The Upper Room

« first day (1639 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2982 days later) »

fredsbend

12:05 AM

@Mr.Bultitude I don't know ...

2 hours later…

Mr. Bultitude

1:45 AM

@fredsbend Not good enough!

8 hours later…

Elisha ponders...

9:22 AM

Q: How do Christians decide which biblical laws to retain and which to discard?

The Christian Bible contains a wide variety of laws and guidance covering a substantial range of topics. Modern Christians do not attempt to follow all of the laws and teaching. Some points are contentious, such as women priests and same-sex relationships (at the time of writing, there are vari...

8 hours later…

Nathaniel

5:15 PM

This clearly out-of-scope question is going to end up in the HNQ list if it or its answers get more upvotes before getting closed.

1 hour later…

fredsbend

6:43 PM

I guess no one wants to answer this:

Q: What is the difference between this stack (Christianity) and biblical hermeneutics?

There's two sites that seem related to the Bible and Christian studies: Christianity.StackExchange Hermeneutics.StackExchange Hermeneutics is kind of like interpretation of the bible. But in Christianity there are several denominations which also have their own interpretations, so what is the...

discussion site-definition

I'm a little embarrassed that our regulars who can answer it haven't tried yet.

It makes it look like meta is dead or no one really knows.

1 hour later…

Mr. Bultitude

7:50 PM

@JonEricson Were you going to answer that meta question? I could possibly take a crack at it, but my concern would be that I could easily misrepresent what is and isn't allowable at BH.

Jon Ericson

@Mr.Bultitude Oh. I have a draft nearly ready to go. I had it written last night and need to post after doing a final edit.

fredsbend

8:19 PM

@JonEricson Cool. Thanks Jon!

fredsbend

I thought I had done well at this one, but no votes and no comments, so I don't know. Anyone have feedback?

A: In Calvinism, why does free will to accept salvation seem to take away from God's glory?

With my understanding of Calvinism/Reformed theology, the question here is confused on what the theology actually teaches. My understanding is that you are unconditionally selected for grace, however, once that grace is poured out on you, you freely and willingly surrender to it and follow God. I...

Nathaniel

8:53 PM

@fredsbend I have some thoughts but hadn't come back to it yet. The first thing that made me pause was:

> instead preferring things like "man acts out of necessity, but not coercion" or "libertarian freedom".

I read that initially as saying that Calvinists believe in libertarian freedom, but I don't think that's what you meant

I'm also not sure about talking about Wesley... it's true that he thought there was a way out of the "false dilemma," but he wasn't a Calvinist, so I don't think his approach is directly relevant to the question.

Perhaps the biggest issue is that the OP hasn't clarified his question based on our comments. You deal with the "false dilemma" aspect of it, but it's not clear if that's what the OP wants to focus on, or if he is looking for biblical passages defending some aspect of Calvinist thought (glory/sovereignty/etc.).

Mr. Bultitude

9:09 PM

@fredsbend It's not bad, but I think it's incomplete. I see the question as ultimately being about irresistible grace. The OP, I think, misunderstands and thus misrepresents the doctrine (in the phrase, "forced on us"), but I think that doctrine is what he's intending to get to the bottom of.

I'm a lay theologian at best, but my understanding of reformed theology is that a man who is elect may freely accept Jesus, but not freely reject him. A man who is not elect does not have free will -- his will is in bondage to sin -- and therefore he is only capable of rejecting Jesus.

Also, I think the question itself could use some work. He seems to be asking, "How do Calvinists defend the idea that resistible grace leads to an unglorifyingly synergistic salvation? Because it sounds like a false dilemma." (My paraphrase is inelegant, but I think it's more precisely phrased than the original; a more elegant but still precise rephrasing would probably be best.)

I don't think your answer adequately deals with the dilemma he perceives about resistible and irresistible grace. You've dealt well with one of the OP's false premises, that irresistible grace makes the elect un-free, but that just moves the dilemma back one level, and you haven't dealt with the underlying issue in my opinion.

@Nathaniel I think the "false dilemma" aspect of the question is a restatement of what the OP finds unconvincing about irresistible grace, and that, "What scriptures lead to this viewpoint?" is a way of saying he wants answers to include verses as support. So a good answer would include support from reformed writers, Bible verses, and good old fashioned logic.

Also, @Nathaniel, feel free to take me to task if I've misstated reformed theology above.

fredsbend

@Nathaniel @Mr.Bultitude Thanks guys. I think I'll refrain from improving it until the op clarifies things. I don't want to waste time answering the wrong question.

Nathaniel

@Mr.Bultitude I like that explanation, though I'd probably put it as "a man who is elect will freely accept Jesus, and cannot, ultimately, freely reject him"... all the elect resist temporarily, some much longer than others.

fredsbend

9:25 PM

@Nathaniel I was thinking the same thing when I wrote that part about libertarian freedom. I meant it in that they'll say they believe in free choice, but will call other "free choice" descriptions by another name. What I wrote there is confusing.

I may fix that but, meh. No input from op. Not worth my time at this point.

Nathaniel

@fredsbend That's what I figured after I read it a couple times. Hopefully OP revisits this.

« first day (1639 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2982 days later) »

all rooms