tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post1813196019215630495..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Answer to Reppert's "Question for Calvinists"Ryanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-51302509541893855962008-04-28T13:39:00.000-04:002008-04-28T13:39:00.000-04:00No, that's not what I assume, Victor.And, it could...No, that's not what I assume, Victor.<BR/><BR/>And, it could be the case that someone could be in the "throes of doubt." <BR/><BR/>This is why I *specified* that answers may vary depending on the person being spoken to. Apologetics is frequently person relative.<BR/><BR/>And, even here I don't think it would be "question begging." I will still assume his orthodox professions. i will call him to submit to the testimony of Christ bearing witness in the Scriptures. If he *still* maintains belief in inerrancy, then i can use it. Of he now *denies* inerrancy, well, then, that puts him in a different camp, now doesn't it? I said the argument applied to certain people with certain beliefs.<BR/><BR/>So, you are, again, not giving full weight to the points and qualifications I've been making. I seriously question whether you're reading everything I'm writting. Or, perhaps, I'm the worst communcator in history? That's an option too, I suppose.<BR/><BR/>I also gave *many* arguments *besides* the appeal to Scripture. You're still ignoring those.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, you are foolish if you think this is all a matter of intellect. Not trusting God is a matter of the *heart* not the intellect. Sinful rebellion against God is a heart condition.<BR/><BR/>Indeed, your friend Talbott says that the unsaved are irrational. That God must remove their self-deception, possibly through increasing levels of evils in their life. If it was just a matter of "getting the facts straight," why doesn't God just come down to everyone, or write a book, that has all the answers to every question in the form of arguments, the force of which no one could deny?<BR/><BR/>So, it may not be possible to "give some intellectual answer" to someone like that.<BR/><BR/>I also pointed out that I would mention Christ's death on behalf of the sinner. Given strong views of sin and God's holiness, the death on behalf of even *one* sinner is eminent proof of God's goodness. Given my background knowledge, this is strongly intuitional for me. Given my views of God and sin, this point has much force. Presumably this person would agree wince you said "he sees the truth of Calvinism." So, what, does he not believe any of this anymore also? <BR/><BR/>Loftus left for emotional reasons. His love of sin. The "intellectual" arguments he has came in later; to justify his apostasy.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes people are going to leave. Nothing you can say will matter. I could play the same game with you.<BR/><BR/>How do you prove God is loving to someone who will not accept Scripture, and thinks bambi suffering in the forrest fire is gratuitous evil? If that someone refuses to give up his intuitions about what a loving God would allow? If he crosses his arms, refuses to budge by digging his heels into the sand? Prove it, Victor.<BR/><BR/>Basically, at the end of the day, what started out as a fine brash hypothesis has died the death of a thousand qualifications.<BR/><BR/>The initial claim that: <BR/><BR/>Calvinsits cannot solve the problem of evil.<BR/><BR/>has become:<BR/><BR/>Calvinists can't solve the problem of evil if you assume libertarian free will, PAP doctrine, Arminian exegsis. And if that's not enough: if you have moral intuition against Calvinism, and don't bother responding to the arguments in response to the moral intuitions, dig your heals in the sand, stick your fingers in your ears, perhaps stick your tongue out, and refuse to believe that that kind of God is good. Add to that massive misunderstandings of Calvinism. Admitted ignorance of the subject. Inability to represent their position. Then, couple that with the objector being "in the throes of doubt." A weakened view of, or denial of, inerracny. Question the reliability of the Bible and its transmission through history. Deny laymen the ability to grasp the Bible are strongly believe any doctrine.<BR/><BR/>Yes, if you include all of that(!), then Calvinists can't solve the problem of evil . . . externally, at least.<BR/><BR/>Is this really what you want to claim?Errorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10615233201833238198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-63395205515484724242008-04-28T01:11:00.000-04:002008-04-28T01:11:00.000-04:00You assume that if someone is responding as a Chri...You assume that if someone is responding as a Christian appeal to Scripture will not be question-begging, because presumably they do believe in Scripture. But it could be the case that someone with faith could be in the initial throes of doubt. The context here is the doubter who still, up till now still believes. John Loftus before he broke.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.com