a Plea To christian Unity On this BB!

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Emphasis mine.

I absolutely disagree with this premise. I think it misunderstands the calvinists Biblical viewpoint completely and nowhere have I seen Calvinism say the Gospel and the work of the cross to not be sufficient. It is in this work and in this message that God regenerates His elect. Nothing added, nothing taken away.

This is an unfair representation. It insinuates calvinists adding to the Gospel, and that would then make the Gospel false.

Calvinists Gospel is not false in any way. What you say is clearly a distortion of the soteriology of calvinism.

splendid response...:thumbs:

 

[David Lamb]

Of course there is a Christ like way to do this... But arguing on here (and I try not to get involved, sometimes unsuccessfully) is not like arguing with my wife or my deacons. I don't live with you people. After I log off, I don't give the debate a moments thought. It doesn't effect how I live, how I serve and my wife still loves me.

That's why we all might think about taking even the insulting things said on here occasionally with a little less sensitivity.

Yes, Tom, if someone makes caustic remarks (a euphemism for being downright rude) to you on the BB, then when you log off, you may not give the debate a moment's thought, but the remarks are still there, and unless they are on one of the few private forums, they are able to be read by anyone with access to the internet.

It cannot be right for us to insult one another, and then use hypersensitivity as an excuse for doing so. Not only is it against Posting Rule 3, it is also (and far more importantly) against what Jesus said in John 13.34-35:

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
​

We should word our posts in such a way that if a non-Christian were to read the messages, his reaction would be, "Wow! I knew that Christians have their differences, but look at the love they show one another even when they disagree!" Their reaction at seeing Christians hurling insults at one another is more likely to be: "Look! Those Christians are hypocrites! They are no different from anyone else!"

 

[quantumfaith]

I love how people use the phrase "Christ-like" to suit them.

Now bear with me here JesusFan. I like you. I think you are pretty sharp so don't misunderstand what I am saying here. And I even appreciate the effort of this thread to quell some of the ad hominem.

But Jesus was EXTRAORDINARILY blunt and pointed and HARSH. Yes- HARSH. Telling Pharisees that they are whited sepulchers is HARSH! Calling them SERPENTS is HARSH!!

The retort to this PLAIN fact is usually- But the Pharisees were evil. We're talking about brothers talking to brothers. We should follow Jesus' example there!

Of course the problem with that is that Jesus called the disciples his friends and called Peter SATAN, he said, "Oh FOOLISH ones! How long shall I suffer you??!!", etc, etc, etc...

Then the final retort is-n "JESUS can do that ! He is God! You are not LUKE2427!!! EVEN THOUGH YOU THINK YOU ARE!!!!!!!!!!"

Of course the problem with this is two fold:

#1. If Jesus was often HARSH and we cannot be because he was God, THEN WHY ON EARTH DO PEOPLE KEEP TELLING US TO BE CHRISTLIKE IN OUR MANNERS OF SPEAKING!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!"

Either we can be like him or we can't. Please pick one.

#2. When one resorts to accusing luke2427 or WHOEVER of having a God complex or of being arrogant, etc... he is guilty of being HARSH- the VERY THING he is condemning in luke2427 or Aaron or Skandelon, etc...


I think this. I think if you (and I do not mean you JesusFan- I mean WHOEVER) are going to jump on people for jumping on people or if you are going to be harsh on those who are harsh because they are harsh- YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE!

God bless.:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Jesus also had a multitude of kind, compassionate and loving things to say, my personal favorite.

"Father forgive them for they know not what they are doing" Luke23:24

Let me add, as I read the NT scriptures, I in no way come away with Jesus being one dimensional. Yes, sometimes he was blunt and harsh. Sometimes he was kind and gentle. Sometime he was humorous.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes, Tom, if someone makes caustic remarks (a euphemism for being downright rude) to you on the BB, then when you log off, you may not give the debate a moment's thought, but the remarks are still there, and unless they are on one of the few private forums, they are able to be read by anyone with access to the internet.

It cannot be right for us to insult one another, and then use hypersensitivity as an excuse for doing so. Not only is it against Posting Rule 3, it is also (and far more importantly) against what Jesus said in John 13.34-35:

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
​

We should word our posts in such a way that if a non-Christian were to read the messages, his reaction would be, "Wow! I knew that Christians have their differences, but look at the love they show one another even when they disagree!" Their reaction at seeing Christians hurling insults at one another is more likely to be: "Look! Those Christians are hypocrites! They are no different from anyone else!"

Spoken like a true moderator Dave

 

[quantumfaith]

Yes, Tom, if someone makes caustic remarks (a euphemism for being downright rude) to you on the BB, then when you log off, you may not give the debate a moment's thought, but the remarks are still there, and unless they are on one of the few private forums, they are able to be read by anyone with access to the internet.

It cannot be right for us to insult one another, and then use hypersensitivity as an excuse for doing so. Not only is it against Posting Rule 3, it is also (and far more importantly) against what Jesus said in John 13.34-35:

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
​

We should word our posts in such a way that if a non-Christian were to read the messages, his reaction would be, "Wow! I knew that Christians have their differences, but look at the love they show one another even when they disagree!" Their reaction at seeing Christians hurling insults at one another is more likely to be: "Look! Those Christians are hypocrites! They are no different from anyone else!"

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Tom Bryant]

Yes, Tom, if someone makes caustic remarks (a euphemism for being downright rude) to you on the BB, then when you log off, you may not give the debate a moment's thought, but the remarks are still there, and unless they are on one of the few private forums, they are able to be read by anyone with access to the internet.

It cannot be right for us to insult one another, and then use hypersensitivity as an excuse for doing so. Not only is it against Posting Rule 3, it is also (and far more importantly) against what Jesus said in John 13.34-35:

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
​

We should word our posts in such a way that if a non-Christian were to read the messages, his reaction would be, "Wow! I knew that Christians have their differences, but look at the love they show one another even when they disagree!" Their reaction at seeing Christians hurling insults at one another is more likely to be: "Look! Those Christians are hypocrites! They are no different from anyone else!"

I am certainly agreeing with you. I try (emphasis on "try") to be kind in my responses. I also understand that any remark is permanent on the internet.

For me, all the arguing and arrogance displayed on both sides is what I did in bible college. I knew everything back then. All I'm trying to do now is tell as many people about Jesus as I can and encourage saved people to love God's Word and obey Him. I'll leave to God how salvation happens and what He decided in eternity past. I don't have to know the mechanics of God's Work to enjoy it.

Personally, i think that any unsaved person reading the threads about soteriology would be bored to sleep far before they ever got to the name calling.

 

[Skandelon]

Calvinism: Christ's work on the cross is sufficient. Noncalvinism: I must add my own righteous work.

If you insist on calling a faith response "a righteous work" then you too must affirm that it must be added for man to be saved. Regardless of wether the grace God grants for faith is resistible or irresistible, we still must believe to be saved.

 

[Skandelon]

Emphasis mine.

I absolutely disagree with this premise. I think it misunderstands the calvinists Biblical viewpoint completely and nowhere have I seen Calvinism say the Gospel and the work of the cross to not be sufficient. It is in this work and in this message that God regenerates His elect. Nothing added, nothing taken away.

This is an unfair representation. It insinuates calvinists adding to the Gospel, and that would then make the Gospel false.

Calvinists Gospel is not false in any way. What you say is clearly a distortion of the soteriology of calvinism.

If Christ dying on the cross and the hearing of the gospel was sufficient for salvation then anyone who hears could be saved, but Calvinists teach that the individual must be "enabled" through the Irresistible Call (regeneration), otherwise the gospel is not "able" to have any effect, thus it is not sufficient for salvation. It is only sufficient for the elect who are first regenerated.

You may word it differently than I did, and that is fine, but there is nothing inconsistent with what I said regarding what most Calvinists affirm regarding the prior need for a work of enabling a Totally Depraved individual.

 

[Skandelon]

Yes, Tom, if someone makes caustic remarks (a euphemism for being downright rude) to you on the BB, then when you log off, you may not give the debate a moment's thought, but the remarks are still there, and unless they are on one of the few private forums, they are able to be read by anyone with access to the internet.

It cannot be right for us to insult one another, and then use hypersensitivity as an excuse for doing so. Not only is it against Posting Rule 3, it is also (and far more importantly) against what Jesus said in John 13.34-35:

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
​

We should word our posts in such a way that if a non-Christian were to read the messages, his reaction would be, "Wow! I knew that Christians have their differences, but look at the love they show one another even when they disagree!" Their reaction at seeing Christians hurling insults at one another is more likely to be: "Look! Those Christians are hypocrites! They are no different from anyone else!"

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Well said David!

 

[TomVols]

Off topic. Reprise the theme song and roll the credits.