That's hilarious! :)
Pretend to be a Muslim and pray. remember, Calvinists are worse than Muslims.Now that's a hoot!
Would an Arminian air passenger want God to be sovereign over the outcome of his flight? I certainly think so.I'm guessing that Arminians quickly become temporarily Calvinistic (although without admitting it) when they are in the midst of situations where it is obvious that they are completely out of control.Tom, this is a great piece.
Remember...in case you are having trouble spotting the Calvinistic passenger. The Calvinist will be the passenger who is NOT wearing a seatbelt...because God will do what God will do and seatbelts are just Arminian ploys to try and force your will over God's.
Tom, you are hilarious and should be getting paid huge wads of cash for this stuff. Keep up the great work, brother.1stLt Judd Wilson, USMCBaghdad
8. Don't bother discussing logical truths from a Calvinistic viewpoint such as these:A: If Calvinism is true, than God created billions of souls with no other purpose than to burn in Hell for all eternity with no hope of salvation through Jesus Christ.B: If Calvinism is true, than God is forcing the 'elect' to love Him, being as how it's completely against their nature.
HAHA...."Freely exit the plane and "Leave all your personal belongings behind."~Was that a crack on the left behind series or am I eisegeting this post.
Anon,hmmm...We could go on and on. Arminianism has nothing to do with logic, but rather emotion. The epitome of illogic is this: "Christ died for everyone, but not everyone will be saved." So the converse of your statement is that "God poured out his divine wrath upon his only begotten Son for every man woman and child that ever lived, yet that is insufficient to save all of them, ergo he poured out his wrath in vain.Your statement about "forcing the elect to love him" being "against their nature" almost made me spew coffee on my computer screen. It is against anyone's nature to love God, because dead people can't love! Something supernatural must take place. A new heart must be given, a heart that by it's very nature loves God, not forced to. -Tom
When Arminians leave comments on TBNN, why don't they leave their names? Is being an Arminian too shameful?Come on, Anonymous, at least tell us who you are.
I just don't get it...why does Calvin ALWAYS get the credit for a beautiful teaching of our Lord? :o)
"We could go on and on. Arminianism has nothing to do with logic, but rather emotion."Would you please stop referring to all non-five pointers as Arminians? You think that the on;t two views in the realm of Christendom are those two? Please, Tom. Cut me some slack.For the record, I'm a 4 pointer, and I lean much further towards soverign grace than I do free will. So stop calling anyone not agreeing with you an Armenian, please? I never said Christ died for everyone, nor do I believe that. Our Savior died only for those who believe the Gospel, the 'elect', the saved. And stop dancing around my post. Is or is not point A true? Point B is also known as "grace-rape". Calvinism's God isn't capable of drawing people to Him, huh? Gotta force them to love Him rather than have them choose to love Him.Oh...you didn't think you were loving Him on your own accord, did you? You said yourself that "It is against anyone's nature to love God"..."Something supernatural must take place."Hence the grace rape.
Anon,I hate calling people "Anonymous" so I'm going to have to call you a real name. I shall refer to you as Bill. Sorry if that doesn't suit you, but you leave me not other option until you give me a real name. First of all Bill, I posted a funny little air safety card regarding what to do if you're seated next to a Calvinist. I am unashamedly a Calvinist, as are the two other guys that blog here. So, you'll pardon us if we have a very fervent Calvinistic slant to what we do. You responded to said post by bringing up the nature of the atonement and forced love, and stated your points in a manner consistent with most Arminians (I would never call you an Armenian by the way...perhaps a Belorussian, or a Moldovian). You implied that there is illogic to Calvinism, and you presented two common objections to Calvinism often presented by Arminians. So I apologize if I wrongly mistook you for an Arminian. But be careful how you state things. People do make judgments by what you say and do. If I walk out in the woods during deer season with antlers on my head I might very well get shot and could I really blame the hunter?I didn't know you wanted an answer to your post, so I'll answer it here. Point A is mostly true, but your first statement seemed to imply that such a notion was illogical. Yes, as Romans 9 makes clear there are billions of souls created that are not elect, some created for honor and others dishonor. The potter has the right to do that. But to say "no other purpose than to burn in hell" is not completely true. Yes, they will burn in hell for eternity, but they are also created for God's glory and his purposes. They accomplish and carry out his plans while they live (unknowingly in most cases), so they are created for this also, not merely to burn in hell. Now, as to the term of "grace rape." First of all that's tacky. "Rape" is forcing oneself upon another against his or her will, much to the displeasure and pain of the person, a displeasure and pain which remain after the rape has occurred. Go ask anyone who's been raped if he or she is glad it happened, who had great love and affection for their rapist and longs to please him or her. I dare you to find one. Now go ask anyone who's saved if they're glad God changed his or her heart. Your terminology is miserable Bill, find another way of stating yoru case. So if this is your view of Calvinism then you're arguing against a straw man. God does not force himself upon us in rape-like fashion. He gives us a new heart, a heart that embraces Christ freely. To prove my point I refer you to one of the oldest documents out there summarizing reformed doctinre. I quote the Wesminster Confession of Faith question 31."Q: What is effectual calling?A. Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel."Now Bill, if you persist in using language like "grace rape" I shall cut you only a little slack by referring to you as a quasi-Arminian. Such, though, a notion is an Arminian notion. A little leven leventh the whole lump.-Tom
Funny how the posts on Calvinism / Arminianism generate the most posts, and the most controversy here – still a hot topic after all these centuries. I used to be a Calvinist, but now I disagree with it; but frankly, I disagree with Arminianism a whole lot more. So I’m no Calvinist, but believe strongly in ‘once saved, always saved’, and think Arminianism has a lot more bad baggage. (I’ve tried to tackle what I make of the issues on my own blog, BTW.) Anyway, though I don’t agree with some of the views, I always take it with a grain of salt, because, frankly, the whole issue of predestination isn’t that important to me. Yes, it’s significant, but it’s not worth having heated arguments about, and I don’t think this is an optimal place to debate it. So I have no problem enjoying your blog, rather enjoy it in fact, and appreciate how Tom-in-the-box pokes fun at a lot of things. But I would like to see more poking fun at premillenialists, post-mill’ers, and dispensationalists, and hey, what would you do if seated next to an Arminian on a plane? (or an Armenian? or an Armenian Arminian?)BTW, I cringe whenever I hear salvation compared sitting on a chair, or getting on a plane (doesn’t work until you sit on it or board it) – what a cheesy, simplistic comparison of salvation – reduces the miracle of salvation to something so trite. (Sounds like an Arminian analogy.) I mean, it’s a life-changing event, for crying out loud, it’s complete surrender, a commitment to being a disciple of Christ, and a great work of God, not something wimpy like parking your butt on a sofa. Anyway, keep up the good work. blessings,kent lee
"But be careful how you state things. People do make judgments by what you say and do."Fair enough. I'll try to be a little more original next time, lol.Now, about the rape issue. (And I do apologize for the use of an offensive term/idea.)Your justification/definition of election and irresistable grace reeks of pragmatism. "It's end is good, so the means were good."Not so.Regardless of the feelings that a regenerate man has after God changes their heart does not negate the fact that it was God who ripped out their old heart, much against their will. There was no choice involved, only force. God doesn't persuade, or woo, anyone. The elect are saved, the non-elect are damned. -BillBtw, I also apologize for my lack of guts in not posting my name. I have a blog out there (with nothing to do with Calvinism, actually), and i don't feel like having all the 5-pointers that read my posts here going over there and spam-bombing me. :-)
Bill,The changing of the heart is totally a work of God. The sinner has no part in it, and it takes place totally contrary to the nature of the sinner. But it's not pragmatic at all to say that what takes place afterward is a result of that new heart being there. The heart will function as God intended for it to function, and that is it will love him, trust Christ and strive to obey. It will be a repentent heart. It is a heart that cannot not embrace Christ. The love of the redeemed sinner toward Christ is love freely given, but it is only given because the sinner has been enabled to freely give it.
"Oh...you didn't think you were loving Him on your own accord, did you? You said yourself that "It is against anyone's nature to love God"..."Something supernatural must take place."Bill,As a 4 pointer, do you believe that you loved God on your own accord without God first performing a change in your heart? You must be a really great person and have quite a bit of boasting about how you chose Christ all on your own. Me? Well, I am quite sure that as a pharisaical religious person, there was not enough righteousness in me to accept Christ had he left me alone to my own free will. I give God all the glory and boast only in his sovereign grace for my salvation.
Hehehe...If I'm ever on a plane and notice the Slawsons and Elder Eric seated across the aisle from Bill and Co. I just might blow the emergency hatch! (Kidding...)I think this post gets the award for best graphics!(Hey! What do you do if you notice a Calv-lin on the on the wing of the plane, like in the Twilight Zone?)P.S. I used to worry about my comments being too long, but now I don't...P.P.S. Comments from MillerPla.net are not all from the same Miller.
DId you come up with this while flying?It's hilarious.Fortunately I don't fly very often, but most of the times I have it's been in the company of other Calvinists.
Anony-BillI am not Arminian, and I don't buy 100% of Calvin, either, but the original post was funny and well-done. Poking fun at God is blasphemous--being able to laugh at ourselves is not.Blessed is he who can tell the difference.Kat
Bill, if you are a four-pointer, an Arminian (though you say you are not), or heck, even a Chaldean Orthodox, be proud of it, and share your views with us in good humour! If you are a four-pointer, though, as you claim to be, then you need to reassess where you stand on things.I know a couple of four-pointers, and they are as convicted of the sovereignty of God as five-pointers. As four-pointers, they affirm Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Irrestible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints, which means that they affirm salvation as being entirely the work of God, changing the hearts of us sinners, against our natural will to sin.If you find this concept offensive, well, that's your prerogative. But you may need to reconsider the theological label you're applying to yourself.
I think it would have also been funny if it said "Pretend to be a muslim because we all know Calvinists aren't evangelistic". Per the Caner brothers' assertions that is.
QUOTE: A: If Calvinism is true, than God created billions of souls with no other purpose than to burn in Hell for all eternity with no hope of salvation through Jesus Christ. endQUOTEIf Calvinism is NOT true, God still created billions of souls with no other purpose than to burn in Hell for all eternity with no hope of salvation through Jesus Christ...even from an Arminian veiwpoint...because God knew they wouldn't "choose" Him.
Anon #2:Hmm, not necessarily. That argument assumes something we don't know for sure about the nature of God's omniscience. Namely, it assumes Molinism, or middle knowledge--i.e. that God can know that someone he doesn't create would reject him if he did create them. That may be true, but I don't know that we can assume it.
Check this out.The “scary” statement is an allusion to a recent remark by Roger Olson.
Post a Comment