How do you deal with others here in our debates?

think that many over in the NON Cal camp are so ardament against it, NOTHING that we posted, no author, no verse from bible will persuade them to ever reconsider their position...
To me, many of them fail to see just HOW the fall of Adam affected all of us, see just what the Cross was, it is a definite propiation atonement work, and deny election on basis of God doing it directly, as being "not fair!"

 

Great, just great. Non-cals are ignorant. I see.

How do I deal with others in debates? When they tell me I'm ignorant as an opening salvo I use the Ignore or killfile option.

> Plonk <

 

Not ignorant, but very much stuck against hearing anything bilical that might hint at supporting calvinism...

Still think big problem is how both sides for the extent/effect of the fall, what the Cross actual accomplished, and this need to still assert man as having a "full free will"...

 

I don't, generally, engage in the ridiculous Calvinist vs. non-Calvinist debates around here given that so much of what is said is so poorly articulated, by both sides, and lacks both nuance and clarity that there isn't much to work with. (Just being honest) Given that there are far more options than just the two positions primarily sought out here my option is to disengage and find other points of conversation.

The debates are pretty pointless.

Also because it reminds me too much of Mad Magazine's Spy vs. Spy bit...

 

My true motives are to contend for proper doctrine so that God may be glorified. I do not do so in order to bring attention to myself; all glory belongs to God alone. I'm not interested in winning a debate at all costs. I'm not interested in a dialog with those who simply like to read their own words or who lack basic Christian charity. I understand that there are many more people who frequent this board and remain silent than those that post. They are the real audience; those who are as yet undecided.

Is my posting consistent with my motives? For the most part, although I admit I occasionally get drawn into fruitless debate. Hopefully that will happen less than it has in the past.

 

I think you are misunderstanding the OP and reading in an insult where there is none. I think he was using a common statements calvinists make against non-cals to make a point that they should not be so antagonistic if in fact they believe that their opponents errors will only be corrected when God opens their eyes.

 

I look at the debates here about the same way I see a Zebra. Are the stripes on a zebra white and black or are they black and white? The Calvinist camp says the non-Calvinist camp are hard-headed and simply won't see the truths in scripture that are so evident to them. The non-Calvinist camp says the Calvinist camp is hard-headed and so stiff-necked that you can't get them to see the reasoning and scriptural truths in free will.

I wonder sometimes, if, when we get to Heaven, we will discover how much time was wasted in these petty, immaterial debates when that time could have been much better spent encouraging and praying for one another and sharing the Gospel of Christ with those who need it so much. I doubt with 100% surety that when we first glimpse the face of Christ, see the nail prints in His hands and feet that we willcare if the Calvinist camp or the non-Calvinist camp were right.

As for how I handle it....I generally have my say, will debate a bit, and then move on down the road. Life is too short to expend too much energy on this..in the whole scheme of things it's pretty unimportant in this venue.

 

It's understandable that we are very passionate about what we believe. What's not understandable nor appropriate is when we leave debate and engage in name calling or cheap shots at others. We all need to remember that we are believers discussing what we believe the Bible is teaching. I see many comments every day where it leaves the discussion to enter in ad hominems. We all have probably at some point resorted to this, but we should repent and not continue to do it. I've said mean things before in the heat of a debate. It's not right. We all have to be careful to treat each other with respect.

 

12strings, I've read a lot of your posts. You're a pretty sharp individual. I have to disagree with your interpretation of the OP. The OP was asking a direct question, "To the Cals...Why get upset or angry at them when their ignorance is part of the flesh?"

The non-Cals being ignorant is presented as a given, or the default state. It was an insult.

 

InTheLight:

I can see something of your point in the OP, though he also said this to the Non-Cals about the cals:

OP...

He asked if the cals were "limited" "blind" and "hard-hearted"?

I suppose both interpretations are possible. Maybe the OPer will step in an clarify for us? (hint, hint).

 

My essential views are a right understanding of the Gospel; get that wrong and you do so to the peril of your soul. I am not open to persuasion on those things because they are the cornerstone of my faith,

I am more open to discussing less important doctrines, but it would take a over all change in my systematic theology to get me to change. Not impossible, but close to.

I am here really for one purpose: to sharpen and be sharpened.