Can the non-Calvinists explain what is wrong with this question...

:laugh:

I assume that was in jest because the fallacy called "argument from silence" refers not to one who attacks straw-men, begs the question, and resorts to ad hominem attacks as you have done, but instead one who is "SILENT." You have given ample information for anyone to see you didn't, and may still not understand the distinction. If you do understand it but have just refused to acknowledge that you do in order to cause me grief, as you said before, then that reveals more about your character than your ignorance of this subject, either way it reflects badly on you.

You are engaging me in debate Fredrick, you just aren't doing a very good job at it because you won't stick to the subject. Instead, you ridicule me, intentionally try to cause me grief (by your own admission), beg the question by making presumptions, attack straw-men by suggesting that we think God can't do what he desires and the list goes on.

Why do you come to a debate forum if you don't wish to engage people in debate? Are you just trolling? What is your purpose exactly? Just trying to cause me grief? Does that bring you pleasure?

 

No, I started this thread so as to allow others to explain to you the error of the question since you were mocking me as if I didn't understand it, or couldn't respond to it. They said the same thing I did. Even a Calvinist agreed with the distinction I was drawing, so the goal was met.

So you still stand in error by not drawing the distinction in God's desires and his sovereign decrees, thus I suppose you believe God's desire is thwarted each time you sin?

Yes you are, you are just doing it poorly because you are resorting to fallacies rather than dealing with the terms of the discussion as have men like Piper and Sproul. You should follow their lead and be willing to draw the proper distinctions so as to clarify our actual points of contention.

No, I want you to acknowledge that there is a difference in what God may desire (take pleasure in) and what God may sovereignly decree, or explain why you don't. I don't want you continue to shame yourself by ridiculing, mocking and purposefully grieving me.

 

Yes, I've referenced this article a couple of times because Fredrick and Aaron refused to acknowledge the distinction between God's desires and his sovereign decrees.

Calvinists obviously believe that the salvation of a select few is a part of God's sovereign decree, where as we believe God desires all men to freely and willingly come to faith. Thus, to suggest that we believe God is attempting to save everyone but can't, or that his will is somehow thwarted isn't a accurate assessment of our actual view because we don't believe an individual's salvation is under God's sovereign unchanging decree. IOW, we don't believe God desires (sovereignly decrees) to save everyone effectually. We believe God desires people to freely and willingly repent and follow Christ in faith. We believe God finds pleasure in this...He desires it, but He doesn't sovereignly decree it and then fail in his effort as Fredrick's question suggests.

 

It doesn't matter if you don't want to engage me on that point. The question itself demands that point to be made.

It's as if I asked you, "Are you saying that if God desires people to freely choose or reject Christ's gift that a mere mortal Calvinistic human can stymie or otherwise cause His failure?

The question itself presumes that is what God desires and thus Calvinism itself would be in violation of that desire, which is to beg the question. Are you saying you wouldn't point out the obvious flaw in that question if that is what I posed to you?

I can't help if you ask a question with a flawed premise, but don't get mad at me for pointing it out. And certainly don't ridicule me and pretend as if what I have said is not pertinent to the question at hand.

As if I haven't offered plenty of posts explaining my own views.

And I didn't tell you what to believe. I corrected a flawed question by drawing a distinction. I did this fairly by pointing you to two other Calvinistic scholars who make this distinction. You and Aaron responded by mocking me and now you even admit you did this to purposefully cause grief....then you have the nerve to say "Shame on you?" Really?