Do non-cals have something to be worried about?

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1511964#post1511964

Just as when you first came on board with no introduction and feigning ignorance; so do you now feign ignorance.

Google it.

 

Are you dense? (I already know you're not, but I'll play along) Has any 'Calvinist' stepped forward to disagree with the previous concise answer? I've already answered the question:

 

It very well could be, but I calculate that there is at least an equivalent probability otherwise as well. (of course accounting for quantum flucuations and deviations as well).

Everyone should be convinced in his/her own heart as to the principles and doctrines of God's word and attempt to dialogue with others (within reason of course) about said doctrines. That being said, any one of us may in fact "learn" from each other, the learning and diaglogue is better fostered through humility, not arrogance. In truth, NONE of us REALLY know all the answers with regard to theology or anything else for that matter.

 

That is partially why I am a "pan-millenialist" with preterist leanings.

 

Heheh; that's zactly how I describe myself when it comes to eschatology!

 

I think I have finally decided on Preterism. It seems to fit best with those troubling immanence verses. Troubling even to my (previous) Amillennialism.

 

I was hoping you might know it. Maybe Rippon knows himself.

"""Read this book, read that book,,,,so-and-so says,,and what's his name claims,,,, here is an authoritative narrative on the subject,,,,here is a proper interpretation of the passage,,,,"""
How does one ever have time to read and find out what "the" Book says?

 

I reiterate again; you are disingenuous; in this age of the internet search engine there's no excuse for anyone to be ignorant of anything that strikes their curiosity, unless they're just plain #$%@ onnery.

 

Ah, I haven't given up at all on most of my previous amil stances, mostly because they are scriptually defined as in Acts 15:14-18. I believe it's a combo of literal and spiritual fulfillments. (or sumthin like that)

 

I suppose that in and of itself could be a debatable topic, perhaps suitable for a new thread; but I just can't figure out how to go about starting it. :tear:

I was hoping for something a little deeper. I am sure all Calvinist would also agree Gen 1:1 was the first verse in the Bible.

When you said:

Since we probably agree God created everything, could you elaborate on when He and why He created the monergistic and synergistic approaches?
I don't know for sure if "all" Calvinist place the same definition on these words as you do.

 

Well, googling is fine in a broad sense; but I am wondering about you personally, your feelings and beliefs, not what someone says you should feel and believe.
So far your responses seem a bit too robotic.

 

One thing is certain: It will all pan out according to GOD's purpose. I am an amillennialist with a pan-millennial fall back position.

By the way an amillennialist does not deny a millennial reign of Jesus Christ; we just believe HE is reigning now!

 

I will never give up on the immanence verses though I suspect we all misunderstand the imminence verses.

 

Oops! Thank you much. I meant imminence.

 

I know, just pulling your leg a little!

 

Heheh, you are one persistent fellow. It's odd, I kinda like you, but I have an inherent distrust of you because of your 'feigning'. Perhaps it's your style to get people to open up. You and I are at odds in that I'm monergistic and preterist/almill and you're synergistic and pre-mil. So there's only so far I care to share my personal feelings and beliefs with you. I'm much more apt to open up to one of my Sovereign Grace brothers or sisters; and the truth be known, that's actually what I long for; to share, and reason about things, not argue. And the last thing I'm gonna do is throw these precious pearls of truth that my Lord has given to me out there for those that despise what I believe in to trample on.

So get over it. I don't stand or fall to you, and vice versa.

 

A little help please, I don't pick up on subtleties to easily?

 

Thanks for the apology! I appreciate it.

 

I think OR's like me and you when it comes to future things; it's gonna pan out the way it's supposed to, except he's mostly almill while we're mostly preterist. Does that make any sense?

 

10-4, thanks