scrunchables
Former Leader of the Black Hebrew Movement (BHM)
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2023
- Posts
- 5,183
- Reputation
- 8,129
It makes absolutely no logical sense, but they hide behind the idea of it being a “mystery” and that there are other mysteries in the Bible, so it’s perfectly fine.
Here’s the difference: those other differences are simply a matter of us perceiving reality at a lower plane of existence. The mystery of the Trinity? Jesus being fully Man and God? We’re just lower level entities, so we’re not going to understand it. We can’t even understand the quantum realm 100%, but there’s certainly a logic in that stuff, or reality would flat out not function.
That is different from the mystery of how a blatantly logically inconsistent idea can be true. Compatibilism is like asking God to create a square circle. Obviously, He can’t make one. Does that mean He’s not omnipotent? No, He just can’t do something that logically contradicts itself. That’s stupid.
Btw I guarantee you, every single time a Calvinist is going to defend their point on this topic, they’re going to commit a fallacy of false distinction or of begging the question.
“He simply preordained sin, but he still maintains control over all that is to come” - false distinction, no matter how much word salad is employed. There is no real difference. Even R.C Sproul slipped up and said that God created sin, thus literally making Him the author of sin, the most terrifying prospect to any mainstream Calvinist. At least the guy was just blatantly honest about how his position is determinism but packaged a bit more neatly for the masses.
“It’s true. How does it make sense? I don’t know, but it’s true because Scripture agrees with my interpretation, so you better believe it!” - begging the question. It is *only* appropriate if you were *100%* certain that YOUR denomination is entirely correct and all the others are wrong. Anyone this assured (conceited) has either done zero outside research or is just ignorant. Even if you WERE correct, you aren’t convincing anybody.
Free will or determinism. Which way? I don’t know for certain. I will do more research and come to a conclusion at some point. But making an unholy marriage of the two ideas is downright dumb.
Here’s the difference: those other differences are simply a matter of us perceiving reality at a lower plane of existence. The mystery of the Trinity? Jesus being fully Man and God? We’re just lower level entities, so we’re not going to understand it. We can’t even understand the quantum realm 100%, but there’s certainly a logic in that stuff, or reality would flat out not function.
That is different from the mystery of how a blatantly logically inconsistent idea can be true. Compatibilism is like asking God to create a square circle. Obviously, He can’t make one. Does that mean He’s not omnipotent? No, He just can’t do something that logically contradicts itself. That’s stupid.
Btw I guarantee you, every single time a Calvinist is going to defend their point on this topic, they’re going to commit a fallacy of false distinction or of begging the question.
“He simply preordained sin, but he still maintains control over all that is to come” - false distinction, no matter how much word salad is employed. There is no real difference. Even R.C Sproul slipped up and said that God created sin, thus literally making Him the author of sin, the most terrifying prospect to any mainstream Calvinist. At least the guy was just blatantly honest about how his position is determinism but packaged a bit more neatly for the masses.
“It’s true. How does it make sense? I don’t know, but it’s true because Scripture agrees with my interpretation, so you better believe it!” - begging the question. It is *only* appropriate if you were *100%* certain that YOUR denomination is entirely correct and all the others are wrong. Anyone this assured (conceited) has either done zero outside research or is just ignorant. Even if you WERE correct, you aren’t convincing anybody.
Free will or determinism. Which way? I don’t know for certain. I will do more research and come to a conclusion at some point. But making an unholy marriage of the two ideas is downright dumb.