Chris Fisher

Yesterday at 2:50pm
Give it your best shot.

20 Questions for Calvinists

Calvinists are notoriously bad at answering straightforward questions. They often avoid questions, especially yes or
no questions about basic reading comprehension in the Bible. This is a list of...
GODISOPEN.COM
Like Comment Share

Will Duffy likes this.

Linda Champion Webroot says this is an unsafe site.
Yesterday at 4:33pm Like

Chris Fisher Wordpress?
Yesterday at 5:07pm Like

Chris Fisher The text from the article:

Sovereignty (Calvinism equates sovereignty with meticulous control although this concept is foreign to any
human culture):

1. If Gods will is always already being done on earth as in heaven (as divine determinism implies) why did Jesus
teach his disciples to pray, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven?

Verse: Luk 11:2 So He said to them, When you pray, say: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Your
kingdom come. Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven.

2. People are tempted by evil. Does God cause this?

Verse: Jas 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, I am tempted by God; for God cannot be tempted by evil,
nor does He Himself tempt anyone.

3. Can Gods appointments be thwarted by man?

Verse: 1Ki 20:42 Then he said to him, Thus says the LORD: Because you have let slip out of your hand a man
whom I appointed to utter destruction, therefore your life shall go for his life, and your people for his people.

4. When God struck (aka killed) the children of Israel, did Gods intended purpose materialize?

Verse: Jer 2:30 In vain have I struck your children; they took no correction; your own sword devoured your
prophets like a ravening lion.
5. In the parable of the potter, does God finish what He started to do?

Verse: Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again
into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make.

Omniscience (Calvinism believes God has complete knowledge of all future events):

6. Does God test people to learn what they will do?

Verse: Deu 13:3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your
God is testing you to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

Verse: 2Ch 32:31 However, regarding the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, whom they sent to him to
inquire about the wonder that was done in the land, God withdrew from him, in order to test him, that He might
know all that was in his heart.

7. Does God ever regret something He did?

Verse: Gen 6:6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

Verse: 1Sa 15:11 I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and
has not performed My commandments. And it grieved Samuel, and he cried out to the LORD all night.

8. Does God say He will do something although He knows that He will never do that thing?

Verse: 1Sa 2:30 Therefore the LORD God of Israel says: I said indeed that your house and the house of your
father would walk before Me forever. But now the LORD says: Far be it from Me; for those who honor Me I will
honor, and those who despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.

9. When the Bible says God thought to do something that He does not do, what does thought to do mean?

Verse: Jer 18:7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down,
and to destroy it,
Jer 18:8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to
bring upon it.

10. Did God do what He said He would do in Jonah?

Verse: Jon 3:10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the
disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

Immutability (Calvinism believes God cannot change in any way):

11. Could God have prevented the evil currently in this world? And if so, how can God be immutable? If no, how
can God be omnipotent?

Verse: Jdg 2:20 Then the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel; and He said, Because this nation has
transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not heeded My voice,
Jdg 2:21 I also will no longer drive out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died,
Jdg 2:22 so that through them I may test Israel, whether they will keep the ways of the LORD, to walk in them as
their fathers kept them, or not.

12. When God became flesh, was that a change?

Verse: Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only
begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Timelessness (Calvinism believes God resides outside of time):

 13. Does God ever wait patiently and endure up to a breaking point?

Verse: Isa 42:14 I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a
woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once.

Goodness:

14. How can a God who cannot lie make specific time-limit prophecies that do not come true when He said they
would?

Verse: Jon 3:4 And Jonah began to enter the city on the first days walk. Then he cried out and said, Yet forty
days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!

Verse: 2Ki 20:5 Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, Thus says the LORD, the God of David your
father: I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up
to the house of the LORD.
2Ki 20:6 And I will add to your days fifteen years. I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of
Assyria; and I will defend this city for My own sake, and for the sake of My servant David.

Jesus (Calvinism believes that Jesus is God except for the part of Jesus that was human):

15. Was the part of Jesus that was body also Godhead?

Verse: Col 2:9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;

16. Did Jesus know everything?

Verse: Mar 13:32 But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only
the Father.

17. In what way does Jesus resemble an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, timeless, and simple
God?

Verse: Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He
who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, Show us the Father?

18. If Jesus will is the same as Gods will, then why would Jesus say that Jesus will would not be done if Gods
will is done?

Verse: Luk 22:42 saying, Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but
Yours, be done.

19. Could Jesus have been saved from crucifixion by praying to God?

Verse: Mat 26:53 Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than
twelve legions of angels?

Miscellaneous:

20. Why are the elect the enemy of the gospel?

Verse: Rom 11:28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are
beloved for the sake of the fathers.
Yesterday at 5:08pm Like

Will Duffy Linda Champion, it's unsafe for Calvinists, LOL!

Yesterday at 5:51pm Unlike 1

 Charlie J. Ray You must be addressing those semi-Arminian Calvinists who follow the theology of apparent
contradictions and paradox? I can assure you that there are no contradictions in the Bible.
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray It will take me some time to answer all the objections in the post. However, the first objection is
so simple even a child can figure it out:

>>>1. If Gods will is always already being done on earth as in heaven (as divine determinism implies) why did
Jesus teach his disciples to pray, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven?<<<

If we are praying for God's will to be done, we are simply agreeing that God controls whatsoever comes to pass.
That's why Jesus taught us to pray according to God's will. THY will be done. Jesus also prayed that if it were
possible that the cup of His suffering would pass, but nevertheless not his human will be done but GOD'S will be
done:

He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass
from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will." (Matthew 26:39 NKJ)
Again, a second time, He went away and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if this cup cannot pass away from Me
unless I drink it, Your will be done." (Matthew 26:42 NKJ)

God already knows the future because He has already determined it. It was NEVER God's will that Jesus would
NOT go to the cross. Jesus providentially in time said the prayer but God had already by the set foreknowledge
of God determined that wicked men, including Judas, Pilate, and Herod, would have him betrayed, tried,
convicted and crucified.

"Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands,
have crucified, and put to death; (Acts 2:23 NKJ)
"For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles
and the people of Israel, were gathered together 28 "to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined
before to be done. (Acts 4:27-28 NKJ)
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Why pray if God is unable to determine the future? We don't know what the future holds. God
does because He controls it. Even the day and hour of your death is already determined by God. Hebrews 9:27.
Psalm 139.
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray More later:)

10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray It is irritating when Arminians flood with several questions instead of sticking to one proposition at
a time. Prayer only makes sense if God is sovereign and can actually answer the prayer. God's answer could be
yes or no. But His will shall be done!
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The more Arminian they are the more they hate the doctrine of predestination.
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I should point out that the OP is from an Open Theism site. Open Theism is worse than
Arminianism because it says that God is ignorant of the future:) Unfortunately, some Arminians, including Roger
 Olson, think that Open Theism is within the Arminian camp. Ironically, Olson contradicts himself when he also
claims that Arminianism is "reformed" theology. If Arminians were more logical, they wouldn't be Arminians.
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The same applies to Open Theism. If Open Theism advocates were more logical they wouldn't
believe Open Theism is true.
10 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray My best shot? My best shot is not mine. It is the Bible:)

The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, "Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass, And as I have
purposed, so it shall stand: (Isaiah 14:24 NKJ)
10 hrs Like

Chris Fisher 1:

///If we are praying for God's will to be done, we are simply agreeing that God controls whatsoever comes to
pass.

That does not work. The text presents a contrast between Heaven and Earth. Why the contrast? In what way is
Jesus asking that God's will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven? If Jesus believed God's will was being done on
Earth, does this make sense? Wouldn't it have been easier to just say "I agree with your will". The sentence was
not spoken by someone with a Calvinist mindset. That is why the question is so hard for Calvinists to answer. It
is a request.
9 hrs Edited Like

Chris Fisher Ray 1: The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, "Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass,
And as I have purposed, so it shall stand: (Isaiah 14:24 NKJ)

Isn't this about God being capable of doing what He says, not about meticulous control of the future? And isn't
this Isaiah trying to convince Israel that God is powerful, which they do not believe? And if Isaiah were trying to
convince the people that God controls everything (something they do no believe) wouldn't he have worded it
extremely different. Isaiah reads like an Open Theist trying to convince a Calvinist that God can actually do what
He says.
9 hrs Edited Like

Chris Fisher Ray 2: Even the day and hour of your death is already determined by God. Hebrews 9:27. Psalm
139.

Hebrews 9:27, men are appointed to die once means that every person on Earth has a specific appointed day?
You are bringing a lot of baggage into that verse. Plus you ignore Hezekiah and God's judgement of angels in
Psalms 82 in which He punishes them with eventual death.

On Psalms 139. Absolutely that is not what Psalms 139 says. "the days that were formed" is an adverbial phrase
meaning that over the days that David's body was forming, the body parts were being written into God's book.
Here is Calvin on the issue:

Some read , yamim, in the nominative case, when days were made; the sense being, according to them
All my bones were written in thy book, O God! from the beginning of the world, when days were first formed by
thee, and when as yet none of them actually existed. The other is the more natural meaning, That the different
parts of the human body are formed in a succession of time; for in the first germ there is no arrangement of parts,
or proportion of members, but it is developed, and takes its peculiar form progressively.
8 hrs Edited Like

Chris Fisher All the attached translations agree with John Calvin that Psalms 139 is not about God recording
every day of your life but about a series of days in which your body forms in the womb, notice the adverbial
phrase:

Geneva Bible: 16 Thine eyes did see me, when I was without forme: for in thy booke were all things written,
which in continuance were facioned, when there was none of them before.

The attached picture is the Jewish translation of Psalms 139.

King James Bible

Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in
continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Jubilee Bible 2000

Thine eyes did see my substance yet being imperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which were
then formed, without lacking one of them.

American King James Version

Your eyes did see my substance, yet being imperfect; and in your book all my members were written, which in
continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

English Revised Version

Thine eyes did see mine unperfect substance, and in thy book were all my members written, which day by day
were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

8 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray I showed you the prayer of Jesus in Gethsemane. I guess you don't believe the Bible.
8 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, that is one of the questions. That proves that God's will does not have to be done and it
proves that Jesus and God do not have the same will.
8 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray That isn't what Psalm 139 says. It says God is absolutely omniscient, not ignorant. God is not a
man;)
8 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ray 2: Charlie, was John Calvin wrong when Calvin wrote:

Some read , yamim, in the nominative case, when days were made; the sense being, according to them
All my bones were written in thy book, O God! from the beginning of the world, when days were first formed by
thee, and when as yet none of them actually existed. The other is the more natural meaning, That the different
parts of the human body are formed in a succession of time; for in the first germ there is no arrangement of parts,
or proportion of members, but it is developed, and takes its peculiar form progressively.
8 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray I am working today. I would ask you to stock to one or two propositions at a time. I will rebut your
answers one at a time.
8 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Alright, I will keep my responses numbered per your points and will keep my counter points
numbered per the original question.
8 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Since we do not know the future being limited in knowledge, we do petition God. But why pray to
an ignorant and helpless finite god who has no providential control over history, time, or evil?
8 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ray 3: He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if it is
possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will." (Matthew 26:39 NKJ)

Doesn't this verse show us that God's will does not have to be done (indicated by Jesus' special asking that God
not change His will on Jesus' account)? Doesn't this also show that Jesus did not know if it was a possibility,
meaning even Jesus was not a Calvinist thinking in terms of immutable divine decrees?
8 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ray 4: But why pray to an ignorant and helpless finite god who has no providential control over
history, time, or evil?

If prayer does not affect God. If the future was set and God time (and time again tells Israel that it is not... that He
is waiting and pleading for them to change such that He does not have to punish them)... If God was immutable
and cold like the stone idols that God despises... If God was timeless and unpersonal, as to make a mockery of
the strong emotional highs and lows God ascribes to Himself throughout the Bible... then prayer would be
pointless. We would be telling God what He already knows and has decreed. Instead, when God says
something, people's natural inclination is that they can convince God not to do it. Followup question: what was
the reason that God decided not to destroy Israel on Mount Sinai?
8 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Out of context quotes only prove you are an irrationalist.
8 hrs Like

Chris Fisher The Geneva Bible that I quoted to you... is that out of context as well? Seriously, you reject Calvin
on this verse as well as good Hebrew scholarship. You are the one not acting rational.
 7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Here is something you can do. Write the following: "Chris, I was wrong about Psalms 139:16 being
a good prooftext for my view. Calvin himself did not take the verse the way I see it and this is reflected in the
Geneva translation. I am too set in my ways to admit when I am clearly wrong and I will attempt to treat valid
points with more respect in the future. I promise not to let my ego just lash out when I am thoroughly called out
on irrational positions I hold."
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Calvin was not infallible. Scripture speaks for itself.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Some for afar off read beforehand, in which signification the Hebrew word is elsewhere taken, as
if he had saidO Lord, every thought which I conceive in my heart is already known to thee beforehand. But I
prefer the other meaning, That God is not confined to heaven, indulging in a state of repose, and indifferent to
human concerns, according to the Epicurean idea, and that however far off we may be from him, he is never far
off from us.

John Calvin. Psalm 139.

7 hrs Edited Like

Chris Fisher So, yes or no. Is Psalms 139:16 a good prooftext that God has planned our entire lives?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible clearly says God knows the future and has exhaustive omniscience.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Yes or no... was I quoting Calvin "out of context" like you claimed?
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher In the opening link, I mention that Calvinists have a very hard time with yes or no questions. I will
try this again:

So, yes or no. Is Psalms 139:16 a good prooftext that God has planned our entire lives?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, no. Calvin said what you said he said. But as I said, Scripture is the final authority.
Furthermore, I was on my phone earlier. How does it follow logically that Open Theism is true simply because
Calvin's focus was wrong in a few places in his commentaries? Just asking?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, let's try a yes or no question for you. Is God absolutely omniscient? Yes or no?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Isaiah 46:9-11 and many other places proves that God is absolutely sovereign and knows
exhaustively everything that will happen. Ephesians 1:11 says God ordains all things that come to pass in time.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Did I claim Open Theism was true because Calvin interpreted a verse in a non-Calvinist way? No,
my point is that your prooftexts, all your prooftexts, do not say what you want them to say. The fact that you
admittedly oppose even John Calvin on some verses is very telling about your mindset towards the Bible. You
are not interested in reading comprehension, and figuring out various and possibly understandings of texts, but
you are looking for affirmation of your platonism. You disregard perfectly reasonable alternative understandings
of the text.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ray 5: Chris, let's try a yes or no question for you. Is God absolutely omniscient? Yes or no?

No.The Bible never makes the claim and neither do I.

7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Calvin also says in the same commentary on Psalm 139:16, "..... it was always one and the same
in Gods book, who is not dependent upon time for the execution of his work." Clearly Calvin's view does not
endorse that God is dependent on time or that God is ignorant of the future.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ray 6: Isaiah 46:9-11 and many other places proves that God is absolutely sovereign

I feel like I am answering more of your questions than you are of mine. Refer back to my earlier question and
answer that:

Ray 1: The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, "Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass, And as I have
purposed, so it shall stand: (Isaiah 14:24 NKJ)

Isn't this about God being capable of doing what He says, not about meticulous control of the future? And isn't
this Isaiah trying to convince Israel that God is powerful, which they do not believe? And if Isaiah were trying to
convince the people that God controls everything (something they do no believe) wouldn't he have worded it
extremely different. Isaiah reads like an Open Theist trying to convince a Calvinist that God can actually do what
He says.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible does make the claim. And that is because we logically deduce from the Scriptures by
good and necessary consequence what the Bible says. There is a system of doctrinal and propositional truth in
the Bible and the Scriptures cannot be broken into disparate parts that have no relationship to the other parts of
the system of logical and propositional revelation in the Bible. John 10:35.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ray 7: Ephesians 1:11 says God ordains all things that come to pass in time.

Eph 1:11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who
works all things according to the counsel of his will,
 Doesn't perfectly normal reading comprehension allow this to say that God does everything that God does with
careful thought. It would be like me saying "I eat everything according to my diet". No, I do not eat "everything",
but "everything" I do eat is per my diet. And my statement is general, so even if there is slippage (I eat cake
once), this does not invalidate my general statement.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray If God is able to control the future, then it implication is that God DOES control the future. If the
universe can run by itself, then the implication by logical deduction and good and necessary consequence is that
the universe is indendent of God and therefore there is something that is God's equal. But that is Platonic
dualism and even deism. God is in absolute control of all that happens, otherwise God is not God.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray If you reject God as defined by Scripture, then you are not a Christian.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher No, I am going skating today. That is me controlling the future. Wow, I much be omniscient and
omnipotent.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The Westminster Confession of Faith summarizes the system of dogmatic theology in the Bible.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray If God foreknows you are going skating today, is it possible you won't go skating today?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Oh, wait. You think your god is ignorant.

7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You have created a little god in your own finite and ignorant image.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Vain thinking is vain.

7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher So, back to my questions. I am not really interested in non-Biblical metaphysics. In my estimation,
you have not answered a single OP question.

1:

///If we are praying for God's will to be done, we are simply agreeing that God controls whatsoever comes to
pass.

That does not work. The text presents a contrast between Heaven and Earth. Why the contrast? In what way is
Jesus asking that God's will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven? If Jesus believed God's will was being done on
Earth, does this make sense? Wouldn't it have been easier to just say "I agree with your will". The sentence was
 not spoken by someone with a Calvinist mindset. That is why the question is so hard for Calvinists to answer. It
is a request.
7 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray You are not interested in what the biblical text says either. And if you are not interested in
metaphysics, why read the Bible? The Bible alone is the source of all knowledge, including metaphysics.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, in my estimation, I am the only one addressing the text. You allude to Psalms and
Hebrews and you do not even use normal reading comprehension to understand them. You assume the text
supports you, and I showed that you were wrong. You have zero verses; which verse have you used in which I
did not follow up that your understanding was idiosyncratic and unwarranted?
7 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Why is there a contrast between the Creator and His creation? Well, the answer to that question
is obvious to any Calvinist. It's because God is eternally a God who possesses aseity by nature and essence.
There never was a time when God did not exist and God transcends time, history, and creation. That's why in
God's omniscient mind there is no passing of time or any passing of one thought to another thought. God is
omniscient and never learns anything new--including the future. God knows the future because it is ordained by
God's eternal decree. God never learns anything new by looking foreward to the future.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Well, your estimation is wrong because you presuppose a finite god. I presuppose an omniscient
God who is also omnipotent and omnipresent. That's because the Bible also presupposes such a God. All
Scripture is inspired by God. God controlled the wills of the men who wrote the Bible and every word they wrote
is the very words of God.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I am indeed a presuppositionalist. I presuppose there are no errors in the Bible. You presuppose
a finite god who does not control the wills of the men who wrote the Bible.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher That is not rational argument. I am wrong because I do not assume your theology? [ding ding ding]
We have a winner of the bad rational thinking award.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, well, since you don't believe God controls men's wills, it follows that you cannot believe in
the plenary verbal inspiration of Scripture or the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Mat 6:10 Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.

Has God's kingdom come? Is this a request by Jesus for God to bring His kingdom to Earth?

In the same way: "your will be done". Is this a request by Jesus for God's will to be done.

"On Earth as it is in Heaven". Is God's will currently being done on Earth in the same respect as it is in heaven.
 My problem with Calvinism is that it takes clearly absurd readings of normal passages.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Well, as I said, the logical implication is that you don't believe the Bible since you cannot believe
God inspired it.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Can God's will be rejected?

Luk 7:30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been
baptized by him.)
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible alone is God's Word. 2 Timothy 3:16. You cannot affirm this verse because for you
God is ignorant and finite. But if God is finite, maybe God is evil and cannot do anything about good?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Of course the reprobate reject the Gospel:) But they were predestined to do so. That's not ability.
It's inability.

8 and "A stone of stumbling And a rock of offense." They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they
also were appointed. (1Pe 2:8 NKJ)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher You reject Jesus's clear teachings. I am sure if we explored Exodus 32, you will reject a host of
Biblical authors on the subject. You reject the Psalmist talking about fetology. Only one of us is rejecting the
Bible, and that is you.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 38 that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: "Lord, who has believed
our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?"
39 Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again:
40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should
understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them." (Joh 12:38-40 NKJ)
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You do not believe because you are not of His sheep:

26 "But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. (Joh 10:26 NKJ)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher This is a yes or no question. Let me remind you that my original claim is that Calvinists are terrible
with yes or no questions:

Can God's will be rejected?

 Luk 7:30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been
baptized by him.)
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Oh, but I do believe the plain teaching of the whole bible in context. How do you think I decided to
become a Calvinist? By reading heretical Open Theist scholars?
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher ^And this is boolay... God's strong will.

boo-lay'
From G1014; volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Can God's will be rejected?

Luk 7:30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been
baptized by him.)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Heb 6:17 uses the same word.

7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I don't answer yes or no questions. Here's why? "Did you stop beating your wife?" Answer the
question: YES or NO?
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher No, because I never started, therefor there is nothing to stop.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Easy... now answer my question.

7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Logical fallacies are irrational and invalid. Asking irrational questions does not entail that the
question was legimate.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher I answered your "impossible question"... now answer mine. The only reason you dont want to
answer is that it is clear you reject the Bible:

Can God's will be rejected?

Luk 7:30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been
baptized by him.)
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray But you didn't answer with a yes or no. You answered with a qualification. So there's the reason
your debate questions are fallacious. Thanks for demonstrating the fallacy for me:)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Your intellectual dishonesty does not make my question a logical fallacy.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Then answer my question with a qualification... but say yes or no.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher The qualification was to ensure you dont misunderstand the answer... it does not invalidate the
answer.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The reprobate resist God's will. No Calvinist says otherwise. The reprobate have a will. But the
question is whether the will is free or not. The answer is a resounding NO.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher So... in your estimation... when the text says that the lawyers rejected God's will, that the lawyers
did not. You reject the Bible. Clearly.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD.

Sect. 9.THIS, therefore, is also essentially necessary and wholesome for Christians to know: That God
foreknows nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His
immutable, eternal, and infallible will. By this thunderbolt, "Free-will" is thrown prostrate, and utterly dashed to
pieces. Those, therefore, who would assert "Free-will," must either deny this thunderbolt, or pretend not to see it,
or push it from them. But, however, before I establish this point by any arguments of my own, and by the
authority of Scripture, I will first set it forth in your words.

Martin Luther

http://www.truecovenanter.com/trueluth.../luther_bow.html...
TrueCovenanter.com: The Bondage of the Will
Sect. 9.T, therefore, is also essentially necessary and wholesome for Christians to know: That God foreknows
nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal,
and infallible will. By this thunderbolt, "Free-will" is thrown prostrate, an
TRUECOVENANTER.COM|BY MARTIN LUTHER
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Your argument is literally the text does not mean what it says because you have overriding
theology.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray >>>So... in your estimation... when the text says that the lawyers rejected God's will, that the
lawyers did not. You reject the Bible. Clearly.<<<<<

This is so obviously false that it does not need a rebuttal. Obviously if the will is not free, then if the lawyers
rejected the commands of God to repent they did so willingly. Where does the Bible say that men do not have a
volition? I have not seen such a verse.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The reprobate willingly rebel and reject God's commands.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher They didnt reject their own will, they rejected God's will.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher This discussion is about reading comprehension.

7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor
indeed can be.
8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
(Rom 8:7-8 NKJ)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ok, can God's will be rejected?

7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher And did the lawyers reject God's will?

7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Your argument is literally the text does not mean what it says because you have overriding
theology.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Define "will." Do you mean God's commands or do you mean God's decrees?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You are equivocating. The term "will" has to be defined. And you are obviously deliberately
defining it otherwise from the Word of God:

29 "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our
children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. (Deu 29:29 NKJ)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher ^ Feel free to define it however is the most favorable to your position. Make it work in both the
context of Luk 7 and Heb 6.

Luk_7:30 ButG1161 theG3588 PhariseesG5330 andG2532 lawyersG3544 rejectedG114 theG3588

counselG1012 of GodG2316 againstG1519themselves,G1438 being notG3361 baptizedG907 ofG5259
him.G846

Heb_6:17 WhereinG1722 G3739 God,G2316 willingG1014 more abundantlyG4054 to shewG1925 unto

theG3588 heirsG2818 of promiseG1860 theG3588 immutabilityG276 of hisG848 counsel,G1012
confirmedG3315 it by an oath:G3727
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Do you claim to know everything that God knows in every single detail? If so, then you are
claiming to be omniscient. We can only know what God reveals in nature and in the Bible.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher ^I told you I am not interested in metaphysics. Please ask questions about the Bible and what the
Biblical authors believed.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray My position is God is omniscient. Your position is that your god is finite and ignorant. But can a
god who is subject to creation and evil save you? I sincerely doubt it.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher ^Platonism. Yum. I get my theology from the Bible. Can we discuss Exodus 32 now?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You're not interested in logic? So why are you here? God IS LOGIC. John 1:1. And logic was
imparted to all men: John 1:9. Man IS the image of God. Genesis 1:27.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray If you are admitting that you are an irrationalist, then there is nothing more to discuss. That's
because without logic nothing makes any sense whatsoever.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Exo 32:14 And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.

What is the reason that God did not destroy Israel, as Yahweh told Moses that He would?
7 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible is not inherently contradictory because God has no contradictions in His mind and it is
God who inspired the Bible.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Metaphysics is not "logic". I would give you a rundown on logical propositions, but it will detract
from the Bible. I can school you in another thread if you wish.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray So Exodus 32:14 says that God works providentially in time in ways that we as creatures can
understand. So how does that prove your metaphysical assertion that your god is ignorant of the future? I
thought you didn't want to talk about metaphysics? Hello?
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Exodus 32, what are Moses' arguments as to why God should not destroy Israel.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray God already knew that He would relent and the reason is He had already ordained that the
people of Israel would repent. Acts 11:18 implies it.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher At this point, this should be friendly reading comprehension.

7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Here is the text to save you some time:

Exo 32:11 But Moses implored the LORD his God and said, "O LORD, why does your wrath burn hot against
your people, whom you have brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand?
Exo 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'With evil intent did he bring them out, to kill them in the mountains and
to consume them from the face of the earth'? Turn from your burning anger and relent from this disaster against
your people.
Exo 32:13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants, to whom you swore by your own self, and said
to them, 'I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to
your offspring, and they shall inherit it forever.'"
Exo 32:14 And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, "Then God
has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." (Act 11:18 NKJ)

Repentance is a gift
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Yes or no, did Moses argue that God would look bad to the neighboring people? Basically, God
should refrain for His own sake and not due to the people's sake. Did this argument work on convincing God?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, so when God speaks to creatures who are subject to time and discursive thinking, how
else would God communicate to them in ways that they could understand? They are NOT omniscient. But your
 error is that you think because creatures need to be talked to on their level that the reverse is true of God and
that God is therefore ignorant like men. False conclusion. God is not a man.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 9 "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said,
and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? (Num 23:19 NKJ)
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Calvinists are terrible at yes or no questions. Let us try this again:

Yes or no, did Moses argue that God would look bad to the neighboring people? Basically, God should refrain for
His own sake and not due to the people's sake. Did this argument work on convincing God?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Your stupidity is in confusing the creature with the Creator.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Yes or no, did Moses argue that God would look bad to the neighboring people? Basically, God
should refrain for His own sake and not due to the people's sake. Did this argument work on convincing God?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray So did you stop beating your mother? Yes or no?
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher No, because I never started therefor there is nothing to stop.
7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Stop being ridiculous.

7 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Yes or no, did Moses argue that God would look bad to the neighboring people? Basically, God
should refrain for His own sake and not due to the people's sake. Did this argument work on convincing God?
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You will not persist in fallacious arguments here. If you insist on that method, you can go
elsewhere. First warning.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I am the head admin here. Behave yourself.

7 hrs Like

 Chris Fisher New question: does God himself claim that God changed His mind for His own sake in this
narrative:

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations
which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, I will pour out My fury on them
and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:9 But I acted for My names sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they
were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
7 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray If you cannot argue logically, you will be banned. Scriptural arguments and logic are required
here.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher This is God recounting the Exodus 32 event.

6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Irrationalism and invalid arguments are not permitted. So if you keep attacking the man with
abusive ad hominem, then it is a fallacious argument.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher What does Yahweh say the reason is that He spared Israel?
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I do not say that God changes His mind because the Bible says that God is eternally immutable.
Malachi 3:6 and James 1:17. Psalm 119:89. The anthropomophisms and anthropopathisms in Scripture do not
entail that God is a creature or a man. God is defined by metaphysical propositions that are revealed in Scripture
and by the logical deductions made from that system of propositional truth by good and necessary consequence.
The word Trinity is not in Scripture. But the Bible teaches both the Trinity and the absolute sovereignty of God.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Is God ignorant of what Israel would do?

6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Yes or no?

6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher What does God say in this text is the reason God did not destroy Israel:

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations
which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, I will pour out My fury on them
and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:9 But I acted for My names sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they
were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray There are conditional commands in the Bible. If man disobeys, God lays out the consequences. If
man obeys, then God rewards the obedience. But it does not follow that God does not ordain what man's
response will be.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray God could not be God if there is anything that happens apart from His sovereign permission. And
if God willingly permits evil, then obviously God willed for the evil to occur since God could easily prevent it.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Right, we are not talking about "conditional actions". It is clear from the text that the only actor is
Moses. The people do not repent and God is not reacting to their repentance. God Himself states that He acted
for His own sake. God's change of mind was due, literally, to Moses' argument that God would look bad if He
killed Israel.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Here is Moses recounting the event:

Deu 9:13 Furthermore the LORD spoke to me, saying, I have seen this people, and indeed they are a stiff-
necked people.
Deu 9:14 Let Me alone, that I may destroy them and blot out their name from under heaven; and I will make of
you a nation mightier and greater than they.

Deu 9:19 For I was afraid of the anger and hot displeasure with which the LORD was angry with you, to destroy
you. But the LORD listened to me at that time also.
Deu 9:20 And the LORD was very angry with Aaron and would have destroyed him; so I prayed for Aaron also at
the same time.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher So, you discount God, you discount Ezekiel, you discount Moses...
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher When you are denying Yaweh's speech about Himself, you should be afraid.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Let me clue you in, Chris Fisher. I am not just another ignorant plow boy:) I have two degrees in
Arminian theology. I did my BA at an Assemblies of God college and my master of divinity at an Evangelical and
Wesleyan seminary. I know your arguments better than you do. If you're not going to answer my objections, you
can go elsewhere to talk to thin air. Here you are required to answer my objections as I have answered all of
yours thus far.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher ^Better ask for your money back. What does God say in this text is the reason God did not destroy
Israel:

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations
which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, I will pour out My fury on them
 and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:9 But I acted for My names sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they
were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I do not deny that there are anthropopathisms in Scripture. Does God literally have emotions or
body parts? No. And so when the text attributes human qualities to God such as "relenting" it does not literally
mean that God repents or changes His mind as humans do.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Next question?

6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray I will warn you again, Chris, you do not get to ignore me. If you want to preach, go elsewhere.
This is a debate forum. I answered you objection several times and you keep repeating misrepresentations of the
Calvinism position. Our position is laid out clearly in the Westminster Standards. So why do you keep creating
straw man fallacies?
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The idea that men do not have a will is refuted several times over in the WCF.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Read the text, answer the question, then you can explain the question. I will provide you a copy
paste version for your convenience:

"God says in the text that He did not destroy Israel and this was for His own sake lest His name is profaned
among the Gentiles. I believe this is an anthropopathism. "

What does God say in this text is the reason God did not destroy Israel:

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations
which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, I will pour out My fury on them
and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:9 But I acted for My names sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they
were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
6 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Chapter 3: Of God's Eternal Decree

1. God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will freely, and unchangeably ordain
whatsoever comes to pass:1 yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,2 nor is violence offered to the
will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.3

See also: WLC 12 | WSC 7

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Eph. 1:11; Rom. 11:33; Heb. 6:17; Rom. 9:15,18.

2 James 1:13,17; 1 John 1:5.

 3 Acts 2:23; Matt. 17:12; Acts 4:27,28; John 19:11; Prov. 16:33.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Ask your question, I will answer:

6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher And, for the record, I have been answering almost all your objections. I even labelled them. You
have not hardly answered any of my objections.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The reason God did not destroy Israel is stated in the text. But simply quoting a text does not
prove your deduction from the text is correct. That's because plenty of other texts prove that God is not finite.
Your error is in confusing God with the creature and ignoring what are clearly anthropomorphisms. We do not
attribute human qualities to God just because God relates to humans in anthropomorphic or anthropopathic
terms in Scripture. God does not literally have a nose or mouth or emotions. Nor does God literally repent or
even relent. Those are clearly anthropopathic terms. God is totally distinct from creation and cannot literally
repent because God is eternally unchanging. If God changes, then He is not God but something else.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You have not answered my objection that your view confuses the Creator with
anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms in Scripture. Does God literally smell or taste?
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Does God literally "breathe"????

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and
man became a living being. (Gen 2:7 NKJ)
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Anthropomorphisms, like your describe, are alien to normal reading comprehension. They are a
mechanism invented such that Calvinists can deny the Bible. There is no hint in the narratives that the narratives
are to be discounted, and the authors show zero familiarity with immutability, omniscience, etc.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray So you agree with the Mormons that God has a body? Oh, brother!
6 hrs Edited Like

Chris Fisher R8: Does God literally "breathe"????

Maybe. Jesus breathed. God can cause wind movement which is breathe. The Bible is not clear on God's
physical properties, so maybe is the best answer.
6 hrs Like

 Charlie J. Ray Maybe you think God loses His temper, too?

6 "For I am the LORD, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob. (Mal 3:6 NKJ)
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, do you understand the difference between metaphor and Anthropomorphism?
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray God has no physical properties! God is a spirit:

"God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24 NKJ)
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Act 17:24 "God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth,
does not dwell in temples made with hands.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (Act 15:18 KJV)
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Looks like God is not ignorant after all.

6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Metaphor is using two similar concepts, one to illustrate the other. A King might have a "hand of the
King". This is not literal, but symbollic (this doesnt mean he doesnt have a hand either). But symbols have
meaning. Your Anthropomorphism does not have a meaning. What does it mean that God says that He repents
for His own sake that the pagan nations will not think of Him poorly? You want to dismiss the text and have to
resort to some any-text mechanism to do so.

And note: spirits have bodies:

1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.
1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power.
1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual
body.
6 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, I thought you said God literally relented? Now you're saying it is a metaphor? Behind every
metaphor in the Bible is a logical proposition.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher No, nowhere do I say it is a metaphor.

6 hrs Like

 Chris Fisher Im explaining to you Language 101.. the difference between metaphor and anthropomorphism as
you use it. Ezekiel and Exodus do not fit a metaphor.
6 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray A metaphor can relate to anything symbolic. An anthropomorphism is attributing human
characteristics to something that is not human. Dogs can be attributed with human characteristics such as
thoughts and emotions. But are dogs humans? No. Dogs don't think. In the same way we can attribute human
characteristics to God so we can understand and relate to Him. But it does not follow that God is a man any
more than it follows that a dog is a man. God is defined by the propositions and attributes given Him in the
Scriptures.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray God is from everlasting to everlasting. He is not a man who is born and then dies.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher There is nothing in the text and there is no figure of speech that explains away what is described.
God saying that He repents for His own sake that the pagan nations will not think of Him poorly... this is not a
concept to be pasted to a real concept in an informing way.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 2 Before the mountains were brought forth, Or ever You had formed the earth and the world,
Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God. (Psa 90:2 NKJ)
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Anthropomorphism are fiction: The Brave Little Toaster. Disney Cars.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Well, since you keep saying God is a man, you are therefore an heretic who does not believe the
Bible. Anthropomorphisms do not make God a creature or a man. Sorry.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Metaphors and figures of speech need to be able to illustrate a real concept. God having wings and
sheltering us gives us an image of God protecting us as a bird protects its young. The concepts are similar and
related. What does "God saying that He repents for His own sake that the pagan nations will not think of Him
poorly" mean?
6 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray You have lost this little debate from the get go. You have denied that God is defined by Scripture
as a whole. ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine, not just a few verses taken out of context. There is a system
of dogmatic truth in the Bible and the Westminster Standards are the best summary of that biblical system of
truth.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray So if God does not have wings, does God repent? No.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray God does not think discursively. He is omniscient. He never learns anything new. Sorry.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Wings illustrate protection... The Genesis 6 narrative is a LONG NARRATIVE... it is not a idiom or
figure of speech, but a story.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 To whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will you compare to Him?
19 The workman molds an image, The goldsmith overspreads it with gold, And the silversmith casts silver
chains.
20 Whoever is too impoverished for such a contribution Chooses a tree that will not rot; He seeks for himself a
skillful workman To prepare a carved image that will not totter.
21 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not
understood from the foundations of the earth?
22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the
heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
23 He brings the princes to nothing; He makes the judges of the earth useless.
(Isa 40:18-23 NKJ)
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray All Scripture is inspired.... That would include the verses that you disagree with. God is
sovereign.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray 35 All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the
army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, "What have
You done?" (Dan 4:35 NKJ)
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray In fact, it is you who reads into the text. I interpret the Scriptures by other more plain Scriptures.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Do you want to deal with the text one by one like an adult, or do you want to spray and pray?
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray God even ordains evil according to Isaiah 45:7....

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7
KJV)
Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath
not done it? (Amos 3:6 KJV)
6 hrs Like

 Chris Fisher Exo 32:7 And the LORD said to Moses, Go, get down! For your people whom you brought out of
the land of Egypt have corrupted themselves.
Exo 32:8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made themselves
a molded calf, and worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, This is your god, O Israel, that brought you out of
the land of Egypt!
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Eze 4:12 And you shall eat it as barley cakes; and bake it using fuel of human waste in their sight.
Eze 4:13 Then the LORD said, So shall the children of Israel eat their defiled bread among the Gentiles, where I
will drive them.
Eze 4:14 So I said, Ah, Lord GOD! Indeed I have never defiled myself from my youth till now; I have never eaten
what died of itself or was torn by beasts, nor has abominable flesh ever come into my mouth.
Eze 4:15 Then He said to me, See, I am giving you cow dung instead of human waste, and you shall prepare
your bread over it.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Eze 2:3 And He said to me: Son of man, I am sending you to the children of Israel, to a rebellious
nation that has rebelled against Me; they and their fathers have transgressed against Me to this very day.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, this is your second warning. I told you I decide what goes on here. If you don't like the
rules, go elsewhere.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Isa 5:4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then,
when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes?
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Jdg 2:20 Then the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel; and He said, Because this nation
has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not heeded My voice,
Jdg 2:21 I also will no longer drive out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died,
Jdg 2:22 so that through them I may test Israel, whether they will keep the ways of the LORD, to walk in them as
their fathers kept them, or not.
Jdg 2:23 Therefore the LORD left those nations, without driving them out immediately; nor did He deliver them
into the hand of Joshua.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray The rules are laid out in the group description. We adhere to confessional and biblical theology
here. The Bible is the final authority and the Westminster Standard are the best summary of that system of
dogmatic theology.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Yes, only one of us has been taking the Bible seriously. And this is evident in the Exodus 32
discussion.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You will refrain from slanderous propaganda like this" "...like an adult...."
 6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray If you cannot answer logically and biblically, go elsewhere. I'm sure others will tolerate your
abusive ad hominem. Here it does not fly.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher How is this an anthropomorphism? What does it mean?

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations
which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, I will pour out My fury on them
and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:9 But I acted for My names sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they
were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Calling something an anthropomorphism does not give you license to ignore the text. What is being
communicated?
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Conditional statements in Scripture do not entail that God literally changes His mind. God is
eternally unchanging.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher How is this an anthropomorphism? What does it mean? Calling something an anthropomorphism
does not give you license to ignore the text. What is being communicated?

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations
which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, I will pour out My fury on them
and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:9 But I acted for My names sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they
were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher And why when we look at Biblical commentary from within the Bible does it always interpret like the
face value of the original text. It is never discounted at metaphorical like Calvinists are prone to do. Could it be
that Calvinists do not really care for what the Bible teaches?
6 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray "It now follows, And I said I would pour forth, that is, I determined to pour forth. God here signifies
that he was inflamed by anger, and unless they had respect to his name he would not withdraw his hand from
the vengeance to which it was armed and prepared. We know that this does not properly belong to God, but this
is, the language of accommodation, since first of all, God is not subject to vengeance, and, secondly, does not
decree what he may afterwards retract. But since these things are not in character with God, simile and
accommodation are used. As often as the Holy Spirit uses these forms of speech, let us learn that they refer
rather to the matter in hand than to the character of God. God determined to pour forth his anger, that is, the
Israelites had so deserved it through their crimes, that it was necessary to execute punishment upon them. The
Prophet simply means that the peoples disposition was sinful, and hence Gods wrath would have been poured
out, unless he had been held back from some other cause. I have already touched upon the obstacle, because
he consulted his honor lest it should be profaned."
 John Calvin's Commentary on Ezekiel 20:8...
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Yeah, but what does it communicate the the audience?
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher God is literally recounting a past event, and not in terms conducive to Calvinism. Why would God
"accommodate" with that event? What purpose does it serve and how is that more meaningful than God
communicating what He actually means?
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher So, the first event describes God repenting due to Moses' argument that God will look bad. Moses
follows this up explaining that is what happened. God comments on this event saying the same thing. The
Psalmist describes this event as Moses saving Israel from God.

Calvinists: Oh, that is just accommodation. Baby talk.

6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You keep confusing God with the creature:)

6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Yes, men are not omniscient:) Hello?

6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher One of the OP questions is about Jesus. Seeing Jesus shows us God.

17. In what way does Jesus resemble an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, timeless, and simple
God?

Verse: Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He
who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, Show us the Father?
6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher 16. Did Jesus know everything?

Verse: Mar 13:32 But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only
the Father.
6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray bbl

6 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray Jesus was a man. So no, Jesus didn't know everything. Don't confuse the Logos with the human
person of Jesus. They are united but not mixed.
 6 hrs Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Later

6 hrs Like

Chris Fisher Great, Jesus did not know everything. That makes this question much harder for your belief:

17. In what way does Jesus resemble an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, timeless, and simple
God?

Verse: Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He
who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, Show us the Father?
5 hrs Like

Charlie J. Ray You are ignorant of the doctrine of the incarnation

4 hrs Like 1

Chris Fisher So, let us sum up the conversation thus far. The Opening Post asserted that Calvinists were bad at
answering questions, listing out 20 questions. You attempted to answer one question, which led to further
complications of the text (which I pointed out and which you never answered). You attempted to use prooftexts to
override the meaning of Jesus words. And every prooftext you used, I explained a common sense
understanding that uses normal reading comprehension to show these verses do not necessarily support your
theology (Psalms 139, Hebrews 3, Ephesians 1, Isaiah 14 and 46) and that allow Jesus words to be taken at
face value. On a side note: This should call into question any prooftext you used that I did not address, as you
regularly misquote the Bible unapologetically for your theology. Contrastingly, all the verses that I used, you
attempted to just dismiss on the grounds that they do not fit your theology! You attempt to dismiss long narratives
and grounded events that are commented on throughout the Bible in a manner never hinted at throughout the
Bible with linguistical mechanisms that are alien to normal human speech. You even go so far as discounting the
words of God, Himself. This, you believe, is rational thinking. Furthermore, you think people who take these
events literally are irrational.

It is pretty clear to me that you have zero Biblical evidence for your beliefs. You are not interested in examining
your prooftexts individually for context and meaning. Instead, you want to flood the conversation with prooftexts
which you load with assumptions (assumptions unfounded when we turn to the texts in question). You have
shown yourself hostile to answering very basic questions (proving the point of the OP) forcing me to ask
repeatedly. You did not answer a ridiculous amount of questions throughout this conversation and wasted my
time having to repeat several again and again. You also would not admit when you were clearly wrong when you
claimed I misquoted Calvin. Your arrogance will not allow you to give any inch anywhere. You then use loaded
language and insults to distract from the issues at hand. You are not a Biblical scholar and you use Platonism to
override the Bible.
4 mins Edited Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, it takes time to answer long posts. We have solidly rebutted your contention that
God changes like men do and that God learns anything new. Your anthropocentric theology leads inevitably to
atheism since a god who is not all powerful is not God at all.
August 9 at 9:45am Like

 Charlie J. Ray Also, since I am the admin here, you will follow MY rules. That means you don't get to soap box
and preach here. This is a debate forum. If you can't hold your own in a Scriptural and logical debate, that is your
problem not mine.
August 9 at 9:46am Like

Charlie J. Ray A very basic error on your part is that you confuse the definitions of Deity with human definitions
and thus you have read human limitations into your definition of God instead of allowing Scripture to define the
logical propositions that tell us who God is. God is according to Scripture omnscient. Yet you say God is
ignorant. Scripture says God is all powerful or omnipotent. Yet you contend that God cannot do anything about
evil. Scripture says that God is not a man, yet you contend that God is a man with body parts and emotions and
every other human limitation we could bring up. You basic axiom is that God is not God. So if your beginning
axiom is wrong, it logically follows that every other proposition you have about God is wrong because it does not
fit with the system of propositional and logical truth in the Bible.

You also resort to straw man fallacies like your contention that man has no will according to Calvinism. The
Westminster Confession of Faith gives only a handful of the many verses that say otherwise in the Bible. No
Calvinist denies human volition. What we do deny is that the will is free from the sovereign decrees of God or
from the curse of sin and slavery to sin that God placed on Adam and all of Adam's progeny when Adam
rebelled. Furthermore, prior to the fall God predetermined that Adam would fall. Thus, God is the ultimate cause
of evil. He could have easily prevented evil by not placing the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the
garden of Eden and by not placing the serpent in the garden. Moreover, God could have told Adam and Eve that
they could eat from that same tree, yet God told them not to eat from it. So the basis for truth is what God says,
not what you think should be the basis for morality or truth. God determines right and wrong.
August 9 at 9:53am Like

Charlie J. Ray >>>And every prooftext you used, I explained a common sense understanding that uses normal
reading comprehension to show these verses do not necessarily support your theology (Psalms 139, Hebrews 3,
Ephesians 1, Isaiah 14 and 46) and that allow Jesus words to be taken at face value.<<<

Proper exegesis takes into account the immediate context as well as the larger context of any verse of Scripture,
including the context within the total system of logical and propositional truth in Scripture. Since you seem to
make it up as you go along, one has to question whether or not you follow any logical system in your theology.
Rejecting logic refutes your position from the get go.

Furthermore, you seem to be totally ignorant of the fact that both Scripture and the Definition of Chalcedon 451
A.D. states that the two natures of Christ are not mixed, confused or separated. Therefore, Jesus in His human
soul and human nature was limited in knowledge. The divine Logos, the eternal Son of God is perfectly united
with the man, Jesus Christ. Yet the Logos does not replace the reasonable human soul of Jesus Christ the man.
The two natures and two persons are perfectly united without any confusion of the two natures and persons
whatsoever. The Trinity is not changed one bit by the union of the second Person of the Trinity with the man,
Jesus Christ. God cannot die. But Jesus died. God never learns anything new. Yet Jesus grew up from a baby
and learned things as all humans do.

Your misunderstanding of the Incarnation is therefore a huge problem for you.

August 9 at 9:58am Like

 Charlie J. Ray The Incarnation (Trinity Paper, #23)

The Incarnation by Gordon H. Clark
13 ratings, 4.38 average rating, 3 reviews
The Incarnation Quotes (showing 1-1 of 1)
A theologians epistemology controls his interpretation of the Bible. If his epistemology is not Christian, his
exegesis will be systematically distorted. If he has no epistemology at all, his exegesis will be unsystematically
distorted.
Gordon H. Clark, The Incarnation

http://www.goodreads.com/.../2759301-the-incarnation...
August 9 at 10:01am Edited Like

Chris Fisher 1. You say: We have solidly rebutted your contention that God changes like men do and that God
learns anything new.

Where and with what Bible verses? You have done no such thing. I continually answer your objections as you
bring them up without any semblance of a rebuttal on your part. You believe that somehow by just saying
something, then it makes it true. All your prooftexts were shown to be forcibly understood in light of theology you
bring to the text. You are left with zero texts at the end of the day. How can you make the claim that you hold a
Biblical position with a straight face? This is not Biblical scholarship.

2. You say: "god who is not all powerful is not God at all."

a. This is a completely unfounded assertion. That sort of metaphysical argument might fly in a debate on
Platonism (of which Calvinism is a subset), but we are talking about reality here. Reality does not conform to
what we think is nice.
b. Did I ever say God is not all powerful? This shows us: either you have unfounded assumptions of what it
means to be Almighty, you have poor reading comprehension abilities, or you are a liar. I will hope for option 2,
as both option 1 and option 3 would show a sever lack of intellectual integrity on your part.

3. You say: God is according to Scripture omniscient.

First, you come up with a non-Biblical word for God. Then you import pagan understandings to that word. Then
you fail to give ANY scripture to support your definition. This is not Biblical scholarship.

4. You say: Yet you say God is ignorant.

This is another example of you disingenuous arguments. I am again left with two options: either you lack basic
reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Where do I say God is ignorant?

5. You say: Yet you contend that God cannot do anything about evil.

Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Show me where this was claimed.
In fact, the Calvinist position is that God cannot do anything about evil. After all, evil is eternally decreed and
cannot be thwarted. God is immutable and cannot stop it. If it is decreed, it must happen. God cannot do
anything about it. That is your position, mind you.

6. You say: Scripture says that God is not a man, yet you contend that God is a man with body parts

Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Show me where I said this.
7. You say: You basic axiom is that God is not God.

Notice the Platonistic assumptions in your statement here. Pretend God is who I say He is, how does that make
Him not God. I assert you are importing your Platonistic metaphysics into a debate on the Bible.

8. your contention that man has no will according to Calvinism.

Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Where do I say this?

9. You say I have been: Rejecting logic

Where do I reject logic? I reject your metaphysical assumptions, which have nothing to do with logic. Again.
Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar.

10. You say: Furthermore, you seem to be totally ignorant of the fact that both Scripture and the Definition of
Chalcedon 451 A.D. states that the two natures of Christ are not mixed, confused or separated.

So, have you considered the possibility that I understand your position but find it counter to the Bible? In
Colossians, Paul was dealing with Platonists who saw a divine between the physical and spiritual. Paul was
countering this vain philosophy when he wrote:

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,

Was Jesus body divine? You seem to side with the Platonists. And that is not surprising.

Conclusion.

You are and have been very disingenuous. You fail to understand or address my points. You claim I make points
that I never do. You then reject large portions of the Bible, long narratives of Gods actions, thoughts, and
speech. You then pretend you make good points, although I address your points and you offer zero rebuttals.

PS. You still have failed to apologize for your blatantly obvious incorrect statement that I was taking Calvin out of
context.
Just now Like
Bottom of Form