Featured Slowly moving my wife towards Reformed Theology from IFB theology

Perhaps it started off track?

 

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

:applause:

 

Of course it wasn't an attack arminian teachings are in fact anti-biblical. It's no different than the threads of Van and others who hold to dissident theology who call the same against my brothers in the reformed camp. I haven't seen you mewling over those threads in the same manner. :thumbsup:

 

Because I usually don't bother reading Van's posts. He's made up his mnd and refuses to budge; attempting to discuss with him only provides more venue for him to espouse his views.

I should probably do the same with Evan.

 

Yet you have read them and haven't mewled about his attacks on others as you've done here. My point.

Why should he budge? His arminian slant has led him to where he is theologically.

I've not known you to be so timid and easily offended. John is outspoken, but he's not in error.

 

He's a young man who is a student at Massillon Baptist College. It's KJVO as he is. It is certainly anti-Calvinistc in its doctrinal stance.

It is a given that he has bought into his theological mindset without much serious reading. Reading the works of noted Calvinists through the centuries and how they interact with the biblical text is something that is off his radar.

 

My books? Which are those?

I suggest you put those Reformed books away and read the Bible, you are learning pure error.

 

No doubt about it. With such a disparity in views, one wonders why they married in the first place—well, we KNOW why Christian men will marry women who don't share their basic doctrines—but why did she marry him?

 

That sickens me too....I just walk away from those places. Have you been following Paul Washer.....he will set you straight.

 

Nobody pays attention to him anyway. NO WORRIES!

 

Well, it is certain that evangelist6589 was not paying attention to me, I never said anything about God paying Satan a ransom for our atonement. I don't know where he got that, but he certainly did not get that from me. I would challenge anyone here to show where I said such a thing.

He also accused me of teaching a "dualism" between God and Satan, again, something I never mentioned. Again, I would like anyone to show where I said or implied such a thing.

So, he might have been paying attention to Paul Washer or one of his Reformed teachers (I don't know), but he certainly was not paying attention to me. I simply said that Satan is not God's servant, he is God's enemy and adversary, and I showed scripture in Revelation 12 where there is "war" between Satan and God.

 

Au contraire, mein freund. I haven't read anything by Van in months. I debated with Van in the past; once I saw that he refused to see any position other than his own, I deemed it a waste of time. The same reason I don't respond to anything about Skandelon or Winman.

My arminian slant has led me to where I am (although as I've admitted in the past, I'm a borderline calvinist); but I prefer to try to be intellectually honest and examine viewpoints rather than simply disregard them.

Timid? :tongue3: You obviously haven't read some of my posts to Evangelist in the past.

Easily offended? Nah; I just prefer not to wallow in the negativity and constant bickering that is the calvinist-vs.-arminian "debate".

 

Not at all. I was merely pointing out that Evan made two conflicting statements. Kind of like this:

"The sky was an azure blue."
"The sky was a leaden gray."

Now, this is an attack on someone's theology:

 

Yes, I believe that. However, you said two different, conflicting things.

 

Who claimed that you could not learn from a Non Reformed book or teacher? Show where anyone said that.