Arminian sore losers

Richard Coords said...

"Life follows doctrine."

That was Dave Hunt's response to James White, in characterizing why John Calvin murdered Servetus (plus all of the others that rarely get mentioned).

If you view a person as someone that Jesus loves and died for, then you are apt to treat such a person with respect and dignity, and all of the care that God has for them.

Conversely, if you agree with Calvinist, Jay Adams, that you shouldn't go around telling people that Jesus loves them, because you may be lying to them if they are not one of the Calvinistic Upper-Caste, then you may be apt to treat people as unloved and worthless.

It's basic psychology. A tree is known by its fruit. If you have rotten Calvinists, it's because they have a rotten Calvinism. Basic deduction.

3/29/2012 8:19 PM

 steve said...

Richard Coords said...

"Life follows doctrine."

So if Billy Birch committed a sex crime, that's because life follows doctrine?

If you agree with Arminians that God knowingly made a lower-caste of human beings he was going to damn to hell, then you may be apt to treat people as unloved and worthless.

It's basic psychology. A tree is known by its fruit. If you have rotten Arminians like Billy Birch, it's because they have a rotten Arminianism. Basic deduction.

If Arminians view Calvinists as devil-worshipers who serve a monstrous God, then they are apt to demonize and dehumanize Calvinists. It's basic psychology. Basic deduction.

If you view another human being as a fellow sinner, and say to yourself, "there but for the sovereign grace of God go I," then you are apt to treat him with mercy and compassion.

If you think there’s a good possibility that another human may be elect, then would you risk murdering one of God’s elect? When in doubt, play it safe.

3/30/2012 9:46 AM

 steve said...

Well, Richard, the Eastern Orthodox have a long history of executing heretics, yet the Eastern Orthodox subscribe to libertarian freewill and universal atonement–just like Arminians. Therefore, executing heretics must be the rotten fruit of rotten Arminian assumptions.

Same thing with Roman Catholicism, which has a long history of executing heretics. Yet the Roman Church subscribes to universal atonement. Likewise, Jesuits believe in libertarian freewill. The Roman Church also condemned the Jansenist counterpart to Calvinism. Therefore, executing heretics must be the rotten fruit of rotten Arminian assumptions.

3/30/2012 9:46 AM

 Richard Coords said...

When asking whether a harsh C-God results in harsh C’s, you need to ask yourself whether role models matter, and if they make any difference? If not, then why do we complain when pro athletes act poorly? Man tends to try to emulate those whom they adore, revere and idolize. That doesn’t mean that they always will. Christians who live by a WWJD example and role model often fail to live up to it, but that doesn’t mean that role models have zero impact, and that opens up a very fair question about whether the C-God is a good or poor role model, and what resulting impact that it has upon its adherents. So first, consider what the C-God does, whom C’s adore, revere and emulate. The C-God “passes by” people. But He does more than that. He scripts all thoughts. The C-God thought up sin and called it good. The C-God dreamt up the idea of creating angels and then unilaterally giving them the thoughts which results in them becoming demons. The C-God creates people for Hell, whomever He could otherwise script to save, but instead scripts their thoughts for evil, and the C-God gets pleasure and glorification by them going to Hell, which is what He created them for. Now if you think that this will have ZERO impact upon the lives of those who emulate, adore and revere such a C-God, then I respectfully disagree. It’s going to have an impact, and it’s going to be a bad one. As examples, there are the imfamous Westboro Calvinists. There are the Anti-Missions Calvinists. There is Vincent Cheung who comments: “One who thinks that God’s glory is not worth the death and suffering of billions of people has too high an opinion of himself and humanity.” (The Problem of Evil) Even some C's have suggested that we ought to think like a C but live like an A, and some A’s have commented that some C’s are evangelists *in spite of* Calvinism, rather than *because* of Calvinism. Consider an old Particular Baptist hymn: “We are the Lord’s elected few, Let all the rest be damned; There’s room enough in Hell for you, We won’t have heaven crammed!” To what degree of blame does the C-God warrant? What role did the C-God play as a role model for these? Were these simply being inconsistent with the C-God? You tell me. Is Steve Hays the natural product of emulating the C-God as his role model? You tell me.

3/30/2012 10:50 AM

 steve said...

Let's apply Richard's argument to the case at hand:

i) God is a role-model

ii) God executed Herod Agrippa for blasphemy (Acts 12:21-23)

iii) Therefore, Calvin rightly emulated God by executing Servetus for blasphemy

Here's another variant of Richard's argument:

i) God is a role model

ii) God employed capital punishment as a form of church discipline (Acts 5:1-11)

iii) Therefore, Calvin rightly emulated God in matters of church discipline

3/30/2012 11:27 AM

 Richard Coords said...

The same God says that God alone is the judge of mankind, and that man, for his part, is to be at peace with all men. Play games if you want. Role models matter, and the C-God is a role model, if you worship and revere and adore such a Deity.

3/30/2012 12:36 PM

 steve said...

It's your game. I played the game by your own rules. So deal with my syllogism. If I beat you at your own game, where does that leave you?

3/30/2012 11:46 AM

 Richard Coords said...

Charles Barkley said that pro athletes are "not role models." He said this to absolve himself of his moral failures, and lack of being a *good* role model. But most disagree with Barkley. Most argue that pro athletes ARE role models, whether for good or for bad, because people (especially kids) look up to them. So they are most definitely role models (whether for good or for bad), when people adore, revere and idolize them, and ultimately try to emulate their hero. So that opens up a can of worms regarding the C-God. Is the C-God a role model? Is the C-God harsh. Would those who adore, revere and idolize the C-God have a similar tendency to want to emulate such a harsh C-God? Perhaps this touches upon the most dangerous and yet subtle aspect of Calvinism. Maybe the purpose of Arminians is to help quarantine other unsuspecting Christians of the dangers of Calvinism.

3/30/2012 12:44 PM

 steve said...

Is Yahweh a role model? Is Yahweh harsh? Should we revere Yahweh?

Arminians like Randal Rauser and Roger Olson think Yahweh is harsh.

Perhaps this touches upon the most dangerous and yet subtle aspect of Yahwism. Maybe the purpose of Nazism is to help quarantine other unsuspecting believers from the dangers of OT theism.

3/30/2012 12:32 PM

 steve said...

Richard Coords said...

"When asking whether a harsh C-God results in harsh C’s, you need to ask yourself whether role models matter, and if they make any difference? If not, then why do we complain when pro athletes act poorly?"

Pro athletes aren't my role models.

"Man tends to try to emulate those whom they adore, revere and idolize."

So Arminians like you adore, revere, and idolize pro athletes.

"That doesn’t mean that they always will. Christians who live by a WWJD example and role model often fail to live up to it, but that doesn’t mean that role models have zero impact, and that opens up a very fair question about whether the C-God is a good or poor role model, and what resulting impact that it has upon its adherents."

If WWJD is your code of conduct, how should Arminians go about emulating his example:

"When the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus" (2 Thes 1:7b-8).

Seems like Calvin took your advice when he executed Servetus.

"So first, consider what the C-God does, whom C’s adore, revere and emulate. The C-God 'passes by' people."

Passes sinners by.

"The C-God thought up sin and called it good."

No, that's just your malicious caricature.

"The C-God creates people for Hell, whomever He could otherwise script to save..."

The A-God creates people for Hell, whom he could otherwise save. For if the libertarian principle of alternate possibilities is true, then every damned sinner has a saved counterpart in another possible world. So the A-God could save the same individual rather than damning him by instantiating his saved counterpart–who freely believes.

"and the C-God gets pleasure..."

That's anthropomorphic.

"and glorification by them going to Hell, which is what He created them for."

That's simplistic. He didn't create them for the sake of damning them. Rather, he creates them to reveal his justice; he creates some of them to be parents of the saints, and so on.

"Now if you think that this will have ZERO impact upon the lives of those who emulate, adore and revere such a C-God, then I respectfully disagree. It’s going to have an impact, and it’s going to be a bad one."

And what example does the A-God set for Arminians? The A-God creates some people whom he saves, only to let them fall away–all the while knowing that apostates are worse off than if he never made them and saved them in the first place. How is that loving? Isn't he harming them by making them?

The A-God lets a mugger beat an old woman senseless to steal her purse. Leaves her bleeding in the alley.

So by that example, Arminians shouldn't jump in to stop a mugging, but allow the mugger to hospitalize the defenseless old woman.

"As examples, there are the imfamous Westboro Calvinists."

They're Hypercalvinists, not Calvinists.

"There are the Anti-Missions Calvinists."

Hypercalvinists, not Calvinists.

"There is Vincent Cheung..."

I'm not a follower of Cheung. Try dealing with my position.

"Even some C's have suggested that we ought to think like a C but live like an A, and some A’s have commented that some C’s are evangelists *in spite of* Calvinism, rather than *because* of Calvinism."

An assertion in search of an argument.

"Consider an old Particular Baptist hymn"

Since I'm not a Particular Baptist, who cares?

"To what degree of blame does the C-God warrant?"

None.

"What role did the C-God play as a role model for these? Were these simply being inconsistent with the C-God? You tell me."

Yes, they're simply inconsistent. Thanks for asking.

"Is Steve Hays the natural product of emulating the C-God as his role model? You tell me."

Is Billy Birch the natural product of emulating the A-God as his role model? Basic deduction. The rotten fruit of rotten theology.

3/30/2012 12:49 PM

 Richard Coords said...

This is the nonsense known as "Steve Hays." There is really no point in discussing anything with you. Play games like a child. Have a nice day.

3/30/2012 1:38 PM

 steve said...

Another Arminian sore loser.