04 November, 2006

Predestination: TULIP versus EMPTOR

What's the fun of looking at ancient and honored doctrines if you can't thumb your nose at them. :-)

The previous post is how I like to think of predestination. It is, admittedly, not a good format for discussion though. TULIP has proven, over the years, to be pretty effective in that right, so let's talk about TULIP for a little while.

If you are not familar with that acronym, Wikipedia has a number of articles on the subject. This one is probably the most succinct and provides links to the counter positions of Arminians.

I had intended to write one post comparing Calvinists and Arminians, identifying where I thought they were both wrong. Then I started writing. That one post would have been long, even by my standards.

Not only that, but I believe there is a missing point in both systems - *the* missing point, actually. So, I am going to write 6 posts on Plenus EMPTOR. Plenus means satisfied and emptor is supposed to mean "buyer." God is the satisfied buyer of our salvation.

So, some time tonight, I would imagine, I will post on Total Depravity, comparing it to the mysterious "E" in EMPTOR.

See you then. :-)


Collin Brendemuehl said...

Interesting. I would differ, but that would be a lengthy discussion. Will be back.


codepoke said...

Differing is welcome here!

Glad to see you, Collin.

codepoke said...

Ah. It took me until this morning to figure that maybe you were taking issue with the first line of the post - thumbing our noses at the ancient and honored doctrines. Other than that, I had wondered with what in this post you could disagree.

Actually, I do have a sincere respect for Calvinists and Arminians, both. Taking issue with them is something that gives me pause, so I made a joke about it.

Fyodor Dostoevsky makes big hay in his book, Notes From Underground, of sticking out his tongue at some things, and "making a long nose" whatever that means. Having just finished this book, his thoughts were on my mind, and my keyboard.