Emotional or Exegetical?

[convicted1]

I know you haven't......I did....you challenged Winman to provide the easily accesible links you demanded he provide you earlier in post: You were betting your Theological ranch that he couldn't provide them. As you stated here:

....and it was a good gamble...but I COULD, and I supplied them... as I referenced Here...Yet again:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1897334&postcount=132

I am submitting to you, for the 452nd time...that you DON'T know the meaning of the word "Pelagian", and you don't KNOW, in any real sense whether you are one or aren't....I only know one thing...NOTHING you have affirmed or denied on this thread is in opposition to "Pelagian" Theology...You haven't bothered to read his words....and that isn't anyone's fault but your own...you have YET to either affirm or deny anything that Pelagius himself would disagree with...and you have been provided ample links to study that for yourself....you refuse to acknowledge that they even exist..as most Calvinists usually do.

Where the word Pelagian is spoken, its like someone who has stepped in "dog doodie" and begins shaking their foot and yelling, "get it off me, get it off me"......when it fact they actually had mud on their shoe, and not "doodie". IOW, they fear what they don't know.

 

[convicted1]

I think it was 453 times, but who's counting. :laugh::laugh:

Apparently you are.......heheheheehheee

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I believe that is one of the biggest problems in the Church today. People think their sins are minor and they graciously accept what God has to offer!

This is possibly true in what you are describing your [edit] congregation to be....but the one I am a member of suffers from no such foolish delusions.

This is one of my favorite passages in the Bible because we see what is pictured here so often in the Churches of today.

Your Calvinist Church maybe.....but not mine.

Perhaps it has always been thus!

I am willing to admit that that could concievably be problematic amongst the numerous Calvinistic congregations you inhabit...but it's never been a problem in any Righteous church I have had the pleasure of being a co-laborer in

The difference between the woman and the Pharisee: The Pharisee was self righteous just as the Pharisee in Luke 18:9-14; the woman realized how sinful she was in the sight of God. Now both the woman and the Pharisee were the same in the eyes of God

,

That is patently false in the Calvinist schema YOU claim to believe...given Calvinism....they are not, nor were they ever fore-ordained to be, "The Same" as you fallaciously claim, in your own Theology. Given your Theology...one was pre-destined to understand and humbly submit to the "Doctrines of Grace" and the other was pre-disposed not to. When you Calvinists stop talking like Arminians instead of Calvinists....I'll give a hoot what you have to say.

the Pharisee was just too self righteous to understand it.

According to Calvinism...he had no option to act otherwise...as that is who and what he was by nature...Why do you continuously question a Sovereign God?? Why do you resist his will??? Who art thou, oh man to reply to God??? God has chosen some vessels to honor and some to dis-honor no?

I believe that this is what Jesus Christ had reference to when He said: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.[Luke 5:32]

A Passage real Arminians understand completely...

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Where the word Pelagian is spoken, its like someone who has stepped in "dog doodie" and begins shaking their foot and yelling, "get it off me, get it off me"......when it fact they actually had mud on their shoe, and not "doodie". IOW, they fear what they don't know.

I know Amy is your beloved sister...and I actually like her a lot.... I truly love the "spunk" (as it were) and I wouldn't have it otherwise. Whatever position she takes...she is a warrior not to be triffled with.....but I am not taking it easy on her, I am un-loading on her with both barrels...I think she's a trooper like none else....but I think she needs to expose herself to some things before she throws out labels like she does. Hey...she may read every link I gave her, and reply to every argument I throw at her....but, as long as she rightly engages them....and is convinced otherwise...Good for HER!!!! I don't mind if she believes as I do....I only care that she come upon it honestly...If she can take all I give her...and stand firm...then, welcome to the world of "hard-core debate"! I am only a little hard on your sissy 'cause, I think she makes a heck of a trooper...regardless of what side she stands on. I really rather like her, quite a lot, and I wish she were on our side. :thumbs:....What I am throwing out, is, as you said, a "dog-doodie"....I am actually trying to submit to all observers that a familiar and agreed-upon term like "Pelagianism" has been falsely labeled, and that our entire Theological tradition needs to be re-thought in view of it.......I have no pre-concieved notions that it comes easy...

1,000 years of TRULY godly men, and their Theology, and their "confessions" are not to be trampled upon lightly...they aren't to be ignored "willy-nilly"...but if they are, in fact wrong, on certain issues, then good men have no choice but to stand against them.

 

[OldRegular]

This is possibly true in what you are describing your godless congregation to be....but the one I am a member of suffers from no such foolish delusions.



Your Calvinist Church maybe.....but not mine.



I am willing to admit that that could concievably be problematic amongst the numerous Calvinistic congregations you inhabit...but it's never been a problem in any Righteous church I have had the pleasure of being a co-laborer in

,

That is patently false in the Calvinist schema YOU claim to believe...given Calvinism....they are not, nor were they ever fore-ordained to be, "The Same" as you fallaciously claim, in your own Theology. Given your Theology...one was pre-destined to understand and humbly submit to the "Doctrines of Grace" and the other was pre-disposed not to. When you Calvinists stop talking like Arminians instead of Calvinists....I'll give a hoot what you have to say.



According to Calvinism...he had no option to act otherwise...as that is who and what he was by nature...Why do you continuously question a Sovereign God?? Why do you resist his will??? Who art thou, oh man to reply to God??? God has chosen some vessels to honor and some to dis-honor no?

I believe that this is what Jesus Christ had reference to when He said: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.[Luke 5:32]

A Passage real Arminians understand completely...

None of the above mindless meanderings, in my opinion of course, merit response. Just what motivates such apparent hatred HOSS? I believe you have lost control of your emotions.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

None of the above mindless meanderings, in my opinion of course, merit response. Just what motivates such apparent hatred HOSS? I believe you have lost control of your emotions.

Emotions have nil and nadda to do with it.....and my posts are not "meanderings" as you are claiming....I am so emotionally dis-jointed from this post, that I couldn't concievably get emotionally involved even if I wanted to.....Your response though, is weak and defeatist. All you did was...fail to respond, by saying..."It isn't worthy of response". That is weak. I am not "hating" anything...I am really rather bored actually....should I engage in the logical fallacy of "poisoning the well" as you are, by accusing you repeatedly of "HATE"....what are you?....a godless liberal Obama-supporting democrat for whom the word "HATE" is used to automatically shut-down any opposition? I am not arguing emotions, monsieur, you are....I am arguing propositions...You are bringing in emotions, not I, and that suggests that your arguments are weaker than mine. I gave a point-by counter-point rejoinder to everything you posted...I understand that you intended it to support Calvinistic assumptions...but it isn't my fault that I am more gifted with rhetoric than you, and am easily capable of turning those tables around on you as swiftly as you present them...But it doesn't mean I have "HATE"...[edited] "Hate" has lost all meaning now-a-days, or didn't you know.

 

[OldRegular]

Emotions have nil and nadda to do with it.....and my posts are not "meanderings" as you are claiming....I am so emotionally dis-jointed from this post, that I couldn't concievably get emotionally involved even if I wanted to.....Your response though, is weak and defeatist.

Bull is bull whether posted on this forum or flushed and, in my opinion, you are the purveyor of such!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Bull is bull whether posted on this forum or flushed and, in my opinion, you are the purveyor of such!

UHHH HUHHH...and go you, with your bad self....:thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Skandelon]

Okay...let's stop addressing each other and address only the topic at hand please...

 

[Mexdeaf]

Okay...let's stop addressing each other and address only the topic at hand please...

:wavey::thumbs::applause:

 

[OldRegular]

[Snipped - continued addressing individuals instead of topic]

 

[Van]

Pitchback

You and I had a debate a while back that had to do strictly with exegeting the Scriptures, not quoting authorities etc...

And you proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not, unlike MANY NON-CALS, know beans from apple butter about how to interpret Scripture.

And I am not saying that just because you are not a Calvinist because I debate numerous Arminians who are VERY faithful to the scriptures. One of them is on this board- Skandelon.

But you and winman, I'm telling you, and I wish other non-cals would join with me for your sake, that you two do not know how to interpret Scripture.

Jacobus Arminius would not handle Scripture the terrible way that you do.

John Wesley would not obliterate Scripture the way you do.

William Lane Craig would not murder the Scriptures the way you guys do.

I mean this honestly- CATHOLICS handle the Scriptures better than you two.

I was an Arminian, educated in an Arminian Bible College, pastor of Arminian churches for years. I handled the Scriptures faithfully, though I was wrong about my conclusions. You do not handle the Scriptures even REMOTELY responsibly.

I say this for your sakes and for the sakes of those who might be so ignorant that you could influence them.

All Calvinists love to claim those who hold views that differ are somehow flawed, hate driven and without adequate qualifications or character. Luke 2427 just joined the list of those who post logical fallacies as if they did not know it.

Lets see, Calvinists claim "from" means "before."

Calvinists claim chosen means never actually chosen.

Saved by grace through faith means saved by grace and given faith.

All they have are generalities, personal attacks, and shuck and jive. People disagree with Calvinism because they accept scripture as it reads, without rewriting it. Thus Christ became the propitiation for the whole world, not just the elect.

 

[OldRegular]

And the truth shall set you free!:godisgood: