Search results

Don't pretend for one second that you know a thing about "Pelagianism"...or what is was..or what Pelagius himself believed...you don't.. And almost NO ONE on this board is even "Pelagian" anyway... You mock yourself. :laugh:

Yes...this article is comically stupid...comically. I doubt any educated Calvinist would take it seriously, Icon would....but, ya know, so it goes

OK ICON you begged for it: Now, for three seconds...stop "correcting" people and learn something you did not know: You wanna hear where your boy McMahon is wrong? Here goes: That is false...Arminians simply do not believe that...it is a lie. NO Arminian has affirmed this statement...

What fight??

NO...it wouldn't...in "Arminianism" it is not even POSSIBLE to "keep the law" except for God's grace...you know the "depravity thing???"?" whether it be saving grace or no, it is all of God....But, no-one on this board understands actual Arminian Theology one whit...so why bother...certainly...

That sums it up quite succinctly. :thumbsup:

I've read that article: Quite frankly....I don't even take this guy seriously. This article is one of the reasons no one should. His writings are so laughable, that they're not even insulting. If I didn't know better, I would actually think this site was a spoof on Calvinism. Look, I was...

The man's article was simply foolish. This strange notion, that someone who publishes a public article is owed some kind of personal visist from me to criticize it is unusual at best. Since when do you Icon, for instance, feel the need to contact Roger Olson personally? You have attacked him...

Of course you can...but not if O.R. had his way you wouldn't. O.R. essentially accused him of "blasphemy". Clarke is a great Scriptural exegete and brilliant mind. O.R. doesn't appreciate him. I find that to be un-believably short-sighted.

right....but only idiots think that "Star-Trek" is a reasonably informed explanation of logic..it isn't. Never Was. I have even said so on this cite before. Luke wouldn't either. The reason is because Luke knows what logic is...and only idiots think that "Spock" represents something akin to...

WOW!!!!!! you just used Gordon H. Clarke as a defeater for the validity of "logic" in Scriptural debate!!! PLEASE! remind me to throw that particular gem in Luke's face when next I debate Calvinism vs. Arminianism with him...He'll NEVER live it down!!!! :laugh::laugh: I would LOVE nothing...

It ISN'T a "GOOD" article Icon.....it's a VERY stupid one. Hence my objecion that you can't possibly distinguish between "good" Calvinist Theology from utterly "moronic" Calvisim..........Trust me my friend: 1.) There are "stupid" Arminians 2.) There are "stupid" Calvinists 3.) There are...

I've been considering responding to your Op for days....It's a good question which requires some real thought IMO...Your actual "question" isn't very clear, truth be told...but in conjunction with your previous thread...I think you are deserving of some response...here goes: The article you...

I keep asking him for his acct# so I might pay him. Look, Calvinism is a legitimate and respectable (since you reject the term, your "Sovereign Grace" Soteriology....) Either way, it's a decent and legit explanation of Soteriology...It DOES have merits.... It has reasonable arguments...

" Dude....just stop man...just stop. You are posting circularities. You do your own position no favours, and the more I read your posts...the more I realize how VERY much I understand Calvinism better than you do. You simply don't know what you are talking about. Usually, you say that you...