text:
Printable View
Seems clear that: a bullet with zero energy (ie, just layin' there) has no ability to do damage; a bullet that's zipping along with ~100 ft-lbs of energy can't compare to effects of one with ~400 ft-lbs of energy; a bullet that still retains energy after exiting a barrier hasn't spent its energy yet; and a bullet that has no energy left prior to exiting a barrier has spent all its energy inside the medium. Call it energy "transfer" or whatever, that energy has to go somewhere, and it doesn't all "disappear" as frictional heat.
I feel that the recent shooting in NYC in front of the Empire State building makes a great case for NOT carrying FMJ in an urban environment.
The rush to blame the two officers for lousy aim was proven somewhat wrong, considering the perp was hit ten out of 14 rounds. So most of the wounded bystanders were hit by 9mms doing a total penetration through the BG. Ergo, they mostly by these through and through rounds.
And I really wish that the news media would stop blaming the LEOs for bad shootings without being there or understanding the first thing about gunfights.
Carry hollow points. I see no reason to carry FMJ.
Give ya an example-
A 200 pound guy stands on a platform that is 5 feet high and jumps to the ground twice. In both instances, he will have the same kinetic energy and the same momentum.
The first time he does so, he bends his legs as he lands. He is uninjured.
The second time he does so, he locks his knees and remains stiff-legged as he lands. Obviously, he sustains injury to his knees, ankles and hips.
It's all about time- and strain-rate dependence and hitting something "important".
There's nothing wrong with carrying FMJs if that's your preference.
Personally, I use Gold Dot and Critical Defense for my carry and HD handguns, I would definitely recommend them.
You guys still aren't grasping that the energy transfer means nothing to the target.
Assume a bullet expands to .60" and does not exit the body resulting in total "energy transfer"
Are you guys actually convinced that's more effective than a bullet that expands slightly less say .55" that makes it all the way through?
Energy is merely bullet fuel. It does nothing by itself as its released into the body. My vest analogy is valid, the armor wearer indeed experiences as much energy transfer as is possible with soft armor yet comes out completely unimpaired
I'll stick to HPs except for in my LCP during the colder months where I switch to FMJ flat points.
Ive had FMJ underpenetrate a few times, and had JHP overpenetrate a few. At the end of the day, i carry JHP because it was designed to expand and cause more tissue damage. With FMJ its much more likely to pass through. In a SD situation, I think its better that a HP underperform and for me to die than for a FMJ round to pass through and hit a bystander. just my opinion.
My take is just as long as you know what is behind your intended target then yes it is OK to use ball ammo. Now in a zombie apocolypse scenario, we all are hoping that when shooting ball ammo, it will go through 2 or 3 or more with one shot destroying and killing them !!! God Bless :smile:
"And I really wish that the news media would stop blaming the LEOs for bad shootings without being there or understanding the first thing about gunfights."
I tend to agree. What would have been the public and media response if the LEOs hadn't fired because the "streets were crowded" and this guy opened fire? Me? I'm not voluntarily dieing because someone happens to be in the background.
Fmj is generally preferred if shooting smaller calibers-22lr,25acp,32acp in particular if winter heavy clothing.
Even a 380 has below min fbi stat penetration if jhp is used.That said even 32 acp can have or meet that 12 in min with correct ammo with fmj.
Bullet placement and yes can be over penetration with hand cannons of large caliber with fmj yet it is what armies are limited to,possibly one of the several reasons they went to smaller calibers.
I shoot same ammo for practice as carry and dont use zombie rounds or any of the frag rounds as they dont often expand or preform as intended.I keep one jhp in tube rest are fmj,yes 32 acp.Backups is pt22 22lr.,25acp Titan,peashooters all over the place can reach one with either hand front or back.
Im small cant hide a large pistol,have a truck to carry the 45.


text:
Teleread has a look at an all too typical case of what happens to people who are honest enough to actually put their hard earned money down and pay for ebooks crippled by DRM.
Then I bought an iPad, and suddenly reading eBooks began to crowd out my paper book reading. I wasn't alone. By Fall 2010 there were new reading apps coming out every few weeks to target the excited iReading populace. I happily downloaded all of them and tried each one out, looking for the perfect eReading experience. Then I ran into a problem.
My iPhone wouldn't let me authorize any new apps that utilized Adobe's DRM. I had run out of the allotted authorizations. By March of this year, I began to contact Adobe to fix the situation, but each web case was "withdrawn", which is to say "dismissed without solving". I called tech support on multiple numbers and each time I was told that they only supported Adobe Digital Editions via the web. Some helped me open a case for Tier2 support, yet each of those web cases was withdrawn.
. . .
I had to delete the app and reinstall it. As I feared, this caused problems when reauthorizing with Adobe. I got the dreaded "Adobe Activation Request Error 2004". I was locked out of my library book. I started calling Adobe again, getting the usual runaround. The one time I thought I finally got help was when a tech said he would happily reset my account, but just reset my password instead. Today I got another "Withdrawn". Adobe would not reset my activation account for love nor money.
I think it is clear what is going on here — The Pirate Bay has clearly infiltrated content and software companies. They don't want satisfied, paying customers. Rather, they want to create such an awful experience for average consumers that everyone gives up and just torrents everything.
It's sad, really.
Post Revisions:
- July 28, 2011 @ 20:49:19 [Current Revision] by Brian Carnell
- July 28, 2011 @ 20:48:45 by Brian Carnell

subset: commoncrawl


text:
$ 5.99
Judged "MOST PORNOGRAPHIC PEPPER" By Organic Gardening Magazine. Gives virility and stamina? As the name implies, this "guy" is shaped very realistically. It is absolutely the novelty of the garden. Everyone in your neighborhood will want to take a peek at your Peter Pepper. Besides being a real conversation piece, let me tell you, this pepper is super tasty. It has a thick fleshy pod that is fairly hot with a unique spicy flavor. The pepper is rumored to be an aphrodisiac in South America. I don't know if that's true, but we all know the many health benefits of eating hot peppers. Loaded with Vitamins A and C, Peter is sure to become a favorite. Very rare!
My Peter Pepper made the News Anchor, Steve Levy, of ABC news in Philadelphia blush. We've gotten a similar response from T-Bone Terry of Alternatives Magazine and Laura Lewis of the Myrtle Beach Sun News. There have been countless other TV and Newspaper folks and Celebrities that have had the same astonished reaction.
EVERYBODY needs to try to grow this Pepper...at least once.
AKA the "Penis Pepper".
Scoville Heat Units: 5,000 - 30,000 SHUs.
$ 4.99
Every once in a while an awesome hot pepper surfaces in the chile industry. This year it's the "Atomic Starfish." The unique starfish shape makes it special. It's from Brazil...
$ 2.99
This juicy and delicious Beefsteak grows nice and plump. Plants can grow to 7' tall so be sure to stake this determined tomato! Big Delicious Tomato belongs in every garden....
$ 7.99
Here it is....We're thrilled to offer you the previous "Hottest Pepper on the Planet" record holder. It became World Famous when it broke all records in the Guinness Book of...


text:
Alexander McQueen's eponymous fashion label will live on despite the lauded designer's suicide last week and a history of troubling debts that have left his clothing brand struggling to turn a profit.
François-Henri Pinault, head of the French luxury group PPR which controls the McQueen label through its Gucci Group, announced yesterday that continuing the British designer's legacy would be the best possible tribute to a man he described as a genius, poet and friend. "The Alexander McQueen trademark will live on," he said during an emotional press conference. "This would be the best tribute that we could offer to him."
The news will come as a brief moment of relief for London Fashion Week which kicks off today under the gloomy shadow of McQueen's death. An inquest this week heard how the 40-year-old was found hanging in a wardrobe in his Mayfair flat with a suicide note nearby on the eve of the funeral of his mother, Joyce.
McQueen won British Designer of the Year four times and over the past decade became one of the world's most talented designers. But despite achieving widespread popularity and respect within the fashion industry, his clothing brand struggled to establish itself financially.
It was only in 2006, five years after the label was originally set up, that the fashion house managed to turn a profit. An analysis of the British wing of the global label, meanwhile, showed liabilities totalling more than £32m. The label owns 11 boutiques and employs 180 people worldwide.
A number of well-established fashion houses, such as Dior, Chanel and Yves Saint Laurent, have continued to thrive without their creative founders but survival is by no means guaranteed.
Early indications suggest that McQueen's death is likely to lead to a huge short term increase in sales as fans rush to snap up his creations. According to the trade magazine Drapers, sales of McQueen clothes have soared by 1,400 per cent. But whether the fashion house will survive without McQueen in the long term remains to be seen.
As he announced PPR's profits from 2009 (which rose by 6.9 per cent largely due to the sale of its distribution business in Africa), M. Pinault paid tribute to McQueen's contribution to the world and promised to continue his brand.
"His art went beyond the fashion world," he said. "He had a great command of technique... he hid behind an armour of provocation. Fashion has lost one of its extraordinary people. He was one of the falling stars that comes across our generation."
The PPR head also alluded to McQueen's recent psychological struggles describing him as "hurt and lost in a world whose superficiality and lack of ideals he couldn't accept."
Robert Polet, president and chief executive of the Gucci Group, said the autumn/winter collection that the designer was working on before his death would be shown at Paris Fashion Week next month. But he said it was too early to think about new design teams when McQueen's family and colleagues were still mourning.
As the great and the good of the fashion world shift their attention from New York to London this week, McQueen's death will undoubtedly dominate conversation throughout the shows.
The British Fashion Council, which hosts London Fashion Week, has mounted a tribute wall where visitors can leave notes and flowers. The wall is set up in the main tent at Somerset House.
- More about:
- London Fashion Week
- Paris Fashion Week
- PPR Group
- Retail


text:
|Prev Close
|Day Low/High
|144.57 / 148.69
|52 Wk Low/High
|114.59 / 170.42
|Avg Volume
|Prev Close
|Day Low/High
|144.57 / 148.69
|52 Wk Low/High
|114.59 / 170.42
|Avg Volume
|Shares Outstanding
|Market Cap
|P/E Ratio
|Div & Yield
Elliott's previous successes in the healthcare space bode well for its chances at athena.
Here are Friday's top research calls, including an upgrade for Walmart and new coverage of AK Steel, IBM, Nvidia and Thermo Fisher.
Wall Street snaps back to gains on Thursday as positive earnings from Walmart help distract from brewing trouble in Washington, D.C.
Stocks add to gains on Thursday, coming back from their worst losses in eight months a day earlier, as a positive quarter for Walmart boosts consumer names.
Stocks shakes off earlier losses to trade higher as a positive quarter for Walmart and gains in the health care sector pull indexes into the green.
Stocks turn higher as Walmart does the heavy lifting on the Dow and S&P 500, and health care gives a boost to the Nasdaq.
When Paul Singer's activist fund urges 'strategic opportunities' it usually means a sale of the business may not be far off.
Application Process Opens Today; Join athenahealth CEO for Reverse Pitch Day® at San Francisco Office June 13
Company Continues Expansion Across Hospital Market; Adds New Government Guarantee Program & Helps Hospitals Achieve Over 106 Percent of Baseline Cash Flow on Average
CEO Jonathan Bush says that the law's emphasis on creating access does so at the price of affordability.
Full-steam ahead for earnings season in the coming week as a range of industry leaders across a swath of sectors release their recent quarterly performances.
Seamless Information Exchange, Aligned Incentives, Reduced Administrative Burden, and Speed of Payment Under Any Reimbursement Model Cements Partnership
Marketplace Doubles Health IT Offerings and Adds New Capabilities
Organizations activate national cloud network to engage providers and patients in line with clinical guidelines; partnerships with pre-eminent societies include the AAOS, ACC and ACOG
Electronic Data Exchange Aims to Transform Previously Manual Processes, Improve Data Quality, and Reduce Workload
Hosts 10 Enterprise Client Presentations, Conversation with ZDoggMD, and athenaInsight Data-Driven Demonstrations
Tom Price will now head the Department of Health and Human Services.
Under the advice of Paul Singer, the provider of technology and consulting services, Advisory Board, is working with Goldman Sachs and Allen & Co. to weigh its options.
Buckle in for a busy week filled with bellwether earnings reports, monetary policy decisions, and closely scrutinized economic numbers.
OurHealth Becomes First On-site Clinic Client; Will Leverage athenahealth National Network and Set of Services to Engage Patients, Identify Gaps in Care, Reduce Costs, and Improve Overall Employee Health
Here are Wednesday's top research calls, including upgrades for Agco, AthenaHealth and Hologic, and a downgrade for Oshkosh.


text:
Download the accompanying reference guide.
© and (P)HarperCollins Publishers
"A great intro to Italian"
Very useful for learning the basics quickly but efficiently. This is a good pronunciation supplement to a phrasebook.
"Good recording"
The audio itself is quite helpful for basic travel Italian. The pamphlet is absolutely worthless. It is just a table of contents and a list of other titles available from the publisher. I did find this to be a good starting point to learning Italian but I wish there was a transcript to follow along with.
"Easy learning"
It was better than I thought. If you listen to this a few times you will certainly pick up some words and sentences. I was quite surprised
"Useful and brief intro for travelers "
I found this short program a well selected intro for travelers to Italy. I listen repeatedly. Obviously made for Brits. Who else would order lager and chips while in Italy? ;) Would be perfect if it included more about directions.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.


text:
Global shares at three-month high on U.S. "fiscal cliff" optimism
By Angela Moon
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Signs of compromise in U.S. talks to stop automatic tax hikes and spending cuts hurting the economy next year pushed world shares to their highest level since September on Tuesday and weakened investor appetite for safe-haven bonds and the dollar.
Wall Street opened slightly higher as investors continued to expect a deal would be reached to avert the "fiscal cliff," though caution remained in the absence of any concrete progress.
Gains were limited following a steep rally in the previous session, which lifted the S&P 500 to its highest in nearly two months, but hopes for a deal grew on signs of compromise between the major political parties in Washington.
"We've been getting a series of snippets suggesting accommodation from both Boehner and Obama, which is feeding the sense in markets that we could get a deal," said Michael Holland, chairman of Holland & Co in New York.
Investors have been reluctant to make big bets in the face of the uncertainty over the budget.
"You can never discount the possibility that the government will do something dumb and screw this up, but right now the market is happy over the prospects for a deal," said Holland, who oversees $4 billion in assets.
The political divide narrowed on Monday night when President Barack Obama proposed leaving lower tax rates in place for those earning under $400,000, moving closer to the $1 million threshold favored by Republican House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner.
The Dow Jones industrial average .DJI was up 52.22 points, or 0.39 percent, at 13,287.61. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index .SPX was up 7.60 points, or 0.53 percent, at 1,437.96. The Nasdaq Composite Index .IXIC was up 21.77 points, or 0.72 percent, at 3,032.37. Continued...


text:
At the Iowa Straw Poll, a member of the Mitt Romney campaign in Iowa was also responsible for running the polls, an admitted conflict of interest which the GOP allowed. After suspicious activity with the Diebold voting machines, Romney won by a landslide. He then joked to the media about "stuffing the ballot boxes."
Today at the Texas Straw Poll, a person promoting their candidate outside the venue observed problems with delegates entering the doors. Voting was to take place at 1:00 PM, and the tickets purchased and printed from the Internet said that the event began at 10:00 AM. Delegates who paid for tickets and traveled to the event were refused entry after 10:00 AM. Part of the conflict was videotaped and posted on YouTube.
The photographer reported that between 10:00 AM and 1:30 PM, about twelve delegates with tickets were refused entry every ten minutes. That would add up to 2,500 votes that may not have been counted.
The Republican Party has no respect for its members or for this country and its democratic spirit. The party is so concerned with keeping its exclusive tier of puppet candidates in power that it is sabotaging the campaigns of other candidates in its own party.
I have contacted the chairman of the Republican Party about these issues. I hope that you will do the same. You can find information on how to do that at http://www.gop.com/ContactUs/. When members of the party were trying to kick Ron Paul out of the debates, a barage of calls and emails to the National GOP, Michigan GOP and other state GOP's showed results, and Ron Paul continued to participate in GOP debates.
Similar action in response to the Iowa and Texas straw polls should demand any possible action that could repair the tainted results of those polls. If we do not take a stand here, we can expect another presidential election with two incompetent candidates dominated by corporations and special interest groups who do not represent the Constitution or the American people.
1 comment ( 17 views ) | permalink | related link


text:
a place for zinesters - writers and readers
Hey guys,
So - as the title might suggest - I've been thinking about starting a Zine review/news podcast. I'm not planning on doing interviews or anything like that just yet (maybe later once we've found or feet or something) but the format I had in mind was reviews of various zines interspersed with readings from their creators. And maybe one guest per show talking about their favourite zine and…
© 2017 Created by Krissy Ponyboy Press.
Powered by
Badges |
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.


text:
There is a compatibility issue with
Java and/or
Windows 7 and the program that I use to build this site that jumbles up
the formatting.
While I am trying to figure out how to fix this problem you may just want to read the pdf version in the link
Predestination is doctrine which teaches that God predetermined who would go to heaven and who would spend eternity in hell.
Furthermore, it
teaches that each person has absolutely no choice in accepting or rejecting salvation through Christ. Every move you
and everything that
happens to you, good or bad, was predetermined by God. If you reject Christ it is because you never had
a chance or
option to believe.
Those who espouse predestination claim that if we have the free will to accept God's salvation then we have earned our way into
Therefore we're not saved by grace but by our own merit-- we caused our own salvation, not God.
Belief in predestination is generally referred to as Calvinism or Reformed Theology.
• John Calvin (1509-1564):
God preordained, for his own glory and the display of His attributes of mercy and justice, a part of the human race,
without any merit of their own, to eternal salvation, and another part, in just punishment of their sin, to eternal damnation.
We proved above that something not subject to free choice is nevertheless voluntarily done.
Some are predestined to salvation, others to damnation
o God "
saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure
" (3)
o Regarding the lost: "
it was his good pleasure to doom to destruction
." (4)
Since the disposition of all things is in the hands of God and he can give life or death at his pleasure, he dispenses and
ordains by his judgment that some, from their mother's womb, are destined irrevocably to eternal death in order to glorify
his name in their perdition
All are not created on equal terms, but some are predestined to eternal life, others to eternal damnation…
Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531)
was the leader of the Protestant Reformation in Switzerland, and founder of the Swiss Reformed
Churches. Zwingli viewed God as the cause of all human sin. A Reformed Theology website said, "
Zwingli's understanding of
predestination as indistinguishable from providence, logically inclines him to the conclusion that God is the cause of human sin
." (7)
Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892):
I believe that nothing happens apart from divine determination and decree. We shall never be
able to escape from the doctrine of divine predestination - the doctrine that God has foreordained certain people unto eternal life.
Loraine Boettner (1901-1990):
Even the fall of Adam, and through him the fall of the race, was not by chance or accident, but
was so
ordained in the secret counsels of God.
Edwin Palmer:
All things that happen in all the world at any time and in all history—whether inorganic matter, vegetation,
animal, man or angels (both good and evil ones-- come to pass because God ordained them, Even sin- the fall of the devil from
heaven, the fall of Adam, and every evil thought, word, and deed in all of history
." (9 )
R.C. Sproul, Jr.:
…God desired for man to fall into sin…God created sin
." (10)
Free will teaches that when presented with the facts of God's plan for salvation that every individual person has a choice to make, to either
or reject God's gift of salvation. God desires that every person accept His gift. What was predestined was God's plan for salvation
through Jesus
for those who accept it. Therefore if you accept that Jesus died for your sins and you have made Him Lord of your life then
you are a part of the
predetermined plan.
Jesus Christ:
or God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish
have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him
Apostle Peter:
The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not
anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
Apostle Paul:
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.
Apostle Paul:
This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved
. (14)
Calvinists claim that their position is proven by
early church leaders
and then quote Augustine who lived from 354 to 430 AD. What do
church leaders say about free will? Let's look at a few. Some of these men were discipled directly by one or two of the original
apostles or by men the original disciples taught and mentored.
Ignatius of Antioch- Died between 98 and 110 AD.
Ignatius was likely a disciple of both Apostles Peter and John and was martyred
was condemned to fight wild beasts in the Coliseum) in Rome. Seven of his letters have survived to this day; he is generally
considered to be one of
the Apostolic Fathers (the earliest authoritative group of the Church Fathers):
If any one is truly religious, he is a man of God; but if he is irreligious, he is a man of the devil, made such, not by nature,
but by
his own choice.
Polycarp- c. 69 AD-c. 155 AD.
Martyred by being burned at the stake in his 87th year. Polycarp had been a disciple of John (there is
debate as
whether this John was the son of Zebedee, or John the Presbyter (Lake 1912)).(16) I list Polycarp here not for any particular
quote but because he
was a teacher of Irenaeus, whom I do quote:
But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by
apostles in
Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried
[on earth]
very long time,
and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom
... (17)
Irenaeus- (ca. 130-202)
- Irenaeus, who was also a martyr, was taught by Polycarp and his writings were formative in the early
development of
Christian theology. About 180 AD Irenaeus wrote
Against Heresies Book IV
, against ideas that would later become
aspects of Calvinist and
Reformed Theology in its denial of the free will as you can see in the following summaries:
Men are Possessed of Free Will, and Endowed with the Faculty of Making a Choice. It is Not True, Therefore, that Some
are by
Nature Good, and Others Bad.
Man is Endowed with the Faculty of Distinguishing Good and Evil; So That, Without Compulsion, He Has the Power, by
His Own
Will and Choice, to Perform God's Commandments, by Doing Which He Avoids the Evils Prepared for the
Justin Martyr- c. 100/114AD – c. 162/168 AD.
He was another early Christian apologist (defender) of the faith and was martyred by
beheading. His works represent the earliest surviving Christian apologies of notable size:
Man acts by his own free will and not by fate.
We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and rewards are rendered
according to the merit of each man's actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power. For
if it be
predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise or the other to be
blamed. Unless
humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their
they may be.... For neither would a man be worthy of reward or praise if he did not of himself choose the
good, but was merely
created for that end. Likewise, if a man were evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not
evil of himself, being unable
to do anything else than what he was made for.
But that you may not have a pretext for saying that Christ must have been crucified, and that those who transgressed must
been among your nation, and that the matter could not have been otherwise, I said briefly by anticipation, that God,
wishing men
and angels to follow His will, resolved to create them free to do righteousness; possessing reason, that they may
know by whom
they are created, and through whom they, not existing formerly, do now exist; and with a law that they
should be judged by Him, if
they do anything contrary to right reason: and of ourselves we, men and angels, shall be
convicted of having acted sinfully, unless
we repent beforehand. But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men
shall be certainly punished, it did so because it
foreknew that they would be unchangeably [wicked], but not because God
had created them so.
Clement of Alexandria (190 AD)
A man by himself working and toiling at freedom from sinful desires achieves nothing. But if he plainly shows himself to be
eager and earnest about this, he attains it by the addition of the power of God. God works together with willing souls.
But if the
person abandons his eagerness, the spirit from God is also restrained. To save the unwilling is the act of one using
compulsion; but
to save the willing, that of one showing grace
. (23)
Neither praise nor condemnation, neither rewards nor punishments, are right if the soul does not have the power of choice
avoidance, if evil is involuntary
. (24)
Archelaus (250-300 AD)
All the creatures that God made, He made very good. And He gave to every individual the sense of free will, by which
He also instituted the law of judgment.... And certainly whoever will, may keep the commandments. Whoever
despises them and
turns aside to what is contrary to them, shall yet without doubt have to face this law of judgment.... There
can be no doubt that
every individual, in using his own proper power of will, may shape his course in whatever direction he
Methodius (260-315 AD)
Those [pagans] who decide that man does not have free will, but say that he is governed by the unavoidable necessities of
are guilty of impiety toward God Himself, making Him out to be the cause and author of human evils
I could have quoted more early church leaders but the point is made. Lest you think I merely cherry picked favorable quotes to make my
consider what Calvinist Loraine Boettner has to say about the early church leaders. Boettner, author of
The Reformed Doctrine of
acknowledges that the early church fathers did not ascribe to the doctrine of predestination:
It may occasion some surprise to discover that the doctrine of Predestination was not made a matter of special study until
the end of the fourth century....They of course taught that salvation was through Christ; yet they assumed that man had
full power
to accept or reject the gospel. Some of their writings contain passages in which the sovereignty of God is
recognized; yet along side
of those are others which teach the absolute freedom of the human will. Since they could not
reconcile the two they would have
denied the doctrine of Predestination... They taught a kind of synergism in which there
was a co-operation between grace and free
Regarding what we now call the doctrine of predestination Boettner went on to say, "
This cardinal truth of Christianity was first clearly
by Augustine..
." Augustine lived from 354 – 430 A.D., well after the church fathers quoted above.
Boettner wasn't alone in his conclusion that prior to Augustine there really weren't any who espoused a doctrine of predestination of a
certain elect
few. In 1882 James Morrison wrote in
The Extent of Atonement
about an English Bishop, John Davenant (1572-1641), who
was present at the
Synod of Dort in 1618. Bishop Davenant wrote:
It may be truly said before Augustine and Pelagius, there was no question concerning the death of Christ, whether it was to
extended to all mankind, or to be confined only to the elect. For the Fathers…not a word (that I know of) occurs among
them of
the exclusion of any persons by the decree of God. They agree that it is actually beneficial to those only who believe,
everywhere confess that Christ died in behalf of all mankind…
Augustine died in AD 429, and up to his time, at least, there is not the slightest evidence that any Christian ever dreamed of
propitiation for the elect alone. Even after him, the doctrine of limited propitiation was but slowly propagated, and for
long but
partially received.
In other words, according to Reformed Theology, the early church fathers, men who studied under the original Apostles and Disciples or
students, did not understand basic Christian doctrine. Apparently the world would have to wait nearly 400 years for this revelation!
They are in
effect saying that Christ's work and the Scriptures were not understood by the early Christians. It required some special
revelation of hidden truth
to special people centuries later. Isn't that Gnosticism?
What we see is that Calvinists would rather put their trust in doctrine developed centuries after Jesus, the Apostles and the early church
fathers, by
a man who did not study with those closest to the source. Biblical historians and scholars will tell you the closer one gets to the
original source, the
more likely one is to get accurate doctrine from those who were there. The reverse is true, the farther away you get from
those who were there, the
more likely that errors are to develop in doctrine.
There is about a 400 year jump between the original Apostles and their students until Augustine revealed "the truth," then you had another
years until men like John Calvin came along to develop and enforce this doctrine.
Dave Hunt sums it up nicely:
The huge difference between the biblical God and the Calvinist God is clear. The biblical God punishes men for rejecting the salvation
provided for everyone, which all could have accepted by their free will-and punishes them for their sins, which are contrary to His
will, none
of which they had to commit but chose to do so.
But the Calvinist God condemns to hell those whom He could save if He so desired but for whom He sovereignly chose not even to
Christ die and from whom He deliberately withholds the salvation He pretends to offer them—and punishes them for not
accepting. Yes,
that's a huge difference."
The Berean Call
July 2007 Q & A
Jewish philosophy stresses that free will is a product of the intrinsic human soul and is closely linked with the concept of reward and
based on the Torah itself:
I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse: therefore choose life
Deuteronomy 30:19
It is further understood that in order for Man to have true free choice, he must not only have inner free will, but also an environment in which
choice between obedience and disobedience exists. God thus created the world such that both good and evil can operate freely. (28)
The 12-volume
Jewish Encyclopedia
, which was originally published between 1901-1906 has this to say about
Free Will
The doctrine that volition is self-originating and unpredictable. That man is free to choose between certain
of conduct was regarded by rabbinical Judaism as a fundamental principle of the Jewish religion. Although generally
following the
ethical system of the Stoics, Philo, influenced by Judaism, professed the doctrine of free will ("Quod Deus Sit
Immutabilis," ed.
Mangey, p. 279), and Josephus states that the Pharisees maintained it against both the Sadducees, who
attributed everything to
chance, and the Essenes, who ascribed all to predestination and divine providence
("Ant." xiii. 5, §
9; xviii. 1, § 5). "All is in the
hands of God except the fear of God" is an undisputed maxim of the Talmud (Ber. 33b; Niddah
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=363&letter=F&search=free will
The belief that the destiny of man is determined beforehand by God. "Predestination" in this sense is
not to
be confounded with the term "preordination," applied to the moral agents as predetermining either election to eternal
life or
reprobation. This latter view of predestination, held by Christian and Mohammedan theologians, is foreign to
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=503&letter=P&search=free will
Free will acknowledges that God is active in our lives and that He does intervene and cause certain things to happen as evidenced by the
prophecies in the scriptures. Other things that happen to us are a result of choices we make. While yet other events happen because of sin
that is in
the world, we can't control the events, we can control how we react to them. Free will teaches that because God is sovereign and
active in our
lives He can use any event for our benefit, even those events He does not directly cause to occur.
I've been told emphatically by a friend I'll call Fred, who is a bi-vocational Reformed Theology pastor, "
there is no middle ground
Loraine Boettner, author of
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
claims "
there is no consistent middle ground between
Calvinism and
There are two reasons as I see it that it matters:
a person's
salvation is already de
is no real
point in being proactive in the faith or urgency in preaching the Gospel.
If your
neighbor is unsaved
Reformed Theology tells you
that they
will come to know Jesus or spend eternity in hell whether you tell
them about
God's plan for salvation or not.
b) Calvinists believe that if you don't believe in predestination it is because the Holy Spirit has chosen not to reveal the truth of
to you. The Holy Spirit reveals the truth of predestination to real believers so you must not be a real believer if you
believe in free will.
Why do Calvinists even bother to debate the issue? After all, if Calvinists are correct then those believing in
and those believing in
were predestined to have those beliefs, there is no basis for argument. Yet there seem to be more books and more web sites
arguing the case
than there are in favor of
free will
. Many Calvinist sites verge on the militant, dismissing any argument
for free will out of hand.
Many Calvinist websites I've come across call freewill dangerous to true faith. If, as Loraine Boettner claims, "
are no valid arguments for
free will
" then why devote so much time to arguing the case for predestination?
Again, does it matter? It shouldn't be anything more than a difference in opinion. However, John Calvin had people executed who denied
predestination and many prominent modern day Calvinists claim that Calvinism "
is the Gospel,
" the implication is if you reject Calvinism you
reject the Gospel, therefore you are not saved.
According to Calvinism
the good news
of the Gospel is not good news for everyone… The Reformed Theology Gospel is essentially this:
God only loves and saves those whom He chooses to love and save. Everyone else God specifically created to spend in hell,
eternal torment and damnation even though they never had the chance or option to accept God's gift of salvation. This is
good pleasure." God demonstrates His Glory when he predestines certain people to destruction.
In case you think I'm exaggerating then read from John Calvin's
Institutes of Christian Religion
God "
saves whom he wills of his mere good pleasure
" (29)
Those, therefore, whom God passes by he reprobates, and that for no other cause but because he is pleased to exclude
from the inheritance which he predestines to his children
…" (30)
Regarding the lost "
it was his good pleasure to doom to destruction
…" (31)
But if all whom the Lord predestined to death are naturally liable to sentence of death, of what injustice, pray, do they
complain…because by his eternal providence they were before their birth doomed to perpetual destruction… what will they
be able
to mutter against their defense?
Now since the arrangement of all things is in the hand of God…He arranges… that individuals are born, who are doomed
the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction…
" (33)
…by his eternal providence they were before their birth doomed to eternal destruction
" (34)
This is in contrast with the Gospel I know. The Gospel means
the good news
which is that God created us to have a personal relationship
Him and cares about every individual person:
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have
eternal life.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."
John 3:
I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew,
for the Gentile.
Romans 1:16
According to Reformed Theology when someone, lets call her Molly, accepted Christ it wasn't really because of her own free will, but
God created her specifically to accept Christ, without a choice.
Now suppose Molly's grown son dies without accepting Christ. Reformed Theology tells us that God created Molly's son specifically to
eternity separated from God, in hell. Therefore all the years of prayer, anguish and hope that Molly's son would someday accept
Christ was a
waste of time.
It's one thing to have a loved one that rejects God because of his own choice, but it is another to believe that person never had a chance
God never permitted or allowed them a chance.
To follow predestination to its logical conclusion we should not feel any sense of grief or sadness when an unsaved friend or relative dies and
spends eternity in hell. Rather we should rejoice because the person is going to hell, just as God intended.
We see in the first chapter of Genesis that God created everything and everything He created was good.
God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.
Genesis 1:31
What did God create that was not good? Nothing!
We're also told that "
God created man in His imag
e". The Bible tells us God created man, male and female, and
God blessed them
(Genesis 1:
28). Nowhere in the Genesis account does it tell us that God created anyone specifically for eternal damnation.
Sin, Rebellion and Evil
God did not create the world to destroy part of it. That is something we brought on ourselves.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
John 3:17
Everything God created was good, so how did sin enter the world? Apostles Paul and John tell us that sin entered the world through
and that God did not create sin.
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men,
all sinned.
Romans 5:12
…But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who abides in Him sins;
no one
who sins has seen Him or knows Him… the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the
beginning. The
Son of God appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil. No one who is born of
God practices sin,
because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God…
1 John 3:5-9
God did not cause Adam to disobey Him; otherwise man wouldn't have been created in God's image. The Bible tells us that God hates sin
that sin can't enter heaven. Solomon wrote
This only have I found: God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes.
Ecclesiastes 7:29
Reformed Theology says "
God created us therefore whatever He does is just, whether we like it or not.
" Yes, that is true, however, I
accept their definition of just nor do I believe that God is that capricious or arbitrary. God sets the standards for us and the standards
are knowable.
parent cannot force his child to eat a cupcake and then slap the tar out of him for eating it. It's a different case when the parent
Don't eat the cupcake
", then if the child thinks about it and says to himself, "
Dad really didn't mean he'd punish me if I did eat
" or "
I don't
care what Dad says, I make my own decisions and I am eating the cupcake anyway
." Then the resulting punishment is
Having free will means bad things are going to happen as a result of living in a fallen world.
When a loved one gets sick, or dies in a traffic accident, or loses their job, or just gets a cold many tend to say "
it's God's will.
" It is
certainly a
convenient and uncomplicated explanation. If one means its God's will because He didn't prevent it this is different than saying
God caused it to
happen.That God didn't
it doesn't mean He
it to happen. Many calamities are a consequence of living in a
sinful fallen world of our
own making. That is a consequence of having free will. Otherwise one would have to conclude that God causes
every rape, every murder, and
every starving child. The truth is because God can use any incident for His glory, He doesn't have to cause it
to use it. In the same way, regardless
of what befalls us, God expects us to react a certain way:
...Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ...
Philippians 1:27
Did God create Lucifer/Satan, specifically to rebel and take a third of the angels with him? Because God is sovereign, He could
prevented the possibility of the rebellion from ever happening. Again, that God didn't
it doesn't mean He
it to happen.
allowed it because He allowed free will.
Did God create evil?
And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the
tree of
the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.
Genesis 2:16-17
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.
Genesis 3:22
You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil;
Psalm 5:4
The LORD loves righteousness and justice
Psalm 33:5
I have been told by my Reformed Theology friends that since God is
over all it is presumptuous for us to call
evil. They
tell me
since we cannot know God's mind and God causes all things as part of His sovereign plan, then nothing is really evil, there is no
difference between
good and evil. Yet God's sovereignty is not threatened by free will and He tells us we can distinguish between good and
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil
Isaiah 5:20
Josh McDowell had the following to say about creation, evil, and God's love for us:
The Scriptures make it plain that God did not create the world in the state in which it is now, but evil came as a result of the
selfishness of man. The Bible says that God is a God of love and He desired to create a person and eventually a race that
love Him. But genuine love cannot exist unless freely given -- through free choice God allows us to accept His love or
to reject it.
This choice made the possibility of evil a reality. When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they did not choose something God
but, by their choice, they brought evil into the world. God is neither evil nor did He create evil. Man brought evil
upon himself by
selfishly choosing his own way apart from God's way.
God created us out of love for a purpose. The purpose is God wants a relationship with us. A relationship cannot be one-sided where the
interaction of one side is all controlled by the other side. Imagine creating a sock-puppet with button-eyes and carrying on both sides of a
conversation with it. How satisfying is it for you as a creator to make up both sides of the dialog?
If you pay attention to these laws and are careful to follow them, then the LORD your God will keep his covenant of love
with you,
as he swore to your forefathers.
Deuteronomy 7:12
... the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God
John 16:27
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
1 John 4:8
This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.
1 John 4:10
God created man for fellowship, not to keep us in a fishbowl as a pet, in a cell as a prisoner, or preprogrammed to be obedient robots. If
God did,
there would be no relationship.
God, from the beginning, had a plan to redeem mankind and built into that plan were choices and consequences for man. God desires
with all mankind, not just certain people. Yet God knows that not all people are going to reciprocate because of the freedoms He
gave us.
We know that God cares for us because He created us. We also know He loves us because the Bible says God gave His Son for our
There is another emotion that shows that man was created with free will. That emotion is
. The Old Testament says that God
was angry with
many people, even His own chosen people, the Israelites. Some He punished, some He relented from punishing at the
pleading of people like
Moses and others. If God preordained everything then why would He be angry if people and nations did exactly
what they were designed by Him
to do? God is sovereign and almighty therefore no one could oppose Him or disobey Him unless they were
given free will.
In Genesis 1, God said everything He created was good. In chapter 6 God flooded the earth.
Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever... The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the
and his heart was filled with pain.
Genesis 6:3;6
Sometime later after Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt they rebelled several times, even breaking the first and second commandments by
creating and worshiping a golden calf:
"I have seen these people," the LORD said to Moses, "and they are a stiff-necked people. Now leave me alone so that my
may burn against them and that I may destroy them…
Exodus 32:9-10
…For forty years I was angry with that generation; I said, "They are a people whose hearts go astray, and they have not
my ways."
Psalm 95:10
…When God heard them, he was very angry; he rejected Israel completely.
Psalm 78:59
…they provoked the LORD to anger by their wicked deeds…
Psalm 106:29
That is why I was angry with that generation, and I said, 'Their hearts are always going astray, and they have not known my
Hebrews 3:10
And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the desert? And to
whom did
swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? So we see that they were not able to
enter, because
of their
Hebrews 3:17-19
Several writers in Psalm wrote about God's anger:
How long, O LORD? Will you be angry forever?
Psalm 79:5
Will you be angry with us forever? Will you prolong your anger through all generations?
Psalm 85:5
Throughout 2 Kings we're told the Lord was angry with the northern nation of Israel and removed them entirely leaving only the southern
Judah. Later Judah too would fall away.
.Although you were angry with me, your anger has turned away...
Isaiah 12:1
Later His anger against Israel subsided:
The LORD said to me, "Faithless Israel is more righteous than unfaithful Judah. Go, proclaim this message toward the
"'Return, faithless Israel,' declares the LORD, 'I will frown on you no longer, for I am merciful,' declares the LORD,
'I will not be
angry forever.
Jeremiah 3:11-12
The prophets wrote about God's anger, punishment, and reconciliation:
The LORD is angry with all nations...
Isaiah 34:2
When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations cannot endure his wrath
Jeremiah 10:10 NIV
The LORD was very angry with your forefathers
Zechariah 1:2
Then the angel of the LORD said, "LORD Almighty, how long will you withhold mercy from Jerusalem and from the towns of
Judah, which you have been angry with these seventy years?"
Zechariah 1:12
They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen to the law or to the words that the LORD Almighty had sent by
Spirit through the earlier prophets. So the LORD Almighty was very angry.
Zechariah 7:12
We have seen that
we cause
God to be angry with us. God did not create us to tick Him off because He would not be angry if we did what
were created by Him to do to do. Let's follow Reformed Theology logic: we are not as great as God and we cannot make Him do
Therefore, if God becomes angry with us it is because He created us to anger Him.
: The Bible calls salvation a
. A gift without acceptance is not a gift. If you force a gift on the receiver it is no longer a gift. In business
to have a legally binding contract or a legal transaction you have to have an
and an
. Another element to a legally
transaction you must also have
, that is, something of value or a price has to be given. In the case of our salvation ,
Jesus paid the
But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and
gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
Romans 5:15
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God
Ephesians 2:8
There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words
John 12:48
Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can
James 1:21
During a question and answer episode on a J. Vernon McGee radio program a person asked "
if Jesus died for everyone why is it that
those who believe in Jesus are saved?
" McGee's answer: "
He died for all, but you have to accept the pardon that He paid in
order for it
to become yours. I'm told that in Pennsylvania there was a prisoner who was granted a pardon by the governor, and he
refused to accept
it. They took it to court, and the judgment was that a pardon could be granted but it wasn't valid until it was
accepted by the individual.
Now, there's a pardon for every sinner on top side of this earth, but you have to call for it by faith
before it becomes yours.
In Romans 4 we're told that it was
by faith
that Abraham was credited with being righteous. It is faith by which all are saved.
Jesus said to the woman, "
Your faith has saved you; go in peace
Luke 7:50
I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have
sinned and
fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ
Romans 3:22-25
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he
those who earnestly seek him.
Hebrews 11:6
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us…He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to
Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.
Galatians 3:13-14
Faith requires an
on our part, otherwise it is not
. If faith was a pre-programmed action then it wouldn't be faith.
My Calvinist friend Fred used as an argument for Reformed Theology that the Bible says we are all without excuse. True and that
helps to
make my case:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in
unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since
creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being
through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Romans 1:18-20
Without excuse
" implies choice and consequence. If God created certain men to be condemned to hell then they had no choice and they
an excuse. The excuse is:
God created me that way and I had no choice to either accept or reject God
Fred also told me, "
I read the bible to teach human responsibility, not free will
." Without free will there is no responsibility. If you accept
predestination then you rule out responsibility. Throughout the Bible God made conditions for individuals and groups, which they had free
will to
obey or reject.
"The LORD will establish you as his holy people, as he promised you on oath, if you keep the commands of the LORD your
and walk in his ways."
Deuteronomy 28:9
"But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the
your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and
household, we will serve the LORD."
Joshua 24:15
"Elijah went before the people and said, "How long will you waiver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him,
but if
Baal is god, follow him."
1 King 18:21
Repentance involves a conscious change on our part. It must be sincere; therefore it must also be made freely by our own
Therefore, thus says the LORD, "If you return, then I will restore you
Jeremiah 15:19
Thus says the Lord GOD, "Repent and turn away from your idols, and turn your faces away from all your abominations.
Ezekiel 14:6
Say to them, "'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that
turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!"
Ezekiel 33:11
But unless you repent, you too will all perish.
Luke 13:3
…if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will
Romans 10:9
The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to
but everyone to come to repentance.
2 Peter 3:
Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God
promised to those who love him.
"When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;
each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed."
James 1:1
If one cannot pass or fail a test because God fixed the outcome, then it is no longer a test, but a pointless exercise. A test has a purpose and
must both be options.
The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked…
Psalm 5:11
Test me, O LORD, and try me, examine my heart and my mind…
Psalm 26:2
And we are told the Israelites were in the desert for 40 years not only as punishment but they were also being tested.
Remember how the LORD your God led you all the way in the desert these forty years, to humble you and to test you in order
know what was in your heart, whether or not you would keep his commands.
Deuteronomy 8:2
According to Calvinism God already predestined the outcome, so why test them? God was testing them, allowing them to keep His
commands or
not, something that could not be done without free will.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of predestination arguments.
Calvinist Argument #1:
Free will denies God's Sovereignty
Reformed Theology claims that those who believe in free will deny God's sovereignty. As to denying God's sovereignty Reformed Theology
has it
backwards. God's sovereignty is limited by those who say that God can only exercise His will by predetermining who will end up in
heaven or in
hell by predetermining every action. The fact is because God is all-powerful He can ensure His plans are fulfilled and allow man
free will.
Looking back at the discussion on Genesis we know that:
Everything God created was good therefore God did not create sin.
Sin entered into the world when man sinned of his own volition.
Even though God is sovereign He did not prevent man from sinning or the effects of sin. Having the capability to sin doesn't make us greater
the Creator which is what Calvinists claim if we have free will. That He could have prevented sin but didn't doesn't weaken God's
position with
respect to sovereignty and neither does allowing us free will. God allowed His perfect creation to become corrupted, but rather
than holler "Cut!"
and make us do the scene over God allowed His creation to continue.
Why did God allow sin in His creation? The answer is that to prevent sin and its effects would be to prevent free will. Therefore the fact that
sin and
its consequences exists is proof that we have been given free will. Otherwise God would either have created a perfect world and
kept it perfect or
he would have prevented the effects of sin from marring His creation once we messed it up.
Free will does not negate God's sovereign will, nor does it deny that God has a plan for mankind. That God allows us free will is
demonstrated by
His paying the price for sin for us all. All we have to do is accept Him.
For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the
of sinful man to be a sin offering.
Romans 8:3
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 2:2
Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can
James 1:21
Calvinist Argument #2:
God chose us, we didn't choose Hi
You did not choose Me, but I chose you.
John 15:16
Jesus is talking specifically to His disciples. In Jesus' day men who wanted to study and learn from a rabbi
chose which rabbi they
to follow and emulate. Jesus is reminding them that
chose them.
Another way to look at this verse which is equally valid is God chose man over all His creation from the beginning, to have fellowship with
Him. So
yes, "
God did choose us, we did not choose Him
Calvinist Argument # 3:
He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world
…just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love
us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the
praise of the
glory of His grace,
which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved...
Ephesians 1:4-6
At first glance it
that Paul is saying that those who are believers were predestinated for salvation. However, Paul is talking about
that God has for us,
through Jesus Christ
. As stated previously, God created (and therefore chose us) to have a relationship with Him.
Calvinist Argument # 4:
The Bible does not teach free will
Fred told me the Bible does not teach free will as the term
free will
is not specifically mentioned. Fred's claim that
free will
is not
mentioned is incorrect. For one thing that depends on which translation you're using. Consider the following:
Four different translations of the Bible, NIV, NJKV, KJV, and NASB on the following variations of predestination reveals how often
derivatives of
the term predestination are used:
* = None of the references were in the Old Testament or in the Gospels. In the case of the KJV the word is only in one chapter, Romans.
And in
the case of both the NIV and the NKJV it is only used in one chapter in Romans and one chapter in Ephesians.
The point here is not that
or the concept is or is not in the Bible, but that it is not a widely used term. That the term is not
used proves nothing one way or the other. So to say that the term
free will
is not used or is used infrequently is a moot point.
Case in point -
the Trinity
is not
mentioned in the Bible by that name yet we are able to infer it when considering the Bible as a
From Genesis to Revelation the concept but not the actual term is there. The same with
free will
, just because the term may not be
there it doesn't
mean the concept isn't.
free will
is specifically mentioned. Read Paul's letter to Philemon, it is a wonderful illustration of how God wants us to do things
for Him,
of our own volition, out of our love for Him. Not because we have no choice in the matter, even though He
make or force us
In this letter Paul is writing to his friend, and brother in Christ, Philemon, to let him know that Paul is returning something that belongs to him,
slave Onesimus who has now accepted Jesus for his salvation. Paul tells Philemon how useful Onesimus has been to him and how he
Philemon to treat Onesimus not as a slave but as a brother in Christ. Paul appeals to Philemon that if he has any regard for Paul that he
accept Onesimus the same way he would accept Paul:
Therefore, though I have enough confidence in Christ to order you to do that which is proper, yet for love's sake I rather
appeal to
you...but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by
compulsion, but of
your own free will.
Philemon 1:8, 9, 14
It was out of
that Paul didn't force Philemon to free Onesimus. By virtue of Paul's position in the Church he could have easily kept
with him or he could have commanded and forced Philemon to free Onesimus and not punish him for running off.
Paul also reminds Philemon he was also indebted to Paul for leading him to salvation through Christ. Paul could have easily forced Philemon
to do
the right thing, but how much better for everyone involved, Paul, Philemon, and Onesimus, that Philemon do so of his own free will. It
is always
better to do things voluntarily, out of love, than by forced compulsion.
Calvinist Argument # 5:
We were predestined according to His good pleasure
having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will
Ephesians 1:5
In his commentary John Wesley had this to say about Ephesians 1:5 (36)
Having predestinated us to the adoption of sons =
Having foreordained that all who afterwards believed should enjoy the
dignity of
being sons of God, and joint heirs with Christ.
According to the good pleasure of his will =
According to his free, fixed, unalterable purpose to confer this blessing on all those
should believe in Christ, and those only.
Calvinist Argument # 6:
God hardened Pharaoh's heart
No doubt God knew what was in Pharaoh's heart. Here are a few different translations of the same passage:
he hardened Pharaoh's heart
, that he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said. And the LORD said unto
Pharaoh's heart is hardened; he refuseth to let the people go.
Exodus 7:14
(King James Version)
Pharaoh's heart grew hard
, and he did not heed them, as the LORD had said. So the LORD said to Moses: "Pharaoh'
s heart
is hard; he refuses to let the people go.
Exodus 7:13-14 (New King James Version)
Yet P
haraoh's heart was hardened
, and he did not listen to them, as the LORD had said. Then the LORD said to Moses,
"Pharaoh's heart is stubborn; he refuses to let the people go.
Exodus 7:13-14 (New American Standard)
Pharaoh's heart became hard
and he would not listen to them, just as the LORD had said. Then the LORD said to
"Pharaoh's heart is unyielding; he refuses to let the people go.
Exodus 7:13-14 (New International Version)
Regardless of the translation what God did was bring to the surface
what was already in Pharaoh's heart
Even accepting the King James translation that God hardened Pharaoh's heart it does not explain what that really means. J. Vernon McGee
explains it well:
Did God harden Pharaoh's heart? Yes, but in this way: If Pharaoh were a tenderhearted, sweet fellow who desired to turn to
and was happy to have Moses deliver the children of Israel because Pharaoh wanted to do something for them, then it
was mean of
God to harden the heart of this wonderful Pharaoh. If that is the way you read it, friends, you are not reading it
hardening is a figurative word, which can mean twisting, as with a rope. It means God twisted the heart of
Pharaoh. He was
going to squeeze out what was in it.
God forced him to do the thing he really wanted to do. God's part in
this was to bring to the
surface that which was already there.
Calvinist Argument # 7:
No one seeks after God
Fred wrote to me in an e-mail, "
The scripture says
times that 'No one seeks after God.'
Fred failed to provide a single reference for his claim so I looked it up. Actually the phrase '
No one seeks after God
,' is used
, not
times and is found in Romans 3:11 and Paul is partially quoting from Psalm 14:1-3, 53:1-3, & Ecclesiastes 7:20. If you read these
in context these
passages Paul references say we're
sinners. No argument from me on that!
The Bible does tell us,
multiple times
, that people are to seek Him: Exodus 18:15; Deuteronomy 4:29; 1 Kings 22:5; 1 Chronicles 28:9; 2
Chronicles 7:14; 2 Chronicles 15:2; 2 Chronicles 20:4; Psalm 9:10; Psalm 69:6; 69:32;Isaiah 55:6; Jeremiah 29:13 to specifically list a few.
But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.
Matthew 6:33
Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks
receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.
Matthew 7:7-8
God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of
Acts 17:27
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he
rewards those who earnestly seek him.
Hebrews 11:6
We know God listens to prayers. Hezekiah and Moses are two examples where God said, "I am going to do X" and then yielded to the
of His people. There are other examples.
The Bible tells us Jesus is our intercessor. People who are predestined to be saved do not require an intercessor. In Reformed Theology
what is the
purpose of prayer or intercession? Is it just pretend listening and interceding?
…God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men.
1 Timothy 2:3-6
Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
Hebrews 7:25
Jesus did not die a painless, quick, clean, and honorable death. In taking on the sins of the world Jesus in fact suffered a very painful, lengthy,
bloody and ignoble death.
If God was going to predestine some to be saved and not others, why set up a scenario where Jesus had to die a horrible death on the cross
for the
sins of the whole world? Why not just create perfect obedient people in the first place without the capability or opportunity to sin?
The reason is simple. Jesus died because God created us with free will. Jesus did not die for sins God created and predestined us to have,
He died
for the sins we willingly commit.
He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his
name, he gave the right to become children of God-
John 1:10-12
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal
John 3:16
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us
Romans 5:8
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men
Titus 2:11
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Matthew 28:19
When I mentioned
the Great Commission
to Fred he told me the purpose of proclaiming the Gospel was not to save anyone, but
to be
for the sake of the command. He said we do not actually accomplish anything as everyone has already been assigned an
eternal place in
either heaven or hell. That is not what the Bible says:
I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so
they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.
Acts 26:18
Reformed Theology mixed with the Great Commission is like having a doctor operate on a dead person. It may be obedient, but it's also a
complete waste of time. Paul tells us differently:
Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! If I
voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me.
1 Corinthians 9:
Calvinists will tell you if you are
to do something then it isn't voluntarily. However Paul is saying he preaches the gospel
voluntarily even
though he is compelled. Being compelled doesn't mean by force and without a choice. Sometimes we are compelled by
conviction or love.
To explain his position on predestination Fred suggested I read
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
by Loraine Boettner, so I
Reviewers hail this book as "
The Bible on Predestination
." In the book Loraine Boettner decrees that there are
valid arguments
to refute
predestination/Calvinism, therefore rejecting all arguments for free will out of hand without consideration. Boettner was definitely not
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness
examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
Acts 17:11
By refusing to examine the evidence for free will this tells me that Boettner is putting the writings of Calvin and his own on the same level as
Bible, as infallible and irrefutable.
Many of the general statements Boettner makes on the sovereignty of God I have no dispute with except, as stated above, I see
and not
free will
, as limiting God's sovereignty.
Several times Boettner states that unbelief in predestination is
unbelief in the Bible
, referring to 1 Corinthians 2:14 to prove those who
believe in
free will are not convinced for a reason:
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and
understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
The implication according to Boettner is those who reject predestination and don't believe in Calvinism
can't believe
because the Holy
Spirit has
not revealed the truth to them. Boettner states, "
To the non-elect, the Bible is a sealed book; and only the
true Christian
is it
"given" to see
and understand these things
."(38) The logical conclusion, therefore, is unbelief in predestination doctrine is rejection of
the scriptures, and
therefore rejection of God, and Jesus.
1 Corinthians 2:14 has nothing to do with predestination but has everything to do with believing on Jesus and accepting Him. We receive the
Spirit when we believe and repent.
Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And
you will
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom
the Lord our
God will call."
Acts 2:38-39
Calvinists love to pounce on the phrase
for all whom the Lord our God will call
claiming predestination proof. The call is for everyone, for
and white, for rich and poor, for people in North America and South America:
He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe.
John 1:7
or God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have
eternal life
John 3:16
He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
2 Peter 3:9.
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.
Titus 2:11
For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
Romans 11:32
• [God]
who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.
1 Timothy 2:4
• [Jesus]
…gave himself as a ransom for all men
1 Timothy 2:6
• …
we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe.
1 Timothy 4:10
The only way predestination works, as described in Boettner's book, is when Calvinists are allowed to determine the meaning of words like
believe, justice, faith, accept, gift, repent
. To Boettner
never means
when applied to free will, in which case it always refer
to all
of a subset, meaning predestined, even when it is clear from the context that all does mean all.
Boettner's rationalization of Predestination:
"Some have declared-- and rightly we believe-- that there is no consistent middle ground
between Calvinism and Atheism."
(39) He elaborates further, "
...As strict Calvinists we believe this to be the
system of
Christian truth
which is taught in the Bible and the only one that can be logically and respectfully defended before the world.
was in bold by
According to Boettner if you believe in free will you are not one of
the elect
and therefore not a believer. The logical conclusion is that those
believe in free will are destined to hell.
Many in Reformed Theology attempt to destroy those who believe in free will by misrepresenting them, sometimes in other areas. For
Lorraine Boettner tries to discredit John Wesley by claiming Wesley "
was a believer in witchcraft
Boettner had this to say of John Wesley, "
It should be said at this point that Wesley was a believer in witchcraft. Failure to believe in
witches was looked upon by him as a concession to infidels and rationalists… In his Journal we read this report of a girl who was
to fits: 'When old Doctor Alexander was asked what her disorder was, he answered, 'It is what formerly they would have
called being
bewitched.' And why should they not call it so now? Because the infidels have hooted it out of the world; and the
complaisant Christians,
in large number, have joined them in their cry.
'" (40)
Other Calvinists have jumped on the "John Wesley believed in witchcraft" bandwagon. Many Calvinist websites state, "
In his Journal,
bemoaned the decline of superstition, the advance of human thought and the more peaceable reign of Christ on the earth,
in the
following words: "It is true likewise, that the English in general, and, indeed, most of the men of learning in Europe, have
given up all
accounts of witches and apparitions as mere wives' fables. I am sorry for it… The giving up of witchcraft is in effect
giving up the Bible!
OK, so John Wesley believed in witchcraft.
are not the same. Both John Calvin and Martin Luther believed in
as well and John Calvin had people burned at the stake on suspicious of witchcraft. Like John Wesley, they believed it existed and
was dangerous.
As I said, John Wesley was neither condoning nor encouraging witchcraft. However, Wesley did believe that witchcraft was in the world
and to
deny it would deny the existence of evil and of Satan. I have seen surveys by Barna that show a significant number of Christians
today, including
many preachers, do not believe in a literal Satan or hell. That is what concerned Wesley.
Wesley's Commentary
on the Bible
reference to witchcraft, while emphasizing that it is real and exists, condemned its practice.
Calvinists link of John Wesley to witchcraft is nothing more than an effort to discredit John Wesley for his belief in free will.
Loraine Boettner failed to mention Calvin and Luther's position on witchcraft:
Calvin and the other reformers (as well as Catholics) also believed in witchcraft.
In 1522 Martin Luther, charged the "witches" with a litany of supernatural behaviors, including transformation into different animals.
In 1545 twenty-three people were burned to death in Geneva under charges of practicing witchcraft and attempting to spread the
John Calvin mentions witches in the "
Institutes of the Christian Religion
." Calvin was frank about his use of the witch craze to
power of his own theocratic order, stating in the Institutes that he had brought up the entire issue "in order that we may be
aroused and
exhorted," (i.e., rallied behind Calvin's religious movement).
Apparently despite Boettner's attempt to discredit John Wesley on the issue of witchcraft Wesley was in pretty good company!
I mention this to demonstrate the flawed logic that is used throughout Loraine Boettner's 400-plus page book.
The reformers were trying to show those who had grown up in the Roman Catholic church with the growing corruption and false teachings,
they couldn't earn, pray, or pay their way into heaven. The reformers were trying to fight the corruption and emphasize the truth that one
cannot do
anything to earn salvation but accept God's gift by faith. Nothing else is required.
One point Loraine Boettner conveniently ignores is that during the Protestant Reformation not all of the early reformers always agreed with
other, sometimes their differences were bitter. For more history on the Reformation see
Radical Reformation vs. Magisterial
There are points from the original Reform movement that we can all agree on:
sola gratia-
we are saved from sin and destruction by the grace of God alone -- never by human works, no matter how good they
seem to be.
sola fide
- our major responsibility toward God is to live through total faith alone in God and his "providence" or good care.
sola scriptura-
all authoritative guidance for the Christian life comes from scripture alone -- not from human authority.
John Calvin commenting on Genesis 6:6 says that since we cannot comprehend [God] as he is, it is necessary that, for our
sake, he
should, in a certain sense, transform himself [by using figures of speech about himself]... Certainly God is not
sorrowful or sad;
but remains forever like himself in his celestial and happy repose: yet because it could not otherwise be
known how great is God's
hatred and detestation of sin, therefore the Spirit accommodates himself to our capacity....God
was so offended by the atrocious
wickedness of men [he speaks] as if they had wounded his heart with mortal grief.
Calvin contradicts himself on the one hand saying God "i
s not sorrowful or sad
" but then goes on to say "
God was so offended by the
wickedness of men.
This idea of a God without passion is found in The Westminster Confession of Faith (II.1.): "
There is but one...true God, who is finite in
and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts or passions...
So many contradictions here… seems to be saying God hates the sin He (according to Reformed Theology) created and also saying that all
parts of God describing His emotions, glad, sad, anger, frustrated
are not real
and that God is either a passionless God or a perpetually
God. Calvinism is full of contradictions and one doesn't have to look far to find them.
So which is it? God has no passion? God is eternally happy? Is the Bible erroneous when God says He gets angry or saddened by us?
I suppose if Calvinism were right that it would take a passionless God to create people for destruction for His own good pleasure… though
sounds more like Satan to me.
There are some who don't want to get involved in this debate partly because it is divisive and partly because they think the discussion is
because "you can prove anything by selecting the right Bible scripture." True enough but that can be a copout because that implies
that the truth is
not knowable. A common mistake many make in understanding what the Bible is telling us is
neglecting to interpret
difficult passages in light
of clear ones
. Another mistake is
basing a teaching on an obscure passage
. (41)
When you look at the Bible as a whole and consider why God created man, why God is angered by us, why Jesus came to earth to be a
for our sins, and why God delays in destroying the world and creating a new one, it is clear God is giving every person every
chance possible to
repent and accept Him. Otherwise we can ignore our lost neighbors, criminals, or those struggling with various
addictions, because the result of
predestination is that is the way they were created and were meant to be.
God is not standing off in the distance, having wound us up and pre-programmed us, watching us and the rest of His creation wind down.
No, God
is actively involved with us on our life's journey and we are involved as well.
There is a difference between the biblical God and the Calvinist God:
The huge difference between the biblical God and the Calvinist God is clear. The biblical God punishes men for rejecting the
salvation He provided for everyone, which all could have accepted by their free will
and punishes them for their sins, which
contrary to His will, none of which they had to commit but chose to do so.
But the Calvinist God condemns to hell those whom He could save if He so desired but for whom He sovereignly chose not
even to
have Christ die and from whom He deliberately withholds the salvation He pretends to offer them-and punishes them
for not
accepting. Yes, that's a huge difference.
One of the God's characteristics that is overlooked, ignored, or misrepresented by Calvinists and Reformed Theology is
. The biblical
created us to have a relationship with each of us and "
so loved the world
" that He sent His Son to save the world by paying the penalty
for our sins
thereby demonstrating that those who are punished are those who, by their own free will, refuse the salvation provided by Jesus.
The Bible tells us
have sinned and are without excuse. There is no one on earth that the angels wouldn't rejoice for if those people accept
Christ as their savior
and so enter heaven, no one. Peter said God doesn't want anyone to perish, but to come to repentance. Paul said that
the grace of God has
appeared to all men and that our Savior wants wall men to be saved.
David Bennett
December 2005 (updated 25 January 2009)
1. John Calvin-
Institutes of the Christian Religion
, II,v.
2. John Calvin-
Institutes of the Christian Religion
, III, viii
3. John Calvin-
Institutes of the Christian Religion
, III:xxi,1.
4. John Calvin-
Institutes of the Christian Religion
, III:xxi,7.
5. John Calvin-
Institutes of the Christian Religion
, III:xxi,7.
6. John Calvin-
Institutes of the Christian Religion
, III:xxi, 5
9. Edwin Palmer,
The Five Points of Calvinism
, 1999
10. R.C. Sproul, Jr.,
Almighty Over All
11. John 3:16-17
12. 2 Peter 3:9
13. Titus 2:11
14. 1 Timothy 2:3-4
18. Irenaeus,
Against Heresies
(Adv. Haer.) III.3.4:
19. Irenaeus,
Against Heresies
Book IV Chapter XXXVII [37]-
Also see Irenaeus
Against Heresies
Book IV Chapter XXXIX [39]-
20. Justin Martyr
Second Apology
, 7
21. Justin Martyr
First Apology
chapter XLIII [43].
22. Justin Martyr Chapter CXLI [141].
23. Clement
Salvation of the Rich Man
chap. 21
24. Clement
bk. 1, chap. 17
25. Archelaus
Disputation With Manes
sees. 32, 33
26. Methodius
The Banquet of the Ten Virgins
discourse 8, chap. 16
27. Loraine Boettner,
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
, (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1932), 365
29. John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion
, III:xxi,1
30. John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion
, III:xxiii,1
31. John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion
, III:xxi,7
32. John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion
, III:xxiii,3
33. John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion
, III:xxiii,4
34. John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion
, III:xxi,7
Wesley's Commentary
See verse 5:
Thru The Bible Commentary
on Exodus by J. Vernon McGee
38. Loraine Boettner,
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
, 111
39. Loraine Boettner,
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
, 337
40. Loraine Boettner,
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
, 426
When Critics Ask: A Popular Handbook On Bible Difficulties
, Norman Geisler & Thomas Howe 1992. Pages 17 & 18.
42. John Calvin,
Calvin's Commentaries
, 22 vols., 1:1:249
44. Loraine Boettner,
The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination,
Predestined for Free Will
© 2004 by David Bennett
updated 27 December 2009
Draw near to God and He will draw near to you.
James 4:8
Download a PDF copy of this paper


text:
In the weeks since acquiring superstar midfielder Freddy Adu, Real Salt Lake has heard from just about every other team in Major League Soccer, wondering the same thing as everybody else:
What's up with Mehdi Ballouchy?
After all, RSL acquired Ballouchy with the No. 2 pick of last year's draft specifically to run the team's attack as a playmaking midfielder, yet handed that job to Adu just as soon as the 17-year-old phenom stepped off the plane from D.C. United in a blockbuster trade.
Yet even though Ballouchy spent much of last season straining to adjust to a role on the left side of the midfield - coach John Ellinger has acknowledged that playing wide isn't an ideal situation for Ballouchy or veteran Andy Williams - general manager Steve Pastorino insisted RSL is not ready to part with him.
Every team in the league has asked about Mehdi since we acquired Freddy Adu, wondering if he was the odd man out, Pastorino said. Absolutely not. . . . He's very much part of our plans.
Probably, that means Ballouchy will continue to work on the left side when Adu is running the show, though Ballouchy figures to get plenty of chances to handle that role when Adu is away playing internationally for the U.S. under-20 national team. RSL opens training camp early next month, and begins the season against FC Dallas at Rice-Eccles Stadium on April 7.
What's more, RSL believes it has improved its midfield depth by drafting versatile Stephen Curfman of Wake Forest in the third round of the MLS SuperDraft on Friday.
The 20-year-old can play wide in both the midfield and along the back line, potentially addressing RSL's defensive needs on the outside - RSL allowed a league-worst 49 goals last season, en route to a 10-13-9 record - while also finding a backup and eventual replacement for goalkeeper Scott Garlick in Maryland's Chris Seitz.
RSL picked Seitz with the No. 4 pick of the draft.
He has it all, Ellinger said. He's a great shot-stopper, great in the air, great hands. . . . He's quick. Good footwork. Vertical jump. And he's smart. He tactically knows the position better than anyone we've seen go through.
If Scott wants to be our keeper in 2008, Ellinger added, he's going to have to have a great year. This kid is legit. If you make a mistake and give him a chance to take your job, he's going to take it.
RSL also made draft-day trades with FC Dallas and then New England to land forward Kyle Brown from the Revolution. Brown played in 12 games for the Revs in his rookie year last season, starting two, after a standout college career at Tulsa.
He could definitely step in and become a big part of our depth, Pastorino said.


text:
Obtained from a Norwegian source, HealthAid Cod Liver Oil (CLO) contains EPA & DHA, which are Omega 3 Oils. These are beneficial for maintaining the health of cardiovascular system, bones and flexible joints. CLO contains Vitamins A & D, which play an important role in nourishing the hair, skin, teeth and gums and is also good for vision. HealthAid Cod Liver Oil with added Vitamin E is cold pressed and hermatically sealed in a vegetarian soft gelatin capsule to help maintain freshness and purity.
Warning: Always read the label and keep out of reach of children.
Any Product sold or supplied by Bodywiseuk.com are not intended for the treatment,
prevention and cure of any medical conditions.
Never exceed recommended intake unless professionally advised.


text: quick question. when you go to a web page that has a form (or even open up search in windows for that matter) and start typing it automatically shows a drop down of all the previously entered data for that box. i wsa wondering how to clear that (or even disable it). thanks,


text:
Not all merchant groups are wild about the proposed settlement in the class action case against Visa, Mastercard and a group of large U.S. financial institutions.
The National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS), one of several plaintiffs that originally filed the suit in the Eastern District of New York, unanimously rejected the proposal, citing a litany of inadequacies that the agreement fails to address. Chief among them is the fact that the settlement doesn't include any means to alter the process by which interchange fees are established.
"Not only does the proposed settlement fail to introduce competition and transparency into a clearly broken market, it actually provides Visa and Mastercard with the tools to continue to shield swipe fees from market forces," said NACS Chairman Tom Robinson, president of Santa Clara, California-based Robinson Oil Corp. "This proposed settlement allows the card companies to continue to dictate the prices banks charge and the rules that constrain the market including for emerging payment methods, particularly mobile payments. Consumers and merchants ultimately will pay more as a result of this agreement—without any relief in sight."
NACS argued that without any mechanism that would force Visa and Mastercard to constrain their interchange rates according to market conditions, the agreement would allow the two credit card giants to continue raising rates as they saw fit, the net result of which will be to make merchants pay for their own settlement.
"Even the monetary agreement in this proposal is a mirage," said Robinson, referring to the more than $6 billion that the defendants will have to pay to retailers as part of the settlement. Despite the fact that the payment will be the largest antitrust settlement in U.S. history, NACS noted that this amounts to less than two months' worth of interchange fees based on the estimated $50 billion in swipe fees collected by the credit card companies on an annual basis. "Merchants won't get these funds for years and will have paid more than that through increased swipe fees long before they see those funds," Robinson added.
It's unclear what NACS' opposition means for the still-pending court approval of the settlement, which has so far been agreed to by all defendants, as well as by the court-appointed class counsel for the class action plaintiffs. "NACS does not accept this proposed settlement and we reserve the right to fight it if other class representatives do accept it," said NACS President and Chief Executive Officer Henry Armour. "There is plenty of time for merchants to make thoughtful decisions related to this proposed settlement. We hope and expect that, as they have the time to review it, many other merchants including class representatives will decide to reject this proposal."
Stay tuned to NACM's blog and eNews for more updates and analysis on the settlement.
- Jacob Barron, CICP, NACM staff writer
Not All Class Action Plaintiffs Wild about Proposed Visa, Mastercard Settlement
2 comments:
- Stacey SmytheJuly 23, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Is there a typo in the last paragraph? Most of the article references NACS, but the quote here refers to NACM.ReplyDelete
- Jacob Barron, CICPJuly 23, 2012 at 1:20 PM
Good catch! It's fixed now.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
In this week's issue of The New Yorker, in a piece titled "Shock Tactics", New Yorker classical music critic Alex Ross writes:
[T]he injection of a mild strain of Regietheater [in opera stagings in American opera houses] ... is a healthy development because it forces American audiences to see opera as something other than a nostalgia trip. [...] [I]t's because we endlessly repeat the same old pieces that we feel the need to reinvent them in ever more drastic fashion.Yes, well, certainly an interesting view of the matter. Consider, however, that by that same sort of reasoning it might be "a healthy development" if American symphony orchestras did away with repeating year after year performances of, say, those same old Beethoven symphonies the way Beethoven wrote them and instead reinvent them just a bit by injecting some orchestration or other that never occurred to Herr Beethoven such as, say, kazoos in place of bassoons; or, say, slide whistles in place of flutes; or, say, musical saws in place of violas. After all, if that were done, American audiences would surely be forced to see those symphonies as something other than nostalgia trips. Yes indeed. They most assuredly would.


text:
Everyone seems to be just scandalized that The Biggest Loser did some fancy editing that made it seem that a former contestant on the show had run a marathon, when in fact he didn't. In case you haven't seen the details, here is what happened. Dane Patterson who had already lost about 100 pounds when he was kicked off the show was shown at the end where they see how contestants are progressing after six weeks of being on their own without the support of the show. In the segment, Dane was showing crossing the finish line of a marathon with his very fit wife in a time that appeared to be 3 hours and 53 minutes which is really fast. So fast in fact that it got people suspicious.
What had happened according to everyone involved was that Dane had run the first 17 miles and a field producer realized that Dane was not going to make the six hour cut off for the marathon and so went and picked him up in a car, drove him 3 miles and then Dane ran the final six miles. As he crossed the finish line, it was an accurate photo, but some of the lights had gone out in the timer and so the actual time when he crossed was 5 hours and 53 minutes.
Immediately after Dane crossed the finish line, he, his wife and another person went back and ran the three miles he originally missed. Everyone is now calling into question whether reality shows are real. Ummm. I think that was answered a long time ago.
No one ever said the guy finished the marathon in 3 hours 53 minutes and they seem to be forgetting the fact that he did run the entire marathon. And even if you don't count his going back to finish the three miles, he still ran 23 miles in under 6 hours which is a fantastic accomplishment for a guy who was a bazillion pounds overweight just a few months before.
I don't see the big deal. I have never expected reality shows to be real. The Biggest Loser is more real than most because you can see actual weight loss, but if you think reality television is real, and are personally offended by some of the editing techniques used, then you really need to find something else to watch.