:laugh:
That really did make me laugh out loud. I really hope they don't ban you because you entertain me. :thumbsup:
As I said the first time, Christ is the same for both groups, just as he is the same for you and TomVols (as an example) even-though you disagree about some points in theology. You may be more right in your description and understanding on some points and Tom may be more right on others, but that doesn't mean the Christ you worship is different... He is just understood differently.
Hey, when we all get to heaven God will gather us all up in one place and explain everything to us at once. BTW, He has personally asked me to head up that meeting, so just be ready! :laugh:
:BangHead:
Though I did not do so, there is no rule saying I cannot bring your salvation into question. It's an interpretation of the rules about the manner of our interaction. If it is now being interpreted to mean one cannot give a straight answer to a question of doctrine, then it is robbing this board of the stated purpose of its existence, and is actually working to suppress the truth, and to give one sect defacto status and power over another.
In fact, it's your only escape from giving a straight answer to my question. Indeed, it seems to be the primary objection raised against the searing light of Calvinism.
The straight answer is, no. If I say I saw your wife at such and such a bar dancing sensually with webdog, and I really think I did see her doing that, am I really describing your wife, or someone else? (Am I really describing webdog? That's a question for another thread.) The two doctrines do not describe the same Christ, and the difference is fundamental, not peripheral. It touches on the very nature of the Atonement.
What did Christ actually do on the Cross?
The fact is, that you sense that the differences are more fundamental than you'd like to admit. Everyone does, and that's why when Calvinism is faithfully expounded, some of the more simpering Noncalvinists get restless and begin to beat the don't-question-my-salvation drums.
As far as questioning salvation is concerned,
the Lord knoweth them that are His. Not I. And as I've said, Calvinism is the only doctrine that would allow that one who has an impression of Christ so fallacious that it would stretch credulity to say he really knows Christ, to be known
of Him. I've been castigated by some of the very people clicking their report post icons against me for saying in the past that a man can be saved even if he doesn't believe in the Trinity or the Deity of Christ or the Virgin Birth, etc.
But to give their teaching legitimate Gospel status? That I cannot, and will not do. I will not say, "Well, that's just one equal view of the same Christ." I'll allow that they see Him from a vast distance and can't make out the details, but to put their view on equal footing with the Reformed view? (Or worse, bring the Reformed view of Christ down?) I won't do it, and neither am I compelled by the rules to do so.
So I say without apology, Calvinism is the Gospel, and nothing else. Does that offend you? Well, Christ is the πέτρα σκανδάλου, the
Petra Skandalon, the Rock of Offence. You should be glad that it may provoke you to jealousy, but your problem is what was said, not with the manner in which it was said. Is there any other move dove-like than Iconoclast? And look at how your cast the same in your teeth against him.