occur. But I'm happy to say that "I believe that it won't."

Unsure is something we use for everything else.
Although you're correct in saying that even though I'm technically unsure about my graduation at university, I'm quite sure that I will, so I believe it. It's not belief without evidence though, whereas it probably would be in the case of God.

[Phier]

This means that you don't believe you will graduate: after all you are not sure. You also don't believe the sun will rise tomorrow: who knows what could happen instead.

Being sure means acknowledging 100% probability of an event. That never happens.

Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.

I've pretty sure that would be to be 100% sure, not who thinks it might be possible

Otherwise faith is just wishful thinking.

[My Favorite Martian]

Otherwise faith is just wishful thinking.

Wishful thinking is a legitimate strategy to extend a limited covering of needs which always confronts the needs of the others. That is why there is poetry, movies, comix, Pink Floyd. Wishful thinking helps to overcome innate conflicts between groups, within groups and inside of self-reflective individuals who read books and listen to music. It's a mode of compassion and solidarity.

What a ... individual.

Looks like Uri Geller to me. My wife would probably ask: "Is he jewish?" And I would have to answer: "If you mean Uri Geller, then probably yes."