[ShadowAce]

Logical implications can be fine (such as double predestination), but not when they contradict God's word.

Are you saying that God, or God's Word, is not logical?

And no, I'm not talking the "spiritual man" vs. "natural man" stuff. I'm talking rules of logic.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: Logical implications can be fine (such as double predestination), but not when they contradict God's word.

Are you saying that God, or God's Word, is not logical?

Not at all. God and His word are perfectly logical, even if we don't always understand the logic. My point was that some things called "logical implications" are really false because they rely on a misreading of scripture (or in this case a misunderstanding of Calvinism). For example, some say it is a logical implication/extension of Calvinism that witnessing is a waste of time because the elect are already chosen. I am saying that kind of logic relies on the faulty assumption that Calvinism holds that it trumps scripture. It does not. Scripture holds that all believers are to witness, therefore it is correct to witness and cannot be a waste. Therefore refusing to witness is NOT a logical implication of Calvinism. That is, certain "logical implications" are not fine when and because they are false.