Featured Why are you debating me?

That's enough reason there.

You've answered your own question.

Convincing himself is not right.

Playing both sides of the chess board- so what?

So what?

 

So what?

Why not?

 

So what, Skandelon? What's your point?

once again this seems to be yet another argument void of exegesis and logic bent on nothing but "God would NEVER...!!!"

That's not an argument.

 

I can think of several verses of scripture that are violated by this determinist view.

1 Cor 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

If God determines that one man believe in determinism, and another man not, then God is indeed the author of confusion and debate, not peace.

Mat 12:25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

If God has determined that one believer believes in determinism, and another believer does not, then God is divided against himself.

Jesus implies that even Satan is smart enough not to be divided against himself.

But some here are not so smart as they believe.

 

As much as I would enjoy joining this debate, I prefer to let you and Luke go at it alone. Sometimes, I just have to jump in though.

That said, determinism is just dumb. I'm sorry, but that's the nicest thing I can say about it. As you have pointed out, it is like God debating himself, God fighting himself, God divided against himself. Jesus implied even Satan is too smart to be divided and fight against his own kingdom. But this is what Reformed folks believe. Dumb.

 

Opera is dumb to my three year old.


A view that God speaks to you so you don't need the help of others is not only idiotic but it is also arrogant.

A hermeneutic that copies and pastes Scriptures as if whoever can copy and paste the most wins is also idiotic in the highest degree.

A view that "ordain" must mean "command" because in one dictionary the word "command" is number five in a list of possible different definitions that illustrate how it COULD be used is moronic beyond comprehension.

 

Good OP another way of saying what the OP states is made by Craig here:


2. Universal causal determinism cannot be rationally affirmed. There is a sort of dizzying, self-defeating character to determinism. For if one comes to believe that determinism is true, one has to believe that the reason he has come to believe it is simply that he was determined to do so. One has not in fact been able to weigh the arguments pro and con and freely make up one’s mind on that basis. The difference between the person who weighs the arguments for determinism and rejects them and the person who weighs them and accepts them is wholly that one was determined by causal factors outside himself to believe and the other not to believe. When you come to realize that your decision to believe in determinism was itself determined and that even your present realization of that fact right now is likewise determined, a sort of vertigo sets in, for everything that you think, even this very thought itself, is outside your control. Determinism could be true; but it is very hard to see how it could ever be rationally affirmed, since its affirmation undermines the rationality of its affirmation.

 

Look Luke, I know that you do not believe in "bare permission". When you say you believe God permits sin, what you mean is that SIN is the one and only thing God will permit in that situation. If God has determined to allow a sinner to sin, that is the one and only thing that sinner is allowed to do, he cannot possibly repent and choose not to sin in that given situation. You think I do not understand your view, but I do and I reject it as plain dumb.

The dictionary defines ordained as an "order" a "command", a "decree" because that is what it is. If God has ordained something, then that is the only thing that can happen.

Calvinists simply play with words, nobody is fooled except Calvinists themselves.

If your view is correct, God is playing a meaningless game with himself. God is his own enemy and is divided against himself. The devil is not really God's adversary as the scriptures say, but the devil is simply God's handyman performing all his dirty work. That is DUMB.

The fact that you cannot easily see how dumb this view is speaks volumes.


'

 

The dictionary offers command as the FIFTH possible definition of a word that can be defined in numerous different ways.

Dictionaries always put the most likely definition first and in descending order from there.

So EVEN THE DICTIONARY YOU USE undermines this idea you purport.

Ask Skandelon and Heir- both very smart Arminians- if the word ordain means command simply because it is listed NUMBER FIVE in a list of possible DIFFERENT definitions.

[snipped]

This is why attending a good seminary like Skandelon has done and reading great works like Heir does is ESSENTIAL to enabling you to debate such things.

[snipped]

 

Baloney and you know it. If God has ordained something, then it cannot happen any other way.

Is this not correct? Tell me you do not believe this.

That means that event has been ordered by God, commanded by God, decreed by God. It must happen.

That is your view. My view is that God can say for a certainty what will absolutely happen because he has perfect foreknowledge of what will take place and allows it.

What you are trying to do is work the foreknowledge view into Calvinism, but it cannot be done, you redefine foreknowledge and reject the biblical view of it.

[snipped], you think you are the only person who has ever thought of these things. I was thinking about this stuff before you were born.

 

Command who, Winman.

Who is it that you think ordain means God commands?

 

Everyone. If God ordains that an event happen, it must happen just as he ordained. If God has ordained that a sinner must sin for something to happen, then he must sin, he cannot possibly repent and choose not to sin.

Isn't this an accurate description of what you believe? If not, please explain precisely what you believe for all to see.

 

So let me get this straight.

You think that God commands sinners to sin if he ordains that they sin?

 

Here is my "dumb" mugwump (though I'm not a calvinist - tulips give me hayfever) position.

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.​

How can it be that the eternal almighty all-knowing, all powerful God would want to stoop down and reason with me concering my sin and love of darkness - I don't know and I can't explain it, but I just accept it without questioning the how-to's and what-if's.​

This passage clearly outlined my own experience.​

It was like a wrestling match (how could I possibly win?).
I exercised my choice and "tapped-out" before I ended up in the place of perdition.​

I will say this: When He called me through His word, I already knew Him (who He was/is) though I was yet unsaved.

HankD​

 

Quit avoiding the question and answer honestly. [snipped]
You give me your honest answer and I will explain exactly what I believe.

 

You're the one avoiding the question Winman.

Do you believe that in order for God to ordain something he must command somebody to do something?

I believe God has determined every single thing that ever comes to pass in eternity past.