You be the judge!

[orthotomeo]

You're walking down the street past an old warehouse. Suddenly you hear shouting coming from inside.

You slip through a back door, following the sounds. You sneak along very carefully. Finally, hiding behind crates, you are within 10 feet of the source of the noise.

Before you is a large cage, about six feet tall by three feet square. A figure stands locked inside the cage. With every movement, you notice some liquid sloshing about 1/2 inch deep around the figure's feet. A moment later you catch a strong whiff of gasoline.

Outside the cage is another figure. In one hand he holds a large key. In the other, a blazing torch.

The man outside the cage makes repeated promises to save the captive. This is the shouting you heard outside.

"Please, just trust me! I love you and I want you to come out of that cage! Please - all I ask you to do is trust me when I say this key will open that door and let you free! All you have to do is hold out your hand and I will let you have this key! All you have to do is ask! But if you don't, 30 seconds after I give the signal, I'm going to throw this torch into that cage - whether or not you're still inside. PLEASE, won't you please let me save you?"

On and on it goes, until the man outside the cage says, "Times up. You now have 30 seconds to decide what you want to happen. The choice is yours!"

Problem is, the man with the key has been, and remains, comfortably seated about 10 feet out of the caged man's reach. As the seconds tick down - "...eleven...ten... nine..." the man with the key makes not the slightest move toward the cage.

Finally, "...three...two...ONE." The man with the key tosses the torch straight through the bars of the cage. The gasoline ignites. The trapped figure dies horribly.

You were there. You saw and heard everything that went on. It seems obvious, from his actions, that the man with the key never really intended to save the person in the cage.

Question: Can the salvation offered by the man with the key be considered a sincere offer? Please explain any answers.

 

[orthotomeo]

By the way - the person inside the cage is totally irrelevant. The man and his offer of salvation is the focus of the question.

 

[frumanchu]

Question: Can the salvation offered by the man with the key be considered a sincere offer? Please explain any answers.

No.

 

[frog83]

No

 

[TwinCrier]

I presume the man with the key is representitive of God. If so, the key is not out of our reach, it's already in the cage, a free gift.

 

[nwmsugrad]

No

 

[ksen]

Good job O.

I thought I had already seen the worst of the caricatures of Reformed Theology. It seems you have proved me wrong.

 

[ksen]

Question: Can the salvation offered by the man with the key be considered a sincere offer? Please explain any answers.

No.

Now let me ask you and everyone else:

Question: Can the question offered by the poster orthotomeo in the opening post be considered a sincere question? Please explain any answers.

 

[Reformationist]

No.

Now let me ask you and everyone else:

Question: Can the question offered by the poster orthotomeo in the opening post be considered a sincere question? Please explain any answers.

It's sincere...sincerely the same as all these other nonsensical things he posts.

I presume the man with the key is representitive of God. If so, the key is not out of our reach, it's already in the cage, a free gift.

The accurate biblical message is that the man in the cage is completely unconscious and is ambivilant to his situation and the Man with the key unlocks the cage, picks up the unconscious person and carries him to safety. Top this off with the understanding that the man inside the cage hates, and constantly lives a life that offends, the Man outside the cage.

Thank you God for your unmerited and unassisted grace in saving me from your righteous wrath.

God bless

 

[lands21]

Wasn't there something like this in another fourm about a well? There are so many holes, I do not know were to begin.

Like in the first place, the key is in reach, and is easy to get.

 

[Reformationist]

Wasn't there something like this in another fourm about a well?

It was exactly the same premise.

There are so many holes, I do not know were to begin.

Well, he told me if I have no answer to such a simple question then don't answer. Maybe that is wise advice, you know, don't answer a fool according to his folly. Before anyone freaks out, I'm not trying to say that the OP is a fool. I'm saying his questions are nonsensical, i.e., foolish.

God bless

 

[orthotomeo]

You guys are so predictable. I got exactly what I expected.

All these Reformed replies, and NOT ONE deals straight with the issue. One reply, true to form, went straight for the guy in the cage, as if he were relevant to the question (that was a dodge). Another called the scenario gross caricature, without explaining why (another dodge). Others focused on ME - an prime example of attacking the person if you can't address his position (which is yet another dodge). In short, no surprises here.

Okay, Calvinists: If you think the guy with the key is a substantial misrepresentation of Calvinism's God, please explain why.

Who goes first? Ken?

o.

 

[Reformationist]

You guys are so predictable. I got exactly what I expected.

Well, as my wise southern mama used to say, "Ask a silly question, get a silly answer."

All these Reformed replies, and NOT ONE deals straight with the issue.

Look orthotomeo, I think the problem is that none of us have a clue what "the issue" is. Maybe you could enlighten us. You always refrain from acknowledging that this is your attempt at analogizing the Bible in some way. Then, you seem to get frustrated that we have no clue how to answer you. What do you expect? Tell us straight, is this supposed to be an analogous representation of someone's biblical view? If so, try not talking in parables and just ask your question. That will definitely help me know what it is that you want to know.

One reply, true to form, went straight for the guy in the cage, as if he were relevant to the question (that was a dodge). Another called the scenario gross caricature, without explaining why (another dodge). Others focused on ME - an prime example of attacking the person if you can't address his position (which yet another dodge). In short, no surprises here.

What's no surprise is that you come on a Christian MB, ask questions that are clearly supposed to parallel someone's biblical theology and then act as if it's just a "simple question."

The problem is that your question presupposes accuracy, i.e., that the scenario you depict is, in some way, biblically accurate. The problem is that this is what is commonly called a strawman argument. You ask questions based on an illogical or inaccurate foundation and then expect people to answer them rationally.

Okay, Calvinists: If you think the guy with the key is a substantial misrepresentation of Calvinism's God, please explain why.

Does that mean that your intent was to parallel the reformed view of God with the guy with the key?

 

[Bulldog]

You're walking down the street past an old warehouse. Suddenly you hear shouting coming from inside.

You slip through a back door, following the sounds. You sneak along very carefully. Finally, hiding behind crates, you are within 10 feet of the source of the noise.

Before you is a large cage, about six feet tall by three feet square. A figure stands locked inside the cage. With every movement, you notice some liquid sloshing about 1/2 inch deep around the figure's feet. A moment later you catch a strong whiff of gasoline.

Outside the cage is another figure. In one hand he holds a large key. In the other, a blazing torch.

The man outside the cage makes repeated promises to save the captive. This is the shouting you heard outside.

"Please, just trust me! I love you and I want you to come out of that cage! Please - all I ask you to do is trust me when I say this key will open that door and let you free! All you have to do is hold out your hand and I will let you have this key! All you have to do is ask! But if you don't, 30 seconds after I give the signal, I'm going to throw this torch into that cage - whether or not you're still inside. PLEASE, won't you please let me save you?"

On and on it goes, until the man outside the cage says, "Times up. You now have 30 seconds to decide what you want to happen. The choice is yours!"

Problem is, the man with the key has been, and remains, comfortably seated about 10 feet out of the caged man's reach. As the seconds tick down - "...eleven...ten... nine..." the man with the key makes not the slightest move toward the cage.

Finally, "...three...two...ONE." The man with the key tosses the torch straight through the bars of the cage. The gasoline ignites. The trapped figure dies horribly.

You were there. You saw and heard everything that went on. It seems obvious, from his actions, that the man with the key never really intended to save the person in the cage.

Question: Can the salvation offered by the man with the key be considered a sincere offer? Please explain any answers.

I would like to know how at all the man with the torch is even close to an accurate representation of the Calvinist God. If you're trying to illustrate how the Calvinist God is not loving than you are way off. Maybe you should ask more straightforward question to get some straightforward answers.

 

[kickingsacredcows]

I would like to know how at all the man with the torch is even close to an accurate representation of the Calvinist God. If you're trying to illustrate how the Calvinist God is not loving than you are way off. Maybe you should ask more straightforward question to get some straightforward answers.

Bulldog,

The "Calvinist God" as you put it is truly a misnomer, suggesting that The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus and Paul has a new name. Just because Calvin wrote at great length about the nature and intent of the One True God doesn't make Him the invention of a man.

No, this title of "Calvinist God" is given by those who through blindness and a puffed up heart refuse to give God His due glory as the SOVEREIGN GOD of the universe, directing ALL things by his perfect will.

The fact that our loving father in heaven, the master potter of the clay known as humans, chooses to make some of his vessels to honor and some to dishonor angers the natural mind of man who considers himself fit and able to judge God's working out his perfect will in the world.

The idea that God would create some for salvation and some for destruction is unbearable to the carnal and unsubmitted mind of man. Thankfully, the Apostle Paul, after carefully explaining God's complete sovereignty in his election of those chosen for salvation in Romans chapter 9, anticipates the protestations of those void of understanding and answers the question succinctly-- " Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? Romans 9: 19-24


Thank God for his grace and mercy towards us, whom he has AFORE prepared unto glory! To point out God's sovereignty and mercy in His election is to give Him His due as the master potter. To question His office as master potter is a dangerous and foolish attempt to sit in judgement of the Almighty. Rather than enter into endless debate we should pray for those who will not accept God's answer through Paul, that God may grant them eyes to see and ears to hear the plain truth of His soverign election.

 

[Bulldog]

Bulldog,

The "Calvinist God" as you put it is truly a misnomer, suggesting that The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus and Paul has a new name. Just because Calvin wrote at great length about the nature and intent of the One True God doesn't make Him the invention of a man.

No, this title of "Calvinist God" is given by those who through blindness and a puffed up heart refuse to give God His due glory as the SOVEREIGN GOD of the universe, directing ALL things by his perfect will.

The fact that our loving father in heaven, the master potter of the clay known as humans, chooses to make some of his vessels to honor and some to dishonor angers the natural mind of man who considers himself fit and able to judge God's working out his perfect will in the world.

The idea that God would create some for salvation and some for destruction is unbearable to the carnal and unsubmitted mind of man. Thankfully, the Apostle Paul, after carefully explaining God's complete sovereignty in his election of those chosen for salvation in Romans chapter 9, anticipates the protestations of those void of understanding and answers the question succinctly-- " Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? Romans 9: 19-24


Thank God for his grace and mercy towards us, whom he has AFORE prepared unto glory! To point out God's sovereignty and mercy in His election is to give Him His due as the master potter. To question His office as master potter is a dangerous and foolish attempt to sit in judgement of the Almighty. Rather than enter into endless debate we should pray for those who will not accept God's answer through Paul, that God may grant them eyes to see and ears to hear the plain truth of His soverign election.

I'm a Calvinist . I just used the term "Calvinist God" because thats what the term the OP used.

 

[orthotomeo]

To all:

My scenario was intended to do one thing only: to parallel what I see Calvinism presenting as the actions of God. In that respect (and in that respect only) I stand by it as accurate and yet-to-be-refuted by anyone on this board.

Let's start at the beginning, with what we all know we can agree on. To do that, let's start where the Word starts: with God.

Show of hands: DOES GOD LIE? I assume all here will agree with me by saying "No, God does not lie." But I want to see your answers first.

Let's start with that common ground - if it is common ground - and build from there, shall we? Then we'll see where we end up.

By the way, reformationist: This is very, very simple. Couldn't be simpler, in fact. Wait and see.

So what say ye, men...does God lie?

o.

 

[Bulldog]

To all:

My scenario was intended to do one thing only: to parallel what I see Calvinism presenting as the actions of God. In that respect (and in that respect only) I stand by it as accurate and yet-to-be-refuted by anyone on this board.

Let's start at the beginning, with what we all know we can agree on. To do that, let's start where the Word starts: with God.

Show of hands: DOES GOD LIE? I assume all here will agree with me by saying "No, God does not lie." But I want to see your answers first.

Let's start with that common ground - if it is common ground - and build from there, shall we? Then we'll see where we end up.

By the way, reformationist: This is very, very simple. Couldn't be simpler, in fact. Wait and see.

So what say ye, men...does God lie?

o.

No God does not lie. What are you gettting at?

 

[orthotomeo]

I will take your answer as representative of the others.

God considers lying to be sin. Since God is without sin, God is without lying. So we agree on that. Good! Let's continue with another simple question I know we'll agree on...

If God does not lie, can His Word contain lies?

Thank you in advance for your response,

o.

 

[Bulldog]

If God does not lie, can His Word contain lies?

No.