I do. How do you keep a straight face when you post this nonsense??
ECT There is only one Gospel
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
I do. How do you keep a straight face when you post this nonsense??
It's a concoction of doublespeak.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
What work is more important than be a workman, approved unto God, that need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth?
Search her posts and you will find it over & over.
Amen STP
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
These 3 men are unwavering in their devotion to 1 Cor 15:1-4 (KJV) and refuse to dilute it.
Calvinism makes no such distinction. The terms are effectively synonymous. The distinctions are for ivory tower theologians to discuss but in normal use, the two terms are indistinguishable. To preordain is to predestine.
There is no published Calvinist who would deny the notion that Adam did precisely as God predestined that he would. On the contrary, every published Calvinist since Calvin has affirmed that belief.
A belief, by the way, that is predicated entirely on Aristotle's idea of an immutable God that is entirely foreign to the Bible.
The "cause" as you use the term is both meaningless and irrelevant.
There is no alternative and thus there is no choice, by definition. In the Calvinist worldview, there are no alternatives and so every cause in nothing more than an effect of a previous cause which in turn is also the result of a previous cause which was the effect of God's decree.
Every cause and effect that came from Adam was predestined to happen by God before Adam ever existed. According to your own source documents.
God predestined that Adam would bring sin into the world or else he would not have done so - according to your own source documents.
Questions?
Why won't you answer the questions I've alread asked?
Do you intentionally contradict yourself or do you say such things and not notice the conflict between them?
Is it when two truth claims contradict one another that they become "profound truths"?
That's a serious question, by the way. To most people reading this, those last two questions will seem rhetorical in that they appear to answer themselves. And while I think I could guess your answer, I don't think I'd bet my house on my guess being right.
Do you deny that this is what you believe?
Is it when two truth claims contradict one another that they become "profound truths"?
That's a serious question, by the way. To most people reading this, those last two questions will seem rhetorical in that they appear to answer themselves. And while I think I could guess your answer, I don't think I'd bet my house on my guess being right.
"Since the universe had its origin in God and depends on Him for its continued existence it must be, in all its parts and at all times, subject to His control so that nothing can come to pass contrary to what He expressly decrees or permits."
Do you deny that this is what you believe?
Another Amen.
Amen Brother.
musterion
Well-known member
Evidently, he doesn't want Scripture to stand in the way of his truth.
musterion
Well-known member
I'm surprised he's deigning to post in a mere religion thread for once.
I can quite imagine that MOST of the posters on TOL feel the same way about you. I know I do. No offense, you just come off as a kind of half-witted guy with a hate filled heart, mind, and soul. I'd feel mighty uncomfortable having you in the same vicinity as myself. I kind of see you as being the type of guy that would suddenly jump up and become aggressive for no apparent reason. I'll bet you have a lack of self-control, as well?
He's a very angry guy. You don't want his type around your family.
I knew a guy once who was in the Marine Corp Special Forces and he had a quick temper (Circa: 1975) He was sitting in my living room and suddenly got very angry with my Wife (his Sister) at the time (I was only married once) and he got up and walked towards her. I stood up and told him to sit down (angerly) he backed up quickly a number of steps and sat back down. My ex-Wife said she'd never seen him back down before. He was always getting into fights with different guys. However, I was six-four he was about 5'10" or so and built like a tank. That guy had a horrendous temper, though. ACW seems like one of those Knuckleheads.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
First, I am sure you have not been exposed to many Reformed churches and/or seminaries; certainly not all, so there is no basis for you to make such a claim. And thinking that these different terms are synonymous is why you wrongly define them.
Perhaps they are to those who prefer to dumb down language, in order to further their view, but for those who desire to plumb the depths of the truths of God, learning to distinguish them reveals many important things. Such as the difference between incommunicable attributes of God and communicable attributes from God. For it is His attributes we are really discussing.
It is a lazy use of the word "predestined" to so use it when speaking of "ordained" or "decreed." God has decreed all in His kosmos, including determining the fate of all persons . . but there remains distinction between the two. The decrees cover all of creation, including the fall of man and God's ordained remedy (saving grace) and predestination has to do with Judgment.
This is the second reason for your wrong thinking. God's attribute of immutability is Scriptural. James 1:17, Numbers 23:19
So you deny all evidences of cause and effect? How brilliant you are! (not)
What you are demanding here, is that the will of man be allowed to work alternative effects, from what God has decreed . . . WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE. Such an attitude and argument against God's sovereignty, is the original sin Adam committed in the garden.
All Adam did was ordained (decreed) by God to happen, due to Adam possessing secondary causal agency. And the awful consequences produced Judgment (predestination).
God ordained the fall, caused by Adam, and righteously judges the effects (predestination).
There is no contradiction. I fear you simply have not spent time studying the attributes of God.
No, I stand by these words. You only see contradiction, because your teachers and mentors contradict the historical Truths of God, and deny the attributes of God.
IOW's, you have been hoodwinked with the errors of Open Theology . . .
It seems that Calvinists ALWAYS accuse non-Calvinists of not understanding Reformed Theology. As if, they are the ONLY ones that are privy to such information. All that needs to be known about Calvinism (Reformed theology) can be found on Google search and off of Reformed websites. Come on people, Calvinists don't have any special hidden information, powers, or decoder rings. They are simply people that have been taken in by false doctrine and a false gospel. (small g) They may or may not be ("Wordsmiths} some are and some are not.
What they do have though is, a Semi-Truck full of arrogance.
What they do have though is, a Semi-Truck full of arrogance.
I'd just about be willing to bet that I've read more about Calvinism than you have both for and against.
I absolutely do have basis for my claim. Not only have I read I don't even remember how many books on the topic but I've been debating this for well over a decade, if not two full decades. Calvinists use the terms preordained and predestine interchangeably as there is no practical difference between the two concepts. The only difference is purely semantic in nature.
What I'm discussing is the fact that everything that happens was set in stone before anyone did anything. There is no choice, there is no volition. You're complaints about whether someone does this or that (e.g. taking forgiveness as a license to sin) is meaningless double talk that directly contradicts your most core doctrines.
A claim that you have yet to deny, by the way.
It isn't lazy, it accurate. What event that has been preordained or decreed is not predestined?
Name one single event.
Calvinism makes NO SUCH DISTINCTION!!!
What is preordained is predestined by virtue of the fact that is has been ordained by the immutable god of Calvinism.
Calvinism's immutability is nowhere at all in the bible.
God's character is immutable, He is not.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
I deny no such thing. You're stupid.
What are you talking about, "WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE"?
You need to go take your meds.
Without alternative possibilities, there is no choice. Without choice, there is no moral implication to any action. Without the ability to choose we're just a collection of chemicals going through the motions.
This was a stupid thing to say. Genesis says nothing at all about denying the notion that God controls everything (i.e. your definition of "sovereign". Further, according to Calvinism, Adam's sin was predestined to happen by God's decree before creation even began and he could not have done otherwise.
And therefore unchangeably predestined.
"Secondary causal agency" is a meaningless phrase. Adam did it because he had no choice. He had no choice because God degree what would happen in advance before Adam ever had a thought in his head.
God caused Adam to "cause" it. Adam could not have done otherwise. His action was not volitional, by definition. (According to your own doctrinal source documents.)
Saying it doesn't make it so, Nang.
Everyone can see that there is a contradiction there, including you! That's why you said it the way you did! Every Calvinist theologian that has ever published anything has gone on at length about the "mystery of the gospel" and making that phrase synonymous with the contradictory nature of the "doctrines of grace" vs. man's will. They go on and on about antinomy this and antinomy that. Everything in your whole theological system that cannot be explained rationally is tossed directly into the antinomy bin. It's what you Calvinists consider to be faith!
Thank God for that!
Resting in Him,
Clete
Yeah; when I read that part, I thought "What? He's already losing the very debate he is calling for even before heir has answered him..." :chuckle:
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Don't put any money on it . . .
Van Tillians excuse many discussions by claiming antinomies, but Clarkians do not.
If you know as much about Calvinism, as you claim, you will know to what I refer.