A Poll for the Forum

I'm not a Clavinist, and I still don't like to see the "Calvinism is evil" trash. Let that poor dear horse alone!

 

No no no no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

It won't go away for as long as there are the likes of Skandelon and winman whose purpose is not to put Calvinism under a spiritually educated scrutiny, but rather to present it as a deceptive, heresy and its adherents heretics who should be burned at the Baptist Board stake.

Well, this is one dawg not going down without a fight.

 

I don't recall ever referring to Calvinism as a heresy or its adherents as heretics. I have said that some of the claims of Calvinism appear to make God "deceptive" or "disingenuous" by offering men something that He has not grant them the ability to willingly accept, which has been a historical argument against Calvinism for centuries and not unique to me. These issues can be discussed in a civil and Christlike manner.

PB, accusations like this, and calling me a "lying devil" as you just did on the other thread, are clearly over the line and I beseech you as a brother in the Lord to reconsider this approach. God bless you.

 

If you don't like the thread that is running don't visit it.

 

:applause::applause::applause: Shouldn't such common sense go without saying?

 

I believe we have established the differences between the two camps. This has divided the church for hundreds of years and we are not going to solve the mystery here. How about more threads that exalt the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and threads where we can agree on things.

 

Of course you don't.
You're a past master at subtility.
I only wish I were like you.

Skandelon, in your Romans 11 post, I have tried to be charitable and helpful to you by posting even if I was not ready for a discussion, since there didn't seem to be anyone among your target crowd who wanted to pick up the discussion.
I said let's start fresh, and all that gobbledygook.
And then you posted something derogatory about what doctrine of grace adherents and Calvinists believe in another thread, in reply to Old Regular's post.
And now you're telling me to reconsider my approach ?

Alright, just so you know that I want a peaceful, civil discussion.
But any trace of subtility on your part will set me off, and I say that as a fair warning.
You be a Christian, I'll be a Christian.
You be a streetboy, I'll be a streetboy.
Your choice.
Not mine.

 

Although it does occur that some threads never meant to address the reformed view gets highjacked by those who cannot help themselves. Rather irritating

 

How charitable of you. Thanks

You are making WAY too much of that in light of all that is said on this forum. OR said, "Calvinism excludes no one." And I merely added, "Calvinism excludes no one "of the elect." Which is exactly the method Calvinists use to interpret texts that say "all" or "no one." They add "all of the elect" or "no one of the elect." That is all I did as a joke and you made a mountain out of a molehill. Plus, how is that statement even untrue or even "derogatory?" Calvinism does teach that God excludes no one of the elect, doesn't it? What is the big deal?

You are comparing that with calling me a "lying devil" and accusing me of calling you a heretic and wanting to burn you at the stake? Come now, brother, you know that is not even close.

You can do as you will brother, but if you don't mind I'll be a Christian regardless of what you choose to be. Okay?

 

Not I! :wavey:

 

I'd settle for a 2 week time out!

 

I voted for the break, but at the same time realizing that such a feat is most likely not feasible. Too many on both sides get thier jollies from the thrill of the debate.

Many times I've wished that there was a 'monergists only' forum and a 'synergists only' forum, but that would have it's problems also (heheh, the synergist forum would probably dry up due to lack of content and substance).

 

I voted for a break but at the same time I wonder what this site is for then. Is it not a debate forum? And, while some threads get under my skin I seriously doubt there's not a person on this site that I couldn't be friends with in real life. After all, with the anonymity of this site one will say things that normally wouldn't be said in the real world.

 

Fair enough. But I do wish there was a special section for these debates, so that threads don't get hijacked.

I've noticed other forums have a certain section dedicated to Calvinism debates.

 

There used to be a forum dedicated to the Calvinism/Arminianism debate but things were said that certain parties decided to abolish that forum which made no sense considering that the debate is allowed anyway.

 

That might be fun though. Watching people go at it unfettered! :laugh:

 

Yeah.
But on a more serious note, one rule I would like imposed and enforced is that the debate exclude any insinuations on the intelligence or intent of either side or on what certain doctrines make God out to be, and therefore its adherents to be.
That raises my hackles.

That other forum was primarily closed I think because one or both sides liked to say, "well, I wouldn't want that kind of God on my side, or what kind of God does that make your God" and such like trains of thought, which in turn elicited unkind responses and the fight was on, and considering how we had outsiders coming in every now and then to lurk around, the forum was discontinued.

I don't like saying the things I say either, I must confess, I would rather be friendly and gentle, but there are debaters here who just couldn't keep me that way. :tonofbricks:

What does "ton of bricks" really mean ?
I didn't want to use this ------> :BangHead:because I'm not angry right now.