Is There Something in the Water?

[Arbo]

Seems like there has been more than the normal bickering on BB this past week. Just saw three closed threads this morning in the Theology area alone. People calling others jackasses, threads about Calvinism leading to racism and naziism, and general nastiness freely displayed in public.

Impressive...even for baptists.

 

[Winman]

Seems like there has been more than the normal bickering on BB this past week. Just saw three closed threads this morning in the Theology area alone. People calling others jackasses, threads about Calvinism leading to racism and naziism, and general nastiness freely displayed in public.

Impressive...even for baptists.

Hey, you got fellas like Luke saying everybody is a sissy except him. So when I start a thread showing how Nazism was a product of Calvinism, the Calvinists cry boo-hoo and shut it down immediately.

You guys can dish it out, but you can't take it. Luke starts threads about me and it is allowed to go on for 10 pages, but if you start a thread about Calvinism it isn't allowed to go on for 10 minutes.

Who are the sissies now?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Hey, you got fellas like Luke saying everybody is a sissy except him. So when I start a thread showing how Nazism was a product of Calvinism, the Calvinists cry boo-hoo and shut it down immediately.

You guys can dish it out, but you can't take it. Luke starts threads about me and it is allowed to go on for 10 pages, but if you start a thread about Calvinism it isn't allowed to go on for 10 minutes.

Who are the sissies now?

NAZISM!?! :laugh:.....you gotta be kidding me. Think before you post.

 

[Arbo]

You guys can dish it out, but you can't take it.

You will note that I generally do not post in the Theology section, and almost never contribute to threads discussing Calvinism et al.

I think you are mistaken to include me in the "you guys' group.

 

[Winman]

NAZISM!?! :laugh:.....you gotta be kidding me. Think before you post.

Find the thread, I posted links to authors who had shown this very thing. I was prepared to show much more, but you crybaby Calvinists had it shut down immediately.

Like I said, you guys can dish it out, but you can't take it. Big babies.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Find the thread, I posted links to authors who had shown this very thing. I was prepared to show much more, but you crybaby Calvinists had it shut down immediately.

Like I said, you guys can dish it out, but you can't take it. Big babies.

You need to take that up with Dr. Bob.....personally I would of barred you from ever posting again but I'm not an administrator, a monitor or a Calvinist.

Since you got big cojones, why dont you try that tactic on some other form like the Puritan one, see how long you last.

 

[preachinjesus]

Hey, you got fellas like Luke saying everybody is a sissy except him. So when I start a thread showing how Nazism was a product of Calvinism, the Calvinists cry boo-hoo and shut it down immediately.

I'm not Reformed nor a Calvinist. That thread was a bad thread and should have been shut down as it was. That kind of posting has no place here or anywhere.

You guys can dish it out, but you can't take it. Luke starts threads about me and it is allowed to go on for 10 pages, but if you start a thread about Calvinism it isn't allowed to go on for 10 minutes.

I think this is a valid point.

Who are the sissies now?

This is unnecessary.

 

[Winman]

I'm not Reformed nor a Calvinist. That thread was a bad thread and should have been shut down as it was. That kind of posting has no place here or anywhere.

I think this is a valid point.

This is unnecessary.

I know you won't believe me, but I did not start the Nazis/Calvinists thread to slam Calvinists. I started it because there is merit to this argument. As that author Fromm wrote, Germany believed the Jews were utterly evil to the core, the non-elect, and that basically they were Satan possessed. It is a lot easier to exterminate evil folks than innocent folks.

As Heir of Salvation pointed out, evolution was also a big factor, and I agree.

This is something people should be able to discuss even if it is distasteful. There happens to be much truth to it.

Go back and listen to that first YouTube video around 2:10 minutes and you will see what I am talking about.

 

[Mexdeaf]

I know you won't believe me, but I did not start the Nazis/Calvinists thread to slam Calvinists. I started it because there is merit to this argument. As that author Fromm wrote, Germany believed the Jews were utterly evil to the core, the non-elect, and that basically they were Satan possessed. It is a lot easier to exterminate evil folks than innocent folks.

As Heir of Salvation pointed out, evolution was also a big factor, and I agree.

This is something people should be able to discuss even if it is distasteful. There happens to be much truth to it.

Go back and listen to that first YouTube video around 2:10 minutes and you will see what I am talking about.

Then why did you say this on that very thread:

"First, this is not a thread designed to attack Calvinism, although it will."

You knew from the minute you posted the thread that there was nothing godly, pure or spiritual about it.

Stop lying to yourself. You hate Calvinists and Calvinism so much that you will stop at nothing and stoop to such low levels as comparing Nazis to Calvinists to try to make your pitiful point.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Hey, you got fellas like Luke saying everybody is a sissy except him. So when I start a thread showing how Nazism was a product of Calvinism, the Calvinists cry boo-hoo and shut it down immediately.

Anyone can say anything about "anything" but that does not make it true. To state that Naziism is a product of Calvinism is either the product of a perverted mind or the pathetic babble of one who has no idea what Biblical Calvinism is.

 

[Iconoclast]

Anyone can say anything about "anything" but that does not make it true. To state that Naziism is a product of Calvinism is either the product of a perverted mind or the pathetic babble of one who has no idea what Biblical Calvinism is.

:thumbsup::applause::thumbsup::applause:Yes...you have identified the cause of the virus...DR.Mexdeaf!

 

[Winman]

Then why did you say this on that very thread:

"First, this is not a thread designed to attack Calvinism, although it will."

You knew from the minute you posted the thread that there was nothing godly, pure or spiritual about it.

Stop lying to yourself. You hate Calvinists and Calvinism so much that you will stop at nothing and stoop to such low levels as comparing Nazis to Calvinists to try to make your pitiful point.

No, what I was really trying to do is start a discussion about how one's religious views can affect their behavior toward other people.

It is a fact that Lutherans and Calvinists in Germany hated the Jews.

The prevailing view[28] among historians is that Luther's anti-Jewish rhetoric contributed significantly to the development of antisemitism in Germany,[29] and in the 1930s and 1940s provided an ideal foundation for the Nazi Party's attacks on Jews.[30] Reinhold Lewin writes that "whoever wrote against the Jews for whatever reason believed he had the right to justify himself by triumphantly referring to Luther."

Among his extant writings, Calvin only dealt explicitly with issues of contemporary Jews and Judaism in one treatise,[105] Response to Questions and Objections of a Certain Jew.[106] In it, he argued that Jews misread their own scriptures because they miss the unity of the Old and New Testaments.[107] Calvin also wrote that the Jews' "rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone."[108]

If you want to ignore history, that is your choice. But both Luther and Calvin were anti-Semites.

When you teach people that certain persons are utterly depraved and children of Satan, it is easy to convince people it is good to exterminate these people.

Now, these were not the only factors, but they were factors in convincing the German people to round up and exterminate the Jews.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Then why did you say this on that very thread:

"First, this is not a thread designed to attack Calvinism, although it will."

*sigh* What he really meant to convey was something more akin to this:
"This is not a thread designed to attack Calvinism, but I do recognize that the implications involved will create a harsh criticism of the necessary logical consequences of Calvinist thinking (or at least the perceived logical consequences of Calvinist thinking)."

You knew from the minute you posted the thread that there was nothing godly, pure or spiritual about it.

Actually, there COULD have been some beneficial discourse in the thread. It COULD have been a teachable moment as far as how to rightly understand and interpret the teachings of history. The thread COULD have been left open long enough for us to learn how to rightly APPLY socio-historical knowledge.
Specifically, there is the basic knowledge of History which is little more than a regurgitation of what occurred <---not particularly applicable and helpful..

But there is also the marriage of understanding the socio-historical context of "WHY" certain things have occured and what the prevailing world-views and ideologies extant in that particular period were, and how they might have contributed to the occurences themselves.
That is how history is properly applied.
Parrallel with historical occurence is also the history of thought....and it is a legitimate discussion.

Stop lying to yourself. You hate Calvinists and Calvinism so much that you will stop at nothing and stoop to such low levels as comparing Nazis to Calvinists to try to make your pitiful point.

That wasn't what was in his heart I believe. Win (IMO) is missapplying historical facts...If he looks more closely, he would put NO faith in Goerring's defense of his own atrocities and merely understand that Goerring was looking for convenient excuses...(for example). That is where he errs in understanding how to rightly apply history.

While I am an amateur lover of history and the history of thought, I disagree with his premise. I believe that his understanding of the history of thought is mistaken and that it is demonstrable that the logical consequences of Calvinism are absolutely NOT to be blamed for the attrocities he mentions....but, I will probably not be given the opportunity (as an Arminian) to defend the historical innocence of Calvinism in those attrocities even though I would like to. The Naziism is solely to be placed in the logical consequences of Darwinism...not Calvinism.
This is because our society is so easily offended and weak, that reasonable discussion of such matters is not to be entertained.

*SIGH*...........We live in a weak age wherein we care more about the "feelings" of the un-teachable than the possiblility of truth.

Any discussion (real discussion) of such matters will be imediately closed down by the mods...

But, honestly, you misunderstand Win's intent....he ISN'T merely looking for a cheap "DIG" at Calvinism...he honestly believes the links he posted have merit....but no discussion of that will be possible, not to worry. Mods will shut it down.

 

[Winman]

*sigh* What he really meant to convey was something more akin to this:
"This is not a thread designed to attack Calvinism, but I do recognize that the implications involved will create a harsh criticism of the necessary logical consequences of Calvinist thinking (or at least the perceived logical consequences of Calvinist thinking)."
Actually, there COULD have been some beneficial discourse in the thread. It COULD have been a teachable moment as far as how to rightly understand and interpret the teachings of history. The thread COULD have been left open long enough for us to learn how to rightly APPLY socio-historical knowledge.
Specifically, there is the basic knowledge of History which is little more than a regurgitation of what occurred <---not particularly applicable and helpful..

But there is also the marriage of understanding the socio-historical context of "WHY" certain things have occured and what the prevailing world-views and ideologies extant in that particular period were, and how they might have contributed to the occurences themselves.
That is how history is properly applied.
Parrallel with historical occurence is also the history of thought....and it is a legitimate discussion.


That wasn't what was in his heart I believe. Win (IMO) is missapplying historical facts...If he looks more closely, he would put NO faith in Goerring's defense of his own atrocities and merely understand that Goerring was looking for convenient excuses...(for example). That is where he errs in understanding how to rightly apply history.

While I am an amateur lover of history and the history of thought, I disagree with his premise. I believe that his understanding of the history of thought is mistaken and that it is demonstrable that the logical consequences of Calvinism are absolutely NOT to be blamed for the attrocities he mentions....but, I will probably not be given the opportunity (as an Arminian) to defend the historical innocence of Calvinism in those attrocities even though I would like to. The Naziism is solely to be placed in the logical consequences of Darwinism...not Calvinism.
This is because our society is so easily offended and weak, that reasonable discussion of such matters is not to be entertained.

*SIGH*...........We live in a weak age wherein we care more about the "feelings" of the un-teachable than the possiblility of truth.

Any discussion (real discussion) of such matters will be imediately closed down by the mods...

But, honestly, you misunderstand Win's intent....he ISN'T merely looking for a cheap "DIG" at Calvinism...he honestly believes the links he posted have merit....but no discussion of that will be possible, not to worry. Mods will shut it down.

Thank you HoS, you understood me exactly. I was trying to honestly discuss how religious views influence people's or a nation's actions. You have to be able to discuss distasteful subjects to learn.

I do agree that religion can be used as an excuse by folks. It is certain that folks wanted an excuse to grab up the Jew's wealth in Germany. These folks could probably have not cared less about any religion. But to justify their actions they used religious teachings.

But what is important is that the people BELIEVED these false excuses because they had been taught religious error. The same could be said of slavery in America, or the extermination of the American Indians.

I am glad there is someone like you who can understand what I was trying to say. Thank you.

 

[Mexdeaf]

*sigh* What he really meant to convey was something more akin to this:
"This is not a thread designed to attack Calvinism, but I do recognize that the implications involved will create a harsh criticism of the necessary logical consequences of Calvinist thinking (or at least the perceived logical consequences of Calvinist thinking)."
Actually, there COULD have been some beneficial discourse in the thread. It COULD have been a teachable moment as far as how to rightly understand and interpret the teachings of history. The thread COULD have been left open long enough for us to learn how to rightly APPLY socio-historical knowledge.
Specifically, there is the basic knowledge of History which is little more than a regurgitation of what occurred <---not particularly applicable and helpful..

But there is also the marriage of understanding the socio-historical context of "WHY" certain things have occured and what the prevailing world-views and ideologies extant in that particular period were, and how they might have contributed to the occurences themselves.
That is how history is properly applied.
Parrallel with historical occurence is also the history of thought....and it is a legitimate discussion.


That wasn't what was in his heart I believe. Win (IMO) is missapplying historical facts...If he looks more closely, he would put NO faith in Goerring's defense of his own atrocities and merely understand that Goerring was looking for convenient excuses...(for example). That is where he errs in understanding how to rightly apply history.

While I am an amateur lover of history and the history of thought, I disagree with his premise. I believe that his understanding of the history of thought is mistaken and that it is demonstrable that the logical consequences of Calvinism are absolutely NOT to be blamed for the attrocities he mentions....but, I will probably not be given the opportunity (as an Arminian) to defend the historical innocence of Calvinism in those attrocities even though I would like to. The Naziism is solely to be placed in the logical consequences of Darwinism...not Calvinism.
This is because our society is so easily offended and weak, that reasonable discussion of such matters is not to be entertained.

*SIGH*...........We live in a weak age wherein we care more about the "feelings" of the un-teachable than the possiblility of truth.

Any discussion (real discussion) of such matters will be imediately closed down by the mods...

But, honestly, you misunderstand Win's intent....he ISN'T merely looking for a cheap "DIG" at Calvinism...he honestly believes the links he posted have merit....but no discussion of that will be possible, not to worry. Mods will shut it down.

Then he should have posted his treatise in the History forum rather than the Theology forum.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

:thumbsup::applause::thumbsup::applause:Yes...you have identified the cause of the virus...DR.Mexdeaf!

Wrong, actually:

Win's error is not that of a "perverted mind" nor is it "mis-understanding Calvinism".....It is NEITHER.

He has not been taught how to properly apply lessons of history. That is his error.

You are only high-fiving this because it is "pro-Calvie"...that is equally as un-informative as Win's mistaken understanding of proper application of history is.

Icon, your posts would be more convincing if you occasionally pointed out the errors fellow Calvinists make and supporting the correct statements made by Arminians or "non-Cals" rather than merely "High-fiving" EVERY statement EVER made by any Calvinist no matter how ridiculous it may be....
Honestly, sir, you post some informative and intelligent things often on this board, but you lose credibility when you merely "thumbs-up" everything a fellow Calvinist says. Trust me....there are some pretty stupid things said by Calvinists on a LOT of these threads...you "high-five" ALL of them. You would do better only to support the reasonable statements and leave the ignorant ones un-touched.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Wrong, actually:

Win's error is not that of a "perverted mind" nor is it "mis-understanding Calvinism".....It is NEITHER.

He has not been taught how to properly apply lessons of history. That is his error.

You are only high-fiving this because it is "pro-Calvie"...that is equally as un-informative as Win's mistaken understanding of proper application of history is.

Let me correct you here- I was not accusing Winman of either- I was stating that such thoughts originated from such.

And it should have gone in the History forum.

 

[Winman]

Wrong, actually:

Win's error is not that of a "perverted mind" nor is it "mis-understanding Calvinism".....It is NEITHER.

He has not been taught how to properly apply lessons of history. That is his error.

You are only high-fiving this because it is "pro-Calvie"...that is equally as un-informative as Win's mistaken understanding of proper application of history is.

Oh, I do not think I am in error at all. Yes, there are people who use religion as an excuse to persecute the Jews (and others), but there is very much the PUBLIC who believes and supports these evil politicians because religion justified these actions.

I just posted this:

The prevailing view[28] among historians is that Luther's anti-Jewish rhetoric contributed significantly to the development of antisemitism in Germany,[29] and in the 1930s and 1940s provided an ideal foundation for the Nazi Party's attacks on Jews.[30] Reinhold Lewin writes that "whoever wrote against the Jews for whatever reason believed he had the right to justify himself by triumphantly referring to Luther."

If I have been deceived, then so have most historians. Perhaps you are not allowing for the real effect of religious teachings on people's actions such as the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany.

 

[Mexdeaf]

This may be applicable here:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0004_0_03871.html

 

[Mexdeaf]

Also this:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Luther_on_Jews.html