The difference between True Arminian/ Non Cal's and False converts

[preacher4truth]

Your last paragraph is excellent.

The problem is when those differences are used in such a way as to indicate that one group of believers is somehow of a "higher grade" than others, or somehow better than others because they believe differently; e.g., Evangelist's use of "arminian" for anyone who believes differently than he does.

If you don't believe this causes discord among the brethren, then you're not paying attention to what happens on this message board.

Oh, I don't know brother. I don't think he is saying any are better than others, but some have a better understanding of Scripture. I'm reminded of Prisca and Aquilla taking Appolos aside and showing him a more accurate way;

'Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately'. -- Acts 18:24-26

I'd say that Apollos came up a notch or two, and frankly he was humble enough to accept what they had to say. He came to a better understanding, and that being true it can be said he would rank higher in knowledge than some, just as an aged pastor should be at such a place in ministry and it is right to hold some in such a regard -- 1 Timothy 5:17 (note it ranks them as those who rule 'well' &c.) We could classify that as being of a 'higher grade' (in its positive definition) than others which is true and it isn't being derogatory to acknowledge this imo.

It was even stated that Apollos was competent in the Scriptures which implies that there are in fact rankings and apparently some are not competent in the Scriptures -- thus Paul's advice to Timothy in 1 Timothy 4:16; 'Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers'. 2 Timothy 2:15; 'Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.' and 2 Timothy 2:20 shows some more rankings as well; 'Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable'.

I believe there are rankings and Scripture does indicate this, yet for anyone to feel they are better than others (which would have to be defined) that's another issue.

I honestly don't believe evangelist6589 is saying he is better than others (if he is he is wrong for that) but is showing some have a better understanding, that is the difference imo.

 

[Don]

Oh, I don't know brother. I don't think he is saying any are better than others, but some have a better understanding of Scripture. I'm reminded of Prisca and Aquilla taking Appolos aside and showing him a more accurate way;

'Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately'. -- Acts 18:24-26

I'd say that Apollos came up a notch or two, and frankly he was humble enough to accept what they had to say. He came to a better understanding, and that being true it can be said he would rank higher in knowledge than some, just as an aged pastor should be at such a place in ministry and it is right to hold some in such a regard -- 1 Timothy 5:17 (note it ranks them as those who rule 'well' &c.) We could classify that as being of a 'higher grade' (in its positive definition) than others which is true and it isn't being derogatory to acknowledge this imo.

It was even stated that Apollos was competent in the Scriptures which implies that there are in fact rankings and apparently some are not competent in the Scriptures -- thus Paul's advice to Timothy in 1 Timothy 4:16; 'Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers'. 2 Timothy 2:15; 'Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.' and 2 Timothy 2:20 shows some more rankings as well; 'Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable'.

I believe there are rankings and Scripture does indicate this, yet for anyone to feel they are better than others (which would have to be defined) that's another issue.

I honestly don't believe evangelist6589 is saying he is better than others (if he is he is wrong for that) but is showing some have a better understanding, that is the difference imo.

May I make a suggestion? Go to the General Discussions and Baptist Theology sections, and read the threads Evangelist has started.

 

[evangelist6589]

May I make a suggestion? Go to the General Discussions and Baptist Theology sections, and read the threads Evangelist has started.

Don you often take me out of context and put words into my mouth. What I am saying is that I am no better than you in Gods eyes. However on the other token I am saying I have a far better understanding than you in certain areas.

 

[preacher4truth]

May I make a suggestion? Go to the General Discussions and Baptist Theology sections, and read the threads Evangelist has started.

Did that. Well sort of, instead I viewed his profile, then looked at the threads he's created. He has a wide mix of thread topics. I don't know how many threads he has to start on a topic to offend you over it but it must not be many because the topic mix is fairly wide.

Don, here is the link to his thread starts.

I know you know this Don, but as a reminder truth divides, and if it divides it must not always be construed as 'sowing discord'.

 

[Don]

Don you often take me out of context and put words into my mouth. What I am saying is that I am no better than you in Gods eyes. However on the other token I am saying I have a far better understanding than you in certain areas.

I've never taken you out of context, and I've NEVER put words in your mouth. You've NEVER accused me of doing such a thing; only of being critical. If you're going to make such a claim, prove it.

As for your other claim of "far better understanding in certain areas," of course you do; in other areas, the opposite is true.

 

[Don]

Did that. Well sort of, instead I viewed his profile, then looked at the threads he's created. He has a wide mix of thread topics. I don't know how many threads he has to start on a topic to offend you over it but it must not be many because the topic mix is fairly wide.

Don, here is the link to his thread starts.

I know you know this Don, but as a reminder truth divides, and if it divides it must not always be construed as 'sowing discord'.

You looked at the threads he created, and made a judgment.

That's like saying you read the title and/or back cover of a book, and determined it was a good book.

Get to know him better. Then come back and talk to me.

By the way: if you had actually read the threads, you might find there's a mix of where I take him to task, and where I've done my best to actually help him.

 

[preacher4truth]

You looked at the threads he created, and made a judgment.

Correct in a sense and so did you, but your following assumption is incorrect:

That's like saying you read the title and/or back cover of a book, and determined it was a good book.

That right there is a false assumption Don and is incorrect. A straw man argument.

Get to know him better. Then come back and talk to me.

I've read nearly everything he has written on BB.

By the way: if you had actually read the threads, you might find there's a mix of where I take him to task, and where I've done my best to actually help him.

There you go assuming yet again.

See above.

I've read nearly all of his threads (if not each and every one), and yet you feel you've 'taken him to task' (a phrase of assumed accomplishment you seem to take pride in and savor) yet I've not seen this. I've witnessed you dogging his steps as if he were in your mind an easy target but your conclusion that you've taken him to task (which reads like you've owned him) is far fetched. You've done no such thing.

Looking at his site I'd gather that he's well learned, and I respect him for that. He's zealous and knowledgeable, and yes, full of quirks. Does he have flaws and issues? Yep. Just like me.

So tell me Don, you've done your best to 'help him' so tell me how so? I will say this, and it is true, the guy seems a glutton for punishment as he reveals far too much personal info imo but at the least in his being raw he is real and I love him for that.

In addition to this you've failed to respond to ANY Scripture references I've provided, and, that said, I've not witnessed one attempt on your part to do so.

None.

Therefore I see you as travelling on fumes and see a need for you to dig into your precious Bible as you have in the past, and take a deep breath in so doing, and relax and get back to serious business.

 

[Don]

Correct in a sense and so did you, but your following assumption is incorrect:



That right there is a false assumption Don and is incorrect. A straw man argument.



I've read nearly everything he has written on BB.



There you go assuming yet again.

See above.

The assumption was based on your own previous words; look at your previous post where you wrote "I have. Sort of."

You indicated that you had seen the thread titles; you did not clarify that you had actually gone through them.

I made no straw man argument. A straw man is proposing a completely different representation of your position. I identified what you said based on what you wrote. If I did make a logical fallacy, it would be the error of analogy. You cannot claim a straw man based on an analysis of what you actually wrote, by saying "that's not what I meant."

I've read nearly all of his threads (if not each and every one), and yet you feel you've 'taken him to task' (a phrase of assumed accomplishment you seem to take pride in and savor) yet I've not seen this. I've witnessed you dogging his steps as if he were in your mind an easy target but your conclusion that you've taken him to task (which reads like you've owned him) is far fetched. You've done no such thing.

Looking at his site I'd gather that he's well learned, and I respect him for that. He's zealous and knowledgeable, and yes, full of quirks. Does he have flaws and issues? Yep. Just like me.

So tell me Don, you've done your best to 'help him' so tell me how so? I will say this, and it is true, the guy seems a glutton for punishment as he reveals far too much personal info imo but at the least in his being raw he is real and I love him for that.

In addition to this you've failed to respond to ANY Scripture references I've provided, and, that said, I've not witnessed one attempt on your part to do so.

None.

Therefore I see you as travelling on fumes and see a need for you to dig into your precious Bible as you have in the past, and take a deep breath in so doing, and relax and get back to serious business.

Guess we'll have to leave this one as seeing it differently.