Featured I don't see how I could go wrong, do you?

Giving personal analogies or suppositions to make a point for discussion is not what 'being personal' means. You know what "ad hominem" is and it just isn't necessary.

Just address the topic. Very few have actually attempted to explain why the logic of this point is not true.

 

Of course. Why wouldn't you think that? We disagree on these points so it wouldn't make much since for you to believe I'm progressing, so doesn't that kind of go without saying?

Likewise. Calvinism was 'entry level' in my journey. The idea of God having to 'play both sides of the chess board to ensure victory' (i.e. sovereignly control not only his choices but the choices of his enemies as well) is a very small and limiting view of a infinite sovereign God, but to each his own. I know, I know, that's a straw man, but no amount of second or third causes stuffed between God's determinative decree and man's action can insulate and differ divine culpability. It undermines His holiness AND HIS SOVEREIGNTY, in my opinion. It is what it is and its a very tiny view of the divine IMO.

Thanks. That is honorable.

 

I read your second post before your first, so once you acknowledged the error it should have been dropped. All is good.

I understand your intent now. No worries.

 

And that comment is likewise PERSONAL as it implies my skin is thin. Trust me, I lost no sleep over your comment. Don't misinterpret my calling you out for wrongdoing as being unable to stand under its crushing, overwhelming, all consuming weight....after all they are just 'words' and a Calvinist, of all people, certainly knows that words have little inner power or ability to provoke the will of man. :smilewinkgrin:

 

A couple of things, and we need to get off this rabbit trail. And I say that as the author of OP, not a moderator.

1. I don't moderate this forum. Squire is the only mod here.
2. It's against the rules to 'get personal' with any participant, even moderators regardless of the 'thickness of their skin.'
3. Some might interpret your construing of my very simple 'rebuke' as a dropping of a 'hammer on you' as a bit 'thin skinned,' not to mention that you don't seem able to let it go. I didn't officially moderate you, give you warning points or anything. I just called you out by expressing MY OPINION of your OPINION.
4. I like DHK too, but openly playing favorites by contrasting us in this manner only further reveals your intent on this ad hominem rabbit trail. I'll gladly engage you on the topic, not on this rabbit trail.
5. Your point has been made, you don't like me much. I'll get over it somehow. Now, would you mind if we actually discuss the OP?

 

Having read several notable scholars on this subject, if they are objective they will eventually have to appeal to mystery on this point...or adopt the 'all Christians will inevitably become Calvinists view,' which is becoming increasingly more popular due to its logical necessity within that system...a ditch similar to other hyper tendencies that typically follow.

 

I was responding to that accusation...come on brother, you know better than this...