Hey neo calvinist

[Tom 1]

If you've got the truth on your side, they aren't long, they end at the truth.

Tell that to a theologian.

 

[Clare73]

We aren't God. We didn't create life so have no right to take it. Certainly not because of beliefs.

Non-responsive to the question. . .

 

[Clare73]

I don't understand what you are saying.

I was asking what your original question meant. Please read the post you first responded to and start again from there.

I think the meaning of my post #91 in response to your post #71 is clear.

Let's not use diversion, to an argument (post #99) about the argument (post #91), to avoid the question of whether or not 1 Samuel 15:2-3 is that "sociopathic God" of Calvin to which you refer.

 

[Clare73]

Tell that to a theologian.

It doesn't apply to Jesus who was more than a theologian.

 

[Tom 1]

I think the meaning of my post #91 in response to your post #71 is clear.

Let's not use diversion, to an argument (post #99) about the argument (post #91), to avoid the question of whether or not 1 Samuel 15:2-3 is that "sociopathic God" of Calvin to which you refer.

Same question again - are you asking me if I think the passage from Samuel refers to how Calvin thought of god, or are you asking me if I think the passage from Samuel is sufficient grounds for concluding who god is? When you say 'would that be...' in response to something I say, my assumption is that you are asking about what I said, and not something else. When you say '...of Calvin' it isn't clear if you mean his idea of god, or some other idea of god.

 

[Clare73]

Same question again - are you asking me if I think the passage from Samuel refers to how Calvin thought of god, or are you asking me if I think the passage from Samuel is sufficient grounds for concluding who god is? When you say 'would that be...' in response to something I say, my assumption is that you are asking about what I said, and not something else. When you say '...of Calvin' it isn't clear if you mean his idea of god, or some other idea of god.

Okay. . .you convinced me. . .thanks for hangin' in there.

I'm asking if the God of 1 Samuel 15:2-3 is different that what you state Calvin's understanding of God to be; i.e., a sociopathic God.

 

[Tom 1]

Okay. . .you convinced me. . .thanks for hangin' in there.

I'm asking if the God of 1 Samuel 15:2-3 is different that what you state Calvin's understanding of God to be; i.e., a sociopathic God.

How long have you got? I don't know if I have the time for such a long topic. If you want a short answer, then no. One verse from the bible can't, and doesn't, sum up the character of god as described in the bible. More to the point, sociopathy implies indifference (rather than anger, or some other emotion), so you'd need more than one instance of violence to have some sort of metric.

 

[renniks]

Non-responsive to the question. . .

Not.

 

[Hammster]

Others! Now it's just Jesus? That yardstick got more difficult to use all of a sudden.

Exactly. As it should be.

 

[Clare73]

How long have you got? I don't know if I have the time for such a long topic. If you want a short answer, then no. One verse from the bible can't, and doesn't, sum up the character of god as described in the bible. More to the point, sociopathy implies indifference (rather than anger, or some other emotion), so you'd need more than one instance of violence to have some sort of metric.

So, in light of 1 Samuel 15:2-3, why did you assign the word "sociopathic" to your characterization of Calvin's view of God?

 

[Clare73]

Non-responsive. . .

I ask you, is it okay (not offensive) for God to destroy children and babies?

Not.

It's not about rights, it's about what is offensive.

So you don't get upset with God for mercilessly destroying guiltless children and babies
(1 Samuel 15:2-3) because he has the right to do so.

But you do get upset with Calvin who mercilessly destroyed no one. . .and assumed no right to do so.

 

[Tom 1]

So, in light of 1 Samuel 15:2-3, why did you assign the word "sociopathic" to your characterization of Calvin's view of God?

I didn't assign my characterization of Calvin's view of God in the light of 1 Samuel 15:2-3.

 

[Clare73]

Calvin was fully involved in each capital decision involving anyone of note, and ultimately responsible for all murder and torture under his regime. All totalitarian regimes have a judiciary, installed by the regime’s leaders. They don’t just set up some private club on their own and start knocking people off. The whole grotesquery would never have existed in the first place without Calvin. Quibbling over whether someone should be beheaded or slow roasted to death over some petty doctrinal dispute was about the extent of his compassion. When it came to dealing with anyone who disagreed with his ideas he was treacherous, deceitful and murderous. Considering him a representative of Christ is insane.

Speaking of "grotesquery". . .who is the author of the "grotesquery" in 1 Samuel 15:2-3?

 

[Clare73]

I didn't assign my characterization of Calvin's view of God in the light of 1 Samuel 15:2-3.

Indeed, you did not. . .I confused you with someone else.

You did the opposite. . .you failed to consider 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when you characterized Calvin as the source of "grotesquery."

Who is the source of the "grotesquery" in 1 Samuel 15:2-3?
Seems like Calvin is in good company. . .

 

[Tom 1]

Indeed, you did not. . .I confused you with someone else.

You did the opposite. . .you failed to consider 1 Samuel 15:2-3 when you characterized Calvin as the source of "grotesquery."

Who is the source of the "grotesquery" in 1 Samuel 15:2-3?
Seems like Calvin is in good company. . .

We are talking about different things.

 

[Tom 1]

Speaking of "grotesquery," who is the author of the "grotesquery" in 1 Samuel 15:2-3?

Your tangent is a different point to the point I was making. Maybe read my previous posts before making assumptions.

 

[Clare73]

Your tangent is a different point to the point I was making. Maybe read my previous posts before making assumptions.

We're both talking about the objection to "grotesquery."

Your objection seems to be inconsistent.

 

[Tom 1]

We're both talking about the objection to "grotesquery."

Your objection seems to be inconsistent.

Do you understand ‘different things’, or not?

 

[Clare73]

Do you understand ‘different things’, or not?

At least as well as the inconsistency of your objection to "grotesquery."

"Different" things. . .both subject to the "same" standard; i.e. objection to "grotesquery."

 

[Tom 1]

At least as well as the inconsistency of your objection to "grotesquery."

Your perception of inconsistency is based on your assumption that what you are thinking, in your head, is the same as what I, someone else, am thinking in my head. That is always a bad assumption to make.

These 2 questions might help:

1) Did Jesus, as far as you know, express anger over the deaths of, by the standards of the time, lots of people, from tribes involved in territorial disputes with Israel throughout the OT period?

2) What things did Jesus get vocally angry about?