 |
| 
fencesitter
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 19
| Posted 7/21/2003 5:36 PM (GMT -6) |   | quote:
Albert and John,
Blessings on you both.
Much has been made of the hatchet jobs that anti-OV apologists do when "refuting" its tenets. No other argument in Christian theology is as one sided as this one where OV'ers clearly have the better scriptural, historical, and logical evidence on their side. I suspect that's one reason why the argument in Evangelical circles because so shrill so fast.
I think, to be respectful, you'd want to offer them the courtesy you say they don't offer you.
To wit: many Calvinist-leaning thinkers (traditionalists) make a distinction between God causing events, and people's compatiblistic free will chosing them the way God foreknew they would be. True, OV'ers use the argument that if God foreknows that I will choose X, then it cannot be otherwise, therefore God is the cause of my action in some sense, but your interlocuters clearly disagree on philosophical/definitional grounds.
You may not buy their argument (just as the foolish antagonists in this thread don't buy the argument that a God who could stop rape but doesn't is "just"), but that doesn't mean you can assume the postion you're trying to prove. It drives you nuts when they do it, right?
Unless I missed something and most OV opponents are proclaiming "Glory to God for rapes and murders, His will be done" it's not fair dinkum to paint them with that brush.
TB
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
Fleetwood
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 110
| Posted 7/21/2003 5:38 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey, Earp, you got some vendetta with Calvin or something? I see no problem with the quotes you provided, but obviously you do. Are you saying that you believe that God's will is with fault?
Wasn't it you who also declared a few days back, "Calvin is not my brother!!!"
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/21/2003 5:44 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Hey, Earp, you got some vendetta with Calvin or something? I see no problem with the quotes you provided, but obviously you do. Are you saying that you believe that God's will is with fault?
You were the one saying Albert and I didn't "have our facts straight" with regard to Calvinism. Particularly you took issue with Albert's statement that God causes every evil thing that happens. I provided quotes from Calvin that quite clearly state that in fact everything that happens is God's will, and happens according to God's determination and bidding. So how can you question Albert's assessment that in Calvinism God causes every evil act that happens? You yourself agree with the quotes I posted from Calvin's Institutes, don't you?
quote:
Wasn't it you who also declared a few days back, "Calvin is not my brother!!!"
According to the standard for a true Christian laid down by Jesus Christ himself, i.e., "love your enemy," no, Calvin does not qualify.
Edited by - John Earp on 07/21/2003 10:45:36 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 7/21/2003 5:50 PM (GMT -6) | | According to the true standard laid down by Christ himself, very few people are Christians. Would David qualify to you- someone who committed bla]tant adultery and murder? But yet god forgave him. How do you know what Calvin believed in his heart? What he thought on his deathbed?'
Christ WAS clear about not judging others, lest you be judged. I challenge you to find ANYONE who is without sin! | | Back to Top | | |
|
fencesitter
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 19
| Posted 7/21/2003 5:53 PM (GMT -6) | | THIS GETS MY "WISDOM-OF-THE-WEEK" AWARD!
quote:
Albert and John,
Blessings on you both.
Much has been made of the hatchet jobs that anti-OV apologists do when "refuting" its tenets. No other argument in Christian theology is as one sided as this one where OV'ers clearly have the better scriptural, historical, and logical evidence on their side. I suspect that's one reason why the argument in Evangelical circles because so shrill so fast.
I think, to be respectful, you'd want to offer them the courtesy you say they don't offer you.
To wit: many Calvinist-leaning thinkers (traditionalists) make a distinction between God causing events, and people's compatiblistic free will chosing them the way God foreknew they would be. True, OV'ers use the argument that if God foreknows that I will choose X, then it cannot be otherwise, therefore God is the cause of my action in some sense, but your interlocuters clearly disagree on philosophical/definitional grounds.
You may not buy their argument (just as the foolish antagonists in this thread don't buy the argument that a God who could stop rape but doesn't is "just"), but that doesn't mean you can assume the postion you're trying to prove. It drives you nuts when they do it, right?
Unless I missed something and most OV opponents are proclaiming "Glory to God for rapes and murders, His will be done" it's not fair dinkum to paint them with that brush.
TB
Edited by - fencesitter on 07/21/2003 10:54:20 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/21/2003 5:59 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
According to the true standard laid down by Christ himself, very few people are Christians. Would David qualify to you- someone who committed blatant adultery and murder? But yet god forgave him.
Yes, after David REPENTED.
quote:
How do you know what Calvin believed in his heart? What he thought on his deathbed?'
This very public act on the part of Calvin was never publicly repented of, and in fact, as far as his writings make known, he did nothing but try to defend his actions with regard to Servetus for the rest of his life.
quote:
Christ WAS clear about not judging others, lest you be judged. I challenge you to find ANYONE who is without sin!
If the Bible states something as definitive for those who would claim to be Christ's followers, it matters not in the least who does or doesn't follow the command. Jesus said, "if you love me, you will keep my commands." I am merely stating Christ's own words here. I think you should agree that Jesus Christ is in one of his main offices, the Judge of all the earth. I am not so ready to dismiss Christ's commands as impossible as you seem to be.
By your logic Adolf Hitler was probably a Christian, too. At the very least we ought not to "judge" him, either.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 7/21/2003 6:05 PM (GMT -6) | | We shouldn't "judge" anybody. God is quite capable of doing that Himself. I don't think God takes into consideration what I think about whether someone should be judged or not. He is the final arbiter of justice, not me, not you or anyone else on this earth.
You've repeatedly equated John Calvin with Adolf Hitler on this board , and that is definitely your right to do, if you feel so moved. But I am quite positive that it does nothing to advance your position.
"Everyone who believes in God at all believes that He knows what you and I are going to do tomorrow." - C. S. Lewis | | Back to Top | | |
|
fencesitter
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 19
| Posted 7/21/2003 6:08 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
From Calvin's own Institutes:
"..it is very wicked merely to investigate the causes of God's will, for his will is, and rightly ought to be, the cause of all things that are."
I care nothing for being entangled in this bru-ha-ha... So I'll keep my own peace and notice that what Calvin is quoted here as saying fits just fine with lots of Scripture. The caveat is, of course, that sin is brought freely into the world by US. God is, of course, not the cause of evil. But when not speaking in THAT way, we also declare, Biblically, that God is sovereign and the "cause of all things." God is Creator and Sustainer. But a different order of things -- a separate one -- adds into the mix the sin and chaos (and evils) that follow sin. God is also not the author of death.
Drop the name of the author of the above if you want. (The bickering bores me.) But the IDEA (minus the Augustinian baggage) is sound.
I hope that you move on...
I will.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(As Starkman would say: "For the Fence of it") | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/21/2003 6:16 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
I hope that you move on.
I will.
Yes, I will now go to bed and think happy thoughts of John Calvin.
Edited by - John Earp on 07/21/2003 11:16:40 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/21/2003 6:24 PM (GMT -6) | | John, realize for an instant, that what you are REALLY talking about is Calvin practicing capital punishment -- not mass murder. (This is obvious; so I'll proceed.)
Compare Calvin to then (the former) Texas Governor .
quote:
Bush's record as Governor of Texas to see ... During his tenure as Governor, (the former) Texas Governor presided over a record ... 152 executions
- http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/03/tucker.pm/
February 3, 1998
Web posted at: 4:06 p.m. EST (2106 GMT)
HUNTSVILLE, Texas (CNN) -- Condemned killer Karla Faye Tucker, who may have less than an hour to live, was denied a last-minute stay of execution by the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday.
Only intervention by (the former) Texas Governor now stands between Tucker and the distinction of becoming the first woman executed in Texas since 1863 and the first in the nation since 1984.
Tucker's attempts to spare her own life have been supported by some Christian groups. This week, Pope John Paul II appealed for mercy for her.
- http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/page1/97/12/15/women.html
Copyright 1997 Houston Chronicle
Televangelist Pat Robertson told 60 Minutes in a recent interview that Tucker has his support and that if (the former) Texas Governor "lets this sweet woman of God die, he's a man who shows no mercy."
- http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/03/tucker.execution.2/
Texas executes Tucker
- http://64.239.13.64/free/ww3/042803_vatican.html
Concerns Raised by the Vatican
During his tenure as Governor, (the former) Texas Governor presided over a record setting 152 executions, including the 1998 execution of fellow born-again Christian Karla Faye Tucker, a convicted murderer who later led a prison ministry. Forty of (the former) Texas Governor 's executions were carried out in 2000, the year the Bush presidential campaign was spotlighting their candidate's strong law enforcement record. The Washington Post's Richard Cohen reported in October 2000 that one of the execution chamber's "tie-down team" members, Fred Allen, had to prepare so many people for lethal injections during 2000, he quit his job in disgust.
(the former) Texas Governor mocked Tucker's appeal for clemency. In an interview with Talk magazine, (the former) Texas Governor imitated Tucker's appeal for him to spare her life - pursing his lips, squinting his eyes, and in a squeaky voice saying, "Please don't kill me." That went too far for former GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer, himself an evangelical Christian. "I think it is nothing short of unbelievable that the governor of a major state running for president thought it was acceptable to mock a woman he decided to put to death," said Bauer.
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/23/2003 8:25:41 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/21/2003 6:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Now!
I have no difficulty believing that (the former) Texas Governor is a Christian. I think his faith is genuine. I have to just forgive him for all those deaths the State of Texas carried out under his watch.
I do the same for John Calvin.
Obviously (the former) Texas Governor thought that was his job, and what he should do. I disagree, and think it was wrong.
But that's the end of it.
PotOnWheel
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/21/2003 11:37:02 PM
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/23/2003 8:26:24 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/22/2003 2:27 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Albert replies:
Terry, pleased to meet you! I would point out something to you though. I chose my words (or had them determined for me) very carefully. I asserted only that Calvinists believe that God causes people to sin. I did not assert that they believe that God is morally responsible for what people do. Compatibilism is a form of determinism, and no consistent Calvinist can deny that he believes that God is the cause of people sinning. Whether secondary causation is involved or not is irrelevant. The word "cause" can mean either a secondary, or a primary, first cause. So it is perfectly accurate to assert that Calvinists believe that God is the cause of people sinning.
Now of course, Calvinists argue that secondary causation somehow absolves God of the blame. That is poppycock, and I am happy to argue that point if anyone is interested in taking it up. They also resort to compatibilism to exonerate God, which is also nonsense. But check my posts. You will find that I was accurate on this point. I did not accuse them of saying that God was morally responsible for, say, rape. I said that they believe that he caused it. So I beg to differ with you. I don't think I misrepresented them at all.
Two observations:
1. The phrase "consitent Calvinist" has reared its ugly head.
Christians are to be consistent Christians, Any "ISMS" are idolotry -- or so says the professsor at Calvin Seminary.
It is a horrible form or patronization to tell someone what they HAVE to believe. It is not humble to do so. It lacks charity. And it puts one's own judgment ahead of hope for fellowship.
Language like "consitent Calvinist" works against the Body.
2. Often we are shaped by what we react to. And reacting to it shapes us.
There is much in what you wrote Albert that has nothing to do with what the "core" of concerns of the OV that TGB and Doc and many others have said here. Instead, what you wrote was part of a reaction; and in reacting it is the ugliest kind of ideas that you wrote.
Surely, to those who are not OV, or who's historical heritage has not involved the American Cal/Armin. debates... whatthey see in what you wrote is just ugly and negative. Repulsive.
There is mych that TGB and Doc have written that is edifying to read. What you posted is not.
Regrets. | | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 7/22/2003 4:25 AM (GMT -6) | | Well, you started it....anyway, I didn't claim you've never literally READ Calvin...I do think you are misinterpreting what he and the other Reformed theologians say regarding God being morally responsible. What you're saying is what you think logically flows from God having caused creation- that, then, he must cause sin. I guess I can say the same for your view, since under your view, God still created the universe, so he, secondarily or tertiarily, or whatever, has caused sin.
I don't know if you read and scientific determinists (most are materialists, but not necessarily atheist) - but many of them don't think that determinism lets people off the hook for their immoral acts. In a nutshell, WHO is the entity that actually DOES the act? It's the person. That the person did the action bc of causes is beyond dispute, and those causes surely influence the action. But, the bottom line is, the person is the one who did the action, so who else can be blamed but the doer?
"Everyone who believes in God at all believes that He knows what you and I are going to do tomorrow." - C. S. Lewis | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 7/22/2003 7:06 AM (GMT -6) | | RD: you must be a very good lawyer. You have the gift for evading the topic and changing so that it looks as if your opponent is talking about a completely different subject. Oh well...I would suggest you go back and look at the statements you made AND the ones I commented on but that would entail you admiting you were wrong and, alas, I just don't see that...
BTW, everyone, RD says she would never say she was right. So everything she says must be taken with a grain of salt.
Edited by - honorman on 07/22/2003 12:17:04 PM
Edited by - honorman on 07/22/2003 12:27:22 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 7/22/2003 7:24 AM (GMT -6) | | POW: thanks for simplistic solution to everything. As long as you and Fred are around posting irrelevant pictures and comments I know the world is safe for democracy ( and Calvin, bless his heart).
Edited by - honorman on 07/22/2003 12:28:05 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
honorman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1137
| Posted 7/22/2003 7:26 AM (GMT -6) | | BTW, Fencesitter, thank you for keeping your peace and solving our dilemma. Proclaimations always fill my heart with such gratitude...
Edited by - honorman on 07/22/2003 12:28:47 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/22/2003 7:35 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Bush mocked Tucker's appeal for clemency. In an interview with Talk magazine, Bush imitated Tucker's appeal for him to spare her life - pursing his lips, squinting his eyes, and in a squeaky voice saying, "Please don't kill me." That went too far for former GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer, himself an evangelical Christian. "I think it is nothing short of unbelievable that the governor of a major state running for president thought it was acceptable to mock a woman he decided to put to death," said Bauer.[/*]
If the above is true, it reveals an incredibly despicable side of GWB, and one that he truly needs to repent of. I am very glad that GWB has announced no plans to write on theology.
Edited by - John Earp on 07/22/2003 12:36:46 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/22/2003 7:49 AM (GMT -6) | | Albert. I think that your differentiation between "authors" and "pew sitters" is a useful one. Please understand that my concern is for the pewsitters. They are the ones who are grandparents, children and parents. It is the pew sitters who do the praying, the witnessing, etc. In actuality the "authors" only exist for moments at a time. And by Doc Boyd's admittion, "they" change their minds--to MephEternal's admiration. (The brave and true ones do.) So I'm concerned about the effects of words on the pew sitters.
Pew sitters are on the internet too. And I work with pew sitters, and have them for neighbors. Some are Calvinists.
Where I REALLY want you to use discretion is in that LOTS of the people I work with and for, and serve in tieir need are ROMAN CATHOLICS. Lots of Evangelicals have SAID unkind things about them and what was supposed as their relationship with the Lord. And I even know people who DID unkind things just because someone is a Roman Catholic.
So, lets be nice out there. (And in here.) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 7/22/2003 7:50 AM (GMT -6) | | honorman
quote:
POW: thanks for simplistic solution to everything. As long as you and Fred are around posting irrelevant pictures and comments I know the world is safe for democracy ( and Calvin, bless his heart).
honorman,
PoW is Fred and Al2Si2H4O9 as well! Go look at the e-mail addresses for all three. It's his method to obscure the true number of his posts and hide (unsuccessfully) his obsession.
PowOnWheel PotOnWheel@aol.com
fred tryPotOnWheel@aol.com
Al2Si2H4O9 GoTryPotOnWheel@aol.com
Edited by - Laika on 07/22/2003 12:55:26 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/22/2003 8:18 AM (GMT -6) | | Laika: It's his method to obscure the true number of his posts and hide (unsuccessfully) his obsession.
PoW: That's being unkind, to make personal attacks. That is not condoned on this board. Ask adiaphora.
As to number of posts, I posted a new name on occassion SO THAT newcomers would not feel any hesitation in criticising whatever came to their attention. I do more on this board than jsut post thoughts. I do some humor, and supportive things too. That chalks up way to high a number. TGB has more than I if you only cound "meaty" posts.
I'm the main one to post all three names together.
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/22/2003 1:24:00 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/22/2003 8:22 AM (GMT -6) | | Laika:
quote:
It's his method to obscure the true number of his posts and hide (unsuccessfully) his obsession.
PowOnWheel PotOnWheel@aol.com
fred tryPotOnWheel@aol.com
Al2Si2H4O9 GoTryPotOnWheel@aol.com
Yea, right. Like anyone would think that I'm trying to hide the connectedness!!! Get real.
The board just won't let you have more than one name with the same address.
(BTW, Laika, honorman has been on this board since 06/27/2001, and has 646 posts under another name. He knows me enough to give me a good 'ribbing.'  )
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/22/2003 1:22:59 PM
Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/22/2003 1:24:41 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 7/22/2003 8:27 AM (GMT -6) | | NotSureWhoIAmTalkingTo
quote:
Yea, right. Like anyone would think that I'm trying to hide the connectedness!!! Get real.
The board just won't let you have more than one name with the same address.
(BTW, Laika, honorman has been on this board since 06/27/2001, and has 646 posts under another name. He knows me enough to give me a good 'ribbing.' )
Why the need to have three e-mail addresses? And those three e-mail addresses all resolve to the same address. It's confusing to people especially when you're sometimes in the same thread seemingly as two or more different people.
Edited by - Laika on 07/22/2003 1:29:03 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
a2rutled
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2003
Total Posts : 22
| Posted 7/22/2003 9:24 AM (GMT -6) | | RD:"Well, you started it....anyway, I didn't claim you've never literally READ Calvin...I do think you are misinterpreting what he and the other Reformed theologians say regarding God being morally responsible."
I think it would be helpful to clarify that Albert wasn't arguing that God is morally responsible for sin, but that, if Calvinism is true, it does make God *the cause of sin*. Usually Calvinists will argue that even thought God is the ultimate *cause* of sin, he is still not *responsible* for sin. Most contemporary Calvinists make the distinction between *causation* and *responsibility* and usually appeal to mystery to explain the apparent contradiction. For instance Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology writes:
"If God does indeed cause, through his providential activity, everything that comes to about in the world, then the question arises, 'What is the relationship between God and evil in the world?' Does God actually cause the evil actions people do? If he does then is God not responsible for sin?"
"In approaching this question, it is best first to read the passages that most directly addresses it. We can begin by looking at several passages that affirm that God did, indeed, cause evil events to come about and evil deeds to be done."
Of course, in affirming that God is the ultimate cause of evil, Grudem wants to make it clear that the Bible never teaches that God is *responsible* for evil.
"But we must remember that in all of these passages it is very clear that scripture nowhere shows God as directly *doing* anything evil, but rather as bringing about evil deeds through the willing actions of moral creatures."
Of course, Arminians and Open Theists will argue that word *willing* as understood by Grudem, is incoherent when it comes to the issue of causation and its relationship to responsibility.
Also, John Piper in trying to defend the position that God is sovereign even over even the bad things that happen writes in his book Desiring God under the heading “His Sovereignty Covers Calamities”
“The evil Satan causes is only by permission of God. Therefore Job is not wrong to see it as ultimately from the hand of God…He (God) himself does not commit sin, but has decreed that there be acts which are sin—for even the acts Pilate and Herod were predestined.”
And Calvinist Gordon Clark writes in his book "Religion, Reason and Revelation"
“I wish very frankly and pointedly to assert that if a man gets drunk and shoots his family, it was the will of God that he should do it.”
“It may seem strange at first that God would decree an immoral act, but the Bible shows he did.”
“Let it be unequivocally said that this view certainly makes God the cause of sin. God is the sole cause of everything. There is absolutely nothing independent from him. He alone is the eternal being. He alone is omnipotent. He alone is sovereign.”
These Calvinistic authors are affirming that God is the ultimate cause of sin, and that it flows logically from the argument that God is the cause of all things, which (they claim) flows from an exegetically accurate exposition of scripture. However, they deny that this makes God responsible for sin. Grudem states that this is beyond his ability to comprehend, nevertheless, he holds it because he believes this is what scripture teaches:
"In spite of all of the forgoing statements, we have to come to the point where we confess that we do not understand how it is that God can ordain that we carry out evil deeds and yet hold us accountable for them and not be blames himself. We can affirm that all of these things are true, because scripture teaches them."
Grudem then goes on to appeal to mystery,
"But scripture does not tell us exactly how God brings this situation about or how it can be that God holds us accountable for what he ordains to come to pass. Here scripture is silent, and we have to agree with Berkhof that ultimately 'the problem of God's relation to sin remains a mystery.'"
as does Piper
“As paradoxical as this may seem to us with out finite minds, it is the teaching of scripture.”
Now, of course, Open Theists would try to argue that scripture *does not* affirm the position that God causes evil, because they think it is irreconcilable with the character of God, and because they find the argument that God can be the cause without being made responsible is incoherent. Grudem (and the rest) would claim that the biblical burden of proof remains on the open theists (and all Arminians) to deal with the passages that show God as actually causing evil.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Fleetwood
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 110
| Posted 7/22/2003 9:54 AM (GMT -6) | | Albert, you think I need to "repent of the false doctrines of Calvinism and join us in fighting them?" Oh, Lord, join you??? Even if I was an atheist, I would not join you in anything. It has nothing to do with your beliefs but everything to do with your attitude and demeanor. It's, frankly, disgusting. I say the same about the others in here rocking on their holy high horses. The smugness is so thick in here, I can barely see through it.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Blood Washed Heretic
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 167
| Posted 7/22/2003 10:42 AM (GMT -6) | | From personal experience dialoguing with Calvinists on other sites, I can attest to outright arrogance on their part. Can the OVers on here be smug? Certainly.
As it happens, I'm still a blissfully ignorant moderate Arminian, so I'm neither Calvinist nor OV. (yet...)
But let's not complain about the specks in our brothers' eyes when we have planks in ours...
In essentials, unity; In matters of opinion, liberty; In all things, love.
Edited by - Blood Washed Heretic on 07/22/2003 3:44:37 PM | | Back to Top | | |
| 106 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:15 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|