This is Barry Setterfield making a brief appearance. I have followed with interest a number of threads on the C/A discussion and feel it is time to register several items of concern. To begin, my scientific background has led me to look out for anomalies where the theories of science are not in accord with data. In the immediate context of this forum, the data that we have to go on is all contained within the Bible, both Old and New Testament. The theories that are being discussed here are essentially those of Calvin and Arminius, and/or variations of them. It is precisely at this point that I find myself again confronted with an anomaly. The theories of both Calvin and Arminius are divergent from the total picture presented by the whole Scriptural revelation. It must be borne in mind that neither of these positions is Divinely inspired, but are theories or interpretations of men, and as such are fallible. What has disturbed me in this ongoing discussion is that both sides tend to uphold their particular guru as infallible and seem to refuse to look at the weaknesses of their position, particularly when it is compared with Scripture. It may be true that some verses quoted give apparent support to the respective positions. However, when those verses are looked at in their Biblical context, another picture often emerges – one which seems to be deliberately ignored in order to maintain the theory rather than accept the discrepant data from the Word. I see this so often in science, particularly in the theory of evolution, that I had hoped to find a different attitude amongst those who ostensibly believe in the accuracy of God’s Word as the data we have to go on. It was in that context that I encouraged my wife, Helen, to go ahead, and really look at what the Bible itself had to say about the word ELECT. Rather than go in with preconceived ideas, we were both prepared to have our views molded by what the Bible actually had to say itself on these matters. To that end, Helen spent over eight hours on study, along with some help from me as well. The outcome was a document which faithfully reflected the Scriptural context of each occurrence of those words. The outcome was, for both of us, also unexpected – namely that in each case the use of the word ELECT was in the context of God’s chosen people, the Jews, and that the word translated CALLED simply meant to invite. However, rather than acknowledge the validity of this Scriptural study, there has been a tendency to marginalize the results because it did not conform to the favoured theory. Little matter that is was profoundly Biblical; the theory had to be upheld at all costs, not because of, but despite the data from the Word. I find this attitude disturbing because it is the same attitude as the evolutionists. In the Biblical context, I also find it strange that the theories/writings/traditions of mere men should be held as being as equally valid as the Bible itself, yet this is what is happening here. And yet this is also what Calvin did in formulating his theology – he went back to Augustine for his ideas rather than go independently to the full Biblical revelation. In that he was following Roman Catholic tradition and practice, and I believe that is where Calvin went wrong. It is for that reason that I again urge you all to take another look, with open hearts and minds, at what Helen has researched from the Bible itself, rather than conform to a man-made theory. While it is readily acknowledged that this was not written as a theological treatise, it is nonetheless Biblically accurate within the limits acceptable for this discussion board. If we had found any Biblical discrepancy on the matter, we would have said so. Instead, a completely consistent view emerged as the word study continued. In conclusion, I want to come at this whole matter from another viewpoint. We are meant to be Christlike in all our attitudes, actions and reactions – so that the mind, the outlook, the whole demeanor that Christ had, is overflowing from us into the world around us in all our behaviour. It is at this point that I note some other disturbing trends. Calvin was a very unsatisfactory character; his harshness on occasion culminated in murder. His theology appeared to do nothing to help his character. By contrast, Arminius was a very gracious man, and his theology, however imperfect, encouraged that graciousness towards his opponents and those who did not know the Lord. There is a harshness which emanated from Calvin that sometimes seems to taint those that follow his doctrine. Unfortunately, that has also been in evidence on this discussion board as I have watched from the sidelines. May I urge those of you who insist on following Calvin’s doctrine, please be careful to allow the overflow of God’s graciousness at all times, particularly towards those who hold views that are divergent from yours. I also believe that some kinds of gloating Calvinism are as repugnant to God as they are to some of us as well as to the unsaved who we wish to bring into the kingdom. In conclusion, and because of all the matters discussed above, I have requested that Helen refrain from further discussion on the C/A forums. She has done a very good work, and I am proud of her and the way she kept an open mind as she did the word study to find out what the Bible itself had to say. This humbleness of spirit is truly Christlike, and it comes through in her daily living, too.