Toréador, en garde!

I see that Billy Birch continues to think with his spleen instead of his brain:

http://classicalarminianism.blogspot.com/2009/09/john-pipers-ill-counsel-to.html

He’s not doing Arminianism any favors when he simply snorts and paws the ground like a short-tempered toro lidiado.

“Steve Hays' nonsense continues…And gee, I guess God had also predetermined for me to turn from Calvinism back in 1999. (And this by decree, nonetheless.).”

Why does Billy think a Calvinist would balk at that rejoinder? Yes, God predestines the religious identity, or lack, of all human beings. He also predestines their theological transitions, if any.

“This act of God must displease Hays very much.”

Why must that displease me very much?

“But he cannot be angry with me (if he wants to be consistent).”

Why would that anger me?

“For I am just a pawn in the hands of God, who ‘turns my heart’ wheresoever he wishes.”

True. And in the predestinarian chess game, losing chess pieces also serve to illustrate the far-sighted wisdom of the heavenly Grandmaster. Likewise, a chess-player may sacrifice one piece to gain a tactical or strategic advantage.

“But, Steve Hays, I cannot ‘change my religious affiliation.’ Hence, God must change it for me. So, God changed my ‘religious affiliation’ to Calvinism in 1997-98, and then in mid-1999, and even into 2000 changed my ‘religious affiliation’ back to Arminianism.”

It’s not a case of God changing his affiliation for him, but rather, through him. Remember, it’s Arminianism that sets up a dichotomy between divine and human agency–not Calvinism. In Calvinism, God works his will through the creaturely media he made. It’s not as though God is acting in place of Billy.

“(God is so busy - not to mention so apt to change his mind).”

This is another incompetent statement. It fails to draw an elementary distinction between willing a change and changing one’s will. Does Birch lack the intellectual aptitude to draw such rudimentary distinctions?

“Ugh. Hays will now conclude that I was not really a Calvinist in a PCA church…”

Why would I now draw that conclusion? Calvinism takes the position that a true believer cannot lose his faith in Christ. It doesn’t take the position that a true Calvinist cannot lose his faith in Calvinism. Is Birch’s grasp of Calvinism so specious and shallow that he can’t tell the difference?

“…and zealously defending Calvinism over ten years ago.”

But Birch never ceased to be an apologist for Calvinism. Birch is an eloquent and passionate, albeit unwitting, evangelist for Reformed theology. His sophomoric objections to Reformed theology present a barren background against which the wisdom of God stands in stark contrast to the folly of Arminius.

“Whatever was going on one can be assured, according to Calvinism's wacky assertions, that God was behind it all.”

So, according to Birch, God is not behind all that happens. In that event, Birch subscribes to a dualistic worldview. Mani and Zoroaster would be pleased with their posterity.