Sabitlenmiş Tweet
God loves everyone. 🌍
Christ died for everyone. 🩸
Everyone can believe. ✝️
Everyone can be saved. 💫
English
Provisionist Perspective 🩸🌍
40K posts
Provisionist Perspective 🩸🌍
@ProvisionistP
Promoting and Defending God’s Love & Provision For Everyone (A Provisionist Podcast with @AverageSc0t)
Everywhere Katılım Temmuz 2020
401 Takip Edilen5.3K Takipçiler
🚨 THIS JUST IN:
People have been committing idolatry with otherwise holy saints for a long time.
CleavetoAntiquity@C2Antiquity
Baptist @WesleyLHuff Claims Prayers To The Saints Are IDOLATRY
English
@DrawNear_ A theological question in response to this, do you believe that you had “transitioned” to a state of complete unbelief and would have perished?
Or do you think it was some kind of stubborn running away with faith running in the background?
English
When I was in rebellion against God, I tried to find a comfortable space between the abandonment of my religious moral grounding and nihilism, but everything between the two caused me to experience cognitive dissonance. I fell down the rabbit hole of more deeply complex philosophical rationalizations, like secular moral realism, Aristotelian naturalism, Kantian rationalism, etc. It was intellectually stimulating, made me feel smarter, and gave me hope for a solution, but a nagging voice kept reminding me that these rationalizations were still smuggling in bits of my religious grounding and their complexity was simply obfuscating that reality. In the end I had to pick one or the other, and nihilism was the heat-death of joy. I couldn't live with it. So I stayed angry for a while until I finally gave up and repented.
I say this as a warning, because the smarter a person is, the more of that philosophical complexity they can tolerate, and the better they become at obscuring cognitive dissonance from themselves, all while patting themselves on the back for being such a well-studied, clever individual.
Frank J. Fleming@IMAO_
The vast majority of atheists are midwits. The few that aren’t go insane from nihilism like Nietzsche.
English
I don’t think so because I think “dishonesty” has to do with intent and motive.
A FALSE statement is a FALSE statement no matter how you frame it but that doesn’t mean the person is being dishonest because we don’t know their motives.
The “in my opinion” thing is mostly just that… your opinion about how these things should be discussed rather than an objective standard.
It might be “clearer” but it has also been said for example that in writing papers you should not constantly say “I think that…” because your reader KNOWS that’s what you think because youre the author and you’re making an argument.
English
@ProvisionistP But is a dishonest statement a dishonest statement no matter how you frame it?
If you make the statement above, and I correct you, and yet you do it again, isn't that purposely being dishonest? Wouldn't it be more honest to preface it with, "In my opinion...."?
English
I am once again asking many of us to stop jumping to the accusation of “dishonesty” in the online theology discourse.
That’s the post. 👍
English
Me: “Calvinism makes God the author of sin”
You: “We don’t believe that! We believe X!”
Me later: “Calvinism makes God the author of sin”
You: “You’ve been corrected! This is dishonest!”
In the first instance I’ve expressed a logical entailment and you think I’m telling Calvinists what THEY believe.
Make sense?
English
@ProvisionistP "expressing logical entailments"
What do you mean by that?
English
@MillerMike28518 I think “even after correction” can be a little subjective and that there’s a difference between expressing logical entailments and what ppl actually believe and ppl often confuse them.
English
@ProvisionistP But if someone purposely misrepresents what you believe, even after correction, what do you call that?
English
@theistinthought I think this is a common “escape hatch” for evangelism where it boils down to “be a good Christian and that will be sufficient light for them to ask”
It turns evangelism into just being a moral person and keeping to yourself.
English
Provisionist Perspective 🩸🌍 retweetledi
Heard a sermon today about being a Christian at work. Pastor said if you work really hard for your non-Christian boss, eventually your boss might ask, “You always work so hard for me, why do you do it?” And then you can tell your boss about Jesus.
No offense, but this is so out of touch with reality it’s insane.
English
@dmullz_117 @rootcausesleuth How can you refute a claim which you’ve not understood? Hmm?
English
@ProvisionistP @rootcausesleuth Better yet, why don’t you just address the quote I sent which refutes your claim.
English
This is not a mystery.
This is nonsense dressed up in sophistry.
English
@dhanabarger @KirkWilson You indicated it was a funny joke half an hour before this…
Dennis Hanabarger@dhanabarger
@ProvisionistP oof. good comeback lol
English
@KirkWilson @ProvisionistP Yes, juvenile insults are about all anti-calvinists have. Serious engagements are hard sometimes.
English
Anytime you see a post that begin with "Calvinists______"
You know some straw men and false information is sure to follow.
Be Better@Be_Like_JChrist
Calvinist suggests that God is fully deterministic. And scripture says that God wants all to be saved Then why, Calvinist, does God not just save everybody? He obviously can.
English
@MonradMonsen @Soteriology101 @Mindtrap028 True but as I said, “show results” option drives up engagement and therefore visibility
English
@ProvisionistP @Soteriology101 @Mindtrap028 All will see the results once the survey time period ends. Only those that respond or take the survey (Calvinists only) can see the developing statistics before the survey end.
English
Calvinists only please:
True or False:
God decrees whatsoever comes to pass except the sinful desires of creatures.
English
@ConfessingKite Funny because in my experience most of the Southern Baptist groups on Facebook are run mostly by rabid Calvinists.
English
A post in this Facebook group practically anathematized Calvinists but I'm not allowed to participate in the discussion because I asked "Do you know what the Abstract of Principles is an abstract OF?"
English
Don’t accuse me of being dishonest. Oz.
I don’t appreciate it.
We may misunderstand each other or talk past one another but I try my best not to accuse people of dishonesty.
Even in the OP, there are two different options and it is not meant to be a sweeping “all who say this are dishonest”
English
@ProvisionistP I didn’t deny those desires are something he decreed to permit. Read it again & stop letting your bias get in the way of being objective. I understand you guys have a lot of investment into attempting to make the decree the cause of sin but be honest and objective for once.
English
Affirming in one breath “God decreed all things” and in another “God has not decreed sinful desires” while BELIEVING “Well yes God has decreed them but does so indirectly and not efficiently” betrays either a presence of cognitive dissonance or deception.
English
Caio, I challenge you to respond to me without implicitly accusing me of dishonesty.
The fact that it seems to be your go-to shows how little you know me as a real person.
It is also a sure fire way to increase the probability that I will not continue to engage with you.
Frankly, I’m a little tired of it.
I’ve tried to be “nice” and respectful to you for a long time it feels like and I’m not getting much charity from you.
I’ve muted you on several occasions so that I would not grow frustrated by these kinds of replies but often end up unmuting you so I can see when you are screencapping me and replying to me or others on my feed.
Even in this reply I’ve deleted and retyped things so as to be best received by you and so as to not come off as combative myself.
You don’t see these things but you should know they OFTEN happen.
English
Your problem with the statement is that you refuse to define “decree” in the way the Reformed tradition has always defined it.
What’s truly dishonest here is importing your own definition, as if doing that is a valid way of addressing the issue, and then pretending as if you’ve defeated the position. You never argue against the actual position as stated. You’re incapable of it.
If someone refuses to address your position as you have defined it then that person is being dishonest, and yet you never once reciprocate the same courtesy you demand. When you redefine stuff it’s totally ok.
This is not only dishonest on your part (and I have told you in the past, directly, that you are incapable of honestly handling people’s words) but also highly hypocritical.
English
This argument is like saying “God created the universe ex nihilo but not the Moon. How the Moon came to be is a mystery. We don’t know how He did this but it’s in a confession of faith so that’s enough.”
It’s just punting when faced with absurd conclusions that follow from your assumed premises.
English
@dmullz_117 @rootcausesleuth The word itself is not nonsensical, don’t be daft.
Re-read what I wrote and try to understand what I’m saying this time.
English
@ProvisionistP @rootcausesleuth How is it a “nonsensical word?”
God ‘permits’ meaning, he allows things to occur according to the free agent’s will.
English
This does not address the OP at all.
You cannot in one breath say “God has decreed all things” and “God has not decreed sinful desires”.
You can talk about the mechanism in which God enacts His decree such that He is blameless but you cannot deny that He has decreed all sinful desires and maintain belief in the confessions.
English