[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Colossians

And the circularity pointed out in my post #55 still has not been addressed.

You presume that changing the question every time it is answered means that the original question has not been addressed, when the reality is that every question is based on the same false proposition that there is a single factor which forces a person to choose God when it is present and prevents a person from choosing God when it is absent.

[Colossians]

And we are still waiting for Mr Muzik to answer the most basic of questions and so confirm that his way of looking at things is the right way.

But wait! he's already answered it: it goes like this:


Calvinist (C): "What is the attribute present in Fred but lacking in Bill, which causes Fred to make the infinitely better decision of choosing for God (as distinct from Bill who chooses against God)?"

Anti-Calvinist (AC): A contrite heart

C: What was the attribute which caused him to have a contrite heart, the lack of which causing Bill to not have a contrite heart?

AC: A desire to have a contrite heart.

C. What was the attribute which caused Fred to have a desire to have a contrite heart, the lack of which causing Bill to not have a desire to have contrite heart?

AC: He realised he was wrong

C: How come he realised it, and Bill didn't?

AC: Because he had free will

C: According to you they both had free will

AC: Yes but Fred used his free will the right way.

C: Apparently so. Why the difference between the two?

AC: Because Fred wanted to be saved.

C: Why didn't Bill want to be saved?

AC: Because Fred had a contrite heart

C: Can we start at the top again?

[Colossians]

And so as we have shown at post 62 above, we don't need scripture to disprove the anti-Calvinist position: all we need is to ask him to answer the above question, and then make sure we don't hold our breath waiting for the answer.

The issue is resolved unambiguously on the empirical axis.

[themuzicman]

Just so people know, I suspect based upon the number of threads created about me and other interactions, here, that Collosians is suffering from Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, and has fixated on me, and I am not going to participate in harming him further. Until he gets treatment, I do not feel it would be right for me to respond.

[Colossians]

Good thing I'm not holding my breath for the answer to this thread's question, for as can be seen above, Mr Muzic thinks this is a chat room where he can remain in denail of his inability to answer the question.

And you know.....it really doesn't bother me that he can't answer it. What does bother me, however, is that it doesn't bother him, for he knows he can't answer it, and yet persists in lying to himself that it just doesn't matter.

[Colossians]

Here's the scenario again:

Calvinist (C): "What is the attribute present in Fred but lacking in Bill, which causes Fred to make the infinitely better decision of choosing for God (as distinct from Bill who chooses against God)?"

Anti-Calvinist (AC): A contrite heart

C: What was the attribute which caused him to have a contrite heart, the lack of which causing Bill to not have a contrite heart?

AC: A desire to have a contrite heart.

C. What was the attribute which caused Fred to have a desire to have a contrite heart, the lack of which causing Bill to not have a desire to have contrite heart?

AC: He realised he was wrong

C: How come he realised it, and Bill didn't?

AC: Because he had free will

C: According to you they both had free will

AC: Yes but Fred used his free will the right way.

C: Apparently so. Why the difference between the two?

AC: Because Fred wanted to be saved.

C: Why didn't Bill want to be saved?

AC: Because Fred had a contrite heart

C: Can we start at the top again?

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Colossians

Here's the scenario again:

Calvinist (C): "What is the attribute present in Fred but lacking in Bill, which causes Fred to make the infinitely better decision of choosing for God (as distinct from Bill who chooses against God)?"

For all those who actually took Logic 101, this is a classic case of the logical fallacy called "begging the question" since this statement rests entirely on the unproven proposition that there is a single factor that is present which forces Fred to choose for God and the single factor being absent forces Bill to choose against God.

Until the poser that posted that question can prove that there is actually a single factor that can affect all the complex decisions making of both Fred and Bill throughout their entire lives with the effect of overriding all the other factors that affect all the rest of the decisions they make, the question is a logical indeterminacy according to the rules of formal logic.