Featured The value of books

You guys are all swarming me like angry bees, classic Calvinist reaction to anyone who challenges them.

Those who can should watch that video by Jerry Walls. If anything, he is Arminianism's James White, although I think he is a hundred times more interesting and entertaining. Five minutes of White and I want to slap the guy he is so obnoxious.

But he says something very interesting at the end of that video. He says the Calvinists have done a terrific job of getting their view "out there". They have written hundreds, if not thousands of books, have numerous websites, etc...

The Calvinists are always selling Calvinism, even to their own. God to keep folks on a short leash you know. :thumbsup:

Arminians or non-Cals have been asleep. We have just assumed folks would read the Bible and agree with us, because the Bible really does agree with us. But that has not been the case. The Calvinists have out-performed the non-Cals dramatically in getting their message out.

But that is changing. Lots of folks are coming out against Calvinism now, as they have done in the past when Calvinism reared it ugly head. It will take a few years, but it will be subdued as it has been many times in the past. Yes, it will rise up again in a few decades, history always repeats itself. Right now, things are good for Calvinism, but I really think it has peaked and is on it's way out again.

At least for now.

 

Yes. He's prided himself in his not reading of books, while valuing his learning as from the Word alone, even showing at times how he has had direct answer to his beliefs (special revelation) (consider his KJV prayer about what version to believe wherein God told him to believe only in the KJV).

At the same time Wes Inman claims to have read 'Sinners in the hands of an Angry God' --- as if it were a major feat, but in reality it is a short read. He also states he's read many things from Johnny Mac.

What I gather from these claims is that no one can teach him -- and that he is in fact myopic in all his views.

Little to nothing was learned, yet at the same time, one is claiming to have read and implies he has learned much.

The claim is oxymoronic. :wavey:

 

You've challenged no one.

 

I remember a while back somebody started a thread on home libraries. Some of you fellas boasted you have many thousands of books on theology.

You know how many I have? Zero. I have 2 Bibles and that's it.

That doesn't mean I didn't pick up a pamphlet at church by John Rice about the Masons or Smoking, or Drinking or some other such subject. I have been a Christian 50 years, and I suppose I have probably read many dozens of little pamphlets like that. And I did read some serious books about Bible versions in the 80s.

But other than that, I have relied on the Bible alone.

And you guys with all your books still can't beat me in a debate. Several times unbiased folks have written here on BB that I put you all to shame. One fella said I "wiped the floor with you Calvinists"

See, good books is no substitute for having the ability to think. :thumbsup:

 

Right, that's obvious to everyone.

 

I didn't claim Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God was a major read, I simply said most of the material I have read over the years leaned Calvinistic. And that is absolutely true.

 

Did you own those John MacArthur commentaries that you bought back in the 80s or not?

 

But he's been doin' a lot of fibbin' though.

 

They weren't commentaries, just study materials. I would buy his books on certain books of the Bible, for instance, I remember I had a study guide through the book of 1 John. Books like that.

I actually thought they were pretty good at the time. Then when I started to see his Calvinist views I stopped buying his material and reading it.

You probably don't know, he was very subtle about being a Calvinist back then.

 

You guys are pathetic. It takes 3 of you to gang up on me, and you've got nothing.

I bet you guys fought the same way in High School, and probably still got your teeth handed to you. :laugh:

 

Regardless Winman, P4T is right, and anyone that's been around here for a while knows that you've prided yourself in not reading the writings of men, not even owning them, now you're telling us you've been buying and reading them all along and trying to give us the impression that you are in actuality well read with the writings of men.

What to believe?

 

No. You are.

 

My point was that you claimed it as if it were a badge of honor in defense of your past journey.

It is a simple read period.

My other point is that you've learned not much at all from your reads years ago which you've proclaimed. You're still at the same point and your views are in fact myopic.

 

Exactly. Jockeying for position and no more.

None should exalt themselves, yet this is just what Wes Inman is doing, seeking pole position. It only matters what he needs to say according to the afforded moment. If another moment presents itself, he claims another position.

He betrays himself in his claims.

He's myopic.

He's even been given special revelation in which he can instruct us all, that is, if each of us would drop what we know is Biblically sound doctrine, and this includes his special revelation concerning Bible versions. Let's not forget his claim that even a dog has faith, so, that said I am hoping he is preaching at his local Humane Society to the unfortunate canines in their stead.

His is nothing short of the claims of Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell.

Think about it.

 

You're adding callow behavior to your arsenal now?

 

That's not correct. I gave my reasons for not reading men. You can find men who support any view, and you can find just as many men of equal standing and education who can refute that view. In the end you get nowhere.

I realized this when I read books about the Bible version controversy. Both sides made many good points. In the end, I realized that it was a matter of faith, at least for me. I personally believe God desires that we know his word, and that he would therefore preserve it. In English, I think that preserved word is the KJB. Compared to the MVs, it wins hands down, no contest.

But this would apply to Calvinism or Arminianism as well. You can find good writers who cherry pick the scriptures to present their view. In fact, this is exactly what both sides have done.

I just read the Bible, and I ask God to show me the truth. That doesn't mean I won't run across a good article and read it, or watch a good video on Youtube. But I don't RELY on these articles and videos to teach me, I try to rely on the Bible and praying for God to help me understand it.

I mean, have you EVER seen anyone anywhere who interprets the elder son in Luke 15 like me? Show me where someone else gave that interpretation, I challenge you.

But I believe it is correct. :thumbs:

 

Oh, now all of a sudden he doesn't read men, but at the same time he wants us to read him. But when it is fitting he will use 'reading men' as his proof, that is, as long as it is fitting.

 

OK, I'm going to show you where I get my knowledge, but remember, this is a secret the world must never know, for if the world knew where I obtained my knowledge, then they would know. And I don't want them to know. Know what I mean?



Remember, this is just between me and you. And them. And they are not always nice. They might visit you in the night and a... and a... well, you don't want to know. But it isn't pleasant.

 

You've stated you know what Calvinists believe, yet you don't read their materials? How can this be possible?


I was right where you're at now. I thought I had Calvinism down pat, knew what it entailed, &c. Boy was I wrong.

You, Wes, have the wrong picture of what Calvinism is. You have erected this picture of an ugly ogre wielding a ginormous club, with his knuckles dragging the ground. That's not the picture.

The picture of true Calvinism is one of God not forbidding anyone from approaching Him. They are all willfully fleeing from Him, with no desire to come to Him. In His mercy, love, and kindness, He reaches out and draws those He chooses to, to be saved. Without Him doing this, none of us would have been saved.