The "stumbling block" of Calvinism

[praise_yeshua]

Yes. The fact that he was in the right place and time, had the resources and ability, was raised in such a way that he felt compassion, was able to see the problem, etc etc didn't have anything to do with his choice. Or something.

1. The Scripture says that "chance" was involved with him being at the right place and time. Did you notice this... or are you purposely ignoring it? You are talking about predeterminism aren't you??? or are you moving the goal post?

2. Yes. He had the resources available to help. You DIDN'T say one thing about dealing with each thing you listed separately. You joined them all TOGETHER...... with ETC!!! Yeah that makes sense.

3. You didn't list "raised in such a way". However, I will deal with it. This Samaritans was raised to hate Jews. This was a Jew coming from Jerusalem. I don't think I need to prove that Samaritans hate Jews... and Jews hate Samaritans. This Samaritan didn't do what he did based on how he was raised.

4. Who knows what you meant by "etc"? If "etc" didn't affect his choice.... They why did you include it? We are talking about choice. You made it about choice. You then included something you admit has nothing to do with choice............

How dishonest can you get?

 

[rsc2a]

1. The bible doesn't SAY chance was involved, although it's implied. The bible also says God controls the throw of dice. Interesting...

2. You really don't nt understand the argument at all, do you? And, etc. doesn't  mean whatever it is you apparently think it means.

3. The text never says the hurt one is a Jew. If you are going to base your entire argument on a story Jesus told, don't make things up.

And, I repeat, you dint understand the argument at all, do you?

4. Again, you really don't understand the argument.

Epilogue: Well, I haven't said I'm through with you three hundred times or made up things about the parable you are appealing to, so that's probably a better question for self-reflection.

 

[praise_yeshua]

1. The bible doesn't SAY chance was involved, although it's implied. The bible also says God controls the throw of dice. Interesting...

2. You really don't nt understand the argument at all, do you? And, etc. doesn't  mean whatever it is you apparently think it means.

3. The text never says the hurt one is a Jew. If you are going to base your entire argument on a story Jesus told, don't make things up.

And, I repeat, you dint understand the argument at all, do you?

4. Again, you really don't understand the argument.

Epilogue: Well, I haven't said I'm through with you three hundred times or made up things about the parable you are appealing to, so that's probably a better question for self-reflection.

1. Sure it does. ESV Luke 10:31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side.

Yeah. God is involved in the throwing of the dice. The "dice" exist don't they? They didn't come from no where. This doesn't mean that the outcome of the dice aren't by "chance"? It just means that even God created "chance".

Just what does "chance" mean to you?

2. I can't see how "etc" can mean anything. I can't read your mind. You're the one that included it. Explain what it means. If you would have said "grapes". I might ask you clarify just what "grape" you're talking about. I have no idea how to understand "etc". You're just being lazy. Leave it out or list something tangible.

3. Sure a Bible does. Luke 10:30 Jesus replied with a story: "A Jewish man was traveling from Jerusalem down to Jericho, and he was attacked by bandits. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him up, and left him half dead beside the road. NLT.

In fact, the VAST majority of scholars agree completely that this was a Jew. The story is rather meaningless if he was a Samaritan or Gentile.

4. I think I understand the argument. You lack of communication skills might be hindering my understanding. Leave "etc" out or be more specific.

Epilogue: I haven't said I was done with you 300 hundred times. Don't be a "drama tranny". I didn't make up anything about the parable. 

 

[subllibrm]

Maybe someone needs to define inclination. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

If it wasn't a stumbling block, it would just be called "Christianity", with no need to pay homage to some political leader/religious figure.

With that brilliant soteriological argument, the matter should be settled forever and ever...Amen!

I am of Paul, I am of Apollos.... Yup, no one has ever had to use this line of reasoning before

:

The Doctrines of Grace were espoused by Jesus, Paul and countless others before and after Calvin countered the five points of Armenius. Calvin has nothing to do with my/our soteriology! : and I'll raise you a  :

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Maybe someone needs to define inclination. 

I'm not inclined to do so.....

 

[subllibrm]

Are we all on the same page that there was no actual Good Samaritan? Parables are like that.

 

[subllibrm]

Maybe someone needs to define inclination. 

I'm not inclined to do so.....

I find that just about every time I lean against the wall I am inclined. Steeply too! 

 

[praise_yeshua]

If it wasn't a stumbling block, it would just be called "Christianity", with no need to pay homage to some political leader/religious figure.

With that brilliant soteriological argument, the matter should be settled forever and ever...Amen!

I am of Paul, I am of Apollos.... Yup, no one has ever had to use this line of reasoning before

:

The Doctrines of Grace were espoused by Jesus, Paul and countless others before and after Calvin countered the five points of Armenius. Calvin has nothing to do with my/our soteriology! : and I'll raise you a  :

A Calvinist will say the "Doctrines of Grace" are Calvinism.  Just pointing that out. You can't win with a "Calvinist". They claim ALL the relevant terms and pretend that Jesus and Paul's Words are echoed in Calvinism.

I didn't realize that you were a "some pointer". Dare I ask what "pointer" you are? 1, 3, 5?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Are we all on the same page that there was no actual Good Samaritan? Parables are like that.

Ah.... so a parable is exempt from the laws of determinism? Really?

Regardless of the literal realty of the parable.... it exists within what a Calvinist would consider the "predetermined" Universe.

I personally believe the parable is a true life story of an actual event. If it COULDN'T happen.... then the story is useless.

 

[rsc2a]

1. Now it's the priest and not the GS under discussion?

And regarding point 2. Wrong. http://biblehub.com/proverbs/16-33.htm

Stop lying.

2. Etc doesn't mean "mash all these things into one". My nine year old understands this.

3. One paraphrase translation says that. The other twenty I looked at say nothing of the man's ethnicity. (Yes. I looked at 20 others.)

4. You cannot get basic facts right. I didn't really expect you to understand controversial philosophical arguments.

 

[subllibrm]

Are we all on the same page that there was no actual Good Samaritan? Parables are like that.

Ah.... so a parable is exempt from the laws of determinism? Really?

Regardless of the literal realty of the parable.... it exists within what a Calvinist would consider the "predetermined" Universe.

I personally believe the parable is a true life story of an actual event. If it COULDN'T happen.... then the story is useless.

Wow, thin skin much?

My post was directed at rcs2's saying the man wasn't identified as a Jew. As if that made a difference to the point Jesus was making. Seems silly to split allegorical hairs.

But if you want to take it personally, go ahead, I can't stop you.

 

[praise_yeshua]

1. Now it's the priest and not the GS under discussion?

And regarding point 2. Wrong. http://biblehub.com/proverbs/16-33.htm

Stop lying.

2. Etc doesn't mean "mash all these things into one". My nine year old understands this.

3. One paraphrase translation says that. The other twenty I looked at say nothing of the man's ethnicity. (Yes. I looked at 20 others.)

4. You cannot get basic facts right. I didn't really expect you to understand controversial philosophical arguments.

1. It sets the story in progress. Are you going to say that the Priest was the only one there by "chance"? Are you really going to constrain the parable to that degree?

2. Here we are AGAIN..... at proverbs 16. Man... I would have thought you would have learned from your last problem with Proverbs 16.

I'll try again. Both the Old Greek and Aramiac texts of Proverbs 16.... are entirely different. Verse 33 is entirely different. Even the Hebrew texts disagree. The KJV reads

The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD

Which is exactly what I said. That the "whole of creation" is from God. Even the "dice" or "chance".

3. I didn't mash them into one. I dealt with them separately. I just pointed out that you have implied both. Be specific.

4. Whatever.

Now. do you have your answer yet? If not, then add something to the question to narrow the focus.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Are we all on the same page that there was no actual Good Samaritan? Parables are like that.

Ah.... so a parable is exempt from the laws of determinism? Really?

Regardless of the literal realty of the parable.... it exists within what a Calvinist would consider the "predetermined" Universe.

I personally believe the parable is a true life story of an actual event. If it COULDN'T happen.... then the story is useless.

Wow, thin skin much?

My post was directed at rcs2's saying the man wasn't identified as a Jew. As if that made a difference to the point Jesus was making. Seems silly to split allegorical hairs.

But if you want to take it personally, go ahead, I can't stop you.

I wasn't upset. Just dealing with argument.

Even allegory is meant to meet reality. Thus, it is subject to a literal understanding. Though that understanding may be somewhat different from "literally" every individual part.

Allegory is often abused in this manner. People pretend its just "fantasy" and I can make of it what I want.....

 

[rsc2a]

I stated that the chance element was strongly implied. Unlike someone, I'm not making things up about the text.

And Proverbs then shows that even "chance" is directed by God, whatever your torturous reading of the text is

 

[praise_yeshua]

I stated that the chance element was strongly implied. Unlike someone, I'm not making things up about the text.

And Proverbs then shows that even "chance" is directed by God, whatever your torturous reading of the text is

"Chance" is still "chance". You're implying that since God created "chance".... that there really is no such thing as "chance". What I said was accurate. Nothing torturous about it.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I stated that the chance element was strongly implied. Unlike someone, I'm not making things up about the text.

And Proverbs then shows that even "chance" is directed by God, whatever your torturous reading of the text is

"Chance" is still "chance". You're implying that since God created "chance".... that there really is no such thing as "chance". What I said was accurate. Nothing torturous about it.

It is chance from our limited perspective.  It is deliberately directed from God's perspective.  See proverbs referenced by rsc2a.

 

[subllibrm]

How many Mega Million lottery tickets does a calvinist buy in a life time. Just the one.  8)

 

[praise_yeshua]

How many Mega Million lottery tickets does a calvinist buy in a life time. Just the one.  8)

I'm rather certain.... (pun intended) that its largely the wrong one...

 

[praise_yeshua]

I stated that the chance element was strongly implied. Unlike someone, I'm not making things up about the text.

And Proverbs then shows that even "chance" is directed by God, whatever your torturous reading of the text is

"Chance" is still "chance". You're implying that since God created "chance".... that there really is no such thing as "chance". What I said was accurate. Nothing torturous about it.

See proverbs referenced by rsc2a.

He referenced one verse in Proverbs. I already dealt with it. READ my answer.

You guy are obsessed with Proverbs 16.

It is chance from our limited perspective.  It is deliberately directed from God's perspective.

Good grief... Its "chance". You can't define it any other way. Its random occurrence. Yes. Ultimately, no random occurrence is beyond God own control. However, to say what you're saying... is down right nonsense. "Random occurrence" takes place throughout our existence. I'm not expecting a "random occurrence" to wipe out the entirety of humanity BEFORE God wills it to happen. However, there is  a lot of "random" stuff taking place in the Universe that has nothing to do with pre-determinism.

I'm rather certain that God isn't Divinely involved with you winning or losing a few pennies at your next "penny poker" match.