A Question for the Calvinist

[atpollard]

It still begs the question, "why some and not others?"

“Because God.”

God had the option of UNIVERSALISM, but Jesus makes the reality of the “wide road” clear, so God rejected that option.

God had the option to Damn everyone (“all sin” and “none are righteous” is clear from scripture) … in fact, God could have simply killed Adam and Eve in the garden when they deserved death and ended it right there … but God rejected that option.

So God rejected his right to “save all” and his right to “damn all”. Instead we have God “showing mercy on whom he will show mercy”. Thus the only available answer to the question “why some and not others?” is “Because God.”

 

[JesusFan]

“Because God.”

God had the option of UNIVERSALISM, but Jesus makes the reality of the “wide road” clear, so God rejected that option.

God had the option to Damn everyone (“all sin” and “none are righteous” is clear from scripture) … in fact, God could have simply killed Adam and Eve in the garden when they deserved death and ended it right there … but God rejected that option.

So God rejected his right to “save all” and his right to “damn all”. Instead we have God “showing mercy on whom he will show mercy”. Thus the only available answer to the question “why some and not others?” is “Because God.”

We know that ALL of his ways are just and true, and also the secret things belong unto Him

 

[prism]

“Because God.”

God had the option of UNIVERSALISM, but Jesus makes the reality of the “wide road” clear, so God rejected that option.

God had the option to Damn everyone (“all sin” and “none are righteous” is clear from scripture) … in fact, God could have simply killed Adam and Eve in the garden when they deserved death and ended it right there … but God rejected that option.

So God rejected his right to “save all” and his right to “damn all”. Instead we have God “showing mercy on whom he will show mercy”. Thus the only available answer to the question “why some and not others?” is “Because God.”

Best answer so far, IMHO.
Ok, I'm done playing devil's advocate on this question.

 

[Carbon]

It still begs the question, "why some and not others?"

Because of God's choice and good pleasure.

 

[prism]

Because of God's choice and good pleasure.

Is God's choice arbitrary? Otherwise, wouldn't He be a respector of persons?

 

[Carbon]

Is God's choice arbitrary?

Because of His good pleasure? He chose the bride of Christ. He chose us worms from the same bucket of scum as everyone else. If He was a respecter of persons, wouldn’t He have made a decision based on something that we might have done good?

Romans 9
though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—

Otherwise, wouldn't He be a respector of persons?