Most people tend to think God is good.
However, you would have to be wondering about the God who created people just to cast them into eternal punishment as being good.
The god of John Calvin apparently does this. John Calvin is still one of the most influential people within the Christian church, even though he died in the 16th century. Evidently, many theological colleges still teach his interpretation of the will of God as being sound, even though there are many Bible verses that contradict Calvin interpretation of the Bible.
One of Calvin’s so-called great Biblical truths is the doctrine of “Limited Atonement”.
This doctrine asserts that Jesus Christ only died on the cross to save a few souls and not as the Bible states to redeem the souls of every person.
The doctrine of Limited Atonement states that Jesus did not come to reconcile the world back to God but rather came to reconcile only those select people whom God created to be reconciled with Him. Everybody else God created to be condemned to eternal punishments.
The god of the Calvinists, and those who teach his doctrines, is obviously not the God of the Bible.
The God of the Bible is a loving God who desires that all men come to salvation and than none should perish.
As you can see that there is big difference between a loving and good God who desires all men to be reconciled with Him and a hateful and evil god who creates people for the sadist purpose of seeing them suffer for eternity.
The other problem with this doctrine of the Calvinists is the god they worship must have a twisted sense of reasoning because he felt the need to create people so he could reconcile them to himself.
Why would an Omniscient God, One who is all-knowing, need to create people so he could reconcile them to Himself? It just does not make sense.
The argument is that Adam needed to be reconciled and all those who were born after Adam, were born into sin and this separated humankind from God, so they need to be reconciled.
Now there is no dispute about the fact that all humankind needed to be reconciled to God because of Adam’s sin. But the doctrine of limited atonements states than only some needed to be reconciled, the rest were destined to eternal punishment.
There is no disputing that Jesus said that hypocrites were going to be cast into eternal punishment. Actually, I find it rather interesting that Jesus seemed to single out hypocrites for eternal punishment and not those who are guilty of murdering, stealing, committing adultery, telling lies or coveting.
Not that I would want to be pointing the finger at anyone in particular, but everybody knows a hypocrite when they come across one.
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a “hypocrite” as
1. “a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion” or
2. “a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings”.
In respect to the first definition, there would have to be no redemption.
In respect to the second definition, our human failings might get the better of us; otherwise we would all be condemned to hell. It is also true that our beliefs and feelings can change over time, and the grace of God allows for our ignorance.
Regarding murderers, adulterers, thieves, liars and the covetous, there is no guarantee that they will escape eternal punishment, unless they repent of their wicked ways. But, unlike those who put on a public face of being virtuous and religious and upright but are not, at least, we who recognize the error of our ways have a hope.
As for those who put on a public face, not all are involved in religion, many use religion as a convenience in the hope of a get out of jail free card or to bolster their credibility for public office.
One has to wonder about John Calvin though. He was not only a religious figure but also a political figure in Geneva. But when he instigated the slow barbecuing of the physician Michael Servetus at the stake, it is doubtful that he was acting in a flash of anger. That was a very public execution instigated by a man cloaked in the appearance of religious virtue and political guise and justified by his doctrine of limited atonement.