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!
Sorry for the "lack of clarity" was not being in anyway intentional, just way to commonly describe the system. I was in no way attempting to be disingenuous or disrespectful.
Are we (you and I) still on "good terms"? We are not 'nit picking" one another are we?
Maybe lump it in with Washington & Lincoln's Birthday & have a white sale for sheets & bedding.....maybe even market comforters....call them Calvin Comforters. I like that & with a toast too. :love2: :applause:
Here's an idea on how to celebrate John Calvin's B-day!!
Have a firewood sale, with all flammable liquids(gas, kerosene, lighter fluid, etc.) half-priced!!! :thumbs:
Plus, they can sell "rock'em sock'em" robots, but instead of robots, have one side Servetus holding lit matches and Calvin holding fans!! LOL
Please, my DoG Brethern, do not take offense to this. I am trying to bring some levity to this thread. If this makes any one mad, I am truly sorry. I pray that ALL have a Merry CHRISTmas!! :thumbs:
i am I am's!!
Willis
Post #169; I believe this is the one you're referring to?
In which case, I agree to your statement that he said Calvin had nothing to do with this nation; I was in error. My apologies.
You bring up one of the reasons we follow Christ and not man. I've yet to see the man who is not flawed, including myself.
While God has gifted His church with great teachers and leaders -- men (and women!) with great insights, great minds, and a great prayer life and ministry -- they are but men living under the curse of sin and apt to get things wrong at some point or another. Like the Apostle Paul said, we now see through a mirror dimly... but one day we will see clearly.
We compare the writings and actions of men with the Scriptures and with the writings and actions of other men. Prayerfully, guided by the Holy Spirit, we extract truth and press on.
The problems seem to stem from not trying -- thinking that any one system of theology or scriptural interpretation is THE way. No such thing.
Here's an idea on how to celebrate John Calvin's B-day!!
Have a firewood sale, with all flammable liquids(gas, kerosene, lighter fluid, etc.) half-priced!!! :thumbs:
Plus, they can sell "rock'em sock'em" robots, but instead of robots, have one side Servetus holding lit matches and Calvin holding fans!! LOL
Please, my DoG Brethern, do not take offense to this. I am trying to bring some levity to this thread. If this makes any one mad, I am truly sorry. I pray that ALL have a Merry CHRISTmas!! :thumbs:
i am I am's!!
Willis
Luke please explain. Just what exactly does one have to do in order to pay "honor" to Mr. Calvin that would meet with your approval? If by that you mean, accept his teachings as related to the five pillars, then for me, that just will not happen. At least not for the foreseeable future.
But if you will explain how I "dishonor" him in any way. Let me know.
It's VERY simple- recognize his contributions- that's it.
Not a bad idea, but then I would have to record it, for some reason Luke thinks that I am "dissin" John Calvin. Disagreeing with a system of theology is not synonymous with "dishonoring" or even "failing to honor" Mr. Calvin. I am sure somewhere, on some thread I have said, probably more than once, that I respect the scholarship and contributions of Mr. Calvin in a general way, but I simply do not agree with the positions that He has arrived at.
Then you should bone up on english.
Do you really want to do this? Do you want me to bring an English professor in to prove to you before all that your sentence was a terrible run on?
I don't care that it was. I am not grammar police. But when you accuse MY English skills of being lacking because I could not understand your poor writing- that is unnerving. I make plenty of errors. But if you ask me to clarify I will. Not falsely accuse you of being a grammar moron.
Is that what you want? Because for you to type a sentence like that which is hardly comprehensible, and for me to say- I did not understand it- and then for you to come over the top and spit on MY English is RATHER frustrating. This is a run on sentence, BTW. It is comprehensible, however.
I think you should either admit your grammatical error and apologize for saying I need to bone up on English or accept this challenge:
When an English professor says, "That is definitely a run on sentence" start a thread entitles- "Luke was right and I was wrong".
What do you say?
No, I asked if you have been raising a toast or saying thank you daily, or were proposing that we start doing so; instead of directly answering, you deflected my question to your charge against Toppass.
I didn't deflect. I answered your question.
NO. Nor is that NECESSARY. All I request is that people do the research, learn somethings about Calvin and this nation's history and then not say stupid things any more like "Calvin had nothing to do with the founding of this nation."
That's it. That's what this is about. Not daily raising toasts or any such other silly notions.
If you're going to spout off about others falling victim to logical fallacies, you should ensure you don't use them yourself.
Let's do this then. Let's employ that same English professor to examine my post and point out if there is or not a logical fallacy.
If there is NOT then you have to start ANOTHER thread by the same title.
You game?
I get tired of people hurling this baseless crud out there. You are wrong. Your was a clear run on sentence. I had to read it three times before I could discern what you were saying.
And you are wrong- I have not employed the use of any logical fallacies in this conversation.
No; where exactly did John Toppass say that Calvin had nothing to do with this nation? I'll go back and look through his posts in this thread to ensure I didn't skim over it; I invite you to provide the date/time of the post in which he made this statement.
You've apologized for your error here. Thanks.
I hope you will continue to do the right thing and apologize for your other two errors.
No man deserves to be burned at the stake.You probably don't know that Servetus deserved to be burned at the stake.
You are not following the conversation at all quantum.
This started because somebody said that CALVIN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS NATION.
No one is saying, nor should any intelligent person derive from what has been said, that you have to ascribe to the DOG to honor Calvin.
Please pay attention and do not take your preconceived ideas to the words but actually READ the words that are typed.
Bring on the English professor.Do you really want to do this? Do you want me to bring an English professor in to prove to you before all that your sentence was a terrible run on?
I don't care that it was. I am not grammar police. But when you accuse MY English skills of being lacking because I could not understand your poor writing- that is unnerving. I make plenty of errors. But if you ask me to clarify I will. Not falsely accuse you of being a grammar moron.
Is that what you want? Because for you to type a sentence like that which is hardly comprehensible, and for me to say- I did not understand it- and then for you to come over the top and spit on MY English is RATHER frustrating. This is a run on sentence, BTW. It is comprehensible, however.
I think you should either admit your grammatical error and apologize for saying I need to bone up on English or accept this challenge:
When an English professor says, "That is definitely a run on sentence" start a thread entitles- "Luke was right and I was wrong".
What do you say?
I didn't deflect. I answered your question.
NO. Nor is that NECESSARY. All I request is that people do the research, learn somethings about Calvin and this nation's history and then not say stupid things any more like "Calvin had nothing to do with the founding of this nation."
That's it. That's what this is about. Not daily raising toasts or any such other silly notions.
Let's do this then. Let's employ that same English professor to examine my post and point out if there is or not a logical fallacy.
If there is NOT then you have to start ANOTHER thread by the same title.
You game?
I get tired of people hurling this baseless crud out there. You are wrong. Your was a clear run on sentence. I had to read it three times before I could discern what you were saying.
And you are wrong- I have not employed the use of any logical fallacies in this conversation.
Amazing, Calvinists freely admit that "irresistable" is a poor choice of words and is misleading as to what they truly believe, then they have the gall to criticize us for not understanding them. George is closer to the truth, but he is in error as well. You cannot have spiritual life, you cannot be regenerated until you first believe on Jesus. Until you believe you are dead in your trespasses and sins.
Bring on the English professor.
BTW: I never denied that it was a run-on sentence. However, there were three elements in that sentence, separated by punctuation; thus, my encouragement to you to bone up on English.
Re-look at your response. I asked if you were raising a toast to all those who were responsible for this great nation, or if you were proposing to do so; you deflected the question to John Toppass' comments, instead of directly answering the question. Now you've actually answered the question (your statement above about "NO.") If you don't see your original answer as a deflection rather than an answer, I can't help you there. Perhaps the English professor can.
In fact, I won't even wait for the English professor. Ask anyone who frequents this board. If they see your answer differently than I do, then I'll apologize.
The question is: If they agree with me, will you?
-----
Edited to add: One more thing -- please ensure you have them evaluate the conversation, not just certain portions (like the sentence you're complaining about).
I for one still don't know the expectations that Luke has for us to "honor" Calvin. Aside from an occasional mention of the Servetus affair, of which no one here on this board knows the "actual" truth, none have been disrespecting Mr. Calvin. Luke wants (seems) to acknowledge that this country would not be what it is today without Mr. Calvin. An assertion no can validate.
Historians are of one mind that Calvin contributed to this nation. Some reputable historians call him the FATHER of this nation.
If that is not good enough for you I expect you are nothing more than pure stubborn on the matter.
Also, Luke fails to consider the other side of history, that is, others who were influenced by John Calvin, which have given the world some very UGLY chapters as well. Case in point, Oliver Cromwell, the utter deciet and visceral violence he perpetrated upon the people of Ireland.
The point being here, Once and for all. Thank you to all the men and women of history who forged this new land, irregardless of the brand of christianity. To me, as an American, their brand of christianity is irrelevant. Much like attempts to make it seem as I and any others are who do not share his views.
Yes, well this sounds noble and will be plenty for Calvin haters and those who obstinately deny his contribution to the country we love- but it will not suffice for thinking people.
Thinking people will say, "Yea, but it is a fact that historians give a great deal of credit to Calvin, and it is a fact that ALL of the Pilgrims were Calvinists and it is a fact that ALL of the Puritans were Calvinists and it is a fact that the first Great Awakening which unified this Country for Revolution was an almost purely Calvinistic Revival, and it is true that most of the founding fathers were Calvinists, and it is a fact that King George called the Revolution the Presbyterian War, and John Adams said "Liberty is indebted to Geneva."
What quantum says, as usual makes you feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside- But facts are facts and I am a facts man.
Those who are not facts people will eat it up though Quantum. Congratulations.
Many preachers talk about the need to return to what made this nation great. Well, like it or lump it, the Doctrines of Grace had a GREAT DEAL to do with it.
No man deserves to be burned at the stake.
Your logic is twisted. With your logic you would have Hitler a good man and every thing that he did should be praised. Saddam Hussein apparently did right as well. These are your heroes? God forbid!
Historians are of one mind that Calvin contributed to this nation. Some reputable historians call him the FATHER of this nation.
If that is not good enough for you I expect you are nothing more than pure stubborn on the matter.
Yes, well this sounds noble and will be plenty for Calvin haters and those who obstinately deny his contribution to the country we love- but it will not suffice for thinking people.
Thinking people will say, "Yea, but it is a fact that historians give a great deal of credit to Calvin, and it is a fact that ALL of the Pilgrims were Calvinists and it is a fact that ALL of the Puritans were Calvinists and it is a fact that the first Great Awakening which unified this Country for Revolution was an almost purely Calvinistic Revival, and it is true that most of the founding fathers were Calvinists, and it is a fact that King George called the Revolution the Presbyterian War, and John Adams said "Liberty is indebted to Geneva."
What quantum says, as usual makes you feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside- But facts are facts and I am a facts man.
Those who are not facts people will eat it up though Quantum. Congratulations.
Many preachers talk about the need to return to what made this nation great. Well, like it or lump it, the Doctrines of Grace had a GREAT DEAL to do with it.
Oh, so now we are down to "my facts are better than your facts"? You are the one who twist things to suit yourself, and I am not referring to theological "facts" at the moment, simply in general.
I will not give alms to John Calvin, which almost seems to be what you want from others.
Luke, Luke, Luke. I said, "bring on the professor." Did that not give implicit agreement to your terms?I got an A in college level English. What is your college grade in English?
I will contact my English professor but first, when he tells you that mine was NOT a logical fallacy and that yours was a run on sentence you must commit to starting those threads.
Do you?