CalvinDude.com

Some Arminians I know have put forth the proposition that love, in order to be genuine, must be free. This linking of freedom and love immediately opens up two different conundrums. On the one hand, if love is free then it cannot be immoral not to love. Secondly, if love is free, one cannot be commanded to love.

Let’s see how that is the case.

Hypothesis:
1. It is not immoral for God to not love all.
2. If love is free, it cannot be commanded.

Definitions:
1. A moral good is doing what ought to be done.
2. A moral evil is doing what ought not to be done.
3. An amoral action is an action that is neither a moral good nor a moral evil.
4. An immoral action is equivalent to a moral evil.
5. Perfectly good beings always do a moral good action.
6. Perfectly good beings never do an immoral action.
7. Perfectly good beings have freedom to either do or not do an amoral action.
8. A free action is something that one is not compelled to do.
9. “Ought” means one is morally compelled regarding the action.
10. Commands ought to be done.

Starting Premises:
1. God is a perfectly good being.
2. Love is a free action.
3. All actions are one, and only one, of the following: moral, immoral, or amoral.

Argument:
1. God is a perfectly good being (Premise 1).
2. A perfectly good being always does a moral good action (Definition 5).
3. Therefore, God always does a moral good action.

4. God is a perfectly good being (P1).
5. A perfectly good being never does an immoral action. (D6).
6. Therefore, God never does an immoral action.

7. God is a perfectly good being (P1).
8. A perfectly good being has freedom to either do or not do an amoral action (D7).
9. Therefore, God has freedom to either do or not do an amoral action.

10. Love is a free action (P2).
11. A free action is something that one is not compelled to do (D8).
12. Therefore, love is an action that one is not compelled to do.

13. A moral good is doing what ought to be done (D1).
14. “Ought” means one is morally compelled regarding the action (D9).
15. Therefore, one is morally compelled to do a morally good action.

16. A moral evil is doing what ought not to be done (D2).
17. “Ought” means one is morally compelled regarding the action (D9).
18. Therefore, one is morally compelled not to do a moral evil (i.e. immoral (D4)) action.

19. An amoral action is an action that is neither a moral good nor a moral evil (D3).
20. There is no “Ought” in amoral actions (Extrapolated from D3).
21. Therefore, one is not morally compelled either way regarding amoral actions.

22. One is not morally compelled either way regarding amoral actions (21).
23. A free action is something one is not compelled to do (D8).
24. Therefore, amoral actions are free actions.

25. One is morally compelled to do a morally good action (15).
26. A free action is something one is not compelled to do (D8).
27. Therefore, morally good actions are not free actions.

28. One is morally compelled not to do a moral evil (18).
29. A free action is something one is not compelled to do (D8).
30. Therefore, immoral actions are not free actions.

31. All actions are one, and only one, of the following: moral, immoral, or amoral (P3).
32. Love is an action (from P2).
33. Love is one, and only one, of the following: moral, immoral, or amoral.

34. Love is a free action (P2)
35. Morally good actions are not free actions (27).
36. Therefore, love is not a morally good action.

37. Love is a free action (P2)
38. Immoral actions are not free actions (30).
39. Therefore, love is not an immoral action.

40. Love must be either moral, immoral, or amoral in its action (restating of 33).
41. Love is not a morally good action (36).
42. Love is not an immoral action (39).
43. Therefore, love is an amoral action.

44. God has freedom to either do or not do an amoral action (9)
45. Love is an amoral action (43).
46. Therefore, God has freedom to either love or not love.

Let us add a supposition now.

Supposition 1: God does not love all.

47. God does not love all (S1).
48. All actions are one, and only one, of the following: moral, immoral, or amoral (P3).
49. Love is an amoral action (43).
50. Therefore, it is not immoral for God to not love all.

PROVEN: Hypothesis 1—It is not immoral for God to not love all.

More simply now:

51. Commands ought to be done (D10).
52. “Ought” means one is morally compelled regarding the action (D9).
53. Therefore, commands are morally compelling.

54. A free action is something one is not compelled to do (D8).
55. Commands are morally compelling (53).
56. Therefore, commands are not free.

57. Love is a free action (P2).
58. Commands are not free (56).
59. Therefore, love cannot be commanded.

PROVEN: Hypothesis 2—If love is free, it cannot be commanded.

The implications from this will be in a future post.

I have recently been brushing up on my Koine Greek, and part of the process I use in addition to learning vocabulary words by rote is to read an interlinear New Testament. I think this is useful as it gives real world examples of how Koine writers structured their sentences.

Today, I read through John 12, and an interesting fact struck me about verse 32. Arminians often point to John 12:32 to counter Calvinistic claims from John 6:44. That passage states the no one comes to Christ unless drawn by the Father. John 12:32 records Christ’s words where He states that when He is lifted up (a reference to His death by crucifixion) He will draw all men to Himself. Arminians argue on this basis that while it is true that no one can come to the Father without being drawn, all will be drawn.

The first interesting point, which is not an essential point but is still worth noting, is that nowhere does John 12:32 say that Christ will draw all men. In fact, the Greek word is simply “all” with no noun attached. Literally, the passage reads: “And I, if I am lifted up from the Earth, I will draw all to myself.” This leads some interpreters to conclude that it’s better to translate the passage as “I will draw all things to myself” rather than “all men.”

But the second point is far more profound and relevant. Often Calvinists respond to an Arminian quoting John 12 by pointing out that the context of John 12 is irrelevant to the context of John 6. Nowhere is that more plain than by this simple point: John 6:44 begins (literal translation): “No one is able to come to me unless the Father having sent me should draw him.” Therefore, the one doing the drawing in John 6 is the Father. Yet Jesus, in John 12:32, states that Jesus is the one who is doing the drawing: “I will draw all to myself.” These are clearly two different instances of drawings, regardless of who (or what) is being drawn.

I’ve been reading some works on translations and language by Moisés Silva. He mentioned that his native tongue is Spanish, and a quick Google search shows me he was born in Cuba. What is interesting is that while English is not his native language, he writes so well in English that it makes me turn a bit green with envy!

Plus he’s got good theology to boot, seeing as how he’s OPC (it’s what PCA Presbyterians would be if we stopped drinking alcohol and joined the Only Perfect Church…).

In any case, I definitely recommend him. He’s scholarly, but easy to read and great with language all around!

I meant to post this yesterday, when I actually hit the 500 mile mark, but never got around to loading my website. Hurray for being busy.

In any case, I’ve passed beyond the 500 mile mark on my bike! As of this moment, I’ve ridden 514.24 miles.

I decided to do the math on this. When accounting for my bike and all the peripherals (helmet, gloves, bike lock, computer to calculate distance, etc.), plus adding in expenses for the repairs I’ve had to make so far (which is just replacing some tires so far), I’ve spent a total of $578.45 on my bike.

That means that as of this morning, I’ve paid approximately $1.12 per mile I’ve travelled on my bike. That’s not too shabby.

On the other hand, riding in the bus I was paying about $0.32 per mile. In order to get to match that value, I’ll need to ride a few more miles.

1,244.26 more, to be precise.

Because when I get to 1,758.5 miles ridden, I will have broken even on the cost difference between biking and riding the bus.

Incidentally, I got my bike on August 1. That was 86 days ago. So, that averages out to approximately 6 miles per day. Which means, at this rate, I’ll “break even” in 207 more days.

On the plus side, apart from the danger of getting hit by a car or developing hypothermia in the winter or getting struck by lightning in the summer, it’s a lot healthier to ride a bike than to ride the bus!

According to this article, Steve Jobs was “a skeptic all his life.” Furthermore:

The book delves into Jobs’ decision to delay surgery for nine months after learning in October 2003 that he had a neuroendocrine tumor — a relatively rare type of pancreatic cancer that normally grows more slowly and is therefore more treatable.

Instead, he tried a vegan diet, acupuncture, herbal remedies and other treatments he found online, and even consulted a psychic. He also was influenced by a doctor who ran a clinic that advised juice fasts, bowel cleansings and other unproven approaches, the book says, before finally having surgery in July 2004.

What a rather odd definition of “skeptic.”

Yesterday, I complained that it was 36 degrees when I rode my bike in to work.

Today it was 29.

That’s enough for me to declare “correlation”!

Speaking of correlation, along a similar thread, it’s been a couple of months since school started, and I have to ride by one on the way in to work. And my conclusion, having been past it nearly every school morning for two months, is that people who drop their kids off at school couldn’t drive to save their life. Like, there’s a 2-way stop sign there that magically becomes a 4-way stop because people just decide to not drive through it and block traffic, and then everyone else stops–even though there is clearly no stop sign at the intersection.

But this brings a dilemma too. What do I correlate that to? Is it that parents dropping off kids are poor drivers, or is it more general, since roughly 80% of the drivers there are female. So maybe it’s women make poor drivers. But then, I have to acknowledge that every single person I’ve seen there has been white, so maybe white people just make poor drivers. Finally, there was an over-representation of SUVs and minivans, so the correlation clearly is that drivers of said vehicles are poor drivers.

Clearly, all of these things are correlated. And therefore, Global Warming is true. Proof of Global Warming is found in the fact that it was 29 degrees this morning when yesterday it was 36. Clearly such a wild swing in temperatures can only be caused by massive global climate shifts….

Two things.

1) The older I get, the less I like cold. And biking in to work this morning, it was 36 degrees. With a headwind. Uphill both ways. In the snow. (Sadly, only the last two sentences–sentence fragments, to be accurate–are false.)

2) I finally got ticked off at an e-mail from work that had nothing to do with the content being delivered, but the manner in which it was delivered. Actually, I don’t feel as bad about this one (i.e., I don’t feel as much of a stick in the mud over this one like I do about complaining about the cold and having a sudden desire to live in Florida), since I’ve read Cracked articles mocking this particular thing I’m about to rant at before. (Sadly, I’m too lazy to link those articles for you because that would require me to do searches and…stuff.)

Now about the offending e-mail. First of all, it was from a corporation. I won’t mention which one, but this would not have bothered me at all if it had been a personal e-mail. Instead, this is from a business that’s supposed to be reputable and is supposed to be professional. And they write stuff like the following lines:

I’ll need to request to come from someone at the organization (with that email address)…What’s your connxn?

I don’t care about the mistake of using “to” instead of “the” because function words get mixed up all the time. But “connxn”? Since when did we move to Russia? English has VOWELS.

But don’t worry, the lady who wrote this followed up that with:

Also we’ll need … [an] email for rep (agent, manager, publicist – any 2ndary point of contact)

2ndary?!

Now, I realize that if you’re typing a voice message to a friend, or a Twitter post, you’ll want to abbreviate a bunch. After all, Twitter limits you to 140 characters, my cellphone (which is pretty typical now) limits texts to 160 characters. But e-mail does NOT have that limitation (and for the record, this particular e-mail had 879 characters, so it’s not like the lady who wrote it was trying to write a Twitter post).

So what’s my reaction reading this e-mail from a “supposed” professional organization hiring “supposed” professionals to write their correspondence? The scare-quotes give some bit of an indication….

But in this instance, I don’t care if it makes me sound like an old fuddy-duddy. If you’re too lazy to look up a Cracked article, that’s one thing. If you’re too lazy to spell “connection” and “secondary” in a business e-mail then you shouldn’t be in the work force.

It’s now been over a decade since 9/11. And to some extent, as a nation, we’ve all “moved on” from that and are living pretty much the way we always used to live before. Then, every once in a while, something will happen that might remind us that we’re living post 9/11.

That happened to me today. Where I work, we will be having a conference in January, so we had to book flights to that. The conference is in Florida, and this will be the fourth one I’ve gone to since I started work. It’s pretty much impossible to get a direct flight there from Colorado Springs, but there’s always been a wide variety of cities we could go to. For instance, the first year I went to Chicago, then to Florida. The next one, just to Denver. Then the last conference I got the connecting flight through Atlanta.

I enjoy being able to pick a new city, just to say I’ve been there. And on the return trip this time, I had it going through Houston. But on the trip out there, I had the option of picking a different city to land in first.

Washington, D.C.

And my first thought was, “While the likelihood of any terror attack is going to be very small, it will be highest on a flight to Washington.”

So it sank in. I realized that I’m really, truly living in a post 9/11 world after all.

Rumor (i.e., the news) says that we have a 70% chance of seeing white stuff falling from the sky tonight. All I know is it got downright chilly last night.

I blame Bush.

300 is more than just an awesome movie with no historical realism.

It’s also how many miles I’ve biked since August 1.

304.26 to be exact.