CALVINISM MAKES GOD THE AUTHOR OF SIN

The GOSPEL TRUTH ^

[thePilgrim]

CALVINISM

CONTRARY TO GOD'S WORD

AND

MAN'S MORAL NATURE.

by

D. FISK HARRIS.

Copyrighted and Published by the Author

1890

---

In order to have an intelligent discussion of about the topic, which is the title of this thread, one must have at least a cursory knowledge of the work of John Calvin. Merely second sourcing citations will most likely quickly reveal to discerning posters that you are woefully ignorant of Calvinism.

I have provided an online book, of which I have skimmed, but not read every jot and title, for reference of a source which makes the claim that Calvinism does make God the author of Sin. See section 3 of the book.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

BTW, perhaps you might wish to comment on the portion of the book I have highlighted. It does seem to me that some of the Calvinist cites are not quite contextually fair, but it will take me a fair amount of time to work through all of the source citations.

For starters, it does not appear that the Author defined his terms adequately for the purpose of proper discussion. Secondarily, on the discourse about Supralapsarians, it is my observation that Hodge (if the reference is to Charles Hodge) was not quoted in it's fullness.

i strongly recommend viewing Charles Hodge's criticism of the Supralapsarian position for a fuller exposition of his objections. You would find it in Volume II of his Systematic Theology.

[P-Marlowe]

Maybe (s)he just lurked, lots of people do you know? Perhaps, it is experimental, because it seems to me that you are attempting to prove his point, Neener Boy.

Well apparently the mods made a determination that he was a previously banned poster has he has been banned once again. That is certainly not something that I could do, as I don't have access to the IP addresses as the mods do.

For the record I did not report him nor did I draw the attention of the mods to his posts. I will note, however that he did come out swinging claiming that: "Those in opposition to Calvinists do all they can to get Calvinists banned as soon as they can, which accounts for a lack of numbers." That did make me suspicious.

IMO the relative lack of numbers of protestant posters is due mainly to the fact that many Calvininsts have a tendency to ridicule and abuse non-Calvinist posters and that this causes many non-Calvinists to avoid the protestant threads. Further the number of posters interested in these topics has dwindled because too many Calvninsts have managed to get themselves banned and/or suspended for violation of FR rules.

IMO, if he were merely a lurker then he would obviously have observed that those in favor of Calvinism seem to do all that they can to get themselves banned and it has nothing to do with those who argue against the doctrines of Calvinism. Making wild accusations against entire groups of people on your first day as a poster is bound to get the attention of the mods. And apparently the poster was sucessful in that endeavor.

I strongly suspect that he was a recycled permanently banned freeper. I also suspect that there may be others on this thread.

[nobdysfool]

IMO the relative lack of numbers of protestant posters is due mainly to the fact that many Calvininsts have a tendency to ridicule and abuse non-Calvinist posters and that this causes many non-Calvinists to avoid the protestant threads. Further the number of posters interested in these topics has dwindled because too many Calvninsts have managed to get themselves banned and/or suspended for violation of FR rules.

Get ourselves banned/suspended? Surely you jest. You can't be serious! I post if there's somethign worthwhile to post to or about. Occasionally, to reply to a post like this one that is not accurate. But, the non-Calvinist posters so rarely post anything of interest to the Calvinists, that we choose to remain silent. That, and some things are posted specifically as banning bait. This one has the appearance of just that kind of post. I've said my piece. Buh-Bye.

[xzins]

I think your analysis is perfectly logical. A newbie would generally not: (1) know about the calvinist wars (2) get involved in them in their very first post (3) get quickly banned by the mods.

I think you are also correct, in general, about why protestants don't frequent these threads. I've had too many freep me privately and say that the climate of the protestant threads was entirely too non-christian in attitude.

Take it or leave it, but it is true.

[thePilgrim]

Since it does appear as if this thread is permanently headed off onto a tangent (yes, I'll admit my tiny part in responding to Dr. Eckleburg's comment about RnMomof7) think I will make another comment: It is quite maddening to want to talk with you Calvinists only to have you on holiday, suspended, or being banned like flies (I presume the poster today was a Calvinist). I really do have lots of questions and things I'd like to hash out with you guys, but you seem so understandably shy.

Your brother,
Christian.

[P-Marlowe]

I've had too many freep me privately and say that the climate of the protestant threads was entirely too non-christian in attitude.

I have been avoiding posting to these threads for that reason. I did post to this thread in response to a couple of unprovoked attacks on non-Calvinists. I could not help but notice on this thread that before I even chimed in, there were one or two veiled swipes at my character beginning with the first and second sentences of the thread (referencing secondary sources) and then in post 5 the poster made the accusation that personal attacks against calvinists seem to be in vogue (this by a poster who IMO will feign ignorance of Calvinism in one post and then in the next post appear to feign expertise on the same subject).

Well nobody seems to be taking the bait.

Maybe nobody cares anymore.

[xzins]

Your rationale is impeccable.

Nobody can argue with it.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Calvinists alone keep getting banned, yet slurs against them by Arminians still stand, so you could be right. Either nobody cares, or they enjoy the political side of Free Republic too much to make themselves into a perpetual target.

Pity.

[nobdysfool]

At least you're admitting it IS bait. Thanks for being honest. You should try it more often.

[P-Marlowe]

Why not settle down and discuss the topic instead of getting FReepers banned, some of whom might be new to this forum and are getting erased for reasons they actually have nothing to do with?

I didn't get anybody banned. I just asked the new guy if he was maybe a recycled old guy. Apparently he was. Either that or the reference to works righteousness of certain unmentionable religious sects got him off on the wrong foot. I strongly suspect (based upon his comments about Calvinists getting banned) that he was a formerly banned Calvinist.

Be that as it may, I am not really interested in discussing the topic at hand. Apparently the person who posted the tread is allegedly interested in some input from people who know these things as to whether or not the Calvinists really believe that Calvinism makes God the author of sin. He has already disqualified me from the discussion because the thread poster stated "In order to have an intelligent discussion of about the topic, which is the title of this thread, one must have at least a cursory knowledge of the work of John Calvin. Merely second sourcing citations will most likely quickly reveal to discerning posters that you are woefully ignorant of Calvinism.

We all know that this was a veiled attack on my character because I happened to quote an inaccuate secondary source on a prior thread, which then became the principle topic of discussion on all the Protestant threads for the duration of about a week.

So since I am (according to the poster of this thread) woefully ignorant of Calvinism (which makes me wonder what he is, since he is feigning ignorance of Calvinism himself), I have no interest in addressing the topic at hand.

That being said, why don't you enlighten our little Pilgrim. He seems so sad that no one wants to discuss this subject with him. Cheer him up. Educate him on the teachings of Mr. Calvin. But don't you dare use secondary sources. It might reveal how woefully ignorant you are.

[xzins]

Dear MrMarmanners and Miss Eckmanners,

I'd like to confess to being a "secondary source." I tried to stop myself, but I was unable. I did a 2ndary 12 step program to no avail. All it did was leave me with 24 steps (12x2), and no appreciable diminution of my tendencies toward being a 2ndary source.

You see....my OWN ideas keep popping up in my own writing.


I don't know how to stop.

Do you have any advice for one in my predicament?

X

[nobdysfool]

We all know that this was a veiled attack on my character because I happened to quote an inaccuate secondary source on a prior thread, which then became the principle topic of discussion on all the Protestant threads for the duration of about a week.

So, did you enjoy your moment in the sun? Your 15 minutes of fame? I hope so.

It stands to reason that if one wants to know about Calvinism, one should go to the source. And if the poster wants to discuss it with other Calvinists, there should be freedom to do so. However, the noise level rises to a deafening level if a Calvinist should try to explain, expound or otherwise give an accounting of Calvinist doctrine here. The non-Calvinists simply cannot abide the Calvinist to speak freely, without challenges, quotes of dubious sources, and when all else fails, ad hominem attacks on either Calvin or the Calvinist, none of which serve to enlighten the serious enquirer. Since they can't refute the doctrine, and certainly will not abide it being taught, their only resourse is to create so much noise and confusion that the conversation gets lost in the noise.

[P-Marlowe]

The non-Calvinists simply cannot abide the Calvinist to speak freely, without challenges, quotes of dubious sources, and when all else fails, ad hominem attacks on either Calvin or the Calvinist, none of which serve to enlighten the serious enquirer. Since they can't refute the doctrine, and certainly will not abide it being taught, their only resourse is to create so much noise and confusion that the conversation gets lost in the noise.

_{BarbaraStreisand}

Well nobody. Nobody is stopping you from posting your ideas here. I'm not going to join in the discussion and I will advise all nonCalvinists to avoid posting to this thread like the plague. You and your whole GRPL can have the freedom to discuss this subject to your heart's content and you will get no grief from me, xzins, Corin or any other nonCalvinst upon whom I have any influence.

The thread is all yours. Ping your GRPL and have at it. Mr. Pilgrim eagerly awaits your responses to the question of whether "Calvinism makes God the Author of Sin".

It's all yours. I'm outa here.

[thePilgrim]

Finally!!! If this thread has not been totally destroyed, I will wait for thoughtful discussion.

Chrsitian.

[xzins]

The non-Calvinists simply cannot abide the Calvinist to speak freely, without challenges

That depends on the nature of the thread.

In an open thread, if you don't like being challenged/questioned, then don't post on FR.

If you try to define a thread as for a particular group, I've found fair broad (but not perfect) leeway on FR.

I've tried to avoid these kinds of threads for a while now believing that they're counter to our Christian witness.

[Religion Moderator]

This horse has been beaten to death. Drop it.