Featured Bent toward Calvinism

Now have I ever used that type of language with a Calvinist on here? I disagree with your VIEWS but I don't tell people that I don't agree with to "go get bent" (slang for go ***** yourself.

Biggest problem addressed in this thread is that many of the Calvinists on here are so willing to defend their beliefs at all costs that they will excuse and overlook the actions of their own no matter how egregious, and blame someone else for being the aggressor or instigator.

 

I totally disagree with your interpretation of the term "get bent." It means "get lost" where I live. You brought up the term. That does not matter anyhow. What does matter you came here with a chip on your shoulder. Things like saying there was no infraction did not help. I believe you will find that moderators/administrators have verified there was one, and that it was over the remarks about being Jewish. Again, wish you the best.

 

You were referring to a PAST infraction, not a current one, and considering you were directing the accusation AT DHK, it is odd that he would have had to check and not remembered. Expired infractions are still displayed on your profile, and as a moderator, he still should have been able to see an expired infraction. His statement which was in response to your claim of a past infraction, was that he found none.

Nevertheless, it is not unreasonable for anyone to have seen DHK's response to you, and conclude that you were lying.

You have repeatedly showed up on threads (most recently POST 8) that I have posted on and left derogatory remarks (and I have an entire list of them that I have kept track of), and yet there have been many threads you initiated that I had not posted on AT ALL because I agreed with what you posted. But virtually every and any post I start or participate in, you, P4T, KYRedneck and EWF are the 4 main characters that attack almost anything I write and derail the thread, and even those of your own persuasion have noticed it.

 

I did not come with any chip on my shoulder. When I first arrived my very first posts were attacked quite viciously and they had nothing to do with Calvinism. It only got worse when I started giving my views on Calvinism and after a certain point I decided to fight fire with fire and you and your ilk didn't like it.

I think Calvinism is a heretical doctrine. Just because I hate CalvinISM doesn't mean I hate CalvinISTS. Many Calvinists on here agree just as aggressively and obnoxiously against Non Calvinists as NC's do against Calvinists, and yet I have not accused any of you of "hating the sovereignty of God" or of "hating the Bible" or of being unsaved such as has been directed at me quite often. As much as I disagree with your theology, I have still have personal boundaries that I will not cross. You may not like the conclusions that I come to about your theology, but instead of dealing with those conclusions, you attack the person and do so quite viciously, and then run to the moderators and act like you not instigated anything and have done no wrong. The only one you admit to is the one you got caught on because it was too blatant to ignore.

 

If you had taken time to know me and other posters, things would also have been different. For example, since you like to research past posts, you would have noticed that a poster named RIPPON and I have had a multi month back and forth over the character of Calvin, even though we are on the same side of his theology. We quit out of sheer exhaustion.

Another thing, I do not run to moderators. I report inappropriate posts and someone did mine. Look at your post above. It is riddled with you, you, you. I never said you hated the Bible. Also, you know you have been proven wrong about me not getting an infraction. Another thing that would have made a difference is to consider what you are posting before you do as being correct.

 

I would have to say you don't follow the threads very closely then. There are several on here that disagree INCLUDING DR. BOB who attributes telling sinners God loves them to Oral Roberts (now if THAT isn't an insult to a BAPTIST I don't know what is).

As a Greek student, you know very well that certain terms define a different type of affection shown as love. I may only eros my wife, and phileo my friends, but I agape EVERYONE. Matthew 5:42-43 makes quite a disctinction between love and hate. When Jesus says "love your enemies" what word is He using? Now why would Jesus tell us to agape our enemies if He Himself doesn't? You and most Calvinists use the "rain on the just" which has nothing do with evidence of a particular love for all, and is not equated with the very love that God told us to have toward those who are unsaved or "non elect" if you will. There is no evidence that God loves the sinner differently. The very fact that Calvinists point to "rain on the just and the unjust" actually proves the opposite-that He loves both EQUALLY. His love may be DEMONSTRATED more after a person is saved, but the status of person does not alter the QUALITY of God's love.

No it isn't dishonest. Some Calvinists (like Pink and Dr. Bob) admit it, the others who don't (Packer) admit that they will tell others God doesn't love them, even though they don't believe that. Common sense tells you that if God COULD HAVE determined that all people freely worship Him, but only chose SOME, and then damned the rest, He did so because He WANTED TO, and if He wanted to, that is a clear indication that He does not love everybody. That's not a caricature, that's a simple rationale deduction from Calvinist stated beliefs.

Now who's building caricatures? Where did I say ALL Calvinists are racist because I pointed out the examples a bunch who have displayed it? Not only did I not say ALL Calvinists are racist, I even NAMED NAMES of those who are. I never broad-brushed Calvinists as a whole with that label. I applied it specifically to those who deserved it.

Really Arch??? Really?? You equate someone's theological accusation of a BELIEF to a PERSONAL RACIST ATTACK?? Come on, I'd like to be able to give you more credit than that.

The Westminster Confession (and all the Confessions) and most Calvinists on here hold that "God from before eternity past hath determined ALL THINGS whatsoever cometh to pass" THAT'S DETERMINISM. When you claim that God controls and causes all things to happen simply because He foreknows that they will happen including storms, rape, murder, that is DETERMINISM. You may not like the implications but it is nevertheless and implication that can reasonably be deduced from stated beliefs by Calvinists, particularly when there creeds use "determine" specifically.

Here is a perfect example of someone who summarily brushes off someones research and pejoratively attacking that character of the person providing the information. You say "trying to refute it only lends credence to it" but yet you used it as an example of my attributing something false to Calvinism which is not a complete defense against what I wrote, but is nevertheless a defense.

Could have save a lot of time and ink by starting with that.

And I have said the same about many Calvinists that I am friends with but those who erroneously accuse me of hating Calvinists dismiss that. My college textbook on systematic theology was by a Calvinist (Wayne Grudem). All of my counseling textbooks were by Calvinists (Jay Adams, Jim Newheiser). On my website, I spent several weeks organizing the KJV articles of Will Kinney and have his site posted on my website and he is a die-hard Calvinist. Also on my website is a referral for those seeking counseling that is linked to the IBCD who are distinctly Calvinist.

Thus the accusation that I "hate" Calvinists is absurd.

I believe in earnestly contending for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints. I do not believe Calvinism has any Biblical or historical support in a large majority of it's doctrines, and believe it is a dangerous doctrine that assaults the character of God, hampers evangelism and discourages believers about assurance of salvation. Jesus said if any man will do his will he shall know of the doctrine, and to mark them which cause division contrary to the gospel we have been taught. That requires me to defend what I believe as well as expose and refute false doctrine. I don't enjoy arguing with people, I do it because it is an important role of any believer that is part of the body of Christ facing a world that is blown about with every wind of doctrine.

And this is just as hypocritical as what you accuse me of. I have shown several cases where the those who oppose me have instigated the issues, and thus not only am I NOT a pariah, it would be erroneous of you to say that I am ALWAYS playing the martyr and ALWAYS the pariah. Did you not accuse me of such broad-brushing of ALL Calvinists on the matter of racism? But yet you feel comfortable in broad-brushing claims of being a pariah when I have clearly demonstrated the disparaging treatment of Non Calvinists on here, and have backed up everyone of my accusations with facts, and links where statements can be found. You seem to validate the harsh words spoken by those who oppose Non Calvinists, but call me a pariah if I fight back.

Is that not what you are attempting to do right now?? I don't recall you being very cordial with Van when you attempted to correct his analysis of a Greek text. You accused him of possessing everything but a brain and he isn't the only one.

I am far from perfect, and have often admitted to some responses that could have been tailored better. But I will not give in to false humility either by simple admitting to conduct that I have not always been guilty of just so that I can demonstrate a balanced explanation of equal culpability. I did not come to this forum with a "chip on my shoulder" and certainly did not draw first blood. I will not be apologize for what I believe and will not receive accusations to those things that I am not guilty of.

 

Not once was 'the Love of Jesus' for sinners preached in Acts nor the 'and has a wonderful plan for your life' nonsense that is being supported above. In fact, preaching this is to preach 'another Gospel'. The true Gospel was simply and powerfully preached in Acts, the elect were converted, and the balance were not. The love of Christ expressed within the epistles applies to the elect and to them alone. Many preachers today attempt to apply things to whom they are not applicable such as applying the truth of Christ's love within Epistles to the unsaved. That is not rightly handling the Word, instead it's shallow preaching and proof-texting.

 

II Opinions 18:12 Lord, I thank Thee that I am not like that non-Calvinist over there...

 

You shouldn't think that way Freddie...hatred will land you in hell.

 

Saturneptune, DrJames, you both need to grow up and put this silly back and forth behind you. You are taking this from thread to thread and its irritating to have to weed through. Take your sabre rattling to pm. Thank you.

 

I totally agree WD.

 

Stop the presses! I think Hell has frozen over. I'm quoting Webdog to say that I am in total agreement with his post on something!

<Makes appointment to have head examined>

The Archangel

 

I definitely noticed a bend towards Calvinism when I joined the board, this could just be because (it would appear) there are more calvs on this forum.

 

Look, I can pull out of the archives exchanges you have had over the years that make my posts look like a Sunday School lesson. So practice what you preach. Thank you.

 

When you can show me following someone thread to thread questioning their education and insulting them every chance i get, be my guest. I have first hand experience being on your wrong side, as does iconoclast and a host of others. Drop it already.

 

I might surprise everyone, but I don't believe the Moderators favor either the Calvinists or non-Cals.

What I think is that the Cals are quicker to complain to the Mods, and so it seems that they favor the Cals.

I have been called a heretic, a Pelagian, and my salvation questioned probably hundreds of times since I came to BB.

But I have never complained to a Mod about these personal attacks ever.

I figure if you guys must resort to calling me names, I must be winning the debate. :thumbs:

Plus, I am not afraid to go at it with you guys, bring it on.

 

You do not dictate when I do or do not drop something. You are the one that stuck you ten foot nose into the situation.

 

You do not dictate when I do or do not drop something. You are the one that stuck you ten foot nose into the situation. Oh and you want copies from the archives, I will be glad to comply.

 

Cant say I ever felt that way about you.

 

Having read some of your past posts, you sir, have no room to dictate to anyone about civility.