God's ability according to Calvinism

[allsmiles]

:first: POD Short, sweet, and so much truth/word ratio is way up there!!!

I don't understand what's so great about that post.

The "two millenia of Christian interaction with the Bible" is the main cause of the false teaching that is so prevalent in today's Christian world.

So, what do you propose, that Christians stop interacting with the bible and then do what?

It's time we dumped it, and went back to the source.... God's own word.

You want to dump Christian interaction with the Bible and then go back to God's own word?

How does any of that make any sense whatsoever?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

...truth/word ratio...

Ha! I love that!

That is my philosophy when posting here on TOL.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

You want to dump Christian interaction with the Bible and then go back to God's own word?

Most of what Christians are taught about the Bible is wrong. And it's wrong because it has been built upon a faulty foundation of man-made theology.

The Bible is not man-made but divine. We have God's own word right in front of us but instead we hold the view's of dead theologians in higher regard.

We have failed.

We should go back to the source, and test what we think we know against the source.

 

[Poly]

I guess so. Things go over people's heads because they were thrown too high, mind dumbing it down a little bit? I might not be the only person who missed it, someone else who's reading this thread might benefit by a bit of exposition on your part.



Have you read The Sovereignty of God by Pink? .

Yep, I grew up on A.W. Pink, R.C Sproul, Calvin, Luther and the like. It was pretty much required reading in the church I grew up in. And in the 10 years I've been on TOL, I've been waiting, and waiiting and waiting for somebody to give us some fresh meat other that the repetitive arguments from these guys that have been submitted over and over and over and over......


We've been longing for fresh meat for years here at TOL. We desperately seek it, hope for it, welcome it, gladly!!

 

[Delmar]

I don't understand what's so great about that post.

:sigh: No, I'm sure you don't

 

[allsmiles]

Most of what Christians are taught about the Bible is wrong. And it's wrong because it has been built upon a faulty foundation of man-made theology.

The Bible is not man-made but divine. We have God's own word right in front of us but instead we hold the view's of dead theologians in higher regard.

So, who's left to interpret the bible and find the true doctrine? My guess will be that it will be a man, and that this man will be a Christian and theologian and my guess is that whatever "true" doctrine the Word of God teaches will be given a theological label.

Open Theism is a good example. You would agree that Open Theism is the "true" doctrine of the bible, correct? How else would this doctrine be interpreted from the bible if not by a theologian? How else is doctrine drawn from the Word of God if not by Christian interaction with the bible?

Calvinists make the same case Knight, that the bible teaches the doctrines they refer to as Calvinism. It teaches it from start to finish and it's one the strongest cases Calvinists can make. Like I said earlier in this thread you all will go back and forth until you're blue in the face, but Christian interaction with the bible is unavoidable.

We have failed.

We should go back to the source, and test what we think we know against the source.

That's an integral part of theology if I understand it correctly, that is going back to the source. You're trying to make a distinction in methodology where there is none.

 

[VanhoozerRocks]

And 99% of belongs in the disposal!!!

The "two millenia of Christian interaction with the Bible" is the main cause of the false teaching that is so prevalent in today's Christian world. It's time we dumped it, and went back to the source.... God's own word.

Wow...I don't know what to say to this. While I will affirm that there is quite a bit of fool's gold and just straight up fools in the past 2000 years of interaction this statement is shocking. I am very curious about this Knight. Can we moderns be so arrogant to believe that most of these people who have spent their entire lives running after the Lord , and interacting with his Word are automatically wrong. I think it is undoubtedly arrogant, very modernistic, and wrong for us to think this. We need to ineract with the Saints and scholars of old my friend, or we are doomed to make the same mistakes, or never dialogue with some of the greatest minds that have walked this earth (in Mikael Dubovs? dialogism sense)

Soli Deo Gloria

 

[allsmiles]

Yep, I grew up on A.W. Pink, R.C Sproul, Calvin, Luther and the like. It was pretty much required reading in the church I grew up in. And in the 10 years I've been on TOL, I've been waiting, and waiiting and waiting for somebody to give us some fresh meat other that the repetitive arguments from these guys that have been submitted over and over and over and over......


We've been longing for fresh meat for years here at TOL. We desperately seek it, hope for it, welcome it, gladly!!

R.C. Sproul is great, he's got a good style and charisma I've never read any of his books because we always had lessons of his on tape, he's fun to watch and he's a good teacher.

As for the arguments being repetitive: What the bible says isn't going to change, there are only so many different ways to say the same things in regards to the sovereignty of God, his foreknowledge, soteriology, etc. I don't think that's as strong a case as you'd like it to be.

 

[Poly]

R.C. Sproul is great, he's got a good style and charisma

Woo frickity hoooo!

So do most of the people who warp the truth.

I've never read any of his books because we always had lessons of his on tape, he's fun to watch and he's a good teacher.

:rotfl:

You've never read what he believes but because he seems like a cool guy, your going to submit your belief about God on what he says. Yeah, he seems cool.. Who cares? Except those who are so desperate to be in sync with the "in" crowd they're willing to deny truth.

I have read what he says. He's simply a copycat, following Augustine cause it feels good. He has no intentions of being honest about the word. He wants it to fit his ideas and interprets scripture to do just this.

 

[Delmar]

Wow...I don't know what to say to this. While I will affirm that there is quite a bit of fool's gold and just straight up fools in the past 2000 years of interaction this statement is shocking. I am very curious about this Knight. Can we moderns be so arrogant to believe that most of these people who have spent their entire lives running after the Lord , and interacting with his Word are automatically wrong. I think it is undoubtedly arrogant, very modernistic, and wrong for us to think this. We need to ineract with the Saints and scholars of old my friend, or we are doomed to make the same mistakes, or never dialogue with some of the greatest minds that have walked this earth (in Mikael Dubovs? dialogism sense)

Soli Deo Gloria

I'm pretty sure Knight would include 99 % of us moderns also!

 

[allsmiles]

Woo frickeity hoooo!

So do most of the people who warp the truth.

I don't understand where this patronizing attitude comes from Poly, I really don't. I was always under the impression that this sort of talk was below people who were firm and comfortable in what they believe.

Guess I was wrong, sorry about that.

:rotfl:

You've never read what he believes but because he seems like a cool guy, your going to submit your belief about God on what he says.

Whoa whoa whoa!!! I NEVER said ANYTHING like that and I resent being misrepresented that way. I've been very clear from the beginning of my involvement in this thread, and TOL itself, as to who my sources are and why they are my sources.

Yeah, he seems cool.. Who cares? Except those who are so desperate to be in sync with the "in" crowd they're willing to deny truth.

You are way off base Poly.

I have read what he says. He simply a lemming, following Augustine cause it feels good. He has no intentions of being honest about the word. He wants it to fit his ideas and interprets scripture to do just this.

How is that any different from any other Christian who picks up the bible and reads it?

 

[Poly]

Whoa whoa whoa!!! I NEVER said ANYTHING like that and I resent being misrepresented that way. I've been very clear from the beginning of my involvement in this thread, and TOL itself, as to who my sources are and why they are my sources.

I'm not in to misrepresenting anybody. I'm simply going by what you said here.

R.C. Sproul is great, he's got a good style and charisma I've never read any of his books because we always had lessons of his on tape, he's fun to watch and he's a good teacher.

(emphasis mine)

How in the world could you come to the conclusion that somebody is a good teacher based on their charisma rather than reading what they claim to believe?

 

[nowheredude]

:ha:

True, Calvin stopped being a "Calvinist" the day he died.

:up:

 

[Granite]

Wow. Got a little heated in here...

I'll say this much, both Arminians and Calvinists (if we need to settle on labels) make persuasive cases in their own way. And I can understand the hostility both sides might have for one another, no doubt--I just think it would simply be foolish to dismiss giants on either side of the aisle out of hand.

 

[allsmiles]

I'm not in to misrepresenting anybody. I'm simply going by what you said here.

(emphasis mine)

How in the world could you come to the conclusion that somebody is a good teacher based on their charisma rather than what they've written?

:sigh:

R.C. Sproul presents his lessons in ways that are easy to understand. Charisma and charm help him to be a good teacher, but he teaches what he believes to be correct doctrine and frankly, he's never been a definitive source, for me, on the subject of the doctrine referred to as Calvinism.

I found his style and personality to be conducive, for me, to learning about the doctrines he espouses. Is that clear enough?

The point is "the doctrines he espouses." Do you think he spent hours recording video taped lessons just standing there being charming? Do you think the tapes I referred to don't contain the doctrines he espouses?

As with the POTD, a big thing is being made out of nothing.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Wow. Got a little heated in here...

Really?

I didn't notice.

I'll say this much, both Arminians and Calvinists (if we need to settle on labels) make persuasive cases in their own way. And I can understand the hostility both sides might have for one another, no doubt--I just think it would simply be foolish to dismiss giants on either side of the aisle out of hand.

Both Arminians and Calvinists are wrong as they BOTH limit God to a settled future.

 

[Granite]

Really?

I didn't notice.

Both Arminians and Calvinists are wrong as they BOTH limit God to a settled future.

:chuckle:

True, I've seen worse...

My take, for the two cents it's worth: Arminian soteriology is closer to OT, in spirit anyway, than Calvinism is. What's interesting is that while OT is not new it's only seemed to catch on recently. Must look into that...

 

[kmoney]

Have you ever thought about all the things God is able to do according to Calvinism? There's absolutely nothing you could think of that He can not do according to Calvinist theology.


God....

knows what the color utieoauri is.
is able to be unable to be able to be unable.....
can be retarted.
can close a closed door.
can hear purple.
can know nothing.


The list goes on.

Do Calvinists say that? What about Calvinism says that God can know/do those things?

 

[allsmiles]

Do Calvinists say that? What about Calvinism says that God can know/do those things?

Actually, nothing about the doctrine referred to as Calvinism says anything remotely close to any of that nonsense. Poly's supposed to be an authority on the subject because she read Sproul as opposed to watching his lessons, but she swung and missed in a big way on this one.

 

[Granite]

Do Calvinists say that? What about Calvinism says that God can know/do those things?

Very briefly, Calvinism teaches that God has pre-ordained all things (including the salvation or damnation of all men) and has exhaustive foreknowledge of every conceivable event, choice, and decision.