Calvinism takes Biblical Truth Too Far

You are correct, I should not respond like this, but like quantumfaith says, it's p4t's condescending attitude that upsets me. He, no doubt, would be more respectful in person, thus the comment about being cowardly.

BTW, I'll be right over to share those peanut butter cups! :thumbs:

 

Robert,

I see you're replying already. Please keep in mind that name-calling and malicious treatment is proof of being incorrect and that you're losing.

I apologize that you didn't see the difference between physical/spiritual death in the passage as you should have. It was very apparent to me, as it well should be.

Anyhow, you employ these works of the flesh often against other brethren on the BB. I wonder what that means that you do this so often?

But still, bless you my friend.

 

Nothing I said was condescending. The fact is plainly there: the passage deals with physical death, not spiritual.

Here's what you've done:

1) Blamed your actions on another.

2) Called the other names.

3) Justified your actions "because of someone else."

4) Failed to stop and see that the passage was misused.

Wow. How biblically mature of you, and how responsible.

Nothing I said was condescending. You're attitude and qafs? Totally condescending while showing yourselves as incapable of admitting the error that is so plain. Instead of doing this, you come back, both of you, with hasty, cursory, and cynical responses, both with name calling.

I find the need of yourself, and of qaf to add malice and name-calling into this, both shameful, and unChrist-like behavior. A simple admittance that this text does not deal with spiritual death, but instead addresses physical death, and therefore does not apply to the subject at hand would've been sufficient, contrary to the name calling. In so doing we could've had mature, Christian dialogue.

You're not learning doing this. A wise man would've admitted the error. The proud and imprudent? Not so much. Instead of this, we have name-calling and an attack on a person, and on said persons theological stance, namely, against Calvinists and Calvinism, calling this doctrine false doctrine.

If you count pointing out what you so obviously missed in your hastiness to respond and attack Calvinism as "condescending", then that is shame on you, not me.

 

PFT, my responses to YOU are an attempt to get YOU to see how YOU respond to others in such dismissive ways. Yes, I do teach new Christians, and I am grateful for that opportunity. YOU are a pastor? Really? We could go on and on, all I have ever wanted is for your "corrections" to be a tad more conciliatory rather than denigrating toward your "opponent". It is your "manner" more than your message (not to mention history) which I do not share.

 

[/QUOTE]
I would like to answer your post but I can't until you learn to use the quote function properly.

 

Again, your evidenced has been weighed byt he scales of the Bible, and been found wanting!

 

JesusFan, we wouldn't know as we cannot decipher through your convoluted posts. PLEASE use the quote feature correctly! You have been shown time and time again. If you cannot do something so simple, just respond to the whole quote! :BangHead:

 

Try answering your own post JF. The above quote is all I see when I hit the quote button. My evidence is not found wanting. That is all I can respond to, that is basically all I can see. Try it yourself.

 

Please reply to # 106, as my replies to your original posting are all "in the box!"

 

Change the () to [].

(quote)bla bla bla bla(/quote)

You must have the (quote) and a following (/quote)

Otherwise it's hard to read.

 

He's been given these instructions again and again. He refuses to follow them.

 

Guess that its just predestined to happen when I post, Eh?

 

Jesusfan, since they have trouble denying some (well, most) of your arguments, they attack the fact you struggle with the quote feature instead. They have to win at something :thumbsup:

Imagine debating them and dismantling their theories live, and they want to start arguing about the podium you're using, or your shoes, anything but the issue.

:laugh:

 

If you want to put deliberate ignorance on the back of God, that's on you.

 

think that would be similiar to when they asked Jesus questions, and instead of directly answering them, had to first point out what the scriptures REALLY said and meant!

 

Wow, imagine you of all people making a sardonic statement.

Try sticking to the OP? Oh, wait, nevermind, you invariably lose those when you do, then it turns into the above cynicism and prattle.

At least you're consistent. Congrats!!! :thumbs:

 

can we please go back to discussing the Bible, instead of going off to "rabbit trails?"

 

Exactly. :thumbsup:

 

Hard to discuss anything when you have to decipher through a long post with quote inside of quote and not understanding who said what.

It's a simple thing to do...I have no idea why the stubbornness in refusing to do it the right way.

 

Hardly. I'm sure they would know how to use the quote feature properly. You have had every one of your questions answered (regardless of what your side kick says). You don't like the answers.