REFUTING ANTI-CATHOLIC APOLOGIST JOHN JOSEPH RAS ON PREDESTINATION OF ST. AUGUSTINE, ST. THOMAS AQUINAS AND JOHN CALVIN, Part 9

St. Augustine, the foremost Catholic Apologist, refuting the Demon of Heresy

John Joseph Ras said...

ABE:

[THEIR SUBSTANCE IS NOT EVIL BUT 'GOOD'. GOD CONCEIVED THEM AS GOOD, HE PLANNED THEM AS GOOD AND HE CREATED THEM GOOD.]

JR: ...wow., sounds Pelagian to me.

So nasan ang Doctrine of UNIVERSAL SALVATION dito?

OBJECTION 1: It seems that God reprobates no man. For nobody reprobates what he loves. But God loves every man, according to (Wis. 11:25): "Thou lovest all things that are, and Thou hatest none of the things Thou hast made." Therefore God reprobates no man.

Reply to Objection 1: God loves all men and all creatures, inasmuch as He wishes them all some good; but He does not wish every good to them all. So far, therefore, as He does not wish this particular good---namely, eternal life---He is said to hate or reprobated them.

February 16, 2010 11:23 AM

Fr. Abe, CRS said...

[Maling-mali po ang akala niyo tungkol sa view Calvin hinggil sa "free will". Ang "free will" na tinututulan ng mga repormista ay ang "free will" ayon sa depinisyon ng mga Romanista at iba pang humanista (i.e. Pelagian, Arminian, etc).]

HA, HA, HA... NAKU NAMAN JJR WAG NA TAYONG MAGLOKOHAN. E SI ST. AUGUSTINE AT SI ST. THOMAS AQUINAS E 'ROMANISTA' PARA SA MGA REFORMERS E. SILA AY KABILANG SA 'ROMAN CHURCH'. MGA CATOLICO ANG MGA YAN E. HA, HA, HA...

NAPAKA OA NAMAN NA SASABIHIN MONG KINAKALABAN NYA ANG MGA PELAGIANS E GINAPI NA NI ST. AUGUSTINE, ST. AMBROSE AT ST. CYPRIAN ANG MGA IYON. SILA AY PAWANG MGA BISHOPS NG ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

YOUR ALIBI DOESN'T JIBE WITH REALITY. YOU ARE MERELY SAVING FACE TO LESSEN THE SHAME OF HAVING THE SAME DAMNATOR GOD WITH JOHN CALVIN.

[Sabi ni Calvin:

"Enough would seem to have been said on the subject of man's will, were there not some who endeavour to urge him to his ruin by a false opinion of liberty, and at the same time, in order to support their own opinion, assail ours..." [Institutes, Book II, Ch. 5, #1]]

WHAT HE IS STATING HERE IS THAT HE DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT FREE WILL ANYMORE. HA, HA, HA... BECAUSE HE IS ASSAILED. HA, HA, HA...

NOW LET ME CHECK YOUR QUOTE:

[Institutes, Book II, Ch. 5, #1]]

HA, HA, HA... LOOK AT THE VERY TITLE OF BOOK II, CHAPTER 5:

"THE ARGUMENTS USUALLY ALLEGED IN SUPPORT OF FREE WILL REFUTED."

HA, HA, HA... CALVIN IS REFUTING ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING FREE WILL. HA, HA, HA... SO HE REALLY DENIES FREE WILL. HA, HA, HA...

YOU ARE LYING TO ME JOHN JOSEPH RAS. LOOK AT YOUR STATEMENT:

"Maling-mali po ang akala niyo tungkol sa view Calvin hinggil sa "free will". Ang "free will" na tinututulan ng mga repormista ay ang "free will" ayon sa depinisyon ng mga Romanista at iba pang humanista (i.e. Pelagian, Arminian, etc).]

YOU ARE MAKING IT APPEAR AS IF CALVIN IS SIMPLY OPPOSING THE WRONG DOCTRINES OF FREE WILL BY HIS OPPONENTS. HA, HA, HA... NO, NO, NO!!! CALVIN DENIES FREE WILL ITSELF AGAINST HIS OPPONENTS. HA, HA, HA...

[See? Ang tinitira ni Calvin ay ang "false view" of free will.]

LIAR, LIAR, LIAR... CALVIN DENIES FREE WILL. HE REFUTED ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING FREE WILL AS HIS OWN TITLE DECLARES. HA, HA, HA...

[Naniniwala din siya sa "free will" (according to his definition), pero hindi sa "free will" (according to YOUR definition).]

"CHAPTER 5. THE ARGUMENTS USUALLY ALLEGED IN SUPPORT OF FREE WILL REFUTED."

HA, HA, HA... YOUR OWN CITED DOCUMENT BELIES YOUR CLAIM. HA, HA, HA... ARE YOU REALLY READING YOUR CITATIONS. IT SEEMS THAT YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF WHAT YOU ARE QUOTING. HA, HA, HA...

[He explained:

["...our freedom is not to the extent of leaving us equally inclined to good and evil in act or in thought, but only to the extent of freeing us from compulsion. This liberty is compatible with our being depraved, the servants of sin, able to do nothing but sin.]

WAIT, WAIT, WAIT... THIS STATEMENT DOES NOT BELONG TO CALVIN BUT TO PETER LOMBARD WHO IS A CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN. LOOK AT THIS: "For LOMBARD ultimately declares (lib. 2 Dist. 25), that our freedom is not to the extent of leaving us equally inclined to good and evil in act or in thought, but only to the extent of freeing us from compulsion. This liberty is compatible with our being depraved, the servants of sin, able to do nothing but sin."

ACTUALLY, CALVIN IS SAYING THAT THE POSITION OF LOMBARD WHICH IS SUPPORTIVE OF FREE WILL IS COMPATIBLE WITH HIS STAND. THAT IS CONTRADICTORY. CALVIN CONSIDERS MAN AS DEPRAVED OF FREE WILL AND IS ALREADY DAMNED FROM ETERNITY BY IMMUTABLE DECREE WHILE LOMBARD ARGUES FOR FREE WILL AND THEREFORE NOT A DEPRAVED MAN BUT A MAN IN LIBERTY... FREEDOM OF CHOICE. HA, HA, HA...

MUCH MORE, CALVIN'S POSITION IS NOT FREE WILL. BECAUSE THERE IS NO EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER DO GOOD OR EVIL. LOOK AT HIS STATEMENT "able to do nothing BUT SIN". HA, HA, HA... DO YOU CALL THAT FREEDOM? THAT IS NOT FREE WILL, THAT IS SLAVERY. THE GOD OF CALVIN IS NOT ONLY A DAMNATOR BUT ALSO THE GREATEST SLAVE-MASTER FROM ETERNITY. THE GOD OF CALVIN AND YOURS IS SIMILAR TO THE DEMON LIZARDO, THE VILLAIN OF PANDAY. HA, HA, HA...

YOU ARE LYING TO US ONCE AGAIN. YOU ARE PRETENDING AS IF THE QUOTE IS OF CALVIN. THAT'S INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY.

["In this way, then, man is said to have free will, not because he has a free choice of good and evil, but because he acts voluntarily, and not by compulsion."]

HE IS NOT TEACHING ABOUT FREE WILL HERE. CALVIN IS SIMPLY TRYING TO FIT LOMBARD'S POSITION AS SOMETHING COMPATIBLE WITH HIS BUT HIS STAND IS THAT MAN IS RELLY PRONED TO SIN AND THUS ACTUALLY DOWNPLAYING THE FREE WILL OF LOMBARD.

CALVIN HIMSELF ADMITTED THAT ST. AUGUSTINE REFUSED TO CLAIM THAT THE WILL IS SLAVE OR DEPRAVED AS HE IS TEACHING. HE ALSO ADMITTED THAT ST. AUGUSTINE DISGREE WITH THOSE WHO DENY FREE WILL BUT HE SIMPLY MADE A HOCUS-POCUS EXPLANATION TO JUSTIFY HIS OWN OPPOSITION TO FREE WILL:

"As to the Fathers (if their authority weighs with us), they have the term constantly in their mouths; but they, at the same time, declare what extent of meaning they attach to it. In particular, Augustine hesitates not to call the will a slave. In another passages he is offended with those who deny free will; but his chief reason for this is explained when he says, “Only lest any one should presume so to deny freedom of will, from a desire to excuse sin.”" [Institutes, Book II, Ch. 5, #8]

ST. AUGUSTINE IS OFFENDED BY THOSE WHO DENY FREE WILL. HA, HA, HA... THUS, HE IS OFFENDED BY CALVIN. THE PALUSOT OF CALVIN IS VERY CHEAP. UNCONVINCING AND ILLOGICAL.

HE CUNNINGLY TRIES TO APPEAR AS IF AGREEING WITH LOMBARD AND AUGUSTINE BUT HE IS DENYING THEIR ESSENTIAL POSITIONS. THE CATHOLIC THEOLOGIANS: AUGUSTINE, AQUINAS AND LOMBARD UPHOLD THE FREE WILL OF MEN.

"This is perfectly true: but why should so small a matter have been dignified with so proud a title? An admirable freedom! that man is not forced to be the servant of sin, while he is, however, ejthelodou'lo" (a voluntary slave); his will being bound by the fetters of sin. I abominate mere verbal disputes, by which the Church is harassed to no purpose; but I think we ought religiously to eschew terms which imply some absurdity, especially in subjects where error is of pernicious consequence." [Institutes, Book II, Ch. 2, #6-7]]

HA, HA, HA... YOU JUMPED FROM CHAPTER 5 TO CHAPTER 2. HA, HA, HA... IBANG TOPIC NA NAMAN DYAN. NAKU, YOU ARE RUNNING AROUND THE FIRE. HA, HA, HA...

ARE YOU SURE THAT YOUR INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT? LOOK ONCE AGAIN AT WHAT CALVIN TRIES TO PROVE IN BOOK II, CHAPTER 2 OF HIS INSTITUTES OF CHRISTIAN RELIGION:

"CHAPTER 2. MAN NOW DEPRIVED OF FREEDOM OF WILL, AND MISERABLY ENSLAVED."

HA, HA, HA... MAN IS DEPRIVED OF FREE WILL. MUCH MORE MAN IS MISERABLY ENSLAVED. OF COURSE IF HE IS NOT FREE HE IS A SLAVE. HA, HA, HA...

SO MUCH FOR YOUR CALVIN'S VIEW OF FREE WILL. HE DENIES AND REJECTS FREE WILL:

"You see how every thing is denied to free will, for the very purpose of leaving no room for merit. And yet, as the beneficence and liberality of God are manifold and inexhaustible, the grace which he bestows upon us, inasmuch as he makes it our own, he recompenses as if the virtuous acts were our own." [CALVIN, Institutes Bk II, chap 5, no. 2 last sentence].

CALVIN SATANICALLY DENIES FREE WILL. THIS IS CONTRARY TO THE POSITION OF STS. AUGUSTINE AND AQUINAS.

[Heto po ang definition (PLEASE READ VEEEERYYY CAREFULLY, para hindi niyo nanaman po ma-misrepresent gaya ng ginawa niyo nung nakaraan)]

YOU ARE THE ONE WHO SHOULD READ CAREFULLY. YOU ARE INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST. EVEN THE POSITION OF LOMBARD YOU ARE PRESENTING AS THAT OF CALVIN. THEN YOU ARE INSISTING THAT CALVIN DOES NOT REJECT FREE WILL BUT I HAVE PROVEN OFFICIALLY CONCURRED BY RENOWN THEOLOGIANS THAT HE REJECTS FREE WILL.

YOU ARE WILLING TO INCREASE YOUR LIES TO SAVE YOUR FACE AND YOUR TEETH. HA, HA, HA...

[Unconditional Election - meaning, God's choice of people unto Salvation from eternity past is NOT based upon any foreseen worthiness on the chosen ones such as faith, good works, or perseverance.]

YOUR DEFINITION IS WRONG. THIS IS PARTIAL. THE UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION OF CALVIN IS NOT ONLY UNTO SALVATION BUT ALSO UNTO DAMNATION FROM ETERNITY. HA, HA, HA... LIAR, LIAR, LIAR...

[* God did not elect them because they would be faithful, but in order that they might be so.

* God did not elect them because they would be holy, but in order that they might be so.

* God did not elect them because they would persevere, but in order that they would do so.]

THIS IS PARTIAL. THERE IS AN IMMUTABLE DIVINE DECREE IN ETERNITY IN WHICH OTHERS ARE DOOMED TO DAMNATION... FOR CALVIN.

YOU ARE NOT PRESENTING THE DAMNATOR GOD OF CALVIN SO THAT YOU CAN FOOL PEOPLE. YOU ARE HIDING THE SATANIC POSITION OF YOUR BELOVED AND FAVORITE THEOLOGIAN.

[Do you agree with this or not?]

I REJECT CALVINISM AS A THEOLOGICAL SYSTEM. THE UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION IS ACCPTABLE TO THE CATHOLIC FAITH BUT AS OUR CATHOLIC THEOLOGY EXPLAINS IT. NOT THAT OF CALVIN.

THE POSITION OF CALVIN IS ESSENTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM STS. AUGUSTINE AND ST. THOMAS AQUINAS. STOP DECEIVING PEOPLE THAT THEY ARE SIMILAR OR IDENTICAL.

[Teka, diba ang pinaguusapan po natin ay ang DECREE regarding the Fall? Pinararatangan mo kasi si Calvin na tinuturo niyang ang FALL ay DIRECTLY CAUSED by God (bagay hindi mo pa napapatunayan).... pero ang sabi ni Calvin, nothing happens without God's order (i.e. direct intervention) or permission.]

HA, HA, HA... EXCUSE ME. YOU WERE TRYING TO PROVE TO ME THAT THE REPROBATION OF CALVIN IS THE SAME WITH THE REPROBATION OF ST. THOMAS AQUINAS. WHEN I POINTED OUT TO YOU THAT THE GOD OF ST. THOMAS ONLY PERMITS SIN YOU CLAIMED THAT IT IS THE SAME FOR CALVIN. NOW, TO PROVE THAT YOU QUOTED CALVIN'S STATEMENT WITH THE WORD 'PERMISSION'. I COUNTERED THAT YOUR QUOTE IS MISLEADING... THAT IS INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY... YOU ARE TRYING TO PROVE THAT GOD IS ONLY PERMITTING SIN ON CALVIN'S DOCTRINE OF REPROBATION BUT YOU ARE QUOTING NOT FROM HIS CHAPTER ON REPROBATION, WHICH YOU PERSONALLY PRESENTED, BUT ON HIS CHAPTER ON CREATION.

TSK, TSK, TSK... DECEIVING... MANIPULATIVE... INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST.

[So where did Calvin said that THE FALL IS DIRECTLY CAUSED by God AND NOT permitted by Him?]

IT IS YOUR PROBLEM TO SHOW ME THAT CALVIN'S REPROBATION IS THE SAME WITH AQUINAS... THAT THE GOD OF CALVIN SIMPLY PERMITS SIN. THAT IS YOUR PROBLEM. HA, HA, HA...

BUT I HAVE PROVEN TO YOU THAT THE GOD OF CALVIN IS DAMNATOR... DAMNATOR... DAMNATOR. YOUR GOD IS SATANIC... EVIL FROM ETERNITY.

[Sorry, it's in Book I, xvi, 8.]

APOLOGY ACCEPTED!

NOW, LET ME CHECK THAT PART:

CALVIN ENTITLED IT AS -

"CHAPTER 16. THE WORLD, CREATED BY GOD, STILL CHERISHED AND PROTECTED BY HIM. EACH AND ALL OF ITS PARTS GOVERNED BY HIS PROVIDENCE."

HA, HA, HA... CONTRADICTORY AGAIN. IMAGINE GOD CREATED THE WORLD, FINE. THEN HE CHERISES AND PROTECTS IT. O HO, HO, HO... HE, HE, HE...

HOW CAN THE GOD OF CALVIN CHERISH AND PROTECT THE WORLD WHEN HE ALREADY DECREED TO DAMN AND TO DOOM SOULS FROM ETERNITY. THAT IS NOT CHERISING, ISN'T IT? THAT IS HATING. THERE IS ETERNAL HATE IN THE GOD OF CALVIN. HE, HE, HE...

LET ME CHECK FURTHER.

HA, HA, HA... ONCE AGAIN CALVIN ADMITTED THAT ST. AUGUSTINE RECOGNIZES THE ROLE OF THE FREE WILL OF MAN BUT AGAIN HE MADE A HOCUS-POCUS EXPLANATION TO DOWNPLAY IT:

"In short, AUGUSTINE everywhere teaches, that if anything is left to fortune, the world moves at random. And although he elsewhere declares (Quæstionum, lib. 83). that all things are carried on, partly by THE FREE WILL OF MAN, and partly by THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD, he shortly after shows clearly enough that his meaning was, that men also are ruled by Providence, when he assumes it as a principle, that there cannot be a greater absurdity than to hold that anything is done without the ordination of God; because it would happen at random." [CALVIN Institute Book I, xvi, 8.]

HA, HA, HA... CALVIN KNOWS THAT ST. AUGUSTINE CATEGORICALLY AND EXPLICITLY SUPPORTS THE FREE WILL OF MAN, YET HE IS DISTORTING IT TO FIT HIS REJECTION OF FREE WILL. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO ME. HE, HE, HE... YOU ARE A TRUE BLOODED CALVINIST, FOLLOWER OF THE DAMNATOR GOD - THE ONE WHO DECREES EVIL FROM ETERNITY TO SOULS.

WOW. NOW I GOT YOUR QUOTATION AND BEHOLD, LOOK AT WHAT I FOUND. THIS QUOTE WHICH YOU CLAIM TO BE OF CALVIN IS NOT OF CALVIN AT ALL BUT FROM ST. AUGUSTINE THE CATHOLIC. HA, HA, HA... LOOK AT THIS:

["...the will of God is the supreme and primary cause of all things, because nothing happens without his order or permission..." [Institutes, I. vvi, 16]]

NOW COMPARE THAT WITH THIS:

"When he uses the term permission, the meaning which he attaches to it will best appear from a single passage (De Trinity. lib. 3 cap. 4), where he proves that the will of God is the supreme and primary cause of all things, because nothing happens without his order or permission. He certainly does not figure God sitting idly in a watch-tower, when he chooses to permit anything. The will which he represents as interposing is, if I may so express it, active (actualis), and but for this could not be regarded as a cause." [CALVIN Institute Book I, xvi, 8.]

LIAR, LIAR, LIAR... HA, HA, HA... INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY... SCHOLARLY DECEPTION.

I HOPE THE WRONG CITATION WAS NOT INTENTIONAL TO DECEIVE AND TO MISLED.

* IN THE ABOVE QUOTE, CALVIN SPEAKS OF ST. AUGUSTINE AND HIS THEOLOGY OF FREE WILL.

* CALVIN ATTESTS THAT ST. AUGUSTINE USED THE TERM 'PERMISSION'. AND THAT TERM IS CONNECTED WITH THE FREE WILL OF MAN ISSUE [WHICH IS CONNECTED TO PREDESTINATION-REPROBATION ISSUE].

* YOUR QUOTE IS NOT THAT OF CALVIN BUT OF ST. AUGUSTINE. IT WAS TAKEN FROM AUGUSTINE'S MAGNIFICENT BOOK DE TRINITATE [De Trinitate. lib. 3 cap. 4].

HA, HA, HA... THERE IS NO DOCTRINE OF FREE WILL FOR CALVIN. NOTHING... NADA, NADA, NADA... NYET NYET. HA, HA, HA...

[ANg sabi ni Calvin, NOTHING HAPPENS without God's order or permission. Hindi ba kasama sa "NOTHING HAPPENS" yung The Fall, and every sins of mankind?]

IT REFERS TO CREATION. IT MEANS NOTHING EXIST IF NOT BECAUSE OF GOD OR CAUSED BY GOD. BUT IT DOES NOT TEACH THAT GOD DAMNED SOULS FROM ETERNITY. NO, NO, NO... HA, HA, HA... THE CREATOR-GOD IS NOT DAMNATOR. HA, HA, HA...

[And where did Calvin said that God DOES NOT permit the sinning of his creatures, but DIRECTLY CAUSES them to do so?]

I DON'T HAVE TO PROVE THAT. THE FACT THAT HE TEACHES THAT MAN HAS NO FREE WILL AND THAT HIS SATANIC GOD DOOMED TO DAMNATION BY IMMUTABLE DECREE FROM ALL AGES. THAT POSITION LEAVES NO ROOM FOR PERMISSION. HOW CAN THERE BE PERMISSION WHEN THERE IS NO FREEDOM. NO FREE WILL. HE, HE, HE... THE FREE WILL THAT YOU HAVE SHOWN ARE NOT OF CALVIN BUT OF LOMBARD AND AUGUSTINE. HA, HA, HA...

[And where did Calvin said that God DID NOT PERMIT the Fall, but DIRECTLY CAUSED it?]

GOD BY IMMUTABLE DECREE DOOMED OTHERS FOR ALL AGES... HA, HA, HA... IT IS YOUR DUTY TO COUNTER THAT AND SHOW YOUR BELOVED 'PERMISSION' IN CALVIN'S TEACHING. HA, HA, HA... NANGANGAMOTE KA NA. HA, HA, HA...

[Hanggang ngayon wala parin.]

HA, HA, HA... CALVIN'S DEMONIC-SATANIC DAMNATOR GOD LEAVES NO ROOM FOR PERMISSION. WHEN THERE IS ALREADY AN ETERNAL DECREE OF DAMNATION NO PERMISSION IS EXISTING. ETERNAL DECREE WAS MADE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF MAN. ISN'T IT? HA, HA, HA... HA, HA, HA...

[Now you are the one deceiving me. It is true that God decreed the doom of the Reprobate, but where did it said that God is the DIRECT CAUSE of their sins?]

HA, HA, HA... THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ADMITTING THAT THE SATANIC GOD OF CALVIN DECREED THE DOOM OF THE REPROBATE.

[where did it said that God is the DIRECT CAUSE of their sins?]

BY IMPLICATION OF ETERNAL AND IMMUTABLE DECREE OF DAMNATION MADE BY CALVIN'S EVIL AND UNJUST GOD. HA, HA, HA...

ACTUALLY, WHAT YOU HAVE ACCEPTED IS MUCH WORSE. EVEN WITHOUT ACTUAL SIN THE EVIL GOD OF CALVIN SENDS SOULS TO DAMNATION. PRIOR TO THEIR EXISTENCE IN CREATION THE SOULS HAVE BEEN CONDEMNED TO EVERLASTING FIRE. WHAT A TERRIBLE INJUSTICE.

[Calvin said that nothing happens apart from God's order or permission. So God's Decree is carried out either by His order (direct intervention), or by permission.]

HA, HA, HA... YOU CARE PUTTING INTO CALVIN'S MOUTH THE POSITION OF LOMBARD AND AUGUSTINE AGAIN. OR USING THE PRINCIPLE USED IN CREATION FOR REPROBATION. HA, HA, HA...

WHEN ONE IS ETERNALLY DECREED AS DAMNED WHERE IS THE PERMISSION THERE? THAT IS INCOMPATIBLE. CONTRADICTORY.

[Now where did Calvin said that God carries out His Decree to Reprobate (including it's means) by DIRECT INTERVENTION and NOT by permission?]

I AM NOT NECESSITATED TO SHOW THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT SHOWN ME THAT GOD REPROBATE BY PERMISSION. I DO NOT NEGATE WHAT IS NON-EXISTENT. HA, HA, HA...

CALVIN... WORSHIPPER OF A DAMNATOR GOD.

[By the way, Sino po ba ang tinutukoy ni Calvin diyan? Sino yung "them"?]

THE SOULS THAT HIS DAMNATOR GOD CRUELLY DOOMED TO DAMNATION BY IMMUTABLE AND ETERNALLY DECREE WHICH YOU PERSONALLY UPHOLD AND AGREED UPON AS GOOD.

****[ABE: [THEIR SUBSTANCE IS NOT EVIL BUT 'GOOD'. GOD CONCEIVED THEM AS GOOD, HE PLANNED THEM AS GOOD AND HE CREATED THEM GOOD.]****

[JR: ...wow., sounds Pelagian to me.]

HA, HA, HA... IT SOUNDS BIBLICAL TOO ME. GOD LOOKED AT WHAT HE CREATED AND SAW THEM AS GOOD! HA, HA, HA... BUT JOHN JOSEPH RAS SAW THEM AS EVIL. DON'T YOU?

GOD SAID: "LET US MAKE MAN ACCORDING TO OUR IMAGE AND LIKENESS". SO, IF SOME PEOPLE ARE MADE EVIL THEN SOME IMAGES AND LIKENESSES OF GOD ARE EVIL. HA, HA, HA...

[So nasan ang Doctrine of UNIVERSAL SALVATION dito?]

HERE IT IS IN SACRED SCRIPTURES:

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

THE CHRISTIAN GOD REMOVES THE SIN OF THE WORLD BUT THE GOD OF CALVIN AND YOUR GOD IS A DAMNATOR.

THE LORD JESUS SAVES THE ENTIRE WORLD AND GIVES LIGHT TO ALL MEN:

John 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

THE GOD OF CALVIN AND YOUR GOD, ON THE CONTRARY, ONLY GIVES LIGHT TO SOME BUT THE DARKNESS OF DOOM FOR OTHERS. THAT IS CONTRARY TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD. THE GOD OF CALVIN AND YOUR GOD IS SATANIC.

ST. PAUL FURTHER DECLARES SALVATION FOR ALL:

1 Timothy 2:3-6 [Good News Bible]

1 Tim 2:3 This is good and it pleases God our Savior,

1 Tim 2:4 WHO WANTS EVERYONE TO BE SAVED and to come to know the truth.

1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one who brings God and human beings together, the man Christ Jesus,

1 Tim 2:6 who gave himself to REDEEM the WHOLE HUMAN RACE. That was the proof at the right time that GOD WANTS EVERYONE TO BE SAVED.

THE GOD OF CALVIN WANTS SOME OF THOSE HUMANS TO BE DAMNED FROM ETERNITY AND DECREED IT IMMUTABLY. HOW EVIL AND CRUEL. HOW UNJUST AND UNLOVING. HOW DEMONIC. SO CONTRARY TO THE GOD OF PAUL, AUGUSTINE AND THOMAS AQUINAS.

NOW LET ME CHECK THIS QUOTE:

OBJECTION 1: It seems that God reprobates no man. For nobody reprobates what he loves. But God loves every man, according to (Wis. 11:25): "Thou lovest all things that are, and Thou hatest none of the things Thou hast made." Therefore God reprobates no man.

Reply to Objection 1: God loves all men and all creatures, inasmuch as He wishes them all some good; but He does not wish every good to them all. So far, therefore, as He does not wish this particular good---namely, eternal life---He is said to hate or reprobated them.

HA, HA, HA... WILL YOU PLEASE BE SO KIND SO AS TO PROVIDE THE PROPER CITATION SO THAT I CAN CHECK IT ACCORDINGLY.

February 16, 2010 8:29 PM