Compatibilism is not compatible with determinism

G

guest1

Guest
Some compatibilists, such as John Hendryx on monergism.com, do not refute these arguments, but simply embrace them by admitting that compatibilism is “no less deterministic than hard determinism.” And compatibilism “simply means that God’s predetermination and meticulous providence is ‘compatible’ with voluntary choice.” In other words, he is virtually saying “Mankind is doing what they want and what they want is determined by God, so get over it, He is God and can do whatever He wants!”

If I cast a spell on John causing him to desire what I decided that he should desire, would he still deem his own choices to be voluntary? I seriously doubt it, but if God virtually does the same thing, then the term “voluntary” is acceptable, I guess? It is quite baffling.

Think about it. According to this premise, guys like Jeffrey Dahmer “voluntarily” molested and ate his victims because God unchangeably determined for him to desire it. James 1:13 teaches God does not even tempt men to do evil, yet Hendryx wants us to believe God unchangeably determined our desires which in turn determine our choices to do evil? Really? Why would anyone want to go with that answer rather than to simply appeal to mystery? Anthropomorphism is looking better and better, isn’t it?

Hendryx’s rebuttal to these types of questions is to point people to God’s determination of the crucifixion, “the worse evil of all time.” His argument goes something like this: If God determined the worse evil of all time without blame then we should be able to accept that God can determine all evil events without blame. First, I have no problem ‘blaming,’ or should I say ‘crediting,’ God with the redemption of sin as accomplished through the crucifixion! While I agree that God did determine the cross by actively intervening in our fallen world to ensure it came to pass, I fail to see how that proves God likewise determined and actively worked to bring about all the sin that needed redemption on that cross. Are we to believe God determined to redeem his very own determinations?

Again, it is quite a baffling perspective and I’m not sure how it is somehow better than the alternative of appealing to the mystery of God’s infinite ways. Give me God’s inspired anthropomorphisms over that any day! I’ll gladly live with people accusing me of being too “simple minded” to accept such audacious speculations about our Holy God.https://soteriology101.com/2014/12/01/why-the-theory-of-compatibilism-falls-short/amp/

Yours Truly, Team Truth !

hope this helps !!!
 

CrowCross

Super Member
Think about it. According to this premise, guys like Jeffrey Dahmer “voluntarily” molested and ate his victims because God unchangeably determined for him to desire it. James 1:13 teaches God does not even tempt men to do evil, yet Hendryx wants us to believe God unchangeably determined our desires which in turn determine our choices to do evil? Really? Why would anyone want to go with that answer rather than to simply appeal to mystery? Anthropomorphism is looking better and better, isn’t it?
Are you saying man doesn't have a sin nature?
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Think about it. According to this premise, guys like Jeffrey Dahmer “voluntarily” molested and ate his victims because God unchangeably determined for him to desire it. James 1:13 teaches God does not even tempt men to do evil,

Nothing but worthless sinful human rationalization.
Only one verse of Scripture, which doesn't contradict Calvinism, and an insulting and uncharitable comparison to a mass murderer.

soteriology101.com/2014/12/01/why-the-theory-of-compatibilism-falls-short/amp/

Well, that explains it.
Garbage arguments from a garbage website.
As usual, anti-Calvinists don't have an original argument to contribute.
 
G

guest1

Guest
Another falsehood as that is what Calvinism is all about since I linked the OP.

false doctrines lead to false accusations

oops

next

hope this gelps
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
Are you saying man doesn't have a sin nature?
I think that could be said of him now. Recently he asked me to show Original Sin in the Bible, and I went to the Unconditional Consequences of the Fall of Mankind in the Garden of Eden and God's Curse; to start an Apology for the Doctrine of Original Sin...
 

David1701

Well-known member
Some compatibilists, such as John Hendryx on monergism.com, do not refute these arguments, but simply embrace them by admitting that compatibilism is “no less deterministic than hard determinism.” And compatibilism “simply means that God’s predetermination and meticulous providence is ‘compatible’ with voluntary choice.” In other words, he is virtually saying “Mankind is doing what they want and what they want is determined by God, so get over it, He is God and can do whatever He wants!”

If I cast a spell on John causing him to desire what I decided that he should desire, would he still deem his own choices to be voluntary? I seriously doubt it, but if God virtually does the same thing, then the term “voluntary” is acceptable, I guess? It is quite baffling.

Think about it. According to this premise, guys like Jeffrey Dahmer “voluntarily” molested and ate his victims because God unchangeably determined for him to desire it. James 1:13 teaches God does not even tempt men to do evil, yet Hendryx wants us to believe God unchangeably determined our desires which in turn determine our choices to do evil? Really? Why would anyone want to go with that answer rather than to simply appeal to mystery? Anthropomorphism is looking better and better, isn’t it?

Hendryx’s rebuttal to these types of questions is to point people to God’s determination of the crucifixion, “the worse evil of all time.” His argument goes something like this: If God determined the worse evil of all time without blame then we should be able to accept that God can determine all evil events without blame. First, I have no problem ‘blaming,’ or should I say ‘crediting,’ God with the redemption of sin as accomplished through the crucifixion! While I agree that God did determine the cross by actively intervening in our fallen world to ensure it came to pass, I fail to see how that proves God likewise determined and actively worked to bring about all the sin that needed redemption on that cross. Are we to believe God determined to redeem his very own determinations?

Again, it is quite a baffling perspective and I’m not sure how it is somehow better than the alternative of appealing to the mystery of God’s infinite ways. Give me God’s inspired anthropomorphisms over that any day! I’ll gladly live with people accusing me of being too “simple minded” to accept such audacious speculations about our Holy God.https://soteriology101.com/2014/12/01/why-the-theory-of-compatibilism-falls-short/amp/

Yours Truly, Team Truth !

hope this helps !!!
Do you try to give thanks for all things, as the Bible instructs (Eph. 5:20)? If so, then how can you give thanks for things that God has, allegedly, not determined to happen?
 
G

guest1

Guest
Do you try to give thanks for all things, as the Bible instructs (Eph. 5:20)? If so, then how can you give thanks for things that God has, allegedly, not determined to happen?
I thank God I’m not longer a slave to tulip and have been set free . And I thank God I get to share it with everyone. When one is set free from bondage it’s very freeing and exciting . I’m not bound by a systematic, I’m no longer forced to see the Bible through the lens of Calvinism . I can be much more objective and unbiased with scripture now.

hope this helps !!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe

David1701

Well-known member
I thank God I’m not longer a slave to tulip and have been set free . And I thank God I get to share it with everyone. When one is set free from bondage it’s very freeing and exciting . I’m not bound by a systematic, I’m no longer forced to see the Bible through the lens of Calvinism . I can be much more objective and unbiased with scripture now.

hope this helps !!!
You managed to type all that, whilst avoiding my questions completely. Well done! :rolleyes:

Here they are again, in case you missed them the first time.

Do you try to give thanks for all things, as the Bible instructs (Eph. 5:20)? If so, then how can you give thanks for things that God has, allegedly, not determined to happen?
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
I thank God I’m not longer a slave to tulip and have been set free . And I thank God I get to share it with everyone. When one is set free from bondage it’s very freeing and exciting

Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a self-proclaimed 'Biblicist' and the other a Calvinist. The Biblicist, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this <ugh> Calvinist over there. But the Calvinist, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ "
 

Slyzr

Well-known member
Then how can you give thanks for things that God has, allegedly, not determined to happen?

determination for something to happen .........

It just means determination for something.

That does not mean we are not.

OK ...... that was a reach.

But NOT ever being ......

How is that tenable?
 

fltom

Well-known member
Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a self-proclaimed 'Biblicist' and the other a Calvinist. The Biblicist, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this <ugh> Calvinist over there. But the Calvinist, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ "
Some compatibilists, such as John Hendryx on monergism.com, do not refute these arguments, but simply embrace them by admitting that compatibilism is “no less deterministic than hard determinism.” And compatibilism “simply means that God’s predetermination and meticulous providence is ‘compatible’ with voluntary choice.” In other words, he is virtually saying “Mankind is doing what they want and what they want is determined by God, so get over it, He is God and can do whatever He wants!”

If I cast a spell on John causing him to desire what I decided that he should desire, would he still deem his own choices to be voluntary? I seriously doubt it, but if God virtually does the same thing, then the term “voluntary” is acceptable, I guess? It is quite baffling.

Think about it. According to this premise, guys like Jeffrey Dahmer “voluntarily” molested and ate his victims because God unchangeably determined for him to desire it. James 1:13 teaches God does not even tempt men to do evil, yet Hendryx wants us to believe God unchangeably determined our desires which in turn determine our choices to do evil? Really? Why would anyone want to go with that answer rather than to simply appeal to mystery? Anthropomorphism is looking better and better, isn’t it?

Hendryx’s rebuttal to these types of questions is to point people to God’s determination of the crucifixion, “the worse evil of all time.” His argument goes something like this: If God determined the worse evil of all time without blame then we should be able to accept that God can determine all evil events without blame. First, I have no problem ‘blaming,’ or should I say ‘crediting,’ God with the redemption of sin as accomplished through the crucifixion! While I agree that God did determine the cross by actively intervening in our fallen world to ensure it came to pass, I fail to see how that proves God likewise determined and actively worked to bring about all the sin that needed redemption on that cross. Are we to believe God determined to redeem his very own determinations?

Again, it is quite a baffling perspective and I’m not sure how it is somehow better than the alternative of appealing to the mystery of God’s infinite ways. Give me God’s inspired anthropomorphisms over that any day! I’ll gladly live with people accusing me of being too “simple minded” to accept such audacious speculations about our Holy God.https://soteriology101.com/2014/12/01/why-the-theory-of-compatibilism-falls-short/amp/

Yours Truly, Team Truth !

hope this helps !!!
The idea God has to redeem his own determinations is not rational

Therefore determinism should be rejected
 

CrowCross

Super Member
That’s not Calvinism that is Arminianism. Calvin denied Jesus died for the entire population of the world.
What I said is that the entire population of the world, past, present and future needs salvation. Let's add to it....or all of the population will be justly judged and sent to Hell.
I believe a Calvinist would say from all of the people who will justly go to Hell for their sin....God choose from the dead in their sins and trespasses a select group of people and gave them the gift of grace, mercy and regenerated them. God didn't have to save anyone. But He did.
 
Top