Anyone ever notice this about Calvinists...

[Guest]

In general, when a Calvinist is asked a question about certain topics that the bible isn't very clear on, they always, without-fail, will utilize a certain reasoning that sends one down rabbit trails....For example.

On a well known Calvinist radio program, a man called in and asked the host, "What do you believe about creation", The host responded with "I am a literal six day creationist(young earth)", the caller then asked "How important is it to believe that particular view", the host then replied "It is very important, because it has to do with the doctrine of the perspicuity(clarity) of scripture, if God's revelation isn't clear on such matters, then we lose this(perspicuity) doctrine".

Let me first note that I am a young earth creationist, but
I, for one, have a huge problem with this type of argument. First, it dodges the original question, and second, it forces dogmatism on a subject that the bible is not entirely clear on.

Calvinists do this on many other doctrines, but they will assert "we are just trying to harmonize scripture and be consistent", but I disagree. I see it more as a trying to force a certain philosophical paradigm on scripture.

Your thoughts?

[Guest]

brody, that is an interesting observation. Would you have preferred that the host answer according to his own opinion and allow for other viewpoints? Rather than insist that his is the only viable one?

I'm not sure how, in your example, the host's answer dodged the original question since he seemed to answer it, or are you saying that the original question is the "How important is it to hold to that opinion?"?

Peace, dmatic

[Guest]

brody, that is an interesting observation. Would you have preferred that the host answer according to his own opinion and allow for other viewpoints? Rather than insist that his is the only viable one?

I'm not sure how, in your example, the host's answer dodged the original question since he seemed to answer it, or are you saying that the original question is the "How important is it to hold to that opinion?"?

Peace, dmatic

Well, I think the host and other Christians I know should be less dogmatic about stuff that the bible is silent on. I used the Calvinist as examples, because they tend to be very systematic in there approach to scripture, and thats can be a good thing, or a bad thing. Its awfully hard to cram all the bible together and make everything to fall under a certain "heading", at least it seems that way to me. Though I still have a ton of learning to do.

[Guest]

In general, when a Calvinist is asked a question about certain topics that the bible isn't very clear on, they always, without-fail, will utilize a certain reasoning that sends one down rabbit trails....

I wouldn't leave this behavior solely at the feet of Calvinists either. There are many non-Calvinists who do the same thing.

I guess its humbling to say that you don't know, or you're not sure and then give all the possible solutions. If you are well known in radio, TV or print, it is self deprecating to appear as if you don't have the answer.

My hat's off to Steve Gregg in this area...

Dave

[Guest]

In general, when a Calvinist is asked a question about certain topics that the bible isn't very clear on, they always, without-fail, will utilize a certain reasoning that sends one down rabbit trails....

I wouldn't leave this behavior solely at the feet of Calvinists either. There are many non-Calvinists who do the same thing.

I guess its humbling to say that you don't know, or you're not sure and then give all the possible solutions. If you are well known in radio, TV or print, it is self deprecating to appear as if you don't have the answer.

My hat's off to Steve Gregg in this area...

Dave

You are right. It isn't the Calvinist who do this exclusively. There are other groups who utilize this practice. But it seems that the Calvinist are better at it than most.

[Guest]

"It is very important, because it has to do with the doctrine of the perspicuity(clarity) of scripture, if God's revelation isn't clear on such matters, then we lose this(perspicuity) doctrine".

This basically amounts to an emotional argument for belief in a particular doctrine, regardless of evidence. It's practically begging the question. The Bible is clear because it has to be clear. Therefore, we believe that the Bible is clear. Because if it's not clear, we lose the doctrine that it's clear.

But at least when you use a great word like perspicuity, it sounds technical and all that...

Also, this is definitely not a Calvinist-only thing.

[Guest]

"It is very important, because it has to do with the doctrine of the perspicuity(clarity) of scripture, if God's revelation isn't clear on such matters, then we lose this(perspicuity) doctrine".

This basically amounts to an emotional argument for belief in a particular doctrine, regardless of evidence. It's practically begging the question. The Bible is clear because it has to be clear. Therefore, we believe that the Bible is clear. Because if it's not clear, we lose the doctrine that it's clear.

But at least when you use a great word like perspicuity, it sounds technical and all that...

Also, this is definitely not a Calvinist-only thing.

Great way of wording things!

Your exactly right, Calvinist aren't the only ones, I notice that Cessationist use this type of reasoning all the time, especially them of the Church of Christ.

While debating a Church of Christ minister recently on the subject of the gifts, he said something to the effect of "Because I don't see the gifts operating amongst the Churches of Christ, the gifts do not exist, and it is safe to assume that since we are the only Christians who have the right doctrines, the gifts, if they existed, would be in operation amongst us"."..... ...I quickly ended the debate. Who can respond to such a brilliant argument?

[Guest]

While debating a Church of Christ minister recently on the subject of the gifts, he said something to the effect of "Because I don't see the gifts operating amongst the Churches of Christ, the gifts do not exist, and it is safe to assume that since we are the only Christians who have the right doctrines, the gifts, if they existed, would be in operation amongst us"."..... ...I quickly ended the debate. Who can respond to such a brilliant argument?

Wow. Just...wow.

Actually Hank Hanegraaff uses something similar to the logic the "six day" guy did when he speaks about the Nephilim, and the fact that they couldn't have been fallen angels who mated with women. He states that, if that kind of thing could happen (if demons could take on flesh), then demons could have masqueraded as the Risen Christ, and we'd have no way of knowing if his appearances were genuine. Fine. True. But hardly a scriptural case for his argument. Fortunately, he backs it up by quoting Luke 24:39 ("A spirit has not flesh"). Much better.

[Guest]

While debating a Church of Christ minister recently on the subject of the gifts, he said something to the effect of "Because I don't see the gifts operating amongst the Churches of Christ, the gifts do not exist, and it is safe to assume that since we are the only Christians who have the right doctrines, the gifts, if they existed, would be in operation amongst us"."..... ...I quickly ended the debate. Who can respond to such a brilliant argument?

Wow. Just...wow.

Actually Hank Hanegraaff uses something similar to the logic the "six day" guy did when he speaks about the Nephilim, and the fact that they couldn't have been fallen angels who mated with women. He states that, if that kind of thing could happen (if demons could take on flesh), then demons could have masqueraded as the Risen Christ, and we'd have no way of knowing if his appearances were genuine. Fine. True. But hardly a scriptural case for his argument. Fortunately, he backs it up by quoting Luke 24:39 ("A spirit has not flesh"). Much better.

I think I am going to start my own radio program..............................................................I think it would be great.............for a good laugh.

[Guest]

Be Sober my friend! For your enemy the devil lurks about seeking whom he may devour!

Let me know, though, what the call letters will be! 8)

I have always appreciated guys who can say "I don't know"!

Peace, dmaitc