Featured Logical extremes

This is a very good question and essential to properly deal with either side. The anti-Calvinist argue as though the so-called "Calvinist" camp is unified and one represents all. That is simply false.

The same can be said about the Anti-Calvinist camp. There are extreme differences within their camp as well.

I have been on both sides of this fense. I think the extreme view of the Calvinist camp is the superlapsarian perspective. However, even within that positon there are great differences. The extreme of that camp is expressed by those commonly called hardshells who deny that the gospel is the elected means of the Holy Spirit's work in regeneration and that there will be people in heaven who never heard the name of Christ and never believed in the gospel. This same extreme attributes sin to God and election to hell.

The extreme view in the Arminian side are the universalists who deny hell and believe everyone will be saved.

 

Good question Herald,

I think that some who desire to get truth so much that they go beyond where the scripture goes. We are sometimes too curious and want to "press" on to find some new idea.....so some will depart from scripturally based thought ....to pure logic, or intellectual speculations.

Sometimes as I listen to a new idea...if it violates clear scriptural teaching I will not spend much time with it at all. We have been given all that pertains to life and godliness....we do not need to look into all speculations.
I back off from some theological discussion if it looks as if it is part of a trivia game, rather than an actual inquiry into useful teaching.

 

Herald, this is a good question. A christian scholar I regard highly tell that he does this with his philosophy of christian religion classes. (Peter Kerr) He divides the class and tells his skeptics of the class to argue for theism, and tells those of christian faith to argue for agnosticism or atheism. He adds that the christian theists tend to a much more passionate job of arguing for agnosticism. Everyone comes away from the class enlightened about one another's positions.

 

If it is truth, an extreme form of it is only extreme truth which means it is only true- the word extreme loses its meaning. If it is east, extreme east is meaningless.

God exists. What is the extreme of that belief? There is none. God really, REALLY exists?

But I know what you are getting at. Hypercalvinism, though, is not the extreme of Calvinism. It is a perversion of Calvinism.

Following Calvinism to its logical ends does not at all lead to hypercalvinism any more than following a true north direction leads to hypernorth.

Arminianism, on the other hand, carried out to its logical ends turns the One true God into nothing more than a god like Zeus.

Arminians contend that God does not control the decisions of human beings. At the same time they contend that God in control of the events of our world. But that is like saying, "God is not in control of anything wet, but he has full control of all creatures of the sea."

If they ever come to the realization that there system is illogical and abandon the whole "control" part they illogically hold to- then their God becomes no more than Zeus.

The Calvinist believes God controls every subatomic particle in the universe at all times forever.

This God is no Zeus.

 

I am supralapsarian and I am as aggressively evangelistic as anybody in my county.

Supralapsarianism is simply the clearest definition of God's purposes. Knowing God's purposes more clearly will inspire you to pursue them more vehemently.

Exactly.

 

Here we have a great example of the typical semantic ambiguity fallacy over a name/title that is commonly used to avoid being pinned to claims (TULIP) which all necessarily must hinge on strict determinism to logically hold water.

"We all don't believe that" is common to hear, yet those saying it are directly associated with others holding to the same (unified) TULIP doctrines, the extremes of such which can be defined as "hyper-determinism" if they were to be held consistent to support the TULIP as being logical in order to maintain a "true" conclusion to any of those points.

To cut to the roots of "Calvinism" (whatever they want to call it) and in an attempt to avoid the common smokescreen chase of always having to forcefully try to define terms before any logical arguments can be made concerning their scriptural interpretations I simply choose to use the term/title "Determinist" or in relation to their soteriological view of Divine sovereignty I choose "Deterministically Sovereign" ...which although is an extreme to the "Cal" view it is accurate in defining the position if the TULIP is to stay rooted.

For one to claim his goal is to be "logical" as if their motive is to come to logical conclusions, but to do so while continually refusing to be pinned to their premises by avoiding being pinned to "any" defining terms to hold to a claim and issues demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the basic "logical" principles ("critical thinking skills 103") needed to draw out the truths in an debate/argument.

The "extreme" of this debate tactic leads to meaningless arguments and never-ending proof-texting BUT NO logical conclusions which are (should be) the ethical goals in a debate.

Therefore, ahh, why do I bother...:tonofbricks:

 

An Extreme truth.. So I can call you a hyper-calvinist then? cool

Theism is the extreme opposite of Atheism sure.

You should really explain this one. I am quite curious. What is different between a hyper calvinist and a calvinist?

So if north is hypernorth, then hypercalvinism is calvinism? so you are a hypercalvinist? but didnt you JUST say that was a perversion? confusing you are.

Good grief, im sure your argument for this will be astounding. Im not even an arminian but since im not a calvinist im thrown into that camp but ok here we go for the ultra awesome DESTRUCTION OF FREE WILL!

That is a terrible analogy.. like... super bad.

God is in the business with desiring men to come to repentance, he controls the world and everything therein, however man walked away from God, but God who is rich in mercy desires not to see His children suffering calls them ALL to repentance. (2 Pe 3:9), God thought of a way to save everyone if they will humble themselves to the Cross. why? For God so loved the world He gave His only begotten son for whosoever shall believe in Him shall not perish but have ever lasting life (John 3:16)

BEFORE YOU EVEN SAY IT! No. Im not misunderstanding the greek, it is only in the reformed circles do they tell this "secret" that all means elect and whosoever means the elect...

Good one! my foundations are shaking. Lets get some better points. We believe God controls everything, in salvation Repentance is a personal action he has left us with just as adam and eve were left in the garden and they chose to eat the fruit, They had a divine plan by God, they made a choice, God is bigger than our choices made by man in the midst of time, since he lives in the fullness of time. This doesn't leave God out of control; as this is His plan, I don't think the outcome is going to shock God in heaven when we do roll call.

So does the non-cal and arminian. Stop lying to yourself and others.

Well we got one.

 

See, this is the problem in that terms aren't defined. The extreme of the Calvinist' (WTWTCI) {New acronym } view of Divine sovereign "control" is "deterministic control" where the non-Cal who also believes that God has Divinely sovereign control thinks of it, or at least I do, as Divine Providential control.

I would have no problem holding to that term, BUT you will NEVER get a Calvinist (WTWTCI) to hold to "deterministic control", as soon as you try to get them to stick to the definition and its logical consequences they will begin on semantics or cloud this issue, endlessly, but you will not get them to hold to "any" such term to draw a logically true conclusion from.

 

I could adhere to that definition I think. At least nothing jarring is coming to mind anyway.

 

To their seemingly surprise they have no monopoly on saying "God is Sovereign" anymore than that "they" preach "THE" Doctrines of Grace" call it what is for Heaven sakes!- Grace alone, pre-selected grace, deterministic grace (WTWTCI) but be specific ...my doctrines of God's Loving Grace are for more reaching and inclusive - when I preach "The Gospel" I'm not thinking Calvinism = Gospel in the least, I'm thinking about the Good News for "ALL the world", not a "pre-selected elect world" where the truth of their gospel is that it is Bad News for most.

 

You know mine already

 

Which is just a bunch of words with no meaning.

God is in "providential control" of the actions of man but not in ACTUAL control.

Right?

He does not control the decisions man makes, right? Trillions of decisions are made by humanity every day and God does not control any of them.

So, basically God does not have any real control whatsoever over the world of man.

Ah, he controls the rain and the volcanoes- but NOTHING in the world of men.

But you say he has providential control.

OH! PROVIDENTIAL control!! Well THAT answers it!!

Throw the word providential in there and it changes EVERYTHING!!

Wrong- I hold to it proudly.

 

The extreme of my position might be that I hold to that God is 100% unchangingly “Omnibenevolent” and what keeps me going to that to that extreme is that I consider this attribute necessary as a major truth factor that must be maintained at all times to maintain His Nature in Truth.

Which leads me to the “extreme” position that God is 100% Truth and this must be maintained in conjunction with not only His Omnibenevolence but with His Omnipotent and Omniscient Nature. All these attributes are unchanging and must work together whether I can fully understand how He does it or not.

I cannot know the depth of His Goodness and Love because it is unmeasurable but I know it is there in His Nature as well as all His attributes and these are unwavering in His existence. So:

God exists.

God is Truth.

Therefore God exists in Truth.

This may seem an over simplistic conclusion but it is one I will always draw upon in faith.

Which brings me to the issue of “faith”:

How does one come to faith if He cannot give logical reason from his own mind that He is Truth?

In short, it’s all about truth to me…100% Truth!

So let’s take this example of an extreme:

When this Determinist puts his children to bed at night it is very simple, does he lie to them and tell them that Jesus loves them because He is an Omnibenevolent God, His Loving promise was made to all people and they have genuine hope of salvation or does He tell them the "truth" that he hopes the Deterministic God has pre-elected them because most people were not included in His promise of love and this was only to those He pre-selected because of NO reason whatsoever?

I would have no problem explaining God as being in Providential Control of all the world and that His judgment of their heart will be in Truth, and if they love the Truth and believe in Him they will be saved, because He is an Omnibenevolent God in Truth, He is Just in Truth, He loves all the creatures He made on the world in Truth...ALL these Words in the Bible are written to ALL the people He made in the world so they could know the Truth that He made ALL of them in Love and wants to save them in Truth, He made a loving promise before even creating the Earth and will show you the Truth, He is going to look into your heart and if you love the Truth He will give you the faith to grow in His Truth and He will save you in Love...that is His way and that is the Truth.

Not once would I need to waver from the Truth.

But watch the Determinist dance around his systematic theological "truth".

The truth comes down to he will either tell his children Jesus love them or not. If he is so proud of his Deterministic God tell it (Good News/Bad News) straight!

 

Who ever said that he cannot give logical reasons from his own mind?

The determinist says that God is love and that God loves everybody and that God will save every single person who confesses Jesus Christ as Lord.

How about the devil who roams to and fro on this earth seeking whom he may devour.

That is one of God's creatures on this earth. Does that apply to the devil?

But God elected to save JUST humans, right. He did not elect to save demons and Satan, correct?

When he looks into these hearts does he find something in them that he did not know he would find until he looked in them?

Also, how did that love of truth get IN those hearts?

Nobody watches me dance in a debate with you, Benji. Because I have the truth, all they watch is me eat your lunch.

 

So he leaves out "part" of the truth when he puts his children to bed. The part that only some are pre-selected to be able to confess the Lord Jesus Christ.

Thought so, you hold back some of the truth you are so proud of.

“If you take part of the truth, and try to make that part of the truth, all of the truth, then that part of the truth becomes an untruth.” ~ Adrian Rogers

IOWs, a lie.

Dance....

 

Now why would anyone leave that out? I certainly would not. Life isn't fair...kids need to know that.

 

God gives life. God says He is Just. Why would anyone tell their kids God is a liar???