AIC,
you posted this;
Quote:
In theological debate, both Calvinism and Arminianism have their longstanding traditions and arguments. Both systems attempt to make sense of Biblical passages and reconcile them to the whole. But the strength of Calvinism relies on another factor outside of the Bible which is valued as much, if not more than the Bible, i.e., unassailable logic.
In their system of theology, one doctrine builds upon the other with perfect consistency with the whole.
{yes ...this is why you will see calvinists say there is not really a 3 or 4 pt calvinist....they just have not understood the other points yet}
I actually admire the consistency of the Calvinistic system, and can see how this peerless system could be so appealing to so many, especially those with an analytical mind.
{you would think he was ready to really dig into the verses then and grasp it}
My objections to Calvinism are not based upon any flaw that I see in their logic,
but with the Biblical basis used to develop their conclusions,
{Lets see if he makes a biblical case....or...an emotional one}
and their willingness to dismiss passages that seem to be too difficult to reconcile to their system.
{ This is not true. Just search monergism .com or any solid reformed site,and they will be more than willing to look at any verse...so this writer is starting to look suspect here!}
The approach to arguing for Calvinism has been almost as predictable and consistent as their theological system. If one challenges one of the five points of Calvinism, and they are unable to convince someone of the validity of that point by using Scripture, then they appeal to the theological point above or below the one they are arguing for as a "proof" of the logic of their conclusions.
{Well....does not look like he is trying to look to make a scriptural case, he has indicated he sees a logical consistency in the teaching, so why does he quibble with the cal showing how the points are inter-related...but it is early,in this article. maybe he will bring the scriptural case soon.}
"If you are predestined, you cannot lose your salvation."
{here he jumps in with a random statement and starts to mis-represent the teaching ...right away! what a surprise! What does he say;
If you are predestined......
The teaching is....WHOM ..he did....FOREKNOW...He also did predestinate to be conformed to the Image of the Son.
The Elective decree of God is first-
whom God did foreknow,
whom God set His love upon, These ones He did predestinate! to be conformed... if the writer had any real understanding of this fact alone,this issue of someone "losing" salvation would not even be an issue}
{If you go back over most of the cal/arm threads...you will see all the calvinists constantly saying.....you have a wrong view of foreknowledge, over and over again.....that is because it is almost always misunderstood.}
While this method is extremely effective in convincing the simple thinker, it is nothing more than the use of circular logic, i.e., using part of a theory as proof of that theory.
{This is useless argumentation,distracting from the real issues on the table,still waiting for his scriptural case}
One thing that I find most amazing is the way that Calvinism approaches some difficulties.
{ If he read good material , he would have answers to these objections already}
For example: If God limits the atonement to the elect,
{The Atonement, is definate,and particular, for a multitude given to Christ}
and those that are "chosen" are not selected by anything within themselves, for God is no respecter of persons;
This is correct:godisgood:
then what happens to babies that die?
{ A good question....All persons conceived in the womb are dead in Adam,guilty in Adam.....If God saves any of them,some of them, all of them, it would be because in His infinate wisdom,He has determined to do so...not because they are infants, but because the God of all the earth will do right!
Gen18:25
25That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right}
He will have mercy upon who he will....
Does the confession of faith answer this question....yes it does;
Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. ( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )
This is a perfect answer as it leaves the fate of such persons in God's control!
I do not think you could word this answer any clearer, or wiser. God will do what is right....I would say amen....lets see what our writer does next??
Well, based upon their theory, they are either elect or they are not.
{Based upon scripture...all persons are elect, or not...if the writer was trying to make a scriptural case...he should start now...but lets see???}
God cannot base His election on their infancy since that would make Him a respecter of persons. So, the God of "love" chooses to torment little babies for eternity in a fiery hell!
{ no scripture again.....but an emotionally twisted,warped idea that the writer tries to leave on the calvinist doorstep. This disturbed comment has so many errors in it , It is hard to know what to address first}
If God is the "cause" of "everything" then is He not the "cause" of sin? Doesn't He have to "will' sin for it to exist? Wouldn't that make God evil?
{ This is a wicked ungodly thought...to suggest that God is the author of sin,
This indicates a disturbed thought process...the scripture is so clear that In Him is no darkness at all...the author needs to repent of this ungodly thought process....and study on God , before he can even consider looking at theology, which has eluded his grasp}
Here if the author was not so busy developing an absurd strawman..he could have read this instead and learned something;
After reading his last set of remarks I feel I must take a shower soon, to cleanse myself from those defiling comments.
Here is something more edifying from the 1689-
2._____God, having all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself, is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creature which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; he is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things, and he hath most sovereign dominion over all creatures,
to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth; in his sight all things are open and manifest, his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to him contingent or uncertain; he is most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands; to him is due from angels and men, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience, as creatures they owe unto the Creator, and whatever he is further pleased to require of them.
( John 5:26; Psalms 148:13; Psalms 119:68; Job 22:2, 3; Romans 11:34-36; Daniel 4:25, 34, 35; Hebrews 4:13; Ezekiel 11:5; Acts 15:18; Psalms 145:17; Revelation 5:12-14 )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[/QUOTE]
These are quoted as if they were an answer to any difficult question that faces their theory.
When their theory makes God out to be a puppeteer, a baby torturer, or the author of sin,
These ignorant comments show the author is void of understanding what he is trying to speak of. He never offers a scripture at all....because he cannot answer what is offered in the confession..pathetic
these verses are quoted as their refuge. If we believe that Calvinism makes God unjust, then we just "do not understand God," for "His ways are not our ways!" This my friends is not an answer, but an evasion. To the Calvinist, "God's ways are not our ways" seems to cover manifold Biblical and theological inconsistencies which they refuse to deal with. We however, should not base truth upon their conscience, but upon the Scriptures!
If one disagrees with their "explanation," then these verses are spouted with an air of finality.
In essence, they are saying that we are wrong in using human reasoning
{as if his absurdities make any sense
....human reasoning....no thanks friend, we will stick with the scriptures}
, and we should yield to their theological absurdities as the mind of God! Anything that does not make sense can easily be dismissed as an "unfathomable mystery" which excuses all contradictions in the Scripture and the character of God. The appeal to mystery seems to be a Biblical answer, but it is not! It is not an answer at all! It is an evasion of the Bible and sound logic. If we cannot "know" God by what the Scriptures say about Him because His ways are greater than ours, then how can we be arrogant enough to say that we can accurately comprehend God and His plans at all? This is equally true for the dogmatic Calvinist. By choosing to believe Calvinism instead of believing the Biblical idea of God, they choose a "mystery" that makes God out to be a monster that the Bible never says that He is!
Sorry to say...this author uses no scripture..is weighed in the balances, and found wanting
