1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Typical Calvinists’ Methods of “Debate” and Elitism

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Benjamin, Jun 24, 2013.

?
  1. Calvinists’ goal is to argue logically to draw out and demonstrate the truth in the Bible

    52.9%
  2. Calvinists value the ability to reason from one’s own mind for the truth

    41.2%
  3. Calvinists’ goal is not to argue logically to draw out and demonstrate the truth in the Bible

    17.6%
  4. Calvinist do not value the ability to reason from one’s own mind for the truth

    35.3%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,425
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You want to talk about Denial? You are one (case in point) that constantly attempts to smokescreen the issues through proof-texting wars and also attempt to defend these fallacious debate tactics and using this agenda in debate.

     
  2. agedman

    agedman Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    11,023
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Did I hit a nerve?

    Good.

    Perhaps, now you will go back and start again.

    This time, rather than posting vitriol and unfounded supposition, start a meaningful dialogue on an area of Cal thinking that you disagree upon.

    See what sort of thread can result from a true discussion built upon the desire to edify.

    Perhaps you will see that some of us don't mind comparing Scriptures with Scriptures, and sharing dialogue over a disagreement while remaining agreeable.

    Perhaps, you just want to remain at the back of the class, shooting spit wads at those who do engage in learning, because you are too immature to consider you might actually be wrong.

    Ben, for all your froth over "determinism" you haven't given the slightest convincing consistent Scriptural proof it is wrong.

    So, why don't you start with that very thought in a thread. Post how that God is benign and undetermined in his dealing with the very humankind that His only begotten Son so lovingly laid down His life to redeem.

    Remember, unless you can prove that God is totally undetermined in the salvation of humankind - in all facets of that salvation - then it remains that "determinism" is NOT the problem you desire make it.
     
  3. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,425
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Faith:
    Baptist

    You are like talking to a rock, and I don't expect to teach an old DoG like you any new tricks, but thank you for the demonstration as per the Op:
    Your goal in debate, not mine. Thank you for another fine demo, again.
     
    #43 Benjamin, Jun 25, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2013
  4. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,425
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Quantum, you voted that:
    “Calvinists’ goal is to argue logically to draw out and demonstrate the truth in the Bible”

    …and also:

    “Calvinist do not value the ability to reason from one’s own mind for the truth”

    That’s very amicable of you:), but how do you suppose the Calvinists argue logically while not valuing the ability to reason from the their own mind??? They argue from having the perspective from God’s logic maybe? Have like some sort of special insight to understanding the interpretations of scripture through being gifted to know the Determinist’ Doctrinal system as truth???

    I’m just guessing to how you see this, but am real curious in how you see the Calvinist reaching their goal to debate logically with such a mindset of not reasoning from one’s own mind to demonstrate understanding the scriptures?
     
  5. agedman

    agedman Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    11,023
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Was it not pointed out that your OP is pure speculation?

    As others have pointed out - you have violated your own standard of debate tactics.

    You further show your own weakness by attempting to distort the responses of others.

    I am beginning to see a pattern with your posts and threads that is quite unsettling.

    I honestly had you pegged as a much brighter wit, and one who could actually contend with soundness.

    But, if you do not see the beam in your own eye, how dare you attempt to remove a splinter from some others eye!
     
  6. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    33,860
    Likes Received:
    1,653
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Again..."Busted":thumbs:
     
  7. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,425
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :rolleyes: Grow up Calvinist!
     
  8. RIPP0NWV

    RIPP0NWV New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2013
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not quite ready to enter a Calvinist debate, but you and your posts are qutie obnoxious.
     
  9. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,425
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Again, here is a demonstration of a typical Calvinist’ response while attempting to go into the circular ole standby tactic of proof-texting to answer, or better said “evade” a logical conclusion.

    Apparently Agedman, between his personal attacks about my “vitriol”, would like me to back up and suggests I should be in agreement with him that the above type of argument from his typical peer Yeshua1 is meaningful and “edifying”.
    I have fully addressed the only agenda that Agedman would like to "conveniently" insist on is the way to debate:
    Perhaps Agedman would like to take time out from his agenda addressed above (bolded for emphases on the agenda) and address the logic of the argument at the top of this post from the Op using some reasoning from his own mind.

    P.S. maybe the Calvinist EWF who has been demonstrating his typical techniques of debate would like to show us something more than childish trolling on this debate board and actually logically address the argument too, eh? ;)
     
    #49 Benjamin, Jun 25, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2013
  10. DrJamesAch

    DrJamesAch New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,427
    Likes Received:
    1

    Reading through some of David Cloud's articles and found this statement:

    "Thus, while I have not read every book on this subject that could be recommended by my readers, I have made a considerable effort to understand Calvinism properly and not to misrepresent it (though I have learned that a non-Calvinist will ALWAYS be charged with misrepresentation")". http://www.wayoflife.org/database/calvinismdebate.html

    Seems to be a major them for all who encounter Calvinists.

    Here's an example of Calvinist James White's sheer arrogance against one of his opponents:

    "Your citation likens my work to that of Jack Chick and Dave Hunt. I have often criticized both Dave Hunt and Jack Chick for their errors and misrepresentations not only of Roman Catholicism but of Mormonism and other issues as well (Chick is a KJV Only advocate, and my 1995 work, The King James Only Controversy is the main target of KJVO advocates to this day). Even Roman Catholics recognize the fundamental difference in my approach and the level of scholarship represented in the nearly three dozen debates I have done with leading Roman Catholic apologists across the United States. Neither Dave Hunt nor Jack Chick have taught Greek, Greek Exegesis, Hebrew, Hebrew exegesis, Systematic Theology, Christology, Christian Philosophy of Religion, Development of Patristic Theology, or Apologetics on the seminary level for the past decade, either, and none work as critical consultants on major Bible translations. "

    Translation:
    Jack and Dave lived in a cave and learned their doctrine from the walls,
    then along came White and made all wrongs right,
    and boasted, "I taught SEMINARY in my overhauls".

    Sorry James, but your ridiculous book on the KJVO issue is not the "main target" of KJVOs. McCrae, Bowman, Ross, Hodges, Sumner, Custer were all publishing anti KJV books and articles LONG before James White was a pimple on purple dragon's pituitary gland. White's works are a rehash of those authors.

    And notice White's slight-of-hand here. He carefully notes that Hunt and Chick haven't taught at the seminary level FOR THE PAST DECADE. So since they haven't been in SEMINARY teaching in the last 10 years, that makes White smarter. Also, note the ridiculous comment that "[neither of them]work as critical consultants on major Bible translations". Why would they? They are both KJV advocates (although Hunt wasn't as staunch). DUH!!! LOL

    And listen to Whites own credentials on Roman Catholicism: "Even Roman Catholics recognize the fundamental difference in my approach and the level of scholarship represented in the nearly three dozen debates I have done with leading Roman Catholic apologists across the United States." That has got to be one of the most arrogant statements I've ever heard. James White is full of more feces than a port-o-pottie at a carnival.

    CLASSIC example of Calvinist 'elitism'.
     
    #50 DrJamesAch, Jun 25, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2013
  11. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Benjamin,

    I voted that way because I honestly think that they are convinced that this is precisely what they do. I, as I assume you know, disagree with them on theological positions, I think that they are personally convinced, and do honestly pursue those poll position.

    I think some of the DoG folks have a wrong attitude, position and fear and criticism of rational, logical thought and "philosophy while wishing to "contaminate" such by coloring them with the effects of "total inablility", while simultaneously forgetting that very same principle, if true, applies to their very own understanding and explanations of theology and all things metaphysical.
     
  12. 12strings

    12strings Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the reply...I suppose my main objection to this thread is that one could easily start the opposite thread about questionable debate tactics of those opposing calvinism, find a few examples to show their point, and it would be equally as valid.

    It's not really about percentages...It's the fact that its all based on anecdotal evidence...Cals say non-cals never address the issues and won't give straight answers and attack people...non-cals say cals do the same...I have seen a TON of both on here, and don't think one can make a determination about which group is the greater offender.

    Also, I'm sorry I did not catch that your OP was directed only at Calvinists HERE...and as such, I'm sure the percentage of those who argue for arguments sake is higher than in the real world.

    Finally, I'm not denying that there are Calvinists who are puffed up in their understanding, and who can and have caused great harm and division in their hard-headed promotion of the Calvinistic system, to the neglect of preaching the gospel and teaching God's entire counsel...but since we're speaking anecdotally here...I have also seen multiple situations in which those who oppose calvinism have treated otherwise good, godly men as if they were the object of a witch-hunt, creating much hurt and life-disrupting trouble.
     
  13. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    21,242
    Likes Received:
    2,305
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Winman

    Really.....If he got EVERYTHING backwards.....and you WINMAN have got everything right...how come there are not WINMANISTS....reading your posts rather than his commentaries????
    Are you just an undiscovered National treasure????:thumbs:


    When I was not yet a christian I could not tell the difference from real christians and cults...they seemed quite alike in many ways.
    Understanding the truth of God sorts it out really fast however:thumbs::thumbs:
     
  14. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    24,988
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I put "Calvinists do not value the ability to reason from one’s own mind for the truth" because of their constant dancing around the origin of evil, their constant obfuscation and redefinition of free will, and their constant ultimate fall back position of appealing to the "mystery of God" when they can't logically explain their theology.

    Any belief system that says, God determines people to be predestined, so they may come most freely (Article X, Westminster Confession) is not valuing the ability to reason.

    If the choice "Calvinists’ goal is not to argue logically to draw out and demonstrate the truth in the Bible" were rephrased to say, "Calvinists' do not argue logically in their attempt to draw out and demonstrate the truth in the Bible" I could have checkmarked it as well. I don't think they set it as a goal for their arguments to be illogical, it just is what it is.
     
    #54 InTheLight, Jun 25, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2013
  15. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    135
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Right. We can't reason and you're all geniuses.

    That must be why we have Al Mohler, Michael Horton, RC Sproul, John MacArthur, Phil Johnson, and you have Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, and Rob Bell.
     
  16. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    24,988
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Once again Benjamin's assertion is being proven! Ha ha!
     
  17. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    135
    Faith:
    Baptist
    ...and once again disproving your claim that we're the ones who can't reason.
     
  18. DrJamesAch

    DrJamesAch New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,427
    Likes Received:
    1
    Another example of elitist attitude. Appealing to the fallacy of success, i.e., John Calvin is better (elite) because he had more followers.
     
  19. DrJamesAch

    DrJamesAch New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,427
    Likes Received:
    1
    And yet another example of elitist attitude. You fellas are rackin em up.
     
  20. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    Icon knows more about the Bible by accident than you do by deliberate study. Although I also disagree with Benjamin, I can respect his position, because he has a good grasp of the subject. You on the other hand do not have a theological clue. One example is taking Hebrews 6:4-6 to prove one can lose their salvation, or that once saved always saved is false, or that irresistible grace is false. That is your pattern, taking verse out of context and giving them false interpretations to match your lack of Biblical knowledge.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...