Sunday, January 28, 2007
No tengo nada
I was going to post some sort of "Calvin's advocate" (if you just thought, "usually 'devil' goes where Ryan put calvin, did he mean something by that?", my reply is, "you said it, not me.") response, but I knew it would come off as completely sarcastic, because it would be.
You are totally right here, Trevor. I would even take things to God cannot do whatever. There are logical impossibilities. There is the classic, "can God make a rock so big he can't lift it?", but what about "can an omnibenevolent God who IS love, not just exhibits love, create creatures with free will but then determine their decisions so that they will be destined for damnation? Mine is a little longer, but here's the deal. It's equally logically inconsistent with the first one. Calvinists will say this is not the case because I don't understand true Divine love, but here's what I understand...that God is gracious and merciful with us in ways we cannot even begin to fathom and when you make eternal life into some sort of elite club, you are playing with serious fire. The good news is that that infinite grace I was talking about covers even your pompous, elitist, arrogant, misguided theology. This kind of theology makes me think that you would watch 'Day of Wrath' and 'The Passion of Joan of Arc' and pine for the good old days of the church. Here's a news flash...Romans was a letter to a Church, not Paul's systematic theology. Read the literary and historical context. Try it out. You'll be amazed at what a nice God God turns out to be. I'm glad this blog is a safe place.
Back to the point, it is true that I cannot understand Divine love. But all of us err on the side of not understanding the infinite grace wrapped up in God's love. Therefore, if a is God's nature (His infinite love), and b is an action contrary to that nature (creating conscious free-thinking beings to be damned), then modus ponens applies and you get a or b, not both. That being the case, I'm sticking with a, but my commitments are to the Word of God, not John Calvin.