Isa 45:7

[reformed_baptist]

I am just responding to the OP, and not necessarily to any of the following posts.

That's a good way to pass over all the points that rebut what you are about to say

Exhaustive determinism is the view that everything that happens is foreordained (predestined).

That might be a term used to describe it, however it is a term mainly used by the critics of the position in a pejorative sense, it isn't term used those who those who support the position - nor is it an accurate representation of the position. Those who hold to the point you are arguing against will most likely refer to it as 'the liability (or contingency) of secondary sources.

The problem with this view is it makes God the author of sin.

That is a straw man that has already been addressed, as you would see if you interacted with the responses already posted on this thread.

One of the examples that i choose to mention was the death of Jesus Christ, according to Peter in Acts 2:23 the Jesus died according to 'the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God' (NKJ) yet Peter is clear that those who killed Jesus bear the guilt for that action, 'you have taken by lawless hands,' (NKJ).

There were other examples I used as well, but I don't see the need to repeat everything I have said previously

Your stawmen fails to take into account the distinction that we make between primary and secondary causes, and that the it is always the secondary causes, who acts of their own volition, that carries the guilt - who was the primary (or first cause of the death of Jesus)? Clearly in Peter's mind it was God, yet who carries the guilt? Those who killed him do.

My friend, with all due respect, if you are suggesting that in saying that I am making God the author of sin, then you are also suggesting that Peter was making God the author of sin.

Furthermore, unless you are an open theist, you must (if you honestly examine you own theology) reach the conclusion that God is the first cause of sin - if you believe God created this world with the knowledge that there would be sin in it, then God is the first cause of that sin - he could have prevented by not creating this world, or by creating a different world - my point being many who reject this clear teaching of scripture actually hold to a position that advocates it in some sense.

One group actually says God ordained whatsoever comes to pass but is not the author of sin. Cognitive dissonance on display.

I can assure you there is no mental stress involved in holding this position!

When the Muslim accuses you of 'cognitive dissonance' because you believe God is one and God is three - is he right, or do you answer along the lines of, 'God is one being, but three persons.'

When the JW accuses you of 'cognitive dissonance' because you believe Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man - is he right or do you explain the wonder of the incarnation.

Just because something appears contradictory to you that does not mean it is contradictory, it simply means that it does not fit within the presuppositional framework of your particular worldview.

Another group says God knows what will occur but somehow (a mystery) we can make decisions that alter the outcome of our lives. Neither view is logical or rational.

So, what is the logical or rational alternative?

To back up a bit, the verse does not teach exhaustive determinism It does not say God causes all evil, or calamity, that leap would only be made by agenda driven eisegsis.

Easy to say, whilst passing over what has been written about the verse, happily assertion is just that assertion! If you feel my explanations are ' agenda driven eisegsis' then that is up to you to prove otherwise it just looks like one of those excuses to puts ones fingers in ones ears and shout repeatedly 'I'm not listening'

Evil is in the eye of the beholder. If our house is destroyed by an earthquake, we would say that was evil because it was adverse to our desires and expectations. God did create our harsh environment, with all sorts of calamities, which if we are a victim, we would see as evil. But since our harsh evironment fosters us to seek God as a refuge, its purpose is not evil in God's eye.

So God was the first cause, correct?

Interesting that your statements rely on a position that you have ridiculed as 'cognitive dissonance' and 'Neither view is logical or rational' and I use the word ridiculed quite deliberately, because 'cognitive dissonance' is a mental condition that leads to stress and need to resolve a conflict - in truth the 'cognitive dissonance' does lie with the person who holds to this position, it lies with those who seek to reject it because it doesn't fit with their attitudes, beliefs or behaviors - your the one seeking cognitive consistency here not me - I already have it.

In addition to the calamity that God creates, people make choices that are evil and add to the pain and suffering here on earth. God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass, which defines His sovereignty.

So again, God is the first cause of all that comes to pass, good and bad - that is what you appear to be saying. Do you not see that every argument you have made against what you erroneously term term 'Exhaustive determinism', if they were genuine and valid would also rebut your own stance?

 

[Bob Hataway]

I would like to hear some thoughts on the following passage;

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

What is your response to those who say God causes everything including people to sin based on that verse?

God is the Creator of all things. When He removes His hand light turns to darkness and should He abide by the wishes of man and leave - evil rules. There are those that claim God turns light into darkness and peace into evil, but it is God granting the wishes of man that brings darkness and evil.

 

[Happy]

I would like to hear some thoughts on the following passage;

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

What is your response to those who say God causes everything including people to sin based on that verse?

God creates all things ~ including "options" for choices.
....mankind chooses what to believe, pick, select, what to follow after.

God does not cause a man to sin, He allows mankind to sin.

 

[Van]

I see reformed baptist has authored yet another denial of the obvious.

Exhaustive determinism is the view that everything that happens is foreordained (predestined). Did RB offer an alternate view? Nope.

Does Acts 2:23 say God is the author of sin? Nope. Does use non-Jews to inflict adversity upon Jews? Yes. Such actions are done by men without the Law - non-Jews. In this case, Roman soldiers. Thus the verse does not say God counts as sin what He predestines. That view would again be illogical and irrational.

Lets talk about word games, if God allows us to act autonomously, is our action predetermined by God? Of course not.

Peter does not say nor imply that God is the author of sin. But God certainly created the opportunity and our capacity to sin.

In summary, Exhaustive determinism (God ordains whatsoever comes to pass) is bogus doctrine. The Biblical doctrine is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass. Thus the calamity that He causes is not evil in His eyes, but is evil in the eyes of those adversely affected.

 

[percho]

Ruling over and causing or ordaining are two different things. We know that God does not always get His will. 1 Thess. 4:3
For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:

We know this does not happen perfectly or even close.

As for hyper that is the term I choose.

I would, bet my bippy, whatever that is that in the end, God's will will be done, even my sanctification.

 

[Happy]

I see reformed baptist has authored yet another denial of the obvious.

Exhaustive determinism is the view that everything that happens is foreordained (predestined). Did RB offer an alternate view? Nope.

Does Acts 2:23 say God is the author of sin? Nope. Does use non-Jews to inflict adversity upon Jews? Yes. Such actions are done by men without the Law - non-Jews. In this case, Roman soldiers. Thus the verse does not say God counts as sin what He predestines. That view would again be illogical and irrational.

Lets talk about word games, if God allows us to act autonomously, is our action predetermined by God? Of course not.

Peter does not say nor imply that God is the author of sin. But God certainly created the opportunity and our capacity to sin.

In summary, Exhaustive determinism (God ordains whatsoever comes to pass) is bogus doctrine. The Biblical doctrine is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass. Thus the calamity that He causes is not evil in His eyes, but is evil in the eyes of those adversely affected.

Precisely!

 

[Mr. Davis]

I vividly recall that R.C. Sproul, (Ligonier Ministries), said that God ordains everything that comes to pass. Evil would not be in the Universe if He had not ordained it. But while most will spend eternity in hell, He works all things together for good to those that love God and are the called according to His purpose.

Sproul is Dutch Reform, I believe, and is a strong defender of God's Sovereignty and man's limited agency.

Has anyone else heard this before?

 

[tyndale1946]

I vividly recall that R.C. Sproul, (Ligonier Ministries), said that God ordains everything that comes to pass. Evil would not be in the Universe if He had not ordained it. But while most will spend eternity in hell, He works all things together for good to those that love God and are the called according to His purpose.

Sproul is Dutch Reform, I believe, and is a strong defender of God's Sovereignty and man's limited agency.

Has anyone else heard this before?

Yes I've heard that in fact... Jerome Zanchius 1516-1590 has an piece called Absolute Predestination. As you can see that God would incline and permit other to do. POSITION 1.—God is, and always was so perfectly wise, that nothing ever did, or does, or can elude His knowledge. He knew, from all eternity, not only what He Himself intended to do, but also what He would incline and permit others to do. "Known unto God are all His works (ap aiwnoV) from eternity" (Acts 15.18).

To me and I may be wrong but this to me is saying God predestinated ALL things... But I have a question if that is so what do we do with the scripture that says... Let no man say we he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God tempeth no man... Brother Glen

Here is the link if you would like check it out... TrueCovenanter.com: The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination

 

[rlvaughn]

I vividly recall that R.C. Sproul, (Ligonier Ministries), said that God ordains everything that comes to pass...Has anyone else heard this before?

I have, though not particularly from R. C. Sproul. There are folks in some circles I move in that hold the absolute predestination of all things. We might say that Jerome Zanchius, who Brother Glen mentions above, "wrote the book" on absolute predestination. Probably most folks who believe this are at least familiar with Zanchius's work. Augustus Montague Toplady, who wrote the hymn Rock of Ages, translated Zanchius's The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination, Stated and Asserted from the original Latin, and I believe that at least part of the book is by Toplady. Many probably don't know that one of their favorite hymns was written by an absolute predestinarian!

That said, there can be a lot of variation across the spectrum of this doctrine. For some the focus in on God the creator as the first cause of all things, and that nothing is outside his divine governance. On the other end I've seen a few who seem to want to shout as loudly as possible "God is the author of sin" to see just how many people they can shock!

 

[Mr. Davis]

Brothers, I really appreciate your replies.

Did Calvin believe in "absolute predestination"?

If not, what was his teaching on predestination?

 

[Happy]

Predestination ~

Carnal mankind's general view ~ God PRE picks and chooses, so what's the point of a man choosing to believe.

A Spiritual general view ~ God is ALL KNOWING ~ He KNOWS before a man is even born, WHAT the man will Choose ~ ie to STAND with God or to STAND against God.

God CALLS "many" ~ IOW ~ His Word is spread for ALL to CHOOSE to hear, learn, trust and believe ~ OR NOT.

Those WHOM "themselves" WILL CHOOSE GOD, God WILL CALL, because; God is ALL KNOWING, thus He Knows, before the man himself knows what He will CHOOSE.

^ THAT man IS "pre-destined". ^ THAT man, at some time in his carnal life-time WILL trust and believe in God. ^ THAT man's DESTINY is he WILL choose to stand with God, and WILL be called BY God, and WILL forever live WITH the Lord his God.

 

[tyndale1946]

Predestination ~

Carnal mankind's general view ~ God PRE picks and chooses, so what's the point of a man choosing to believe.

A Spiritual general view ~ God is ALL KNOWING ~ He KNOWS before a man is even born, WHAT the man will Choose ~ ie to STAND with God or to STAND against God.

God CALLS "many" ~ IOW ~ His Word is spread for ALL to CHOOSE to hear, learn, trust and believe ~ OR NOT.

Those WHOM "themselves" WILL CHOOSE GOD, God WILL CALL, because; God is ALL KNOWING, thus He Knows, before the man himself knows what He will CHOOSE.

^ THAT man IS "pre-destined". ^ THAT man, at some time in his carnal life-time WILL trust and believe in God. ^ THAT man's DESTINY is he WILL choose to stand with God, and WILL be called BY God, and WILL forever live WITH the Lord his God.

I think at this time this is not the place to derail this thread. Since this post seems to be leaning towards predestination I may start one in the C/A Forum as that is where I believe it belongs... Let me get my ducks in row and see how to approach this very scripturally valued subject... Stayed tune!... Brother Glen

 

[Mr. Davis]

I think at this time this is not the place to derail this thread. Since this post seems to be leaning towards predestination I may start one in the C/A Forum as that is where I believe it belongs... Let me get my ducks in row and see how to approach this very scripturally valued subject... Stayed tune!... Brother Glen

Brother Glen,

How do I find the "Calvinism / Arminianism" forum?

Please let me know once the new topic has been moved.

Thanks!

 

[tyndale1946]

Brother Glen,

How do I find the "Calvinism / Arminianism" forum?

Please let me know once the new topic has been moved.

Thanks!

Glad to help and from now on I'll call you Brother Davis... Go to Forums... Click on it!... Scroll down to... Christian Debate Forums (All Christians)... The C/A Debate or Calvinism / Arminianism Forum is the 1st one... Click on that... And join any discussion group you would like... If you are brave you can start one!... See you there Brother Davis!... Brother Glen

 

[Happy]

I think at this time this is not the place to derail this thread. Since this post seems to be leaning towards predestination I may start one in the C/A Forum as that is where I believe it belongs... Let me get my ducks in row and see how to approach this very scripturally valued subject... Stayed tune!... Brother Glen

okie dokie

 

[reformed_baptist]

I see reformed baptist has authored yet another denial of the obvious.

Sorry I missed this, but as you didn't quote anything I said it didn't come up on my alerts - but then your really talking to me are you, more about me? And who are you addressing?

Perhaps you prefer a monologue?

Are maybe just a rallying call to those who already in your camp, because in all honesty this post I am responding to is nothing more then that!

Exhaustive determinism is the view that everything that happens is foreordained (predestined). Did RB offer an alternate view? Nope.

This makes no sense, "Exhaustive determinism" as you define it is a strawman and your insistence on sticking to it and continually expressing it in such ways merely shows you up!

As for not offering an alternative - well that is simply dishonest. I had offered my view before you even posted on this thread, and I repeated it in response to you - for example note:

Your stawmen fails to take into account the distinction that we make between primary and secondary causes, and that the it is always the secondary causes, who acts of their own volition, that carries the guilt - who was the primary (or first cause of the death of Jesus)? Clearly in Peter's mind it was God, yet who carries the guilt? Those who killed him do.

Why let a bit of honesty stand in the way of a good argument - I have Ex 20:16 in my bible though!

Does Acts 2:23 say God is the author of sin? Nope. Does use non-Jews to inflict adversity upon Jews? Yes. Such actions are done by men without the Law - non-Jews. In this case, Roman soldiers. Thus the verse does not say God counts as sin what He predestines. That view would again be illogical and irrational.

Previously you accused me of "agenda driven eisegsis"

To back up a bit, the verse does not teach exhaustive determinism It does not say God causes all evil, or calamity, that leap would only be made by agenda driven eisegsis.

Lets examine you eisegesis shall we?

NKJ Acts 2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;"

You state that Peter is talking about what the Romans did to Jesus, now we note firstly that the question of who put Jesus to death is irrelevant to the point I was making, the point I was making is that Jesus was killed by men, and also according the determined purpose of God - your 'response' ignores that and goes down a different road entirely - it is nothing but a poorly executed redirect!

However to address the point you make, to show that I am not simply following your actions, notice the word 'you' Peter says, 'you have taken by lawless hands' - Peter is addressing Jewish people, not Roman people, and he doesn't say 'they' he says 'you' - he considered the whole action to be lawless - and he squarely lays the blame collectively upon the Jewish people.

Yours is a classic example of what you call "agenda driven eisegsis"

Lets talk about word games, if God allows us to act autonomously, is our action predetermined by God? Of course not.

What a shallow view of the sovereignty of God you have!

Peter does not say nor imply that God is the author of sin.

Already addressed - but of course the strawman is easier to refute then the actual doctrine so you just not going to let it go are you - for that to happen you would actually have to be interested in discussing the matter - which clearly your not!

But God certainly created the opportunity and our capacity to sin.

Are an open theist?

If not, you must conclude that God also created with the knowledge that we would sin - in which in your theology he is the first cause.

Of course we don't know what you actually believe because that is not your agenda is it?

In summary, Exhaustive determinism (God ordains whatsoever comes to pass) is bogus doctrine.

Your strawman certainly is!

The Biblical doctrine is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass. Thus the calamity that He causes is not evil in His eyes, but is evil in the eyes of those adversely affected.

is it 'cause' or is it 'allows' they are different words with very different meanings and it has to be either or!

In my conclusion, because I won't be responding to another post like this - it simply isn't worth the time or effort to address this any further for the following reasons:

1) Clearly your not interested in a dialogue, but rather a monologue,
2) Your not prepared to even try and properly understand the position your seeking to refute
3) Your posts bear false witness
4) You throw accusations around

In the end all i can assume is your posts are meant as a rallying call to those who are already convinced your right - happily the argumentation is so shallow that I do believe your posts will be of far more benefit then mine in persuading those who still sit on the fence to come down on my side - so I close by saying, thank you for making my job a little easier.

 

[Van]

Yet another "attack the messenger" post by RB. Count the number of times "you" and "your" are used.

There is absolutely no support in scripture for Exhaustive determinism (God predestines everything).

The eisegesis offered on Acts 2:23 tried to claim God's predetermined plan caused men to sin. Utterly bogus.

Next, I pointed out God causes calamity (evil in the eyes of those adversely affected) and God allows men to cause evil (thought and deed) in the world. RB rebuttal "is it cause or allow?" LOL

In summary, if God predestines everything, He becomes the author of sin. Since God is not the author of sin, then He does not ordain (predestine) whatsoever comes to pass. The correct Biblical doctrine of God's Sovereignty is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass.

 

[Happy]

In summary, if God predestines everything, He becomes the author of sin. Since God is not the author of sin, then He does not ordain (predestine) whatsoever comes to pass. The correct Biblical doctrine of God's Sovereignty is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass.

Eph 1
[11] In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

(one of) The purpose of Him is to reveal the TRUTH.
(one of) The gifts of Him is He "ALLOWS" individuals to make "their own" CHOICES.
(one of) The mysteries of God is; He already KNOWS an individuals CHOICE, before the individual knows.
(one of) The "works" of God is; He has already PREPARED a place and future for every individual based on.... their "choices".
(one of) The "knowledge/truth" of God revealed is; the result of any mans choices thus are revealed.

Any man can hear, read, verify the truth of God, and individually choose to believe or not, and individually know their consequence for their choice, thus on judgement day, they have no excuse to appeal their judgement.

And absolutely, God does "call" those He "already knows", shall choose Him.

 

[reformed_baptist]

Yet another "attack the messenger" post by RB. Count the number of times "you" and "your" are used.

Speaking to crowd (rather then me) again I see!

the reason I am using those pronouns is because I am talking to you - I am polite enough to address you! I am not talking about you to other people as if your not in the room!

There is absolutely no support in scripture for Exhaustive determinism (God predestines everything).

This is laughable - and again I will dispute the pejorative name you insist on labeling my position with.

The truth of the matter is that I have supported my position across several posts now, #6; #8; #11; #15; #16; #21; 36 - most of those include my interaction with scripture - however I am struggling to see much appeal to scripture in your posts - beyond a failed attempt to interact with Acts 2:23 that is.

What you actually mean, there is absolutely no support in scripture that you are willing to except!

That is something I quite believe to be the case for the bible is clear on what it teaches in regards to God's absolute sovereignty.

The eisegesis offered on Acts 2:23 tried to claim God's predetermined plan caused men to sin. Utterly bogus.

So your claim is that God did not send his son into the world to die for sin?

Was the cross then an accident?

The text is clear, as is my exegesis of it - but we shall go over again!

Acts 2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;

1) Peter states that Jesus was delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God what does 'determined purpose' mean in your mind?

2) Peter tells his audience that they are the ones who too part in the death in of Jesus and therefore they carry the guilt - You have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;

You, on the other hand tried to dismiss this text, by saying that Peter was merely saying the Roman's killed Jesus - that, my friend, is an abuse of context, not to mention the meaning of words - and, as I pointed out, does not actually impact my argument at all (even if it was true).

Furthermore, this is not the only scripture I have used in support of my position - those posts that you glossed over previously contain any number of biblical texts for you to interact with - yet you haven't gone back and interacted with them! I challenge you to do that now - to go through my posts systematically and formulate a response that with every argument from scripture I have presented.

I would so the same for you but, sadly, there isn't that much for me to get my teeth into!

Next, I pointed out God causes calamity (evil in the eyes of those adversely affected) and God allows men to cause evil (thought and deed) in the world. RB rebuttal "is it cause or allow?" LOL

No you didn't, shall I quote you again have you noticed how when I interact with your words I always quote them - why won't you offer the same courtesy to me?

The Biblical doctrine is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass.

Now, the fact that you have explained it further does enable to understand what you meant - but what you saying now whilst it might be what you meant - it is not what you wrote!

In summary, if God predestines everything, He becomes the author of sin.

So you keep stating!

And so I will keep saying this is a strawman! Afterall, my shouldn't my assertion be worth at least as yours is?

You keep stating it, but your not prepared to back it up with any interaction with the well established teaching known as 'the liability/ contingency of secondary causes'?

Since God is not the author of sin,

I agree.

then He does not ordain (predestine) whatsoever comes to pass.

So you are saying that God is not the one who works all things according to the counsel of His will, (Eph 1:11) and that God is not the one who is ensuring that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose (Rom 8:28).

You want us to believe that when Joseph's brother threw him into the pit that God didn't mean for good (Gen 50:20) and that when we read in 2 sam 24:1 that God put into David's heart to number Israel so that God could judge on them that the writer of Samuel got it wrong?

The correct Biblical doctrine of God's Sovereignty is God causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass.

You've asserted it but you haven't brought a single text of scripture forward to support it - you might reject all the scriptural support I have brought (as is your right) but at least I have brought some - where is yours?

Tell me, in your mind, what is the distinction between God causes and what he allows - are you suggesting he causes good things, but merely allows bad (sinful) things?

Firstly, let me again point out that even if your right, merely allowing them (unless you say he has no foresight) makes him the first cause through his act of creation - hence your own position demands that God is the first cause of sin - so please desist from calling my position illogical when your own position demands the same reality as mine

Secondly, let's examine what you seem to be saying, namely that God merely allows some things to happen - now I would suggest that can be understood in two ways (I have detail both because you seem unwilling to state your position with any clarity or detail)

1) Some things take God by surprise - the problem with that is the bibles clear teaching on God's omniscience does not allow for that to be the case (1 John 3:20 For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.)

So, option 1 is out of the question, clearly God is never taken by surprise! So, what is option 2?

2) God is unable to avert some things happening - again, scripture won't allow for this (Gen 18:14)

That takes option 2 off the table - so what are we left with?

God knowing the sin we will commit, and deciding not to do anything about it - to let us suffer - we are therefore left in the hand of blind fate - that is the God that you somehow believe is more attractive then the God who is control of all things and is working all things out according to his purposes, purposes that are just, holy and good - wow, in your determination to insist on your lbertarian free will you are willing to turn God into some capricious monster!

My understanding of God's sovereignty fits into a systematic and biblical theology without any gaps or any squeezing - you seem to avoiding the need to apply that test by not clearly stating (and supporting from scripture) what you actually believe.

My friend, it seems to me that the big problem here is that your ultimate authority is not scripture, but rather logic or perception, whilst these things are not to neglected, they must be reined in by the clear testimony of scripture. And scriptures testimony is completely clear - God's sovereignty is absolute and yet, at the same, as secondary causes of sin, we carry the blame - just like Judas.

Think about him as my last example, and then i really must sign off, as I have spent too much time on this already. "The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born." (Mar 14:21 NKJ) - In betraying Jesus, Judas did what God said he would do, but yet Jesus tells him that it he will pay for his sin.

Again, hand in hand, as in Gen 50:20, 2 Sam 24:1/ 1 Chron 21:1 & Acts 2:23 we see clearly both the sovereignty of God in these sinful actions and the guilt of those committing the sin.

Now, it will be interesting to see what you response will be like - another shot fired from the hip aimed at giving those who already agree with you something to cheer about. A post full of strawmen and perjoratives or will there be some real and meaningful interaction with what has been said?

Will you, for example, use the language I use to describe my position, or will you insist on misrepresenting it?

Will you, as another example, address me rather then talk about me as if I am not here?

In short, will you practice Phil 2:1-4, or is that too much to ask?

 

[reformed_baptist]

Yet another "attack the messenger" post by RB. Count the number of times "you" and "your" are used.

ps. having had a quick look around the forum I will at least not be taking your posts personally any longer - it seems your resorting to rhetoric, acusations and false representations of what others say is normal behavior. Maybe one day you will release that whilst this might be the way the unbeliever frequently tries to win arguments it is not the way for us, who have to be prepared to give a reason for the hope that within us, and to do so in love and gentleness - however for my part I am content - the more posts of this type you aim at me posts the less credible your arguments become - you make case better for me then I could ever make it for myself