Originally posted by Faith, Fact & Feeling:
[qb]
Originally posted by C4K:
[qb] If this degenerates into a Calvinism debate it will be closed without notice.
This warning doesn’t apply to Gene C4K? Now if I reply to this, C4K will shut the thread down. Of course he wouldn’t if you do it, but that is just his
bias showing.
No, it does not bear mentioning, because Ruckman's cursings are not exegetical. What you said amounts to nothing more than the red herring fallacy of argumentation. (Yet another logical fallacy that KJVOists employ).
Yes it does bear mentioning. Calvinism is far worse than cussing. Your knowledge of fallacies is obviously limited. Red herring: This fallacy is committed when someone introduces irrelevant material to the issue being discussed, so that everyone's attention is diverted away from the points made, towards a different conclusion. I guess you would have accused Jesus of this when he made a similar point to the Pharisees about focusing on weightier matters?
Calvinism in no way makes God out to be unloving.
Since C4K allowed your statement, how about a question. Does God send people to hell without them ever having a chance to believe? Answer me this and we can go to the next question.
It can be argued to the contrary that it would be unloving to ground election in man's faith, since, left to their own devices, no man would ever come to faith in Christ.
It can only be argued from the head, not the heart. You have assumed man does not have the capability to choose God, which of course is false.
Simply put, that one statement shows you understand a caricature of Reformed theology, not Reformed theology itself. (Probably right out of Dave, "I can't handle sources correctly," Hunt's books).
Or from a doctoral course on calvinism and years of personal study, prayer and dealing with people on the issue. You assume much.
Let's not forget that in your scheme of things if nobody gets a chance to respond to the gospel, then God is just as unjust as you make Calvinism's version out to be, and He's powerless to save, because not all people receive a chance, and His power to save is subject to His own creation, in contradiction to His own essence, and the Persons of the Trinity are all set in opposition to each other since Jesus intercedes for persons that the Father does not save and the Holy Spirit draws some persons that are not saved.
Is this supposed to be a sentence? Me thinks not. You need some elementary English skills before you move on to theology. In your twisted understanding of theology you think damning people to Hell is fair since God has to force people to believe? There can be no love without free will Gene. Forced love is not love.
If you have issues with it, then by all means come to the Calvinism/Arminianism forum and test your views there.
Been there before, and will probably go again. Arguing doesn’t change cold hearts though. Calvinism is man wresting scripture to their own destruction because of a hard heart. Nothing more, nothing less.
It's worth noting that you KJVO guys that repudiate Reformed soteriology and chastise MV's because of a supposed association with Roman Catholicism are, in fact, holding to Arminian soteriology
Nope. We don’t believe you can loose it. Bifurcation fallacy.
Still waiting for people to deal with his numerous false prophecies. How much bad behavior and false prophecy does it take before a man becomes a false prophet?
He has problems there.