The No-Straw-Man Calvinism challenge.

[-V-]

I have explained twice. Here's the third.

515

You explain your contradiction by quoting the contradiction? Once again, you demonstrate that the meaning of the world "explain" still eludes you.

More dancing and dodging. I guess that's just your thing.

 

[Hammster]

You explain your contradiction by quoting the contradiction? Once again, you demonstrate that the meaning of the world "explain" still eludes you.

More dancing and dodging. I guess that's just your thing.

Which part is eluding your grasp?

 

[-V-]

Which part is eluding your grasp?

No, I'm done. You've had chance after chance, and you just want to play your little games. It's clear you either can't explain, or you won't explain. Any more of your dodging and dancing will just be ignored.

 

[Hammster]

No, I'm done. You've had chance after chance, and you just want to play your little games. It's clear you either can't explain, or you won't explain. Any more of your dodging and dancing will just be ignored.

Okay.

 

[TheSeabass]

Which is why the OP goes farther than you quoted.

Just the title of the thread alone is poisoning the well. The issue is can a Calvinist prove any argument I have made against Calvinism is a straw man argument?

 

[Hammster]

Just the title of the thread alone is poisoning the well. The issue is can a Calvinist prove any argument I have made against Calvinism is a straw man argument?

So asking for posts that aren't straw men is poisoning the well?

How would you have framed it?

 

[TheSeabass]

So asking for posts that aren't straw men is poisoning the well?

No, claiming that the arguments upfront are straw men is poisoning the well and there is no proof given in the OP that the arguments against Calvinism are straw men type arguments.

How would you have framed it?

Unless specific proof is given that all arguments here against Calvinism are straw man arguments, leave out the claim arguments here against Calvinism are straw men type arguments.

 

[Hammster]

No, claiming that the arguments upfront are straw men is poisoning the well and there is no proof given in the OP that the arguments against Calvinism are straw men type arguments.



Unless specific proof is given that all arguments here against Calvinism are straw man arguments, leave out the claim arguments here against Calvinism are straw men type arguments.

I never said they were all straw men. I said that they usually happen. So I provided a place to present arguments that could be demonstrated to not be straw men. Instead of saying, for instance, that Calvinism makes all men robots, one could go to a source and say "it's says this here, and I conclude that this makes men robots". Then it could be discussed.

So I'm not looking to "win". I'm just wanting a fair discussion based on what Reformed Theology actually teaches.

 

[EmSw]

You do not need to challenge it. You don't need to respond here at all. In fact, I'm not even asking you to challenge Calvinism. What I'm asking is that if you do, have integrity and challenge what we actually believe and not use the standard straw man arguments.

Isn't there a forum for extra-biblical literature?

 

[Hammster]

Isn't there a forum for extra-biblical literature?

Maybe. Why?

 

[EmSw]

Maybe. Why?

Well, that's what you have given in the OP.

 

[RisenInJesus]

Have you even clicked one of the links?

Yes, clicked and read more than one.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Yes, clicked and read more than one.

Thanks. That's good.

They all have appendices, so you can quickly go to a section that you are interested in.

 

[TheSeabass]

I never said they were all straw men. I said that they usually happen. So I provided a place to present arguments that could be demonstrated to not be straw men. Instead of saying, for instance, that Calvinism makes all men robots, one could go to a source and say "it's says this here, and I conclude that this makes men robots". Then it could be discussed.

So I'm not looking to "win". I'm just wanting a fair discussion based on what Reformed Theology actually teaches.

Have I had any straw man arguments against Calvinism? If so, can you point it out.

There was this thread:
Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

I responded post #73, did I misrepresent Calvinism?
Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

Is there a common everyday misrepresentation of Calvinism that you see on this board? Can you give an example?

 

[Hammster]

Have I had any straw man arguments against Calvinism? If so, can you point it out.

There was this thread:
Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

I responded post #73, did I misrepresent Calvinism?
Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

Is there a common everyday misrepresentation of Calvinism that you see on this board? Can you give an example?

I have no idea if you have had any. This wasn't directed at any one person.

 

[Si_monfaith]

I will go first, although I have a feeling this will turn into a buzz saw: (From the Canons of Dort"

"FIRST HEAD: ARTICLE 6. That some receive the gift of faith from God, and others do not receive it, proceeds from God's eternal decree. "For now unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world" (Acts 15:18 A.V.). "who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will" (Eph 1:11). According to which decree He graciously softens the hearts of the elect, however obstinate, and inclines them to believe; while He leaves the non-elect in His just judgment to their own wickedness and obduracy. And herein is especially displayed the profound, the merciful, and at the same time the righteous discrimination between men equally involved in ruin; or that decree of election and reprobation, revealed in the Word of God, which, though men of perverse, impure, and unstable minds wrest it to their own destruction, yet to holy and pious souls affords unspeakable consolation."

Predestination/Election - The idea that God never gives most people the opportunity for salvation because he will not/has not chosen them.

Ezekiel 18:32 NIV
“For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!”
‭‭
Through the prophet Ezekiel God makes the declaration that he takes no pleasure in the death of ANYONE. Now you can make the argument he is speaking only of the elect (Israelites) here, but that would present another problem with "Election", the idea that an elect can still die spiritually in sin. But I don't think he is speaking only of Israelites because Paul wrote in 1 Timothy that God wants ALL to be saved & Peter wrote that God wills ALL to come to repentance.

Luke records in Luke 7:29-30 that people had either accepted or rejected the purpose of God for their lives by accepting or rejecting John. This alone speaks of man's ability to accept or reject God's will (which as spoken above includes salvation for all people).

(The following are important questions for me concerning Calvinism but may not be related to the OP)

*This idea that God has purposes only a few for salvation from the beginning brings to bear much deeper and heavier questions that need asked but in this environment will probably be dismissed as "straw men", which is another issue altogether.

Why pray if God purposes all things and will do them without human interaction/intervention?

Why evangelize if the elect will be saved regardless?

Is God responsible for evil in the world if everything that happens, happens as a result of his will & purpose?

God says to repent for people to understand that they can't repent without He giving them repentance as in Acts 5:31.

Prayer is for relationship not for victory in evangelization.

The elect need the gospel to understand salvation and be saved.

Through His Son Jesus, God takes all responsibility. Man is not free to take any responsibility.

 

[JLB777]

God says to repent for people to understand that they can't repent without He giving them repentance as in Acts 5:31.

Prayer is for relationship not for victory in evangelization.

The elect need the gospel to understand salvation and be saved.

Through His Son Jesus, God takes all responsibility. Man is not free to take any responsibility.

29 But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: “We ought to obey God rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree. 31 Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.”
Acts 5:29-32


Jesus preached the Gospel to Israel, that they might repent.

The only way to receive salvation is to obey the Gospel command to repent.

• the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.

JLB

 

[BobRyan]

Romans 10
9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.”

John 12:32 "I will DRAW ALL mankind unto ME"
John 16 the Holy Spirit "convicts THE WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment"

John 1:11 "He came to HIS OWN and His OWN received Him not"

Isaiah 5:4 "what more could I have done - that I have not already done?"

Matt 23 "37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.

 

[BobRyan]

Regarding Protestant "Election": in Romans 9:11, Paul is referring to Rebecca's twin sons Jacob and Esau. How one was chosen even before their birth having done nothing good, or bad. Paul made that statement questioningly. .

As an Arminian - I see nothing amiss here in Romans 9:11 because as we see in 1Cor 12 in distribution of spiritual gifts - God has always had sovereign right to choose and assign roles, ministry, leadership, who will be pastor, who will be evangelist, who will have "gift of helps" but not leadership etc.

11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, 12 it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.”

 

[BobRyan]

If one obeys to gain something then his obedience is only every self-serving. Only grace allows for true obedience. If I have nothing to gain or lose, I am then, and only then, free to truly love God and neighbor.

Romans 2
11 There is no favoritism with God.
12 All those who sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all those who sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be declared righteous.

Romans 2
4 Or do you despise the riches of His kindness, restraint, and patience, not recognizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hardness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath, when God’s righteous judgment is revealed. 6 He will repay each one according to his works: 7 eternal life to those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality;

One has to firs be forgiven and born-again to produce via the Holy Spirit - good fruit... good works.

But as Romans 10 points out - God leaves it to the lost to choose repentance and confession because all the world "all mankind" has been supernaturally "drawn unto Me" John 12;32 --- drawing that "enables all the choice that depravity disables"