From Lxsbian Atheist to Stay-at-Home Mother of Six

[Revmitchell]

May 20, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - “I was an atheist for as long as I could remember,” recalled Brigitte Bedard, a young-looking 41-year-old journalist and stay at home mother of six with cropped tousled brown hair and stylish thick-framed glasses. She was addressing a crowd of 200 participants at the Quebec Life Coalition pro-life conference on May 15 in Quebec City.

While Bedard is less well known than the conference’s keynote speaker – Cardinal Marc Ouellet – whose staunchly pro-life statements made later that afternoon were seized on by the anti-life Quebec media, she might be the speaker who most touched hearts that Saturday afternoon.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/may/10052001

 

[preacher4truth]

“I am His daughter, there are no two ways about it, and I can’t explain it.” She admits she is at pains to explain exactly what it was that caused her conversion: “I just say that God floored me, staggered me; I didn’t convert myself, he brought me to Him.”

Interestingly her soteriology is much more solid than most on the BB.

 

[HankD]

Interestingly her soteriology is much more solid than most on the BB.

Her quote brought tears to my eyes.

Thank you Lord.

HankD

 

[preacher4truth]

Her quote brought tears to my eyes.

Thank you Lord.

HankD

Yes, it is a great testimony!

 

[annsni]

Her quote brought tears to my eyes.

Thank you Lord.

HankD

Amen! It's amazing when we see this happen. There is no question that these people are not seeking God but have a Damascus Road experience - just basically knocked off their horse! How completely humbling to see it in it's extreme.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Interestingly her soteriology is much more solid than most on the BB.

So you think her Catholic theology is orthodox? Maybe your theology is not as good as you claim.

 

[webdog]

So you think her Catholic theology is orthodox? Maybe your theology is not as good as you claim.

That was my thought, too. Apparently this 'Damascus road' experience includes God's determination she would be involved in a false religion.

 

[preacher4truth]

So you think her Catholic theology is orthodox? Maybe your theology is not as good as you claim.

Tom,

As I've said recently God will use His preachers, and even those preachers who are contrary to truth in whatsoever manner He so desires, and His people will be saved. That you make a caricature of my beliefs and make as though I endorse Catholicism is simply an ardent unfounded jab from you toward me. I disagree vehemently with Catholic doctrine and my track record attests to this fact.

But if this is what you need to do this morning, then go for it, but it won't be profitable to you nor to me. Tom, it seems apparent there is a grudge on your part, I hope you get that thing settled and taken care of brother.

Furthermore, I think her salvation is Scriptural. She fully understands it was all of God and not decision based (John 1:13; Romans 9:16).

Tom, I've never claimed my theology to be as such, in fact it is not where it should be, and never will be this side of the Sun, but God is faithful and merciful and reveals His truth to His people -- 1 Cor. 2:10ff.

That said, I do understand that salvation is all of God, and none of man, and that is good enough for me.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Tom,

As I've said recently God will use His preachers, and even those preachers who are contrary to truth in whatsoever manner He so desires, and His people will be saved. That you make a caricature of my beliefs and make as though I endorse Catholicism is simply an ardent unfounded jab from you toward me. I disagree vehemently with Catholic doctrine and my track record attests to this fact.

But if this is what you need to do this morning, then go for it, but it won't be profitable to you nor to me. Tom, it seems apparent there is a grudge on your part, I hope you get that thing settled and taken care of brother.

Furthermore, I think her salvation is Scriptural. She fully understands it was all of God and not decision based (John 1:13; Romans 9:16).

Tom, I've never claimed my theology to be as such, in fact it is not where it should be, and never will be this side of the Sun, but God is faithful and merciful and reveals His truth to His people -- 1 Cor. 2:10ff.

That said, I do understand that salvation is all of God, and none of man, and that is good enough for me.

So if I believe that salvation is all of God, I am saved? I don't have to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? I can accept Mary as the co-redemptrix and be saved?

I am not even sure other Calvinists would accept what you say.

You are making belief in salvation being all of God the means of salvation. The Bible disagrees. John 3:16, Acts 4:12, Acts 16:31, and a score of others.

 

[preacher4truth]

So if I believe that salvation is all of God, I am saved? I don't have to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? I can accept Mary as the co-redemptrix and be saved?

The above is you out of control and on a tirade for nought. Salvation is all of God and only through Christ alone. If one believes salvation is not all of God, are these saved?

I am not even sure other Calvinists would accept what you say.

They will accept what I've said, not what you say I said. :wavey:

You are making belief in salvation being all of God the means of salvation.

You continue to see things that are not there, thus your statement is untrue, yet I am sure you want to believe it since your straw man accusations are the only 'facts' you have against me and are your strongest argument thus far. :thumbs:

However, the redeemed know their redemption to be all of God, and, that their knowledge of this is not the cause but the result of salvation.

The Bible disagrees. John 3:16, Acts 4:12, Acts 16:31, and a score of others.

I believe in all those passages, contextually, and interpreted in the light of God's entire counsel. That said, none of these verses infer what you want them to infer, nor do they discount the truths I've mentioned, as that is the objective as to why you are using them, as if somehow, someway you've just rebutted and neutralized other truths with them (not to mention you are using them to attack your straw man arguments you've erected).

I do pray for you and other saints that what Paul requested in his prayer in Eph. 1 will be fulfilled in you and also for myself.

 

[Tom Bryant]

The above is you out of control and on a tirade for nought. Salvation is all of God and only through Christ alone. If one believes salvation is not all of God, are these saved?

They will accept what I've said, not what you say I said. :wavey:

You continue to see things that are not there, thus your statement is untrue, yet I am sure you want to believe it since your straw man accusations are the only 'facts' you have against me and are your strongest argument thus far. :thumbs:

However, the redeemed know their redemption to be all of God, and, that their knowledge of this is not the cause but the result of salvation.

I believe in all those passages, contextually, and interpreted in the light of God's entire counsel. That said, none of these verses infer what you want them to infer, nor do they discount the truths I've mentioned, as that is the objective as to why you are using them, as if somehow, someway you've just rebutted and neutralized other truths with them (not to mention you are using them to attack your straw man arguments you've erected).

I do pray for you and other saints that what Paul requested in his prayer in Eph. 1 will be fulfilled in you and also for myself.

So I am out of control and on a tirade? I have simply asked you some questions about what you believe based on what you have said.

I am tired of this kind of attack Calvinism. It is not what most Calvinists are like.

May the Lord bless you.

 

[webdog]

If one believes salvation is not all of God, are these saved?

If one believes sin is not all of God, are these saved?

 

[preacher4truth]

So I am out of control and on a tirade?

Yes.

I have simply asked you some questions about what you believe based on what you have said.

Not quite. You put words in my mouth and made conclusive statements and accusations upon them. You've inferred I've said things that I've never stated. You created a straw man and began to attack it.

In fact you have, in your false statements about what I've said (which I hadn't stated) also concluded based on your own false assumptions (and proves that your 'questions' weren't 'questions', but are in fact accusations) concluded that Calvinists don't believe what I said, which was actually what YOU said.

Here is the quote where you use what you call 'questions' as conclusive statements which are actually false accusations:

So if I believe that salvation is all of God, I am saved? I don't have to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? I can accept Mary as the co-redemptrix and be saved?

I am not even sure other Calvinists would accept what you say.

You are making belief in salvation being all of God the means of salvation. The Bible disagrees. John 3:16, Acts 4:12, Acts 16:31, and a score of others.

See?

Own up and learn to stick to facts, not your own false assumptions and adding things that were not stated.

I am tired of this kind of attack Calvinism. It is not what most Calvinists are like.

:laugh:

Attack Calvinism? Not hardly. I am actually on the defense due to your false accusations and conclusions. Yet there you go again, pretending, and now falling on your own sword. Congrats! :thumbs:

Tom, you've made pretense all along that what YOU'VE said is what I'VE said. As I stated, your purposeful misrepresentation is your strongest argument and your only argument. It's actually shameful behavior on your part.

May the Lord bless you.

He is as of right now, and I take this false unfounded attack as such.

 

[Revmitchell]

...........................................................

 

[InTheLight]

How in the world does this become yet another Calvinist thread? Oh, I see...

Interestingly her soteriology is much more solid than most on the BB.

You put words in my mouth and made conclusive statements and accusations upon them. You've inferred I've said things that I've never stated. You created a straw man and began to attack it.

In fact you have, in your false statements about what I've said (which I hadn't stated) also concluded based on your own false assumptions (and proves that your 'questions' weren't 'questions', but are in fact accusations) concluded that most on BB don't believe what you said, which was actually what no one on BB has said.

 

[Revmitchell]

This thread is not about calvinism. Please use some self control and refrain from such.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I agree. One more on her "soteriology" and this thread will be closed. This is a news forum not the CvA forum.

This thread is not about calvinism. Please use some self control and refrain from such.

 

[Tom Bryant]

I agree. One more on her "soteriology" and this thread will be closed. This is a news forum not the CvA forum.

You are right. I should not have responded.