tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post785803759671124645..comments2024-03-28T12:34:14.649-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Irresistible grace, or total depravity?Victor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-91952650399146320402009-09-23T09:21:08.124-07:002009-09-23T09:21:08.124-07:00And by the way, Steve,
As further evidence that y...And by the way, Steve,<br /><br />As further evidence that you have no substantive grip on factual data, your statement,<br /><br /><i>"...you’re the one, not me, who indulged in slanderous innuendo and bearing false witness by your broad-brush insinuation that two or more Tbloggers were sockpuppets.”</i><br /><br />This is plainly untrue, since I never mentioned anything about “two or more Tbloggers” being sockpuppets. Go ahead, point to where I’ve made any such claim (you can use Google's cache if you want to search recently deleted items). You’re either misreading, confusing events, or have just resorted to making things up.<br /><br />Either way, you're attributing a statement to me that I didn’t even make, and then falsely accusing me of slander and such based upon your spurious attribution. Your blatant sophistry becomes all the more apparent from the fact that you'll recklessly contrive, confuse, or conflate facts to substantiate false charges if it suits your agenda. Again, your leveling accusations with no basis in fact comes as no surprise, given your attempts to justify the practice.J.C. Thibodauxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12884600822119690931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-44530648284203537352009-09-23T09:20:31.731-07:002009-09-23T09:20:31.731-07:00Interesting points Victor. I would agree that it i...Interesting points Victor. I would agree that it is problematic for Reformed thinkers to question the salvation of free-will advocates. If God chooses who is saved, then who are they to question it? <br /><br />I'm thankful for God's mercy and grace in whom I have full assurance. Nevertheless, I would serve Him anyway because HE is worthy!!!Quintessentialhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00758222091276128986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-77710754323202130812009-09-22T14:31:10.245-07:002009-09-22T14:31:10.245-07:00Steve,
I mean specifics on this 'equal treatm...Steve,<br /><br />I mean specifics on this 'equal treatment for all' that you claim we're supposed to believe.<br /><br /><br /><i>"You’re also shifting ground."</i><br /><br />And you're attempting to argue with humorous observations. :D<br /><br /><br /><i>"You came to his defense by responding to something I said in reply to Robert."</i><br /><br />A response to you isn't a defense for the person you're talking to. Is that so difficult a concept to grasp?<br /><br /><br /><i>"For you to then say, in that very context, that you’re not defending Robert is a tribute to your powers of partisan self-deception."</i><br /><br />Sorry, look for someone else to play in your paranoid fantasy-world. If you'll notice, I never even brought up Robert in my reply to you; I simply found your demand for evidence inconsistent when you yourself try to implicate people based upon lack thereof.<br /><br /><br /><i>"And given your high tolerance for Robert’s Nazi/Klansmen” rhetoric...."</i><br /><br />I haven't even commented on that. Once again you draw ridiculous conclusions without evidence.<br /><br /><br /><i>"Which I rebutted"</i><br /><br />Which turned out to be nothing but more sophistry, check the combox.<br /><br /><br /><i>"I’d also add that you’re the one, not me, who indulged in slanderous innuendo and bearing false witness by your broad-brush insinuation that two or more Tbloggers were sockpuppets."</i><br /><br />That is plainly a falsehood Steve, as asking people to confirm or deny suspicions isn't 'bearing witness' of anything (as my reply to the above details).J.C. Thibodauxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12884600822119690931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-40342849653029253682009-09-22T13:59:20.062-07:002009-09-22T13:59:20.062-07:00What sense do you make of petitionary prayer on Ca...What sense do you make of petitionary prayer on Calvinist assumptions? Wouldn't any petitionary prayer be an attempt to change a past state of affairs?Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-8674327874454751572009-09-22T13:09:50.074-07:002009-09-22T13:09:50.074-07:00Steve Hays wrote in direct response to something t...Steve Hays wrote in direct response to something that I had written in another thread:<br /><br />“To the contrary, it’s not my problem when folks like Robert store up wrath for themselves on the day of wrath. They’re fulfilling an eschatological prediction. That’s a problem for them, not for me.”<br /><br />Hays is making reference to Romans 2:5 here. That verse is talking about nonbelievers (“because of your stubborn and unrepentant heart”) who by their continual sinning are “storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath”. In Hays’ theology that verse is referring to reprobates: believers’ sins have forgiven because they have trusted in Christ for salvation so they are not “storing up wrath” for themselves, only the reprobates are doing so.<br /><br />Steve Hays direct question for you: Are you claiming that I am a reprobate?<br /><br />RobertRobertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-59922382492135402842009-09-22T09:01:52.629-07:002009-09-22T09:01:52.629-07:00Steve - when you and I are in Heaven, worshiping G...Steve - when you and I are in Heaven, worshiping God together, will you then admit that you love me? I'd prefer not to wait until then but I can...drwaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17914024954991986479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-8953134487809590092009-09-22T08:26:51.057-07:002009-09-22T08:26:51.057-07:00William Watson Birch said...
"BTW, Dale is o...William Watson Birch said...<br /><br />"BTW, Dale is one of the nicest Arminians on the 'net."<br /><br />One of the nicest Arminians to fellow Arminians. When commenting on Calvinists and Calvinism, he leaves his nicety at the door.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-9022366464861572322009-09-22T08:22:18.549-07:002009-09-22T08:22:18.549-07:00J.C. Thibodaux said...
“Such elephant-hurling/non...J.C. Thibodaux said...<br /><br />“Such elephant-hurling/non-explanatory strawman burning doesn't explain anything about what you're saying. Care to cite any specifics?”<br /><br />Specifics for what? Evidence that Robert frequently insists on the necessity of civil discourse? Since you read blogs where Robert has often left such comments, I hardly need to tell you what you already know. Do you deny that Robert has frequently made statements to that effect?<br /><br />Or evidence that given his aforesaid statements, he has violated his own code of conduct? A specific case in point would be the very example I cited (e.g. Nazis/Klansman).<br /><br />“Wrong again, you've plainly stated as much yourself. Your sophistry won't evade that fact.”<br /><br />Which I rebutted:<br /><br />http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/08/arminian-two-step.html<br /><br />“If you're still under the delusion that answering someone 'on his own grounds' justifies breaking God's commands by bearing false witness, you can keep such godless rhetoric, thank you.”<br /><br />i) Which I’ve rebutted (see above).<br /><br />ii) You’re also shifting ground. Your initial argument imputed irony to my response. Since, however, there was nothing ironic about my response, you have to change the subject. <br /><br />iii) I’d also add that you’re the one, not me, who indulged in slanderous innuendo and bearing false witness by your broad-brush insinuation that two or more Tbloggers were sockpuppets. <br /><br />iv) And given your high tolerance for Robert’s Nazi/Klansmen” rhetoric, your abhorrence of “godless rhetoric” is somewhat deficient in the sincerity dept.<br /><br />“You continued to baselessly wail that I'd ‘defended Robert’s misconduct,’ even after I'd clearly stated that Robert could speak for himself on the matter.”<br /><br />i) You came to his defense by responding to something I said in reply to Robert. For you to then say, in that very context, that you’re not defending Robert is a tribute to your powers of partisan self-deception.<br /><br />ii) You speak on his behalf when it suits your agenda, but conveniently say he can speak for himself on other occasions when his statements are indefensible.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-89482437063779605412009-09-22T08:15:50.634-07:002009-09-22T08:15:50.634-07:00Steve,
Since Dale doesn’t act lovingly towards Ca...Steve,<br /><br /><em>Since Dale doesn’t act lovingly towards Calvinists, I take it that you don’t think Dale is born again–a la 1 Jn 5:1-2. Was that your point?</em><br /><br />And yet you avoid answering the question. And we all know why. BTW, Dale is one of the nicest Arminians on the 'net. So really, you're acting desperate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-24483375053557819652009-09-22T06:47:57.281-07:002009-09-22T06:47:57.281-07:00William Watson Birch said...
“And how could compa...William Watson Birch said...<br /><br />“And how could comparing the fatalistic and dualistic notions of Manichaeanism be a valid comparison of Arminius's Arminianism?”<br /><br />For specific reasons I gave–which you’ve done nothing to rebut.<br /><br />“(Don't think that I and everyone else watching hasn't noticed your avoidance in answering Dale's simple question, cf. 1 John 5:1-2.)”<br /><br />Since Dale doesn’t act lovingly towards Calvinists, I take it that you don’t think Dale is born again–a la 1 Jn 5:1-2. Was that your point?<br /><br />“Nazis and Klansmen prefer to favor a respective race. God unconditionally prefers to favor certain people.”<br /><br />Racists (e.g. Nazis, Klansmen) don’t favor one race over another unconditionally. Rather, their racism is predicated on a theory of racial superiority. To be favored, you must meet a condition of racial purity and racial superiority. <br /><br />So your comparison is fatally equivocal. <br /><br />“I loved your latest post on prayer. What a coincidence that you thought to post that after I publicly stated my praying for you.”<br /><br />I didn’t single out anyone in particular. I didn’t name anyone.<br />“BTW, you just exposed the apostle Paul's public acknowledgment that he prayed specifically for others.”<br /><br />No named individuals–much less individuals he disapproved of.<br /><br />“…betrays praying for one's enemies in the first place.”<br /><br />Since I don’t regard mere theological opponents as “enemies," what’s the point?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-37469154667494851022009-09-22T06:25:26.646-07:002009-09-22T06:25:26.646-07:00Steve,
"You’re the guys whose theological et...Steve,<br /><br /><i>"You’re the guys whose theological ethic commits you to equal treatment for all."</i><br /><br />...<br /><br /><i>"...he then proceeds to flagrantly violate his own code of conduct where the Calvinist is concerned."</i><br /><br />Such elephant-hurling/non-explanatory strawman burning doesn't explain anything about what you're saying. Care to cite any specifics?<br /><br /><br /><i>"Aside from your tendentious mischaracterization, which is, itself, slanderous..."</i><br /><br />Wrong again, you've plainly <a href="http://www.indeathorlife.org/debate/two_wrongs.htm" rel="nofollow">stated as much yourself</a>. Your sophistry won't evade that fact.<br /><br /><br /><i>"...try to master what it means to answer an opponent on his own grounds."</i><br /><br />If you're still under the delusion that answering someone 'on his own grounds' justifies breaking God's commands by bearing false witness, you can keep such godless rhetoric, thank you.<br /><br /><br /><i>"But, of course, you’re a partisan..."</i><br /><br />As can be plainly seen in the link above, your tendency is to make wild and unfounded claims when you think it will gain you advantage. You continued to baselessly wail that I'd <i>"defended Robert’s misconduct,"</i> even after I'd clearly stated that Robert could speak for himself on the matter. It's quite apparent that your judgment on such matters is simply too self-servingly biased to be taken seriously.J.C. Thibodauxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12884600822119690931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-43934110381639372922009-09-21T21:50:01.798-07:002009-09-21T21:50:01.798-07:00Steve - I'm feeling left out. You answer ever...Steve - I'm feeling left out. You answer everybody's question but mine. Steve, I love you. Do you love me?drwaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17914024954991986479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-52623734755765050692009-09-21T18:06:15.901-07:002009-09-21T18:06:15.901-07:00Steve,
I loved your latest post on prayer. What a...Steve,<br /><br />I loved your latest post on prayer. What a coincidence that you thought to post that after I publicly stated my praying for you. <br /><br />BTW, you just exposed the apostle Paul's public acknowledgment that he prayed specifically for others. Paul: "I have not stopped giving thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers. I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you . . ." (Eph. 1:16-19); "And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge . . ." (Phil. 1:9-11); "For this reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you. We continually ask God to fill you . . ." (Col. 1:9-12).<br /><br />That Paul . . . <em>To begin with, I think that savors too much of Mt 6:5. Spiritual pride under the chasuble of spiritual humility.</em><br /><br />And on the off-chance that this was in any way directed at me: <em>On a related note, to say you’re praying for someone, especially someone everyone knows you disapprove of, can easily be, and frequently is, a backhanded slap</em>, betrays praying for one's enemies in the first place. <br /><br />Just so you know, when I prayed for you and your family that day, it was sincere. God knows my heart. The problem is, you don't want to be loved by an Arminian. That is something, Steve, that you need to carry to the Lord.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-42650981343063861552009-09-21T17:40:07.410-07:002009-09-21T17:40:07.410-07:00Steve,
And how could comparing the fatalistic and...Steve,<br /><br />And how could comparing the fatalistic and dualistic notions of Manichaeanism be a valid comparison of Arminius's Arminianism? You managed to conjure that up from somewhere.<br /><br /><em>how could comparing the true God with Nazis and Klansmen be a valid comparison?</em><br /><br />(Don't think that I and everyone else watching hasn't noticed your avoidance in answering Dale's simple question, cf. 1 John 5:1-2.)<br /><br />Nazis and Klansmen prefer to favor a respective race. God unconditionally prefers to favor certain people. I haven't invested too much time in thinking this one through. But there seems to be at least a similarity, even if it shakes out to be categorically wrong. And by your own standards, Steve, these comparisons <em>only have to be similar to one another in some important respect.</em>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-17262207745408731702009-09-21T17:27:10.750-07:002009-09-21T17:27:10.750-07:00William Watson Birch said...
"Well, Steve, s...William Watson Birch said...<br /><br />"Well, Steve, shall you not partake of your own medicine? Robert was merely taking an idea and showing a similarity. They only have to be similar to one another in some important respect."<br /><br />Which begs the question of whether his Nazi/KKK comparisons are specious or logically sound. Are you now agreeing with him?<br /><br />Unless you have suddenly retracted your oft-stated position regarding Arminians and Calvinists worshipping the same (true) God, how could comparing the true God with Nazis and Klansmen be a valid comparison?stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-58914315718456612372009-09-21T16:56:32.859-07:002009-09-21T16:56:32.859-07:00Steve,
BTW, I prayed those prayers quite separate...Steve,<br /><br />BTW, I prayed those prayers quite separately from one another. So, to suggest that one cancels out the other is nonsense. You just cannot stand it that an Arminian would pray to the Lord for your best interest. And from your character, as demonstrated on the internet, it is obvious to everyone that you have no interest whatsoever in befriending an Arminian brother in Christ. <br /><br />Have you yet answered Dale's very easy and short question?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-18246272216574969142009-09-21T16:48:04.616-07:002009-09-21T16:48:04.616-07:00Steve,
What is difficult to take seriously is Bir...Steve,<br /><br /><em>What is difficult to take seriously is Birch’s breathless ineptitude. Ideas don’t have to be historically traceable to other ideas to be variants thereof. They only have to be similar to one another in some important respect. Birch isn’t doing himself any favors when he advertises his lack of intellectual competence by raising such muddle-headed objections.</em><br /><br />Well, Steve, shall you not partake of your own medicine? Robert was merely taking an idea and showing a similarity. <em>They only have to be similar to one another in some important respect.</em>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-41286712982985675912009-09-21T16:45:45.622-07:002009-09-21T16:45:45.622-07:00Steve,
Well, God caused me to pray both prayers, ...Steve,<br /><br />Well, God caused me to pray both prayers, right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-76370647835617875762009-09-21T16:40:59.408-07:002009-09-21T16:40:59.408-07:00William Watson Birch said...
"And I noticed ...William Watson Birch said...<br /><br />"And I noticed that the ONE thing you refused to comment on in my thread was my sincere prayer for you, Hays, and your family."<br /><br />Well, Billy, the problem is that you mentioned two different prayers:<br /><br />"Perhaps something happened to you or a family member. Immediately I began praying for you and your family, that God would protect you physically, mentally and emotionally."<br /><br />"I have, however, prayed that God would open your hearts to treat others better."<br /><br />The first prayer is a nice Christian prayer, and I have no reason to question your sincerity.<br /><br />However, the second prayer is really a reproof cloaked in prayer. The mention of the second prayer spoils the effect of the first.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-16181018126114919022009-09-21T16:36:09.076-07:002009-09-21T16:36:09.076-07:00Steve,
And I noticed that the ONE thing you refus...Steve,<br /><br />And I noticed that the ONE thing you refused to comment on in my thread was my sincere prayer for you, Hays, and your family. <br /><br />"Oh, thank you Billy for you genuine concern for me and my family. Gee, you must really consider me to be true brother in Christ. I really do appreciate that Billy."<br /><br />No problem, Steve. Because in spite of our obvious differences, I do count you as a true believer. God bless, Steve. "God bless, Billy." <br /><br />SO PREDICTABLE!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-51765444342906614602009-09-21T16:20:43.564-07:002009-09-21T16:20:43.564-07:00William Watson Birch said...
“Where are Robert...William Watson Birch said...<br /><br />“Where are Robert's words? I haven't read them in this thread.”<br /><br />I see. So you rush to Robert’s defense before you even read the statements of his that I was responding to. That knee-jerk reaction is the very definition of a blind partisan.<br /><br />“Yeah, you just say that he is storing up wrath for himself against the Day of God's judgment. That's so much nicer!”<br /><br />Let’s evaluate Robert by Birch’s own criteria, shall we? As a recall, Birch has said, on more than one occasion, that Calvinists and Arminians worship the same God. And since he obviously thinks that Arminians worship the true God, then, by parity of argument, he must believe that Calvinists also worship the true God.<br /><br />Enter Robert: Robert compares the God of Calvinism to Nazis and Klansmen.<br /><br />By Birch’s own logic, this means that Robert is comparing the true God to Nazis and Klansmen.<br /><br />Wouldn’t that qualify as blasphemy? And what is the presumptive spiritual status of blasphemers? You tell me.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-11093232958721408872009-09-21T16:12:18.632-07:002009-09-21T16:12:18.632-07:00J.C. Thibodaux said...
“Irony #1, someone who tea...J.C. Thibodaux said...<br /><br />“Irony #1, someone who teaches that God condemns people on an unconditional basis but saves others on an equally unconditional basis is so quick to accuse people of 'respect of persons.'”<br /><br />No irony here, since I’m not faulting Robert, or his Arminian defenders, by my own standards. Rather, I’m faulting him and his Arminian defenders by Arminian standards. You’re the guys whose theological ethic commits you to equal treatment for all. <br /><br />“Irony #2, a person who baselessly implies that Christians are reprobates and thinks that maliciously slandering and bearing false witness against them is justifiable, suddenly starts whining that the other side's supposed to be 'civil' when comparisons between his beliefs and a racist belief system are drawn.”<br /><br />Aside from your tendentious mischaracterization, which is, itself, slanderous, bearing false witness, &c., I’m not faulting Robert by my own standards. Rather, I’m faulting Robert by his own standards. He’s the one who makes pretentious claims about Christian civility, while he then proceeds to flagrantly violate his own code of conduct where the Calvinist is concerned.<br /><br />Next time you go hunting for ironies, try to master what it means to answer an opponent on his own grounds. It would behoove you not to be so trigger-happy, for you end up shooting yourself in the foot.<br /><br />But, of course, you’re a partisan, so you react like a partisan-thereby corroborating my allegation. Thanks for the supporting evidence.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-2279354806748103132009-09-21T14:30:50.109-07:002009-09-21T14:30:50.109-07:00Steve, that doesn't clarify anything with rega...Steve, that doesn't clarify anything with regards to how you employ the term here. While I'm on the subject, a few ironies I've noticed:<br /><br />Irony #1, someone who teaches that God condemns people on an unconditional basis but saves others on an equally unconditional basis is so quick to accuse people of 'respect of persons.'<br /><br />Irony #2, a person who baselessly implies that Christians are reprobates and thinks that maliciously slandering and bearing false witness against them is justifiable, suddenly starts whining that the other side's supposed to be 'civil' when comparisons between his beliefs and a racist belief system are drawn.<br /><br />Irony #3, a follower of the teachings of Jean Chauvin referring to other people as 'chauvinist.'J.C. Thibodauxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12884600822119690931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-70985940346919893342009-09-21T12:18:45.105-07:002009-09-21T12:18:45.105-07:00Steve,
Thanks for the link (I haven't checked...Steve,<br /><br />Thanks for the link (I haven't checked it out yet). Does it really take an entire post to answer a simple question like this? Could you maybe try to narrow down your answer and post it here so we can all see it and interact with it here?<br /><br />Thanks,<br />BenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-89032350981325346322009-09-21T11:05:50.858-07:002009-09-21T11:05:50.858-07:00Hey Steve - are you gonna answer my question? I&#...Hey Steve - are you gonna answer my question? I'm waiting in line...drwaymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17914024954991986479noreply@blogger.com