Featured True motives?

First, let me applaud this forums moderator for his active moderation and zero tolerance for baseless accusations, aspersions, and generally uncivil behavior. This type of moderation is long in coming and I applaud it.

I recognize that the opinions of many who post on this topic (Calvinism) are shaped by anecdotal experience, not fact. Quoting Google searches on Calvinism to make the case that Calvinists are arrogant is intellectually dishonest. Keyword optimization has a disproportional effect on Google searches; often yielding a biased result. "isms" are not arrogant, people are. If you think differently then you open your own way of thinking to the same bias on the part of others.

I know there is a battle royal going on in the SBC over Calvinism. Those who have a dog in that hunt are not exactly impartial, so discounting their hyperbolic statements is to be expected. When someone offers a cogent, reasoned, and rationale opinion during a debate; and they are attacked personally, but not substantially, it is a pretty good indicator that the person making the attack is not interested in the truth. In other words their motive may not be as pure as the wind-driven snow. Insults and rhetorical skills do not equal truth.

 

You are missing the point. When you do a Google search on the word "Calvinism" you come up with this: Calvinism

When you do a search on "Calvinist Arrogance" you come up with this: Calvinist Arrogance.

I should not even need to comment on the difference between the two. Should I go through the exercise of doing the same search on Arminianism?

The fact is that if you are convinced of something no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind. People back themselves into a corner with their bias and inflammatory rhetoric. Both sides do it. Once in that corner it is hard to get out. It takes a honest admission that you were wrong. It is much easier just to keep believing and doing the same thing.

 

It makes perfect sense since the whole premise of such a search is to advance a line of thinking without considering one's own foibles. If I do a search to find arrogant Arminians, do you think I will find some positive results? Of course I will. Why not just state that both sides have individuals who are arrogant? Answer: because it will not make the person's point.

This is why constructive debate is difficult for some people. They cannot separate the idea from the person. If you start off a debate with the premise that your opponent is arrogant, nothing your opponent says will be received with serious consideration. I have seen Calvinists and Arminians go into formal debates with that presupposition. The debates were a waste of time. The same thing happens here.

 

You are making my point. You mind is made up. Nothing...NOTHING anyone says will change your mind. I am not trying to be mean, Rev. Even if I provided volumes of data to the contrary your mind is made up that Calvinists are arrogant. You are free to walk around the cabin and believe that, but understand that the same charge can be made against your camp.

 

Do you know that I was just waiting until this accusation was made? Thank you for not disappointing.

I am truly saddened that some of you have decided that Google is the arbiter of theological debates.

And as to why did I not post my findings on Arminians? I left that exercise up to you to see whether you, and those like you, would be honest enough to say, "We are prone to be just as arrogant." That type of admission would be an honest one and may just allow us to dialog with an eye on ourselves first. That is what our Lord would have us do (Matthew 7:5).

 

Rev., I know full well that individual Calvinists can be arrogant. Nothing I posted in this thread denies that. When Calvinists police their own that is a good thing. My issue is with Arminians ignoring their own problems. You are acting just like my daughter when I used to confront her about doing something wrong. She would say, "Yes, Daddy, but...". As soon as the word "but" came into play I knew she was not ready to take responsibility for her actions. I am not giving you a "but". I personally know arrogant Calvinists; and not from a Google search. I personally know arrogant Arminians; and I did not have to go to Bing or Yahoo to find them. Arrogance is a character issue, not a theological one. If both sides just admitted that we would all be better off. Unfortunately even those admissions come with a finger being pointed.

 

Please stop making my point for me or I will have to start charging you royalties.