Category: Calvinism

Arminianism, Calvinism, Dr. Leighton Flowers, FreewillLeave a comment

Effectually Caused

TheSire

26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. Most Freewill theists find it a repulsive notion that God “effectually” causes us to make choices. Notice that the conclusion from this passage would be that anyone God causes to walk according to His statutes must be robots and not culpable for their deeds.   Continue reading Effectually Caused

Arminianism, Calvinism, Doctrine of GodLeave a comment

Mirrored Reality

TheSire

The whole point of the Boethian solution was that God’s timeless knowledge is partially comprised of what happens within time, what is temporal in part constitutes what is timeless. Since we can plainly see from the above counter-example that current action can make something timelessly true, I would counter we have no reason to think that God couldn’t base His timeless knowledge on what occurs within time. This is not our reaching into a timeless realm to affect God, but rather He reaching into His creation with and for His understanding. “…for the Lord searches all hearts and understands every … Continue reading Mirrored Reality

Arminianism, Calvinism, Divine Timelessness, Doctrine of GodLeave a comment

Thibo Dabble

TheSire

I’ll comment on the things Thibodaux asked: [“You can see his additional commentary here, though I’d recommend it for entertainment purposes only. On why he thinks choices are random:] Yes, other than the irony that some of these words apply to each article he has written in response to me. I appreciate his ability to be wrong.  [@But his article gives no explanation for why they aren’t blips of chance. Besides the fact that there’s no reason to buy his counter-intuitive assertion in the first place, free will being random (as I point out in the article) would imply that … Continue reading Thibo Dabble

Arminianism, Calvinism, Doctrine of God, FreewillLeave a comment

Thibodaux: A Dependent Independence

TheSire

Thibodaux has written a response to my article. So, let’s review it: http://spirited-tech.com/COG/2019/08/06/thibodaux-the-saga-continues/ https://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/2019/08/09/tackling-calvinist-errors-on-omniscience-aseity-plus-a-deductive-proof/ I’ve been pretty clear since the beginning of our dialogue that God doesn’t derive His attributes from creation. Quoting previous posts: Does Thibodaux not distinguish between a person professed position and the implications of the position? Sure, he denies that that is his position but that is the implication of his position. He doesn’t do anything to dispell us of that argument. To sum up the heretofore poorly-explained objection, the objector makes the error of conflating the attribute of omniscience with the specifics of God’s knowledge. … Continue reading Thibodaux: A Dependent Independence

Calvinism, Doctrine of GodLeave a comment

Thibodaux: The Saga Continues

TheSire

J.C. Thibodaux has responded to my refutation: https://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/2019/08/01/calvinist-debate-talking-past-the-argument/ Before we get to that, his big objection in his initial post was that the Arminian view of free will would somehow ‘explain’ God’s attributes. Though I expressed that his objection about people ‘explaining’ God’s attributes wasn’t clear, instead of any clarification we get this: The problem with the second point is that it is clearly incorrect. It is relevant because it still shows that Arminians have tensions in their worldview. He’s still not clear what he means by this, but suffice to say that complaining about creation ‘explaining’ God’s attributes without even defining his … Continue reading Thibodaux: The Saga Continues

Arminianism, Calvinism, MetaphysicsLeave a comment

Thibodaux’s Cooked Goose

TheSire

J.C. Thibodaux has responded to an article I wrote against his view of aseity. https://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/2019/07/26/calvinisms-inconsistencies-on-gods-attributes/ The first of his objections involves people ‘explaining’ God. Van Til thinks of aseity as God being self-contained. Nothing can further explain God other than himself but on Thibodaux scheme, God being is explained by creatures. But how can a being that is a se or self-explained be further explained by created things(people and their choice)? It isn’t really clear what he’s asking. If he’s talking about how we define God, He most certainly is, in some ways, defined by His creation. “God, furthermore, said … Continue reading Thibodaux’s Cooked Goose