Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Calvinism/Arminianism Debate' started by Reformed, Nov 16, 2015.
Not going to touch this....LOL!
Yeah,.....I don't think we need to open this can of worms again
Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
I have realized that some people can't debate theology without getting personal. I find it's usually a result of poor debating skills or poor theology.
True.....I would add personality type to your list. It takes a certain personality type to debate without getting upset. Sometimes when one side gets upset, the other follows suit.
Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
And what happens over there has not moved to here again.
I wouldn't have either. I have no idea why I added the "not' but it was not my intention.
It takes a type of character to debate without insulting people you debate with.
I do agree. But what I have noticed as of late is one side getting very easily offended. If you state that the other side is wrong someone takes it as a personal attack. If I say Arminianism is logically inconsistent it's now an attack. Some people don't have thick enough skin to engage in any intellectual debate.
I have found the ignore feature helpful here. If someone repeatedly reverts to name-calling rather than debating the subject, I ignore them. Also, if they are very sarcastic and snarky, the same treatment. The trouble is, that doesn't leave many of my Arminian brothers to debate with. . . However, I too don't favor people on "my side". There was one person here, I believe he is now banned (savedbymercy) who is a hyper-calvinist loose cannon. I called him out on a few occasions, and blocked him when he wouldn't come around.
This is the "CALVINISM/ARMINIANISM DEBATE" forum, so there are two things we know for certain, one, there are people here who hold opposing views, and two, they are here to debate those views. It should go without saying that people will think your views wrong.
I would not agree that it's a matter of personality type. I think it's a matter of maturity and intellect. Debate can be so helpful and meaningful, but fighting is worthless. Debate in the Christian sphere should always be pressing its opponent to think biblically and critically. Debate in the Christian sphere should be a way in which to help your brother, not hurt him. Many difficulties here stem from people not thinking enough rather than too much. There is more emotion than intellect on display, typically.
By his comment, RM is doing precisely what he is accusing others of doing.
It seems like the whole thread was an ad hominem attempt to poison the well....setup for a guilt by association.
I didn't see the thread, as the Rev is on my ignore list. . .
I didn't see see it because RM is on my ignore list since he reverted to calling me names, so again, the irony and hypocrisy is thick enough to cut with a knife.
Here's what I see frm Calvinist, and I would say I have seen it from each one here on this board. Calvinist are convinced they have received special Divine revelation that Calvinism is the gospel. They believe "God opened my eyes" or something to that effect. To hear them speak they talk as one talks when they are born-again. Thus, there is no debate, no true consideration from a Calvinist that they could be wrong. Therefore they are only here to indoctrinate. Calvinism is not just a theology for them. It truly is the very gospel to them.
Now you are getting it Steaver.....we come here to grow in grace and knowledge. ....we would rather learn more and strengthen the stakes.
More time could go into helping each other.....but others just resist, and disrupt without positive imput.
Then when a biblical response is given....of course....it must be labeled arrogant.
Which is exactly what is wrong with their posts. They are not here to debate they are here to be right. Two completely different things.
Do you believe we all need to have thicker skin? Maybe it should be applied here as well. Anyway, I have seen only a few cals who seemed to display an attitude other than what Steaver mentioned. Those are Ann, Tom Butler, robustheologian (has his moments) and you, but then with regards to you it has only been recently. By your own admission you had previously been much like the others. The problem is with the great number of cals that frequent this board. If you want to nit pick and play the "fine" card then there is certainly nothing I can do about that but it just seems to me that in doing so you are looking for an opportunity to be offended.
So what are the camps looking like numbers-wise here, any recent polling data?
Your post does not take into account the idea that indeed the Calvinists could in fact be right. Where would that leave you RM? I would suggest it leaves you set up to be a critic of the Truth of God.
Do you think Calvinists do not think they are right?
So then they would be posting just to be contentious?
If someone comes in as they do from time to time and deny the trinity....should we make believe we are unsure of the teaching so we do not "come across" as arrogant? Or should we give biblical teaching on the trinity?
Further more....if every Christian offers verses....are you going to then say they are ganging up on the person?
More people lurk and observe then post. Some try and avoid theological labels and yet within a few weeks you can see exactly what they hold.