tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post6045998439063677763..comments2024-03-28T08:58:27.412-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Why the Calvinist treatment of John 3:16 won't washVictor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-16255522333136706522010-10-12T13:36:55.137-07:002010-10-12T13:36:55.137-07:00SCHIZOPHRENIA is a mental illness, and Calvinism/R...SCHIZOPHRENIA is a mental illness, and Calvinism/Reformed Theology/The Doctrines of Grace and/or Sovereign Grace...No matter what you call it/them it's all SCHIZOPHRENIA! I pray to GOD for all of those stuck in that garbage to repent in THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST REPENT! <br />PS-Whether you believe the raw sewage of calvinism or no, go to YOUTUBE, and type in the search Calvinism Refuted, and repent and forsake Calvinism, in all it's forms, Or if you are not a calvinist, it'll help you avoid that garbage...Just in case you didn't read this right calvinist's REPENT! IN THE NAME OF JESUS AND BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS, THAT WILL WASH AND CLEANSE YOU FROM ALL UNRIGHTEOUSNESS! REPENT!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-87606216546197070262008-05-28T12:51:00.000-07:002008-05-28T12:51:00.000-07:00NormaJean: "Illion, why the link to Clayton's resp...<B>NormaJean:</B> "<I>Illion, why the link to Clayton's response to me?</I>"<BR/><BR/>Odd. The link is supposed to be to your response to him: "<I>Clayton, I promise I’m not being stubborn here. ...</I>"<BR/><BR/><BR/><B>NormaJean:</B> "<I>He was nice. Agree? I was nice. Agree?</I>"<BR/><BR/>I don't put much store in "niceness" ... history (and personal experience) teaches me that a concern for "niceness" over truth and/or justice always leads to injustice and falsehood: the people who assuredly are not "nice" ... you know, persons such as those who do not scrupple, apropos of nothing, to call a person such as Mr WL Craig a "<I>a charlatan and a huckster</I>" ... will always use persons such as yourself, who value "niceness" above more important things, as advantageous tools.<BR/><BR/>Clayton "nicely" attempted (on authority of his own recognizance) to de-legitimize your argument ... which undercut his by showing his to be mere subjectivity ... and to which undercutting he would not have been able to offer a consistent counter. You "nicely" cooperated with him.<BR/><BR/>Sure, everything is "nice" all around. And false. And built on lies. But such "nice" and pleasing falseness.<BR/><BR/><BR/><B>NormaJean:</B> "<I>He's a bright guy who has every right to disagree with me.</I>"<BR/><BR/>I'm leaning more towards "intellectually dishonest."<BR/><BR/><BR/><B>NormaJean:</B> "<I>What I'm saying is that I don't think pissing wars accomplish much. If you guys enjoy fighting, step into the cage.</I>"<BR/><BR/>But see, that attitude is part of the problem. It's that attitude that enables those such as Clayton (and don't get me wrong, he's small-fry in this regard) to use those such as you as tools.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Passionate disagreement ... even active scorn of the others' claims/arguments ... is not automatically a "pissing war."<BR/><BR/>Perhaps you've been watching too much TV, in which the plucky heroine always settles that matter between the two (slightly dense) men by dismissing it as a mere pissing contest. In fact, I gotta tell ya, as a life-long male, I'd never even heard of "pissing contests" until I noticed the plucky TV heroine scorning the men as just little boys engaged in a pissing contest. But, maybe I lead a sheltered life ... there are other things, supposedly encountered by all boys, that I'd never even heard of until I was an adult.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-49180968690468989972008-05-28T11:29:00.000-07:002008-05-28T11:29:00.000-07:00Illion, why the link to Clayton's response to me? ...Illion, why the link to Clayton's response to me? He was nice. Agree? I was nice. Agree? He's a bright guy who has every right to disagree with me. You're a bright one also. What I'm saying is that I don't think pissing wars accomplish much. If you guys enjoy fighting, step into the cage. I personally enjoy mma = )normajeanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06612628618334389249noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-90377413041052178602008-05-28T08:06:00.000-07:002008-05-28T08:06:00.000-07:00J.Loftus: "... So, I should partially thank you fo...<B>J.Loftus:</B> "<I>... So, I should partially thank you for helping my book be as forceful as it is. I put my all into it. ...</I>"<BR/><BR/>But doesn't all of nothing remain precisely nothing? And doesn't all the force of nothing accomplish precisely nothing?<BR/><BR/><BR/><B>J.Loftus:</B> "<I>... I just don't think you understand.</I>"<BR/><BR/>Oh, you poor, dear, intentionally and willfully self-deluded thing: you *just* don't understand ... But then, you dare not allow yourself to understand, do you?<BR/><BR/>As with all the tribe of pretend-atheists, you imagine you can have it both ways: you imagine you can both assert a "philosophy" by which NOTHING AT ALL MATTERS and yet continue without self-contradiction to believe that it matters very much to "cure" us Christians of our "delusion."<BR/><BR/>I could call your "reasoning" (by which I mean not merely yours personally, but that of all 'atheists' in general) sophomoric, but that would be to insult all sophomores throughout all time and space: no 'atheism' ever rises even to the level of the sophomoric.<BR/><BR/>As I said: you're a fool ... you lie to yourself.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-1157283382376794582008-05-28T07:07:00.000-07:002008-05-28T07:07:00.000-07:00john w. loftus said...“But it's precisely because ...john w. loftus said...<BR/><BR/>“But it's precisely because of people like you, Steve, and Paul Manata, and JP Holding, and Frank Walton, that I am so motivated to destroy the delusional faith you have (even if Holding isn't a Calvinist). 30 years from now there will be many people who will have rejected the Christian faith from reading my book, and it will partially be your fault since neither you nor Paul, nor Holding nor Walton ever treated me like a human being. I have other major motivations for what I do, of course, but what you and your ilk have done is to pouring gas on the flames of my passion. Switching metaphors it makes me want to go for the jugular vein of your faith like nothing else. It's one thing for me to argue what I do because I think Christianity is a delusion, which it is. It's quite another thing for it to be made into a personal vendetta with me. You and your ilk have done just that. So, I should partially thank you for helping my book be as forceful as it is. I put my all into it. It should be out at the end of July. I just don't think you understand.”<BR/><BR/>That would explain why Loftus is so irrational. Logically speaking, why bother promoting atheism? Even if you think it’s true, is that a cause to live for? You might as well become a Televangelist for Ebola.<BR/><BR/>But, you see, Loftus views himself as a nullifidian version of Charles Bronson. He’s a brave, lone, vigilante who’s gonna single-handedly disinfest the Hood of Christian scum like Walton, Manata, and me. Cuz it’s personal, dude! A grudge match for the ages, baby! <BR/><BR/>Coming soon to movie theaters near you. Rated R for pervasive language, graphic violence, and drug references.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-30751982291963679442008-05-28T07:02:00.000-07:002008-05-28T07:02:00.000-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-80857862628202649982008-05-28T05:20:00.000-07:002008-05-28T05:20:00.000-07:00Steve: "I’m sure Ilíon must find it quite surprisi...<B>Steve:</B> "<I>I’m sure Ilíon must find it quite surprising to see himself promoted to the ranks of the Truly Reformed.</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, it does amuse me every time Mr Loftus "accuses" (ha! even calling it an accusation is amusing!) me of being a Calvinist.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-33054363852043933902008-05-28T05:14:00.000-07:002008-05-28T05:14:00.000-07:00NormaJean: "Can't we all just get along? Serious, ...<B>NormaJean:</B> "<I>Can't we all just get along? Serious, all... let's at least try to be nice.</I>"<BR/>No. Not until we actually are dealing with "nice" people ... who, more importantly, are intellectually honest people ... dare we be "nice."<BR/><BR/>Here is <A HREF="http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2008/05/bill-craigs-account-of-his-debate-with.html#c2414809785490963261" REL="nofollow">(a mild instance of) what valuing "nice" above truth</A> leads to.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-29983661112198061582008-05-27T19:21:00.000-07:002008-05-27T19:21:00.000-07:00Can't we all just get along? Serious, all... let'...Can't we all just get along? Serious, all... let's at least try to be nice.normajeanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06612628618334389249noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-366907842861359902008-05-27T18:16:00.000-07:002008-05-27T18:16:00.000-07:0030 years from now what happens to my book won't ma...30 years from now what happens to my book won't matter, Steve, no matter where I am. Books only have a limited lifespan anyway. But it's precisely because of people like you, Steve, and Paul Manata, and JP Holding, and Frank Walton, that I am so motivated to destroy the delusional faith you have (even if Holding isn't a Calvinist). 30 years from now there will be many people who will have rejected the Christian faith from reading my book, and it will partially be your fault since neither you nor Paul, nor Holding nor Walton ever treated me like a human being. I have other major motivations for what I do, of course, but what you and your ilk have done is to pouring gas on the flames of my passion. Switching metaphors it makes me want to go for the jugular vein of your faith like nothing else.<BR/><BR/>It's one thing for me to argue what I do because I think Christianity is a delusion, which it is. It's quite another thing for it to be made into a personal vendetta with me. You and your ilk have done just that.<BR/><BR/>So, I should partially thank you for helping my book be as forceful as it is. I put my all into it. It should be out at the end of July. I just don't think you understand. And given your lack of understanding here I suspect you won't. But it no longer matters. <BR/><BR/>Vic's faith is much more attractive to me than yours will ever be. Your faith repels me like nothing else.<BR/><BR/>Cheers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-46527875761647757982008-05-27T17:39:00.000-07:002008-05-27T17:39:00.000-07:00john w. loftus said...“Why is it that when trying ...john w. loftus said...<BR/><BR/>“Why is it that when trying to have a discussion of the ideas that separate us that the Calvinist doesn't even try to deal with my arguments and instead offers a bunch of red herrings?”<BR/><BR/>Arguments? What arguments? This was your “argument”:<BR/><BR/>"Oh, and just to get in a dig, Calvinism is morally bankrupt."<BR/><BR/>You call that an argument? That’s your idea of an argument?<BR/><BR/>Why do you even bother, Loftus? Suppose, for the sake of “argument,” that you’re right and I’m wrong. What difference does that make? None. Absolutely none. <BR/><BR/>If atheism is true, then your existence is no more important than slug on hot pavement. The sun doesn’t care if you live or die. You’ll just melt away in a puddle of goo. No one will notice. Except the vermin. <BR/><BR/>If atheism is true, it doesn’t matter if atheism is true. Atheism and Christianity aren’t symmetrical propositions. The world is indifferent to one, while the other makes all the difference in the world.<BR/><BR/>If you’re right and I’m wrong, it doesn’t make a dime’s worth of difference. But if I’m right and your wrong, it makes an eternity of difference. <BR/><BR/>30 years from now, brown copies of Why I Rejected Christianity will take their place alongside 5¢ copies of The Celestine Prophecy, The Miracle of Seed Faith, and 88 Reasons Why The Rapture Will Be in 1988 at roadside flea markets—while you’re drooling in a nursing home.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-22975454428211610042008-05-27T17:15:00.000-07:002008-05-27T17:15:00.000-07:00john w. loftus said...“Vic, do you see the nature ...john w. loftus said...<BR/><BR/>“Vic, do you see the nature of Calvinism from Ilíon? In the Calvinist mind God has reprobated me to hell so there is no reason to engage me. That's covering one's ears and shouting over another human beings objections, and a major reason why I seek to debunk Christianity. They cannot treat us as humans beings because God does not treat us as such.__Such a barbaric viewpoint. I must argue against it.”<BR/><BR/>I’m sure Ilíon must find it quite surprising to see himself promoted to the ranks of the Truly Reformed. Sorry to disappoint you, John, but unless brother Ilíon has undergone a deathbed conversion to the Horrible Decree, I rather doubt his pedigree as a true son of Calvin. Not a supralapsarian Calvinist. Or even an infralapsarian Calvinist.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-43298552423236703322008-05-27T08:03:00.000-07:002008-05-27T08:03:00.000-07:00What a self-satisfied ignorant (and satisfied in h...What a self-satisfied ignorant (and satisfied in his ignorance!) fool.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-11082376124868723322008-05-27T07:58:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:58:00.000-07:00Vic, do you see the nature of Calvinism from Ilíon...Vic, do you see the nature of Calvinism from Ilíon? In the Calvinist mind God has reprobated me to hell so there is no reason to engage me. That's covering one's ears and shouting over another human beings objections, and a major reason why I seek to debunk Christianity. They cannot treat us as humans beings because God does not treat us as such.<BR/><BR/>Such a barbaric viewpoint. I must argue against it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-12756494856060851382008-05-27T07:53:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:53:00.000-07:00Mr Loftus,You *have* no arguments. Firstly, you'r...Mr Loftus,<BR/>You *have* no arguments. <BR/><BR/>Firstly, you're a fool ... and I assuredly am not calling you stupid ... so anyone wishing to attain wisdom understands the he ought to look elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, importantly, IF your assertions were true, then your "arguments" are self-defeating. Once we understand this primary and undeniable fact about the nature of your "arguments," then we *know* we can disregard any further spinning you attempt. <BR/><BR/>Asserting the same ignorance in different words does not transform it into knowledge. <BR/><BR/>That you *refuse* to see the visciously vaccuous nature of your "arguments" tells us the important thing (in the context) about you.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-19996114572505147642008-05-27T07:42:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:42:00.000-07:00Ilíon, the way you offer counter-arguments to my s...Ilíon, the way you offer counter-arguments to my specific arguments reminds me of someone who covers his ears while shouting so he cannot hear his detractor.<BR/><BR/>When you actually want to deal with my arguments I'll be listening in. I've heard your broken record too many times. Is that all you can offer in response to everything I say?<BR/><BR/>Cheers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-46357849162959832832008-05-27T07:33:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:33:00.000-07:00Loftus: "Oh, but I'm boring. Yep, that answers me....<B>Loftus:</B> "<I>Oh, but I'm boring. Yep, that answers me. ;-)</I>"<BR/><BR/>Are you?<BR/><BR/>Regardless, you're *utterly* irrelevant: you're a self-professed Zombie; you're nothing but (by your own admission!) soon-to-be-worm-shit.<BR/><BR/>IF what you so (ignorantly yet so) triumphantly prumpet were indeed the truth about the nature of reality, <I>then nothing at all matters in any way</I>. And, apparently, you don't even have the sense (unless it's that you don't have the honesty!) to grasp that simple and basic point.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-45798414274068854292008-05-27T07:27:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:27:00.000-07:00Why is it that when trying to have a discussion of...Why is it that when trying to have a discussion of the ideas that separate us that the Calvinist doesn't even try to deal with my arguments and instead offers a bunch of red herrings? I've offered an argument against their position, and rather than dealing head on with that argument they throw problems for the atheist in my face. Doing so DOES NOT ANSWER MY ARGUMENTS! I can deal with the problems they throw at me sufficiently, but that's not the issue we're discussing here. Are they conceeding they cannot answer my arguments and then trying to offer the fact that atheism has its own problems as a way of saying "you too"?<BR/><BR/>"You too" type of arguments don't deal with the specific issue at hand. <BR/><BR/>Oh, but I'm boring. Yep, that answers me. ;-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-61774095656428334262008-05-27T07:20:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:20:00.000-07:00Ilion, certain ideas in Scripture are clear, as ar...Ilion, certain ideas in Scripture are clear, as are the primary teachings which lead to salvation. My quibble is with those who'd make the plain teachings confusing, while simultaneously arguing that the whole thing is plain and simple. After all, even Peter said that some things that Paul wrote were hard to understand, and I don't think that was a comment on his penmanship!Rob Granohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01265922348436080828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-63205494935651596232008-05-27T07:14:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:14:00.000-07:00Rob Grano: "... In addition, Calvinist hermeneutic...<B>Rob Grano:</B> "<I>... In addition, Calvinist hermeneutics of this sort seem to go against the Protestant idea of the perspicuity of Scripture, which I, as an Orthodox, do not hold, but which Protestants generally do.</I>"<BR/><BR/>Do you really not belive that Scripture (at least, in general) is clear? It appears to me to be quite the reverse ... for, after all, what you'd written *presupposes* that the average man can understand what he's reading in the Bible.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-10414211625873361382008-05-27T07:09:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:09:00.000-07:00Really! Isn't it just amazing that a self-proclam...Really! Isn't it just amazing that a self-proclamed Zombie and soon-to-be-worm-droppings ... or, WormBait, for short ... imagines he has anything interesting or substantive to say about anything at all?Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-77042661631843410392008-05-27T07:07:00.000-07:002008-05-27T07:07:00.000-07:00"Therefore John 3:16 refutes Calvinism. Or rather,..."Therefore John 3:16 refutes Calvinism. Or rather, the most natural, least forced reading of the passage undermines the claims of Calvinism."<BR/><BR/>Exactly. As does a similar reading of I Tim. 3:4, 2 Pet. 3:9. etc. The fact that Calvinists have to jump through all kinds of hermeneutical hoops to avoid the plain reading of these verses strongly militates against their interpretation being correct. The only people who would possibly read these verses this way are people who've already got the Calvinist lenses on.<BR/><BR/>In addition, Calvinist hermeneutics of this sort seem to go against the Protestant idea of the perspicuity of Scripture, which I, as an Orthodox, do not hold, but which Protestants generally do.Rob Granohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01265922348436080828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-61303442145200713242008-05-26T12:40:00.000-07:002008-05-26T12:40:00.000-07:00john w. loftus said..."I'm so very thankful I don'...john w. loftus said...<BR/><BR/>"I'm so very thankful I don't have to try to find out what I should believe from an superstitious authoritative text."<BR/><BR/>Yes, Loftus subscribes to the alternative philosophy that first you die, then you rot. Something to be so very thankful for, don't you think?<BR/><BR/>"Oh, and just to get in a dig, Calvinism is morally bankrupt."<BR/><BR/>Oh, and just to get in a dig, atheism is morally bankrupt. <BR/><BR/>Don't take my word for it. Michael Ruse admits it. Does did Bertrand Russell in his debate with Fr. Copleston. So does Quentin Smith.<BR/><BR/>Then there's Peter Singer...stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-12682388425134137682008-05-26T10:42:00.000-07:002008-05-26T10:42:00.000-07:00run along Loftus . . . you are boring.run along Loftus . . . you are boring.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-82012544527984865832008-05-26T08:02:00.000-07:002008-05-26T08:02:00.000-07:00Oh, and just to get in a dig, Calvinism is morally...Oh, and just to get in a dig, Calvinism is morally bankrupt. <BR/><BR/>Given that exegesis of a historical document is a slender reed to hang one's hat on it's exceedingly better to go with Vic's moral notions when reading that text. I just wonder if these Calvinists have actually read in the area of the history of hermeneutics or the history of theology. Surely they seem to have done so, but from the elitist and unjustifiable assertion that they are right and everyone in the past is wrong except for Calvin, and even there they think he was wrong on some things. <BR/><BR/>Now, compare this slender reed against Vic's moral notions and Vic wins hands down. For God to decree that unbelievers are reprobated to hell is moral bankrupt plain and simple.<BR/><BR/>The weight of Vic's philosophical arguments (vs historical textual data) are so strong that the only reason why Calvinists disagree is because of some psychological problem like fear, or blindness, or a deep seated desire to have an absolute conviction about their faith.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com