Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Are grace and rape synonymous?

Some comments I left at Beggars All:

steve said...
I'd note that this Mohammedan was all nicey-nice over at Articuli Fidei when Waltz made himself a doormat for this enemy of the faith. But see how he now unfurls his true colors.

9:22 PM, JULY 12, 2010

steve said...
David Waltz said...

"Me: I personally do not like the term 'rape' for the Reformed position concerning regeneration (i.e being born again) prior to belief. Yet with that said, I think I understand why non-Reformed folk invoke the term, for despite protestations, when one breaks down Reformed soteriology, one is left with the fact that regeneration occurs against the will of the unregenerate sinner—the sinner has NO CHOICE in the matter; as such, there is some truth to the claim that it is 'a forced love'."

Everyday we have patients wheeled into the ER who can't give informed consent. It maybe because they are comatose, or high on drugs, or poisoned, or psychotic, or suffering from head trauma, or some infection in the brain.

So the ER physicians act on their behalf when the patient is unable to act in his own best interests.

Do you think ER physicians should be prosecuted for "rape" when they intervene to save someone who is not in his right mind, who is unable to make decisions for himself in his current diminished condition?

What about a spouse or grown child who has to care for a senile parent or husband or wife. Should the caregiver be prosecuted for rape?

Parents often make decisions for young children, against their will, to protect them from harm. Should caring parents be prosecuted for "rape"?

It's a remarkably revealing and twisted view of saving grace to cast it in such invidious terms.

9:06 AM, JULY 13, 2010


  1. Besides, this statement -- "that regeneration occurs against the will of the unregenerate sinner—the sinner has NO CHOICE in the matter" -- is not really true, is it? Regeneration is all of God, but doesn't God accomplish it in part by working on the will of the sinner? We're not saved kicking and screaming, but joyfully, even though left to our own devices we never would be saved.

  2. Yes, God renews the will rather than bypassing the will.

  3. I don't like the rape analogy. When has anyone ever considered rape to be a form of love? Especially, when it comes from God. How can grace be rape? Considering that when God changes a persons heart it is always the greatest most beneficial thing God can do for that person. This is not even close to rape. When does anyone ever actually want to come to God outside of His grace?

  4. In the "Pot Calling The Kettle Black" category, funny how the non-Reformed person doesn't mind God "forcing" His "prevenient grace" upon the unknowing sinner, eh? See my further thoughts here: http://thelightheartedcalvinist.com/2010/06/18/newsflash-arminians-believe-god-forces-his-grace-upon-men-against-their-will/

  5. Not to mention "forcing" people into perfect sanctification and glorification when they die and enter Heaven.

    I mean, it's not like they chose to be perfected. If they had chosen it, they'd've done so already before dying.

  6. I once knew a fellow who was noted for his inappropriate one-liners. He said once, "Stop rape: give in."

    The false notion of Arminians is that they equate not having libertarian choice in the matter of salvation with salvation being foisted upon us "against our will". The problem is that they evaluate Calvinistic soteriology using Arminian presuppositions. That's like entering your thoroughbred race horse in a NASCAR race and complaining that the rules governing engine construction don't make sense because horses don't have engines.

    Since people don't have libertarian free will and our will is governed by God's mercy and grace, then all who are saved will desire the salvation and salvation will never be against the will of anyone who is saved. Once Calvinism is evaluated on its own logical coherency it makes perfect sense. On the other hand, Arminianism is not internally coherent and I think that's been well laid out by the Triabloguers.

  7. Yes, how evil of Christ to go yanking ol' Lazarus out of the tomb like He did.

    He didn't even ask the next of kin, let alone the man himself.

    I bet he felt violated. Prolly tried to wrap himself back up and lay himself back onto the slab.


    I thank God that he didn't ask permission first. I would've said "no" before He finished the question.

    Nope. He made me alive. Borned me again, so I could see the kingdom even.

  8. He does not force them against their will, He opens their eyes. Blessed are the eyes that see! The eyes that see Jesus immediately cling to Him!