PaulThomson said:
Why is drug rape not an appropriate characterisation of the Calvinist doctrine of irresistible grace? In drug rape the rapist, without the victim's prior consent, injects a [foreign] chemical that makes the victim, [who would otherwise reject him], want to be intimate with them; and in calvinist irresistible grace, God, without the person's prior consent, injects [foreign] calvinist faith[/heart/spirit] into a person, that makes the person, [who would otherwise reject Him], want to be intimate with God.
Did God rape you by creating you or did He get your permission? When God chose your parents, was He raping you? When God sets boundaries for you, is He continuing His serial rape of you? Was the Apostle Paul raped when God forbid him to go places?
It was a very poor and incendiary and inappropriate analogy to begin with. The defense of it is anathema.
No. I did not have my own will before He created me.
No, I did not have parents before I had them.
No, setting boundaries does not replace my own will with a foreign will. I can still choose to want or not want the boundaries.
No. Paul was left with his ability to decide whether he wanted or did not want to go where God sent him.
But when the Calvinist and Calvinique apologist ascribes to God an act of taking away my own will that hates Him and unilaterally replacing it with a will to love Him by injecting Calvinist faith/new heart/ new spirit into someone, that is the Calvinist or Calvinique apologist ascribing faith rape/heart rape to God.