Free-willer Straw Man Argument

Here it is again.

No it don't. It's the means. Not because of.
The instrumental cause as even Calvin admit

Faith as an Instrumental cause


John 3:16 (KJV 1900) — 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.



The efficient (primary) cause of our eternal salvation the Scripture uniformly proclaims to be the mercy and free love of the heavenly Father towards us; the material cause to be Christ, with the obedience by which he purchased righteousness for us; and what can the formal or instrumental cause be but faith? John includes the three in one sentence when he says, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life,” (John 3:16).


That is not the word of an Arminian or a provisionist but of


John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 1997).


Similarly The Calvinist Theologian Berkouwer states


3. TO FAITH. Faith is the mediate or instrumental cause of sanctification as well as of justification. It does not merit sanctification any more than it does justification, but it unites us to Christ and keeps us in touch with Him as the Head of the new humanity, who is the source of the new life within us, and also of our progressive sanctification, through the operation of the Holy Spirit



L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938), 537.

There is not just a correlation between faith and justification, faith and regeneration , faith and salvation

There is a causal relationship even Calvinist theologians have affirmed
 
If we don't have free will, then we are robots with no will at all. (And 1,000 thematic variants, like "if we don't have free will, creation is deterministic and fatalistic".)

This is actually a tutti fruitti of logical fallacies, including "Straw Man", "No Third Option", and "Non-Sequitur".
It's because Stoicism is so passe, but Stoicism isn't Christianity either.
 
If we don't have free will, then we are robots with no will at all. (And 1,000 thematic variants, like "if we don't have free will, creation is deterministic and fatalistic".)

This is actually a tutti fruitti of logical fallacies, including "Straw Man", "No Third Option", and "Non-Sequitur".
The first step in the serious discussion of any issue ought to be a clear definition of the issue. This OP falls short in explaining what in mean by the freedom of the will.

The noun will is closely associated with, and its meaning is involved with, other words like desire, purpose, intention, determination, and decision. To say that a person has a will is to say that a person experiences purpose, intends things, and makes decisions.

When when we use the term free will we are talking about the notion that choices are involved. Free Will is a way of saying that a person is capable of making decisions, that a person can choose between two or more alternatives.

There is nothing "tutti fruitti" as you say about free will.

In the New Testament, sinners are commanded over and over to “repent” and “believe” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17; Acts 3:19; 1 John 3:23). Every call to repent is a call to choose. The command to believe assumes that the hearer can choose to obey the command. Got?
 
Well let's see. How about the resurrection? Regeneration?
Explain your logic. Are you seriously saying that election onto salvation is unconditional to the means of regeneration and resurrection? It has to be for you to believe that election unto salvation is unconditional. Explain to us how that wacky unconditional logic of yours works.
 
Last edited:
God does both.

He gives life (regenerates) those with faith and he resurrects the dead
@Presby02 , being a Calvinist and believing that election unto salvation is unconditional, must prove that his proposed means of regeneration and resurrection are not conditions/requirements of election onto salvation. In other words, Presby is caught between a rock and a hard place. That's typical of Calvinists. They never weigh the implications of their wacky statements. 🤪🤪🤪
 
@Presby02 , being a Calvinist and believing that election unto salvation is unconditional, must prove that his proposed means of regeneration and resurrection are not conditions/requirements of election onto salvation. In other words, Presby is caught between a rock and a hard place. That's typical of Calvinists. They never weigh the implications of their wacky statements. 🤪🤪🤪
Cognitive dissonance at work
 
Back
Top Bottom