Molinism

[Hammster]

When God decrees a thing, that you will fish to day, will you fist today and is God the cause of you going fishing today?

Yes, I will fish today. No, God is not the cause.

 

[heymikey80]

When God decrees a thing, that you will fish to day, will you fist today and is God the cause of you going fishing today?

That's so obviously a double-question. It's a fallacy to require one answer to a double question.

The answer to the first is yes, you will fish today. The answer to the second is undefined. God is not necessarily the responsible cause for your fishing just because He decrees it.

If you do require a single answer, answer singly my one question: Is God so weak that He can't prevent sin from occurring, and didn't God make creation stronger than He is, so we shouldn't trust Him to overcome His own creation? Hm, and the question seems awfully relevant to Molinism, too.

 

[themuzicman]

Calvinists (and Molinists) only deny double predestination by creating a thin veil, a philosophical nit, claiming that God only picks the elect, even though by doing so, He is ultimately picking the reprobate by conscious neglect rather than declaration.

It's kinda like me picking 4 students out of a class to get automatic As, knowing that the material I'm giving the class will fail all of them, and then claiming that I didn't pick who would fail. It's really only valid to those who want to ignore the obvious.

 

[Easystreet]

Where do you find Dr. White ever promoting double predestination? Is that all you have now? Lying about what other Christians say? It probably makes your new buddy happy, but it is quite pathetic.

Hammster, in all fairness to the information given do you deny that to have God decree that a man rape a woman is not double predestination. Do you deny this?


You have not answered the content I quoted from the video that attributes the act of rape as being directly the cause God intended it to be and white is teaching this and this is double predestination.


Do you deny this?

Do you deny that the words I quoted from the video are true?

Do you affirm that the words I quoted from the video are indeed the words that represent white’s view of believing that God makes men rape women?

Yes or No and why if you don’t mine, because it would be educational to understand the why of your view and answers?

Do you hold to double predestination as white does and if not how so and please explain the difference if you hold this view. If you do where in the holding of this view can you logically depart from it, if that is how you believe. If you don’t believe in double predestination of which “white” teaches in this video then explain how you can defend “white’s” position that he seed God decreeing that God makes men rape women?

Based upon my several reads of Dr. Keithley’s book he does not ascribe to nor believe this extreme view.

Molinism is very attractive and it is a welcome position that balances the tension between Calvinism and Arminianism, but I must admit I hold very tightly to Norm Geislers view of things, one of my heros and he does not hold that God decrees that men rape women.

Where do you place yourself in this range of Calvinistic views? Do you identify with “white” or a view that would condemn “white’s” view?

I think many are curious as to where you land in this broad Calvinistic believe system of which “white” claims to be a part of.

What exactly do you specifically believe in the broad field of views within Calvinism?

 

[Hammster]

Calvinists (and Molinists) only deny double predestination by creating a thin veil, a philosophical nit, claiming that God only picks the elect, even though by doing so, He is ultimately picking the reprobate by conscious neglect rather than declaration.

It's kinda like me picking 4 students out of a class to get automatic As, knowing that the material I'm giving the class will fail all of them, and then claiming that I didn't pick who would fail. It's really only valid to those who want to ignore the obvious.

This would only be true if people went to Hell because God didn't save them. Since that isn't true, your premise is false.

 

[heymikey80]

If the only thing that commends Molinism is that "it's not Calvinism", then it has already fallen on the sword of history.

 

[Hammster]

I think many are curious as to where you land in this broad Calvinistic believe system of which “white” claims to be a part of.

Why? Have I not made my views clear over the past two years? I would guess about 8000 of my posts deal with what I believe. Go look them up.

 

[themuzicman]

This would only be true if people went to Hell because God didn't save them. Since that isn't true, your premise is false.

Well, they go to hell because God didn't elect them. Keep in mind, Calvinist, that heaven and hell are the result of God's arbitrary choice and nothing else.

 

[nobdysfool]

Well, they go to hell because God didn't elect them. Keep in mind, Calvinist, that heaven and hell are the result of God's arbitrary choice and nothing else.

No, YOU keep in mind, Open Theist, that Hell is where sinners go, FOR THEIR SINS. Justice is getting what you deserve, and every sinner deserves Hell, for their sins. God has chosen those whom He will have in Heaven with Him, and that is Unmerited Grace and Mercy. Those who are not chosen are not treated unjustly, for they justly deserve their punishment and condemnation.

 

[Easystreet]

So Dr. White DIDN'T say that God caused the rape? Thanks for the retraction.

Did God decree the rape?

Yes or no

 

[nobdysfool]

Did God decree the rape?

Yes or no

Rabbit trail. Thread derail.

 

[Easystreet]

It's now missing an argument -- again -- that God is thus responsible for authoring everything that happens under His decree.

So what was White's answer, when he was cut off? "One man's answer seems good until another comes to review it."

Westminster itself says God ordains whatever comes to pass, so the facts of criminal actions occurring is indeed ordained for redemptive good by God in Calvinism. But through the decree of all things, God isn't forcing evil to be evil -- evil is evil just fine on its own.

So you do not believe in double predestination as white does where he affirms that God decreed the man to rape the woman?

 

[Easystreet]

Rabbit trail. Thread derail.

No avoidance on your part because to embrace what white actually said is to accept that God according to white decreed that a man raped a woman so that it did not have meaningless purpose.

white asserts that if God did not decree the man to rape the woman that such acts apart from God decreeing it would be meaningless and purposeless, that is exactly what he teaches in the video.

Do you deny this?

 

[themuzicman]

No, YOU keep in mind, Open Theist, that Hell is where sinners go, FOR THEIR SINS. Justice is getting what you deserve, and every sinner deserves Hell, for their sins. God has chosen those whom He will have in Heaven with Him, and that is Unmerited Grace and Mercy. Those who are not chosen are not treated unjustly, for they justly deserve their punishment and condemnation.

It continues to amaze me how Calvinists can compartmentalize their theology, pulling out the pieces they need to post something like this, and then put that away and pull out doctrines of unconditional election and limited atonement and eternal predestination and their version of sovereignty, and think everything is OK.

So, sinners go to hell for their sins, but they were predestined by God before creation TO sin, and because God didn't pick them for election, they're going to hell.

I go back to my example: I set up a class curriculum where every student will fail because they are incapable of doing the work, and then I arbitrarily pick 4 to get 'A's. However, I claim I didn't pick the rest of the class to fail, and they fail because they couldn't do passing work.

This is the Calvinist view. The sinner is blamed because God creates circumstances where they can do nothing but end up in hell. And they are then blamed for it.

Thing is, Molinists do the same thing by a different means.

 

[heymikey80]

So you do not believe in double predestination as white does where he affirms that God decreed the man to rape the woman?

As White didn't say what you're saying, and I don't say what you're saying, I can but disagree with your representation of White's statement. A decree is about what would happen. To demand that mean God makes it happen as the immediate responsible party is not concluded. The responsible party in a crime is the one who wills the crime in an evil interest.

I hold to double asymmetric predestination; White does, too. In point of fact, predestination is not a belief in deterministic decrees, and confusing them indicates a singular, continuing lack of understanding of Calvinism.

I might also point out, the decree may be as simple as, That evil be shown to be what it truly is. Is God unable to decree the results of true evil be made clear to people? Hm.

How does this relate to Molinism?

 

[nobdysfool]

No avoidance on your part because to embrace what white actually said is to accept that God according to white decreed that a man raped a woman so that it did not have meaningless purpose.

white asserts that if God did not decree the man to rape the woman that such acts apart from God decreeing it were meaningless and purposeless, that is exactly what he teaches in the video.

Do you deny this?

Why is this such an issue for you, aside from the obvious emotional nature of the subject? Are you trying to portray White as some sort of devil, so since he's a Calvinist, all Calvinists must be devils too?

I don't agree with what I heard, but let's be clear, it was an excerpt, and taken out of the full context of the discussion. As such, any value it has is limited, and it looks more like a diversion and an attempt to stir up strife and anger. You should know better than that.

Now, let's get back to the real subject of the thread which is the false doctrine of Molinism.

 

[drstevej]

No avoidance on your part because to embrace what white actually said is to accept that God according to white decreed that a man raped a woman so that it did not have meaningless purpose.

white asserts that if God did not decree the man to rape the woman that such acts apart from God decreeing it were meaningless and purposeless, that is exactly what he teaches in the video.

Do you deny this?

Start another thread, this one is not about that video.


Note to self: When losing an argument: [1] change the subject; [2] find any radical overstatement and pretend it is the opponent's view and that of all of his theological comrades.

 

[heymikey80]

Start another thread, this one is not about that video.

Note to self: When losing an argument: [1] change the subject; [2] find any radical overstatement and pretend it is the opponent's view and that of all of his theological comrades.

"SERVETUS!"

 

[nobdysfool]

It continues to amaze me how Calvinists can compartmentalize their theology, pulling out the pieces they need to post something like this, and then put that away and pull out doctrines of unconditional election and limited atonement and eternal predestination and their version of sovereignty, and think everything is OK.

So, sinners go to hell for their sins, but they were predestined by God before creation TO sin, and because God didn't pick them for election, they're going to hell.

I go back to my example: I set up a class curriculum where every student will fail because they are incapable of doing the work, and then I arbitrarily pick 4 to get 'A's. However, I claim I didn't pick the rest of the class to fail, and they fail because they couldn't do passing work.

This is the Calvinist view. The sinner is blamed because God creates circumstances where they can do nothing but end up in hell. And they are then blamed for it.

Thing is, Molinists do the same thing by a different means.

The only thing you and I agree on, and I mean the ONLY thing, is that Molinism is wrong. I don't believe you truly understand Calvinism, as evidenced by some of your statements, but it's not up to me to convince you, it's up to God.

 

[Hammster]

So you do not believe in double predestination as white does where he affirms that God decreed the man to rape the woman?

Oh, I get it. You have no clue what double predestination is. Now it is starting to make sense.