Featured Did Augustine Corrupt The Church With Gnostic Doctrine?

No one has attacked anyone personally. For crying out loud cals are starting threads to belittle non cals and visa versa. This thread like others was not started to have legitimate debate. It was started to poke a finger in the eyes of cals. Both sides need to grow up and get over yourselves.

 

Oh, but don't you know that since the evidence that proves the facts of the videos history would be wrong is because the Reformed article shows how Augustine was vindicated by the Roman Catholic council of Ephesus and Carthidge?

The entire article hangs it hat on juries of wolves hearing a case against sheep.

Also of worthy note is the article sites as an authority, noted ROMAN CATHOLIC APOLOGIST Bart Ehrman whom Calvinist apologist James White (isn't there a thread about him somewhere where the Calvie's on this board jumped all over his coat-tail) has debated on many of THESE VERY ISSUES and disagrees with him.

Thus not even Calvinist apologists agree with this CATHOLIC source, and the rest of the article is merely quoting the same sources that Ehrman MISQUOTES in his books, and a few quotes from Catholic apologists like Carol Harrison (who wrote another book about Augustine trying to link the NT church to his teachings to prove continuity in "Rethinking Augustine", the first book of hers I'd ever read).

It is amusing how often Calvinists punt to Roman Catholic historians when attempting to justify John Calvin's reliance on Augustine, but then distance themselves from Augustine and Calvin's views on murdering their enemies (of which those same councils Archangels article relies on was also responsible for approving of) and from the beliefs that they yet held consistent with the RCC.

 

The quotes used in these articles also merely repeat what many Christians believe anyway about predestination and election. The Calvinists, since they presuppose that predestination and election are CALVINIST terms instead of BIBLICAL terms, presuppose that early churches taught these doctrines in the SAME WAY that they are explained in the Confessions simply because the words "predestined" or "election" are found in the quotes. What you do NOT find is any explication of said quotes that agree with the Calvinist definitions of these doctrines.

Another fallacy that the author commits is category error where in refuting Ignatius, he punts to FF Bruce and Eerdman's views on Acts 1. The issue isn't about a debate over Acts 1, it's whether or not Ignatius as an early church "father" HISTORICALLY taught views opposed to Augustine and Calvin.

The article is a very poor apologetic for the authors view.

 

Exposing the false doctrine of Calvinism is like turning on a light in a room full of roaches.

 

All right! Saving this to my potential signature file.

 

Very unedifying of you RS. Your drive-by mo is very cowardly.

 

Ouch, my posting must have hurt. And just who are you to call some cowardly? I said what I believe. A coward would post what other want to see.