“…Jennifer Colhouer, and what life was like for her little brother after he found her bloody body on his bedroom floor among his Christmas toys…and think that our pure, holy, loving God either directly or indirectly decided that it was BETTER for these horrible events, these sins, to happen….
…One thing that stays with me is, it is my responsibility to think more highly of God than that.”
Excellent point. And I love this: “…it is my responsibility to think more highly of God than that.”
Your statement really goes to the heart of Christian “orthodoxy’s” problem: in its process of eliminating man from the existence equation by making him a DIRECT function of two mutually exclusive absolutes, God’s “sovereignty” and Total Depravity, it likewise eliminates God, Himself. When a philosophy/theology destroys the conscious agent (man) who is able to efficaciously (thus, rightly and truthfully) define God…destroying man by declaring his epistemology utterly defunct, it also destroys the ability of God to exist TO THAT AGENT. You see, if man has no real mind of his own because he is always governed by some external force (again, sovereignty AND, contradictorily, depravity) then he cannot claim to know anything, and that includes God. Thus, man can make no claim that God exists, because…how would he know? He has no autonomous mind with which to think. His mind is a direct function of not the SELF, but the absolutes of depravity and God’s divine control.
Man cannot possibly know that God exists because even if God did, without an actual consciousness–an actual distinct, absolute, and autonomous SELF–by which to acknowledge Him, God’s existence is utterly irrelevant to man…because man is, all the way to his metaphysical root, NOT HIMSELF. And any idea or notion that is irrelevant cannot possibly be declared TRUE; because without an actual Standard of Truth to which ALL concepts and ideas (including the notion of “God”) can act in observably efficacious service, then the concept has no point. And if a concept has no point then it can never be verified to BE whatever it purports to BE. Thus, man can cry “God” all day long, but in the absence of his own mind and his own ability to recognize himself–his LIFE–as a standard of TRUTH (a standard of efficacious, legitimate reality of SELF) by his own free, unfettered and absolute consciousness which manifests as a actual self-awareness…yes, in the absence of an autonomous non-determined mind man can make no claim to know ANYTHING about God, even that He is, in fact, God at all.
So not only is it our responsibility to think more highly of God than the improper mysticism of Christian “orthodoxy” allows, it is the only rational course to follow if we want to assure that we as believers are not only faithful and good but are psychologically balanced. It is impossible to have a healthy mental outlook on anything when our fundamental philosophy is rooted in ideas which contradict so severely that they actually demand man’s removal from himself and his own mind in order to be “righteous”. This means that man’s goodness and worth can only come about when he entirely denies the efficacy of his own existence and all the attributes thereof, including his own ability to think…to know ANYTHING, even that God loves him or that his existence is effectual to the very root purpose of BEING something and someone.
The thing to remember, and the thing which your statement directly addresses, is that the evil idea that is “God is in control” is a concept which does one thing and one thing only: it removes man’s mind from himself. It makes man’s mind a direct function of some “force” outside of him, which means that it turns EVERYTHING man knows into a lie, including God. To deny that man is free to cognitively interact with his environment and others (including his God) in a way in which man’s cognition in the form CHOICE works efficaciously in service to the truth of the SELF–a reality in which he is independently and rightly able to discern and observe–does more than just make God the author of evil, it destroys the concept, and all concepts, altogether. God, evil, good, black, white, red, up, heaven, love…all of them vanish in a mist of the ILLUSION of your SELF.
What remains is worse than moral relativism, it is moral equivalency qua nihilism (the philosophy that everything is ultimately meaningless). Which means that everything you observe isn’t really happening, because what you observe is processed by your mind, and your mind is not your own (it is a DIRECT extension of a determining force outside of “you”), therefore your mind cannot exist.
Now I ask you, what is the only possibly way in which to govern a church, a state, a nation…any group of people when the interpretive philosophy which under girds the polity is one of moral equivalence qua nihilism?
Hold that thought. We can answer that question with my next point:
What are the leaders of a “Christian” movement, like neo-Calvinism/Reformation Protestantism, even Catholicism, going to do when confronted with, say…an insatiable pedophile and sexually abusive monster like Nate Morales running amok in the church and littering the aisles of the sanctuary with the bodies of his innocent young victims? How do you think the leaders of such a church–a church with a categorically determinist theology which grants the ecclesiastical “authority” the sole right to interpret reality for every other fucking human being on the planet, and all the trappings of the absolute power of punishment and compelling violence which is thus granted, ipso facto, to he who occupies the role of “church leader”–yes, how do you think they will choose to handle such a situation?
By calling the cops?
Scoff and mock!! As if, you naive boobs!! (My brilliant readers excepted.)
In your dreams, Van Winkle. Since when do the apostles of God, who “stand in His stead” (C.J. Mahaney) and wield His power and pass His judgment upon the earth as His Church’s right arm of authority, twirling the keys to the Kingdom upon their forefingers and blinding the masses with the light of Christ’s glory as it glares off of their obnoxiously conspicuous and greasy bald heads…yes, since when shall they listen to men instead of God? Judge for yourselves if this is right, so says God’s “Word”.
Shall they handle it by declaring the perpetrator an evil-doer and commanding him to stop and delivering him over to Satan to be sifted that he may be spared on the day of judgement and granted clemency for his sick and wicked crimes?
Scoff and mock again!!
This course of action is hardly defensible given that the rallying cry for all good Christians, apart from “Kill the Pelagian!” and “We are of (fake) Christ, and John Calvin is our father!”, is “We are ALL just sinners saved by grace!” This woeful declaration is nothing more than a bumper sticker quote for their moral equivalency. Since there is no actual definition of good or evil–because rational consistency with respect to their deterministic theology demands they acknowledge (and they do, in so many words) that the raping of little boys in various rooms of the church building is, in fact, a part of God’s sovereign plan and Will–then the only course of action is their own capricious desires, whatever they happen to be. Since they alone have the monopoly on God’s will because they alone have been “called”–which is a euphemism for “divinely gifted with the only “real” knowledge of anything, and this is known in the pagan philosophies from which Christian “orthodoxy” springs, as the “gnosis”–then they alone get to say what is wrong or what is right at any given moment. Thus, they decide according to their own whims whether or not a sexual deviant like Nate Morales is actually doing evil or not; and if he is, then they alone get to decide what to do with him. Which usually involves, well…nothing. Except perhaps transferring him to someplace where his actions are less of a distraction and less inconvenient to their power structures and financial stashes. For it is hard for the neo-Calvinist pastors-in-God’s-stead to tread out the grain and feed upon the morsels which fall to the ground in the form of six or seven-figure paychecks when they have to sidestep a fucking child molester.
Make no mistake. Abuse in the church, like all other forms of systemic, institutional abuse, is rooted in distinct and fundamental philosophical assumptions which masquerade as “Biblical ethics” and “sound doctrine”. In the case of Sovereign Grace Ministries, the promotion and perpetuation of child sexual abuse is a direct function of that institution’s false and evil beliefs.
And anyone…any “discernment blog” or outraged commenter or pensive observer who will not acknowledge this needs to take the log out of their own fucking eyeball before they judge C.J. Mahaney or Josh Harris or that hypocrite Brent Detwiler…or that reprobate Nate Morales. Who, if you want to know the truth, is just as much a victim of SGM’s evil doctrine as anyone else. If SGM wasn’t so enamored with the lies of hell they might have stopped this predator twenty-five years ago, and he might have gotten some seriously needed psychological treatment. And just maybe he and a number of his victims and SGM itself wouldn’t now be so colossally fucked.
43 thoughts on “The Evil Determinism of Christian “Orthodoxy”, and Why Child Sexual Abuse in the Church is Propagated by its “Sound Doctrine””
Argo, my brain is sparking and turning itself inside out. You hit on something I had in mind but did not have the time or energy to mention, i.e. the rationality of thinking more highly of God than that.
“To deny that man is free to cognitively interact with his environment and others (including his God) in a way in which man’s cognition in the form CHOICE works efficaciously in service to the truth of the SELF–a reality in which he is independently and rightly able to discern and observe–does more than just make God the author of evil, it destroys the concept, and all concepts, altogether. God, evil, good, black, white, red, up, heaven, love…all of them vanish in a mist of the ILLUSION of your SELF.”
Love how you explain this, and it is frightening. A frightening black hole of nothingness. The kind of frightening thing that used to plague my thoughts as a kid… And what you say next about abuse in the church and evil beliefs… This drives me mad! I am so tired of screaming and trying to wave down zombies, so to speak, who only dismiss the real, actual dangers and rotten fruit of this kind of thinking. “Secondary issues” that destroy LIVES.
But gotta admit, “Kill the Pelagian!” and “We are of (fake) Christ, and John Calvin is our father!” made me laugh…
“And what you say next about abuse in the church and evil beliefs… This drives me mad! I am so tired of screaming and trying to wave down zombies, so to speak, who only dismiss the real, actual dangers and rotten fruit of this kind of thinking. “Secondary issues” that destroy LIVES.”
I am done with that, Oasis. Just in the past few months I made the decision to break all ties to anyone who dismisses such evil with excuses. That includes all spiritual abuse. Not just the heinous ones that prove they are hardened past the point of no return?
It is freeing. I would rather spend my time around athiests who know some basic right and wrong than “Christians” who excuse evil claiming you need to forgive and move on. I am sooooo done with it. unfortunately most of Christendom thinks like that which only proves what Jesus said at the end of Matthew 7 is going to be a reality someday..
Aside from the doctrine of determinism a contributing factor is the program-orientedness of the Protestant churches nowadays and the concept of hierarchy. Rome has always had this kind of abuse because the chillrens are taught that the priest has authority from God and they must obey him. Protestantism of the magisterial and institutional variety will have the same problem with or without determinism. But they there is the added component of program-orientedness. Two centuries ago, parents went to church on Sundays and took their chilrens with em, and they went home. Now parents ship their chilrens off to the youth group, send them to sunday school, etc. etc. I’m not blaming the parents. I’m blaming the churches. All these unscriptual activities dividing the assembly of the churches and sending children off alone with one adult who ain’t their parents and who probably believes in faith alone and therefore is liable to do anything…..well, its an obvious recipe for disaster. Get rid of the teaching that these guys have authority. Get rid of the programs. Just have a sunday morning worship service and that’s it. And then get rid of the determinism too while you’re at it.
Furthermore, getting your children off to themselves in their programs is their tool to brainwash them into their determinism without you knowing it. Sunday school was the invention of the devil to introduce all manner of false doctrine into the churches through the chilrens when and where the parents couldn’t hear it, so that Calvinism could take over in the next generation when the parents were dead and the chilrens were grown, and so it did! And don’t you think for a moment that the prince of darkness isn’t using the same tactic on homosexual prograganda. You don’t know what they’re teaching your kids in sunday schrool and that’s why Satan introduced it in the early 1900s….yep, its that modern. (“Sunday school” as an institution to teach the poor to read began in the 1780s but church sunday schrools to “teach the chilrens about Jesus” began in the 1930s, just to clarify.)
This is the best paragraph ever, by the way:
“It is freeing. I would rather spend my time around athiests who know some basic right and wrong than “Christians” who excuse evil claiming you need to forgive and move on.”
Yes. I have done the same. Thinking of some friends dating back to college years believe in God, but not Jesus as God. But I trust them & they are honorable. And they just don’t get it – excusing evil because of a Jesus-follower name-tag. And I can’t explain it to them either. Labels like Christian create special exemptions? Actions & behavior don’t matter to a Christian’s God? Ugh…
“Actions & behavior don’t matter to a Christian’s God?”
But Paul said faith and not works, right? I mean Jesus and the Old Testament said a lot about works, and the General Epistles do, and Revelation talks about those who obey Jesus’ commandments, and even Paul actually contradicts his own Gnostic faith alonism to say things like “Know ye not that no adulterer etc. shall inherit the kingdom of God?” But in that one verse where Paul said faith and not works without adding the further explanation from elsewhere, he said faith not works, so we’re going to be idiots and stick with that despite the fact that 99.9% of the Bible says works do matter.
That is why the covering doctrine is actually so terrible. I have a sermon by the same super-apostle that I previously quoted and should you guys have the time to watch without foaming at the mouth, rolling on the floor and making piggy sounds I would love you to watch it. It is called “Dealing with Sexual Sin in the Church” and you would need to have your tin foil caps on for this one:
Well, I try to mix in a little snarky humor. I find mocking these tyrants quite pleasurable. I find that pointing out how ridiculous they look (pointy bald heads almost every damn one) and sound (“Calvinism IS the gospel) puts them in a more appropriate perspective. They ARE scary motherfuckers, but even more than that they are, for the most part, short little insecure men-children with precious little intellectual capacity, group-think and crowd-following proclivities, who lack even a rudimentary awareness of their own creepy-in-a-molester-kind-of-way affect.
And pointing this out through sarcasm and snark sits very well with my soul.
Thanks for the compliment. See my response to Oasis. I love mocking these tyrants.
John Immel has a new article up. It’s excellent.
Just had to share:
I left 2 comments at TWW because their name was mentioned on a popular SBC Pastor blog and I copied the comments for them. Seems I am in perpetual moderation. I am in your club, Argo. :o)
They want nothing to do with our ideas. To me, that says enough. I don’t need to comment there anymore; there’s no point. If reason is not how you draw conclusions, it is mysticism. And that’s pretty much what TWW has become. Instead of a solution, it is an extension of the problem. They just don’t realize it.
If they’ve not ears to hear…shrug.
“But in that one verse where Paul said faith and not works without adding the further explanation from elsewhere, he said faith not works, so we’re going to be idiots and stick with that despite the fact that 99.9% of the Bible says works do matter.”
db, In order to create an official a doctrine or theology… you don’t use the whole Bible, silly. You cut what you want out of it and throw away the 99.9%.
“Sunday school was the invention of the devil to introduce all manner of false doctrine into the churches through the chilrens when and where the parents couldn’t hear it, so that Calvinism could take over in the next generation when the parents were dead and the chilrens were grown, and so it did! And don’t you think for a moment that the prince of darkness isn’t using the same tactic on homosexual prograganda.”
db, I went to Sunday school at a baptist church as a young girl. Those are fond memories for me. I would not have enjoyed the FIC setting. Boring. I remember wonderful songs, Bible history, God’s love for me. I wouldn’t change a thing. It was a solid foundation. Not everyone has this experience, I get that. But Sunday School isn’t bad just because it’s Sunday School. There are good & loving teachers. One of my best friends, for instance. But that was a long time ago, before Calvinism again crept into the SBC.
P.S. Homosexuals aren’t the big problem that faces the church. You seem to be uber focused on it & seem to buy that fear-mongering, not my sin propaganda….
I will try to take a gander. I’m sure I’ll find it consistent with the madness all of us have come to know and despise.
Mr. looking for Cool Dry,
I watched the video. Ugh. Where did you find that one?
It’s amazing there are that many people who attend, considering he constantly (and I mean constantly) contradicts himself & contradicts any scripture he quotes two sentences later. He makes no sense.
I suppose if someone can make you laugh, & seems like a somewhat likeable guy, then the teaching passes the litmus test. Yikes!
“I find that pointing out how ridiculous they look (pointy bald heads almost every damn one) and sound (“Calvinism IS the gospel) puts them in a more appropriate perspective. They ARE scary motherfuckers, but even more than that they are, for the most part, short little insecure men-children with precious little intellectual capacity, group-think and crowd-following proclivities, who lack even a rudimentary awareness of their own creepy-in-a-molester-kind-of-way affect.”
Had to call you out on this one, Argo. I’m not enjoying this paragraph. When you speak of physical appearance that may be purely genetic, you detract from the truth of personal responsibility & choice. Pointy bald heads & shortness of stature have NOTHING to do with it.
I adore you…but you’re not going to like this.
These men, other than their height (that’s my bias…I just can’t take seriously a five foot John Piper demanding I submit to his authority; I start laughing out loud) these men are entirely responsible for their appearance and affect. They aren’t the Coneheads; They CHOOSE to shave their heads completely bald, sporting their chrome domes as luminescent as crystal; they CHOOSE their creepy, false modesty and their forced smiles and their unsettling, toothy, Cheshire Cat grins and their unctuous emotional heavy petting and their melodrama and pulpit histrionics. To me, there is a Stepford qualify to it all, and it just adds to the cultish atmosphere of the neo-Calvinist authority fiat.
But more than that, I simply don’t believe I owe these men any benefit of the doubt. I don’t assume that anything about them is innocent. Nothing. Not the way they dress, not the way they groom themselves, not the way they speak, not the way they think, not the way they relate to each other. They are vindictive, subversive, deceptive, destructive, self-serving false teachers whose determination to achieve absolute power by removing you and I from ourselves is matched only by their desire to remove God from HIS Self.
They are categorical life-wreckers and I will criticize them in way that makes it plain to all who will listen that there isn’t a thing about them I take seriously.
When CJ takes his head out from up his own bottom and assumes a modicum of responsibility for destroying the lives of a disturbing number of people, including at least half a dozen of God’s precious little ones, then I’ll knock off the bald jokes.
Until then…he’s a doorknob with wire frames. That’s all I see .
I like your honestly & passion. I am with you in your words that call their fake out. But many are bald (by choice) or short who aren’t diabolical… who may be reading here. That’s my message. Call their deeds out, not their hairstyle or stature out. I don’t care if they are long – haired or bald, 6 foot tall or 5. It’s their actions & what they peddle that are the problem.
A mom, I certainly see your point and agree it is easy for people to use the descriptors as deflection from the real arguments. However, I have to relate something I witnessed in 2009 that totally changed my paradigm about those sorts of descriptors.
My 90 year old step dad wanted to attend what for him would be his last SBC annual meeting as a messenger. So I took him. There were about 50 years of his life he never missed one. He has been a BIG believer in our right to vote on issues for the church even if his issue lost. (and many times they did)
So I took him and WHAT AN EDUCATION. As someone who had been following trends in evangelicalism online for quite a few years, I got to see it in real time.
I could easily pin point the Mahaney followers, the Driscoll followers, Mohler followers and so on. It was uncanny. I could not believe it. And it was obvious with appearance and behavior. Had I not been familiar with their gurus I would not have seen it so clearly. These young men were emulating their favorite guru.
For 2 days I saw this. At one point we were in the back (near door to restrooms) and I watched Russ Moore standing back there for hours while speakers preaching with his young entourage joking, laughing, texting and even jumping around. He and his adoring young entourage were acting like 12 year old boys. Russ Moore maybe weights 100lbs soaking wet and is big into Patriarchy. In fact, he claimed comps are wimps and we need more patriarchy. And he is teeny tiny. If the house were on fire, I would have to carry him out. But he could not rescue me because I am 5’9. He is now President of SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.
Have you met Piper? I have. He has to look up to me. (hee hee). After a while one starts to see the “overcompensation” that fits into some of their doctrines. “You must respect me because I am a man”. While other celeb leaders affirm comp or patriarchy they don’t tend to die on the hill. Piper does. Why? Doug Phillips did? Have you met him? Teeny tiny man.
You start to see a pattern of doctrines to cover over deficiencies. Mahaney and sports is another example. Or Mahaney the high school grad fawning over Mohler as brilliant to be in that club because now Mahaney has correct doctrine.
The more I am around it the more I see how they have totally decieved themselves, too. They are evil. They are proud. The lie about God and themselves.
DAvid, I researched the concept of Sunday School a few years back. It seems to have originated in England by “low church” do gooders in the 19th century to teach children, who had to work 6 days a week instead of going to school, how to read and write. The classes were before church started hence the name Sunday School. It morphed into what we see later when the child labor laws changed in England and public education was opened up to the masses..
I am editing a long response to you which will appear as its own post. Look for it later today!
Lydia, Thanks for chiming in. I’m not disagreeing with you one bit that those are the physical characteristics of those men & some of their followers.
The problem with discussing their stature, etc. is two-fold that I can think of off the top of my head (maybe more fold?):
1. There is absolutely no correlation between short & bald AND personal theology / belief system. Sorry. So, do followers emulate their leaders? Sure. But to call out short or bald & lump it in with evil-doing, wrong thinking/doing? Hmmmm……
2. Stature and hair/no hair is a distraction. It gives a person trying to be objective an out. It’s petty.
What about Tullian T? He has a superb mane of hair. The reality is wrong doesn’t belong to hair, no hair, tall, short, etc. That brings it down to high school, IMO.
You are free to disagree. I won’t run or be ticked off. But this has been on my mind & wanted to say & be clear where I stand on it.
“Overcompensation”. You nailed it. Thanks for articulating that so well. Also, I would like everyone to keep in mind that my criticism is facetious and snarky. It’s just my style (I address this in my post I will publish today).
But having said that, it IS hard to ignore the correlation between stature and authoritarianism in the YRR phenomenon. And I know correlation is not causation, and I know that not everyone is like this (I am only 5’10” and am no cover model and yet I am a huge feminist), but…I’m just saying.
Also…did Mahaney even graduate high school?
Please understand that my criticism is specific to the neo-Calvinist movement. It ALWAYS stays in that context; I do think that should be considered in your objection.
Argo, Tullian T. has a lovely head of hair. 😉
A mom, Of course you are right that it is not causation. Because not all short bald men become patriarchal pastor tyrants. :o)
The sad part for me in 2009 is there was no one around to share my aha moment. It was eerie. Reminded me of my high school rock star concert days where everyone was trying to dress like the Stones or Bowie, etc. Only now it has a plastic Calvin slapped on it.
The other sad part is that most of the older people there had never heard of Driscoll or Mahaney. You get a real sense they are gurus to seminary students and those who do Reformed internet stuff. Taht is where their ”
brand” matters. Their larger public notoriety is really coming from the scandals and people talking about it on Huffpo. Sigh.
Anyone else find it interesting that Billy Graham’s grandson is a Calvinist? Billy was all about “choice”. His magazine was called “Decision”. :o) Tullian said today on fightingforthefaith interview he was raised Reformed.
Just find that interesting. If I recall Ruth Graham’s parents were Presbyterian missionaries, I think
Bowie and the Stones? You are dating yourself. You should have said One Direction.
BTW, TT is being fawned over, but not because of his deceptive hair that throws one off to his reformed theology.
The more blatant and obvious the tyranny, the more consistent the doctrine. The fact is that TGC (The Gospel Coalition) is right, Tullian (I’m too tired to spell his last name) is wrong. If you juxtapose his explanation of the doctrinal assumptions with those of TGC as seen in that article, you will notice that his are much less consistent.
The one thing you CANNOT blame CJ, Piper, et al. for is DOCTRINAL hypocrisy (in general)…they are at least committed to embracing the logical conclusions of their evil theology. Tullian, Detwiler, Burleson…THEY are the hypocrites. They are twice as insane and vile as CJ and Co.
At least Piper is consistent when he says God brought destruction on your kiddos, which is in step with his total control God.
When a choice to do right reality clashes with a none can do right theological fallacy, you will see either disgusting consistent action or hypocrisy to theology. It is also called: when love trumps theology.
When love trumps my theology, then my theology is very, very wrong. Choose love, trash the unloving theology. Get out of hypocrisy. Just saying.
And I had to come to that realization myself. Thank God I kicked it goodbye.
Better said, I kicked Calvin goodbye. LOL
“Bowie and the Stones? You are dating yourself. You should have said One Direction.’
Aging like fine wine here, friend. New Direction? Never heard of em. Will ask 13 year old.
Stones and Bowie were very cool but very few liked both at same time. That made me an iconoclast of my generation. (wink)
I switched to classical in the 90’s. Don’t do country. EVER. PERIOD. :o) Closest I come is some folk like old Joan Baez stuff. Even before my time.
“The one thing you CANNOT blame CJ, Piper, et al. for is DOCTRINAL hypocrisy (in general)…they are at least committed to embracing the logical conclusions of their evil theology. Tullian, Detwiler, Burleson…THEY are the hypocrites. They are twice as insane and vile as CJ and Co.”
This is definitely something to watch. And no I don’t trust Tullian. I listened to his interview on doctrine on fightingforfaith and am even more confused. Which is the point. I came away with the feeling he would have loved to just say outright: Jesus will force you to do right.. But he stayed on the law/grace dichotomy which I find very confusing. All this first, second and third use of the law stuff. PULEEZE.
Can we please go back to the OT context for the law in the first place? Please!!!! The Jews had been living among pagans for generations. The pagans had law. Jews got their own law from Yahweh so they would have to think about Him every day. If Yahweh gave them laws knowing they could not keep them then that makes Him a horrible tyrant.
Anyway, I do understand where you are coming from. Piper would just tell me to go back and be knocked around because God ordained it and my suffering glorifies God.. Wade would tell me it was wrong of the abuser to knock me around but God loves the abuser and me equally and God works the suffering for good. Wade does it with a bent toward compassion but the outcome is the same: Death.
There is no love in any determinism. There is no justice in any determinism.
Truth is we determine our worth by our behavior. GASP!!! that is heresy to them.
“Anyway, I do understand where you are coming from. Piper would just tell me to go back and be knocked around because God ordained it and my suffering glorifies God.. Wade would tell me it was wrong of the abuser to knock me around but God loves the abuser and me equally and God works the suffering for good. Wade does it with a bent toward compassion but the outcome is the same: Death.”
Apologies, but am having trouble uploading the new post…technical difficulties. It’s a long one, so I’m not going to have enough time to get it up tonight. Will try to work out the bugs tomorrow.
Wade would first say that it was supposed to happen, it was of God, and God chose not to prevent it. Then he’d deny ever having spoken of determinism with you.
“Wade would first say that it was supposed to happen, it was of God, and God chose not to prevent it. Then he’d deny ever having spoken of determinism with you.”
Oasis, Give me the Christian who gets righteous anger over abuse and faces the abuser with a police back up. The real Christian leader would say, Ok, come on big guy hit me instead. I dare you.
When you get down to it they are weenies with a cruel definition of Calvin’s “love”.
I like the Biker guys who protect children of abuse. Ever heard of them? I cannot remember their name.
BACA. Bikers Against Child Abuse
Oh yeah, W would also use the words “orchestrated” and “designed”…
Yep, when I’m not wondering if they can all be trusted, I love the bikers, too. Comparison is like night and day. Or should I say, darkness and light.
“Oh yeah, W would also use the words “orchestrated” and “designed”…”
Oh dear yes. The flowery words used to camouflage the nasty truths of their determinist god who orchestrates child abuse so he can be glorified by the good that MIGHT come out of it.