Reformed Blogger and Commenter, the Famous Randy, Loses an Argument by the Sword of Reason: An ode to my “mind numbing arrogance”, LOL

Today, Randy posted a comment under the thread of the last post.  You can read his entire comment there.  This was my response.  I add it as a new post for instructive purposes.  It is an abject lesson on destroying despotic neo-Calvinist in a single stroke of HUMAN reason:

Randy,

“After all, reason, so-called, trumps revelation every time.”

Reading the sarcasm in there, I must say I had a guffawing laugh over that one.  Oh yes…as if revelation cannot POSSIBLY be vetted by human reason.  Reason and revelation are ultimately exclusive…and this is why you and your ilk terrify me.  At the end of the day, you NEVER have to prove WHY your ideas are better.  They are just better because you say they are.  Because, by some mystic divine enlightenment, you somehow, hypocritically beyond your own self-confessed sin-nature, get to define truth for the rest of humanity without ever having to defend it.

I appeal to reason because reason is the only way man can ever know TRUTH.  If revelation falls outside of reason, then revelation has nothing to do with man.  In which case, it is impossible for you to accede it or not.

But here is where you entire argument with me comes crashing to the floor in the face of my “mind numbing” arrogance…which, arrogance is irrelevant. My idea crushes yours because you cannot even RESPOND to it without conceding that I am right.

You ready to lose?  Here you go:

The wickedly ironic thing is that REASON is the ONLY way you yourself can claim to believe anything.  Why do you believe revelation, even if it isn’t reasonable (logically reconcilable)?  Because you REASONABLY assume that God has truth and you don’t.  But your acceptance of that fact is wholly rooted in this:  it makes SENSE to you to believe that. Meaning, you still use YOU OWN version of reason to decide whether this thing (be it “revelation” or whatever thing you accept or reject) is true or not.  You can never appeal to some greater “understanding”; reason is the very way you vet ALL you believe. If you appeal to some kind of “divine enlightenment”, it is still axiomatic that you must DECIDE to agree.  And if it is YOU deciding, then YOU must have a plumb line for measuring it veracity.  So you are not really arguing that “revelation” supersedes reason.  No, you are saying that YOUR reason is better than mine.  Nothing more.  And you are demanding that I accept that YOUR reason is better than mine.

That won’t happen, Randy.  Because your reason is rooted in insane ideas.  What you accept as reasonable is the ANTITHESIS of human life.  Your reason despises humanity and will go to destructive ends to compel it to your insanity.  And I as a Christian will never yoke myself to such darkness.

But even worse for you, is that to answer my argument you must, again concede I AM RIGHT.  Because by responding, you must FIRST concede that YOU get to decide on what basis…by what REASON you will agree or disagree.

And this is why you are a hypocrite and you will have much to answer to God for.  You are a hypocrite who capriciously and viciously condemns others for doing that which YOU yourself do.  And even in the face of my utterly logical argument you will reject the idea that human reason is the ONLY source of truth for ANYONE, Christian or not, which is precisely why all revelation must be REASONABLE revelation.

You will reject it because that is your heart…the heart of a Pharisee.

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Reformed Blogger and Commenter, the Famous Randy, Loses an Argument by the Sword of Reason: An ode to my “mind numbing arrogance”, LOL

  1. “…and this is why you and your ilk terrify me.”

    They don’t terrify me — they just make me fighting mad.

    Look at how these hypocrites operate. Did they find a Scripture that says “Jesus only died for the elect?” No. They didn’t get there by “Revelation” — they got there by REASON, twisted reason, but reason nonetheless.

    How did they arrive at that loony conclusion? First, they accept the premise of arbitrary election. Mistake #1. Then they REASON that it would be a waste for Jesus to shed even one drop of blood for anyone who is not elect. So by REASON they come to the conclusion that Jesus died only for the elect.

    Of course they fed their reason garbage. You know the saying: Garbage in garbage out. Reason is a lot like a computer in that regard. It needs good inputs.

    But don’t let them tell you they’re going by revelation and not reason. Don’t let them bully you. They admit, actually, to using a great deal of “human reason.” Aren’t they always telling you: “You don’t UNDERSTAND Calvinism.” Well, understanding is a function of REASON, is it not? So they’re telling your right there they use reason.

    Don’t they brag about how “intellectual” the “Reformed tradition” supposedly is. Intellectual? That’s not a property of revelation! That’s a property of reason!

    Don’t they call you stupid for not agreeing with them? We could go on an on about how this thugs use reason. Its demonic reason they use, but reason nonetheless.

  2. The fact of the matter is they use too much sophisticated college professor and “monk in a cell” reason disconnected from the real world. They live in the world of ideas, in the world of Plato’s cave where they never see the Sun but only the shadows on the wall. There’s a Mandy Moore song that says “I spoke about wings — you just flew.” They speak about many things, but experience nothing but the darkness of their souls. They speak of righteousness — we do it. They speak of holiness — we do it. They speak of knowing God — we do it. They speak of believing — we do it. They speak of election — we do it, we exercise our freewill. They sit in the dark of Plato’s cave making hand puppets and contemplating Plato’s forms as they see them on the cave wall. Then with the cold, inhuman, dispassionate, emotionless reason of an alien virus, they pass judgement on the human race as a thing totally separate from themselves and completely disconnected from them, something they care nothing about but loathe (in much the way I loathe mayonnaise).

  3. Argo, Randy does not lose arguments because he never stops. :o) He even started sending me his arguments by email!

  4. Lydia, did you ever get the last one I sent you? Gmail only sends my mail when it feels like it. Sorry to ask here.

  5. Lydia,

    LOL…

    No, not stopping is not why he never loses. His inability to recognize the integrity of the counter argument is his problem. He has an enviable immunity to a rational perspective.

    These Calvinists are like drug addicts. The first step in recovering is admitting one has a problem.

    But that is where they constantly fail in their recovery process. They NEVER concede that their argument is logically insane. They NEVER concede that their opinions simply cannot possibly be true, because the very ideas and constructs human beings axiomatically use to accept “truth” are totally denied by their assumptions. They are self-cancelling/self-deleting programs that continue to run in a redundant loop. Idea-to-contradiction-to-physical-destruction-to-respawning, and the cycle continues again and again, like Neo in the Matrix.

    If I ever concede that free-will is a farce, I will use Randy and his ilk as the material proof for my argument.

    Exhibit A: That Calvinists are automatons who cannot change

    It’s a pretty strong argument…except that I was once a Calvinist, so I’d contradict myself in the process.

    But…wouldn’t that in some strange way just prove my point? LOLOLOLOL

  6. Well here is one for you Argo,

    Arminian: “How does God love those he predestined, foreordained, to hell?”

    Calvinist: “He gives them many temporal blessings.”

    Arminian: “You mean he gives them a little bit of heaven to go to hell in.”

    Calvinist: “Well, I wouldn’t put it that way.”

    Arminian: “That’s what it sounds like to me.”

    Calvinist: “That’s because you don’t understand God correctly. God is infinite and beyond our comprehension. So God’s love is not the same as our love. It transcends it.”

    Arminian: “How is that different from saying God is ‘supercalifragilisticexpialadocious’?” –

    LOL!

    HT: Roger Olson

  7. “These Calvinists are like drug addicts. The first step in recovering is admitting one has a problem.”

    LOL!!!

    Unfortunately, they presuppose they (and Calvin) are too smart to have a problem. (Circular but par for the course . . . for all addicts.)

  8. James Jordan….

    I’m going to have to plagiarize this! Fan-freaking-tastic!

    They sit in the dark of Plato’s cave making hand puppets and contemplating Plato’s forms as they see them on the cave wall. Then with the cold, inhuman, dispassionate, emotionless reason of an alien virus, they pass judgment on the human race as a thing totally separate from themselves and completely disconnected from them, something they care nothing about but loathe (in much the way I loathe mayonnaise).

  9. Uhh . . . I had this thought . . . How can someone who places Revelation above Reason ever speak of something being MIND numbing?

  10. Here is more of Randy’s comment from the previous post:

    “The bottom line is, if any of the NT revelation is unreliable, it all becomes suspect? We can’t really trust any of it. We must then be left to trust Argo who, in his mind-numbing arrogance, is the self-proclaimed authority on such matters. After all, reason, so-called, trumps revelation every time.”

    While it sounds like Randy is condemning reason . . . which he is on some level . . . the real issue is authority. His defining measure of epistemology is authority and “reason” is really TRUST for authorities’ conclusion.

    Notice that he offers a false choice: Canonical authority VS Argo authority. Randy’s root presumption is if the bible contains error then the only other epistemological choice is a bewildering sea of arbitrary assertions of authority.

    So of course the concept of reason—a volitional process that integrates the whole of man’s existence via the tools of logic—sails right over Randy’s head. He cannot conceptualize that each man is fully capable of vetting TRUTH, or that there is an objective standard by which man can judge. Without authority to dictate, man is incapable of grasping . . . well, anything.

    The charge that you are arrogant is the logical consequence of this world view. He resents an epistemology that does not stem from “authority.” He has an implicit hatred for anyone who musters a self-directed (read REASON directed) conclusions, because HE can’t do that. So just like the Marxist who can’t fill his own belly with his own work he blames HIS failing on the capitalist who can. The outworking of his hatred manifests in moral condemnation i.e. the charge of arrogance.

    BTW . . . I thought this was a strange comment Randy said: “Just so you know Argo, I don’t hate Paul and, I have no money train to be threatened.”

    I don’t think I get this. The only “threat” Paul can pose is if Randy had money?

  11. John Immel said, “BTW . . . I thought this was a strange comment Randy said: “Just so you know Argo, I don’t hate Paul and, I have no money train to be threatened.”

    I don’t think I get this. The only “threat” Paul can pose is if Randy had money?”

    I think Randy, since he isn’t reason directed, gave away the fact that the leaders he follows have a money train & it’s being threatened. Well, that’s no secret. He, the pious one, is not reimbursed for his effort. He righteously goes after Paul out of the goodness of his heart.

    But that’s just my guess. I think he should clarify.

  12. John Immel said, “So of course the concept of reason—a volitional process that integrates the whole of man’s existence via the tools of logic—sails right over Randy’s head. He cannot conceptualize that each man is fully capable of vetting TRUTH, or that there is an objective standard by which man can judge. Without authority to dictate, man is incapable of grasping . . . well, anything.”

    I hear Randy loud & clear. Man is totally depraved. God must have been out of His mind to put brains in depraved humans. Humans are really no different from animals. “Thinking for yourself” is an impossible oxymoron. That’s why humans are dumb sheep that must be led & must submit to, a ahhhem, another human.

    Julie Anne’s 8/11/13 post is on authority. Brian Thornton (fivesolasguy) asked her in a tweet, “Do you currently have yourself submissive placed under the authority of a local church and her elders?” Her crime? She tweeted, “Jesus’ command is to love. Yet a lot of church leaders spend more time focusing on “biblical” authority. Anyone see a disconnect there?”

    Get back under, get back in line, shut up.

  13. A Mom…

    “He, the pious one, is not reimbursed for his effort. He righteously goes after Paul out of the goodness of his heart.”

    That might be a pretty good guess. Funny thing is though… the top dogs with the money also think they operate out of altruistic virtue . . . so I suspect they would be confused by the assertion that they do things for money. Such is the deceptive subterfuge of Altruism.

  14. Hmm…my own comments are not appearing on my OWN blog. Somehow, I have put myself into perpetual moderation re Wartburg Watch. LOL Must be “God’s plan” manifesting itself apart from the false me to the real me, which is a me which is purely God and so is not me at all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s