BRUCE ALMIGHTY: Atheism's Critique of Arminianism

[drstevej]

Bruce Nolan (Carrey), a television reporter in Buffalo, N.Y.,is discontented with almost everything in life despite his popularity and the love of his girlfriend, Grace (Aniston) . At the end of the worst day of his life, Bruce angrily ridicules and rages against God and God responds. God appears in human form (Freeman) and, endowing Bruce with divine powers, challenges Bruce to take on the big job to see if he can do it any better.

 

Bruce Nolan:       How do you make someone love you without changing free will?
God:                     Welcome to my world.

[FormerLib]

Yep, he is trying to do something as mindless as trying to claim that as proof that we shouldn't be eating a human body at the Eucharist.

How pathetic!

[conservonator]

BTW, I despise shellfish.

Good for you, but your taste or lack thereof is not an answer is it? Why don't you answer the question? Since shellfish and other fish are not specifically mentioned in Acts 11, why are they not considered to be forbidden?

Now I’m going to be as specific as I can here so pay attention, I’ll type slowly… Acts 11 does not apply to the Eucharist because Christ’s command to take and eat His flesh and drink His blood are incontrovertible. He instituted the practice; He would not induce us to sin. But that’s really a moot point because the prohibition against eating human flesh refers to dead flesh i.e. the practice of cannibalism. If you read John 6:51 you will see that Christ refers to himself as “the living bread”.

Your argument is silly, ill conceived and I feel like a fool for giving it any attention at all.

[Alex Murphy]

Since shellfish and other fish are not specifically mentioned in Acts 11, why are they not considered to be forbidden?

Guess you're not too familiar with the second half of Romans 14, are you? Well, not on Fridays, anyway.

Please explain how you interpret Deuteronomy 28:53 as specifically dealing with dead human flesh as anathema, but allows for living human flesh? The text does not make that distinction.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

If you disagree with the Acts 11 continuation of Deut 28:53's proclamation that the consumption of human flesh is a sign of an anathema from God, please advise me now.

Seems you miss the whole point. We consume the whole Christ, not His flesh in little bits and pieces, and not for earthly nourishment, but for spiritual growth. Each drop of wine and each particle of bread is the whole Christ. So recieving Him, He indwells in us, but is not consummed and destroyed like a nice juicy steak (ahh ... too bad it is Friday!). He isn't broken up and bleeding in our mouth, but is whole and glorified at every moment.

Can we say "ignorance of truth"?

As to Deuteronomy 28.53 "And thou shalt eat the fruit of thy womb, and the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the Lord thy God shall give thee, in the distress and extremity wherewith thy enemy shall oppress thee."

I see canabilizing your family being prophesied here during the distress of the Jews in their punishment. I don't see anything saying "Don't eat human flesh ever".

Honestly, I have to wonder if canabilizing the dead is to be absolutely prohibited even in extremis.

I think I'd be munching down if I crashed high in the Andes too. Better than starving to death.

[conservonator]

Guess you're not too familiar with the second half of Romans 14, are you? Well, not on Fridays, anyway.

Thank you for reminding me of Romans! So the phrase "Everything is indeed clean" in Romans 14:20 doesn’t mean everything? Do you shoot your own argument in the foot as a regular practice? Why does the “everything here refer to shellfish and not the flesh of Christ? Again, it’s a moot point; Christ instituted the Eucharist, your protestations not with standing.

Re; Deut 28:53 Are you implying that this passage and the following are referring to the consumption of living human flesh? Was eating the flesh of living humans a regular practice? If you're going to be a hyperliteralist with no guidance, be consistent.

Look, you made a silly argument, it has been shot down, move on.

[conservonator]

We consume the whole Christ, not His flesh in little bits and pieces, and not for earthly nourishment, but for spiritual growth. Each drop of wine and each particle of bread is the whole Christ.

Yes, precisely! I assumed, and you know what problems that can cause, that he understood the distinction between the spiritual nourishment and material nourishment. I can see, however, that this is an issue I should have addressed.

Thanks

[FormerLib]

I think I'd be munching down if I crashed high in the Andes too.

I would have started hiking down that mountain on the first day!!!

[Hermann the Cherusker]

I would have started hiking down that mountain on the first day!!!

That goes without saying. Anyone can walk down a mountain in a day.

[FormerLib]

Well, that was always the thing that got me about that story, how they hadn't tried to get off the mountain until they realized that remaining there was hopeless.

[Jean Chauvin]

"So is there a lot of unity between the Homoloving PCA and the Orthodox Presbyterians? Aren't you both reformed? ;-)"

Yes, the PCA and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church are both confessing Reformed denominations. (Not to be picky, but the "you" in "Aren't you both reformed" does not apply to me as I am neither OPC or PCA.) But I must ask what makes you say that the PDA is "Homoloving"?

"We are talking about the difference between a few million Calvinists, and 1.1 billion Catholics plus 300 million Orthodox."

Appeal to the Majority fallacy?

"If you reduced us to the very knowledgeable core of perhaps 10%, you'd see the same unity on everything you are so impressed with in Calvinism. "

Why the need to "pick and choose" which people in your "church" are in agreement. The fact that each RC church has over 3100 members with only a teensy tiny fraction in regular attendence doesn't mean that you simply can pick and choose a "very knowledgeable core of perhaps 10%" and (snapping your fingers) make it an equal analogy. The fact that only a small fraction of your "church" is actually faithfull to your professed beliefs is extremely telling. In confessing Reformed congregations, the tares do not outnumber the wheat. (That's a parable -you'll have to ask your "church" for the meaning of that one.) It appears that the opposite is true (by a 9:1 ratio if we use your "10%".). That's quite a record for "Christ's church" < /sarcasm >

Jean

[Jean Chauvin]

"But I must ask what makes you say that the PDA is "Homoloving"?"

Make that: But I must ask what makes you say that the PCA is "Homoloving"?

Jean

[Jean Chauvin]

"But FL and I would say our understanding with the Church of Scripture is infallible. Its impossible the Church should err in this. If we join ourselves to the mind of the Church always, we can't go wrong. Error starts when we start thinking we know better than the Church."

And just where would you get the idea that this is actually true?

Jean

[Jean Chauvin]

"The fact that each RC church has over 3100 members with only a teensy tiny fraction in regular attendence doesn't mean that you simply can pick and choose a "very knowledgeable core of perhaps 10%" and (snapping your fingers) make it an equal analogy."

Make that: "The fact that each RC church has on average over 3100 members with only a teensy tiny fraction in regular attendence doesn't mean that you simply can pick and choose a "very knowledgeable core of perhaps 10%" and (snapping your fingers) make it an equal analogy."

Jean

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

So is there a lot of unity between the Homoloving PCA and the Orthodox Presbyterians? Aren't you both reformed? ;-)

There is indeed a lot of unity between the Orthodox Presbyterians and the (much larger) Presbyterian Church in America (which was formed in 1973 when the "Dixie Core" of the Presbyterian Church USA [Southern Presbytery] broke away from the liberal PCUSA)... we have full fraternal relations, allowing for immediate transferability of Elders, Deacons, and Laymen between these two theologically-conservative Presbyterian churches.

However, aside from the love of preaching the Gospel of Repentance from Sin and Salvation in Jesus Christ to homosexuals -- exactly why would you call the "Johnny Reb" Southern Presbyterians of the PCA "homoloving"? If by that you meant to imply that they have any sort of fraternal relationship with the liberal Presbyterian Church USA, that would be a falsehood and a misrepresentation, you know.

[Jean Chauvin]

Hey ctd, I just wanted to wish you a Happy Sinterklaas Day!!!!

Sinterklaas kapoentje
(muziek)

Sinterklaas kapoentje
gooi wat in mijn schoentje,
gooi wat in mijn laarsje
Dank u, Sinterklaasje.

"Sinterklaas"

"Zwarte Piet"

Jean

[Gamecock]

So is there a lot of unity between the Homoloving PCA

The Homoloving PCA?

Hermann, I think you are confusing the PCA with the PC(USA).

Get your sects right man!

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Apologies for mixing up the PCUSA and PCA. I had no idea there were so many sectlettes of Calvinists.

[Jean Chauvin]

That is why I mentioned confessing Reformed churches.

Jean

[Gamecock]

Not quite as many as the 200+ Catholic denomonations... ;-)

[Cvengr]

Targeting another Calvinist---