That's the contention of the fellows at http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2008/07/jesus-loves-me-critique-of-hymn-633.html, but it's one that has no force whatsoever.
Hell is the final resting place for those who have rejected God's love and grace, and in so doing have themselves become incorrigibly evil and incapable of repentance. For those who refuse God's grace and love, the only thing remaining is God's justice and wrath. The result of separation from God is misery and must be if God is the source of all goodness and happiness. Thus, those who refuse God's love experience misery, but this hardly means that God stops loving them. Experience teaches us that we may love someone and yet realize that the moral law demands rectitude and justice for the sake of others we also love. To shield evil people from the consequences of their choices would be to undermine completely the significance of morality. We may desire the highest good for a family member who commits murder or theft, but we also realize that unrepentant transgression calls out for justice for the sake of those who have been hurt. It must be that the wicked pay, even if we would prefer the wicked to repent and receive grace. The two are hardly mutually exclusive as both experience and Scripture make clear. In the Bible, we are told that Christ showed His love for us by dying for us while we were yet sinners (Romans 5). Yet we are also told that God's wrath abides on those who are rebellious (Romans 1), and that in the end they will be locked away with their misery from the rest of God's good creation if they persist in wickedness. This hardly detracts from God's love for them. God loves them in spite of such rejection, but His holiness demands that evil is dealt with. The two fit together perfectly well in God's character, as Scripture makes evident.
Yet another failed Calvinistic argument. I ought to be keeping a tally.
New Testament Intersections 4: Community Rule
23 hours ago
3 comments:
You just came to these conclusions because you ripped Scripture out of context. If you would only read Reformed writers, you would see the error of your ways. ;)
A very common move by Calvinists! You can't understand Calvinism, for if you did, you would obviously become a Calvinist immediately.
Another common ploy:
"You have made this and that error. You don't understand this passage. You have committed this or that logical fallacy."
Calvinists are long on assertion and short on argument. They simply assert all the errors you are making without actually arguing that you have made any. In so doing, they go completely around the arguments and simply accuse you of being unable to understand.
Short on argument, long on assertion. That's something of a Calvinist motto!
You are becoming my favorite theologian.
Post a Comment