tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post901980026176630792..comments2024-03-28T08:41:39.614-07:00Comments on Winging It: An Election That MattersStanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-37292851987615393942016-05-17T10:26:32.808-07:002016-05-17T10:26:32.808-07:00BingoBingoCraighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17149415942585847184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-43876855961961979872016-05-17T10:06:49.873-07:002016-05-17T10:06:49.873-07:00It seems like it comes from a Man-centered view of...It seems like it comes from a Man-centered view of the world. Choosing one of us for a role is okay, but WE must be allowed to be the determining factor of whether or not WE get saved.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-22308819718932567962016-05-17T10:04:37.476-07:002016-05-17T10:04:37.476-07:00I've always thought it strange that while we s...I've always thought it strange that while we see God choosing people for particular roles throughout scripture and don't really question it until it comes to salvation. At that point it becomes a huge issue.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17149415942585847184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-25073951118794270122016-05-16T13:10:38.948-07:002016-05-16T13:10:38.948-07:00And I was agreeing with you, Neil.And I was agreeing with you, Neil.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-28008616495035159012016-05-16T11:10:20.400-07:002016-05-16T11:10:20.400-07:00Stan, I agree completely. I just use that as my s...Stan, I agree completely. I just use that as my starting point. If they can't realize that their personal attack on God's character (or, as they would say, on the allegedly false "Calvinist" view of his character) is the same attack that they'd have to make on their own beliefs, then the odds of them seeing the merits of additional arguments is basically zero.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-24763592893654131412016-05-16T06:01:51.218-07:002016-05-16T06:01:51.218-07:00Yes, Bob, the question is apparently His Sovereign...Yes, Bob, the question is apparently His Sovereignty. If He simply <i>knows</i> who will come and chooses them, that is no sovereignty. That's "playing nice". That's what we do as kids choosing teams -- we choose our friends. That is, our choice is contingent <i>upon them</i>. If God chooses by looking into the future, <i>His</i> choice is contingent and "contingent" is not Sovereign.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-47914745006746678912016-05-16T05:59:02.099-07:002016-05-16T05:59:02.099-07:00Yes, Neil, the problem is not in the lap of the do...Yes, Neil, the problem is not in the lap of the doctrine of Election, but even in the lap of those who deny it. The simple fact is that the Bible is clear that "few" will be saved. Thus, the simple fact is that God <i>knowingly</i> made humans who would <i>not</i> be saved. The other inescapable fact is that humans on their own have earned their damnation. The question is <i>not</i> "Is God a monster for not saving them all?", but "Why would He save even one?" If He saves one, it is a miracle of grace.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-78558104289275696952016-05-16T05:05:49.404-07:002016-05-16T05:05:49.404-07:00If God has to look into the future to see who woul...If God has to look into the future to see who would choose to be saved, then that would imply that God is not Omniscient. that would imply that God's knowledge is contingent upon what he sees in the future. If God were to change his mind about what he was going to do to that same person that chose salvation, then God would not be immutable.<br />it is interesting to note how un-biblical ideas diminish God's character. Bobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-57540176158987758872016-05-16T04:30:17.657-07:002016-05-16T04:30:17.657-07:00"If God chooses people based on His purposes ..."If God chooses people based on His purposes rather than their free will, it's not fair. He chooses to send billions to Hell."<br /><br />Unless someone is a universalist, which is wrong for a bunch of other reasons, their accusation against the "mean" God comes back on them.<br /><br />If God created someone who could "freely" choose Jesus (using their definitions for free will, election, predestination, etc.) but He never did, then what other possibilities exist for those going to Hell besides these two?<br /><br />1. God refused to save them. The person would have chosen Jesus but God deliberately didn't put the right people/circumstances in his lives to lead him to that choice. <br /><br />2. God was unable to save him. The person wouldn't have chosen Jesus no matter what God did.<br /><br />Please note that I'm assuming the Arminian worldview is true and merely pointing out that it results with God having perfect foreknowledge of the person's choice yet electing (heh) not to reorder events to "make" him choose differently or creating him knowing that he wouldn't choose Jesus under any circumstances. <br /><br />Assuming Arminians agree that God knew before creation precisely which people wouldn't use their "free will" to choose him, then their view would cast God in at least the same negative light as their Calvinist caricature, if not worse.<br /><br />You can show them that by asking if the God of Arminian theology could have done anything to convince the Hell-bound person to choose differently, such as putting top-notch apologists, more loving Christians, etc. in their lives.<br /><br />If they say yes, then ask them how a "good" God of love would let someone go to Hell just because He chose not to re-order things for their benefit. And if He chose not to do those things, how is that different from the Reformed view of election with respect to God's goodness and love?<br /><br />If they say no, then ask them how it differs from Reformed theology to say that God created someone who wouldn't have used his "free will" to choose him under any circumstances.<br /><br />In other words, in God created people knowing that they would go to Hell because they either wouldn't believe under any set of circumstances or that He wouldn't re-order circumstances to cause them to "choose" to believe. So why are they criticizing the God they claim to worship?<br /><br />Molinism doesn't fare differently. Under Molinism, if God selected the scenario where the most people would "freely" believe, then one of these must be true:<br /><br />1. Some people would have become Christians in other scenarios but not in the one God created. How loving is that towards them, assuming you consider predestination, as defined in Reformed theology, to be a liability? They could rightly claim that if God had done things differently then they would have believed.<br /><br />2. Some people would not have become Christians under any of an infinite amount of scenarios. How is that different than the Calvinist view of predestination?<br /><br />And if you assume in scenario 1 that no one who doesn't become a Christian in this universe would have become one in any universe, then you've just chosen option 2.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com