Featured Only calvinists are believers.

Yes you said that Webdog.The problem that you do not seem to grasp is my own words do not condemn me.It is your jaundiced eye that has you being obsessed with this notion.There are four or five of you here who attack in this way because you are frustrated.
You cannot answer the biblical positions so you attack what I say by leaving out the context, or not reading the post correctly.
Everyone else does read the post as intended and if the truth be known they agree with the verses offered even if they think they could write it smoother than I can. Agedman read the thread correctly and answered exactly correct. You pouted and "added him to your list". Good luck with that.

You questioned me the other day on the image bearer doctrine using Gen.9:6.
I thought ok WD is finally engaging the scriptures....good.
I gave a solid biblical response that if anyone took the time they could find agreement in almost any systematic theology. I stand by that response.

Instead of agreeing with the response and maybe adding something edifying to it....you looked to mis-read it....intentionally, or unintentionally...only you and God know your heart motive. It is ironic that you would post this:

Really... this is tedious:thumbsup: Go make yourself some hot cocoa, and come back when you can enter in to some scriptural discussion.
Most come in here for that no matter what doctrines they hold. You and your 3-4 other teamates seem to have an aversion to that.

I have disagreements with several in here.That is good and can be healthy.
Move past your agenda and join the mainstream....let the healing begin:love2:

 

You mean "Great Commission" Baptists.

 

That is not the worst thing Michael!

15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

 

I don't equate "moderate" with "lukewarm". I equate moderate with non-fanatical.

 

This might be the subject of another thread:wavey: I can say it seems as if I tend to be more on the radical edge of the spectrum,so I view it more as the lukewarm passages..or like this verse;

You are viewing moderate as gentle which is good. I think it is not as easy to maintain in a war like condition...like BB:laugh: as in a peaceful situation like BB could be :thumbs:

 

Well, I meant theologically moderate. I know I haven't been moderate in some of my replies.

BTW, I still believe that if you and I could come to an understanding and get along, ol' Fred and I could -- although he doesn't seem to be as willing as you to try.

 

No, it's the rejection of the Calvinistic definition of the Sovereign God. Most people don't accept the idea that God predestines people to damnation.

 

:thumbsup::wavey::godisgood:Another Clear Post!!!:applause:

 

:thumbsup::jesus::applause:Some Biblical Truth!!!:thumbsup:

 

Well said WD :applause::jesus::wavey::thumbsup:

 

Well said !!!:applause::thumbsup::wavey:

 

The difficulty in accepting these two posts as other than opinion is that in my earlier post I specified exactly what the problem post was and the reason for the reaction.

I further attempted (obviously in vain) to clarify how that particular selection misconstrued the various Calvinistic thinking on threads. Why it is that Calvinistic thinkers generally come at a passage from various angles of application.

Another interpretation to the first part of the post could have been that the poster hasn't encountered very many Calvinistic thinkers in his sphere of interaction; that the BB presents a strange phenomena that generates vulnerability issues that to some expose areas of immaturity or weakness which in turn are handled by emotional struggles. I do not consider that the poster is either immature or weak; I do think that the sphere of the understanding is helped more than might be realized by all contributions on the board. It is neat to watch how the Scriptures are handled so skillfully, and how many wonders are disclosed by all who post.

Rejection of a view is not bad; that is called discernment. As we grow, in wisdom and knowledge of the Savior and understanding of God, we are not all at the same time at the same levels. God has done this purposefully. We all can learn from each other.


There will always be a general undercurrent of sharp tone, words of biting edge, and volatility that lays just under the surface. Even a thread on periods, that bring a smile, show how that the form of generating an argument is part of the board.

Two points were being made by my response and posting of the original statement: First, to show that, "yes, there was the statement of something said, and here it is;" Second, to encourage a backing away from posting the extreme carnal emotionally based indictment of any view by any poster.

Again, apparently not everyone is in agreement.

But that isn't anything out of the ordinary for the BB.

Like my first post on this thread, this thread is only meant to foment further division and not for edification.

So far, the projection has been born truthful.

 

You have every right to question whether they are Christians. If someone believes or advocates a false gospel then they are displaying evidence that they are lost. The question is whether those who hold to free will view (a.k.a. foreknowledge view) are Christians. I believe their view is in error, but that is not enough to separate them from Christ.