True motives?

[Herald]

First, let me applaud this forums moderator for his active moderation and zero tolerance for baseless accusations, aspersions, and generally uncivil behavior. This type of moderation is long in coming and I applaud it.

I recognize that the opinions of many who post on this topic (Calvinism) are shaped by anecdotal experience, not fact. Quoting Google searches on Calvinism to make the case that Calvinists are arrogant is intellectually dishonest. Keyword optimization has a disproportional effect on Google searches; often yielding a biased result. "isms" are not arrogant, people are. If you think differently then you open your own way of thinking to the same bias on the part of others.

I know there is a battle royal going on in the SBC over Calvinism. Those who have a dog in that hunt are not exactly impartial, so discounting their hyperbolic statements is to be expected. When someone offers a cogent, reasoned, and rationale opinion during a debate; and they are attacked personally, but not substantially, it is a pretty good indicator that the person making the attack is not interested in the truth. In other words their motive may not be as pure as the wind-driven snow. Insults and rhetorical skills do not equal truth.

 

[InTheLight]

The Google searches linked to articles written by prominent Calvinists who admit their theology comes off as arrogant. The Calvinist themselves are stating they are arrogant.

 

[Revmitchell]

Quoting Google searches on Calvinism to make the case that Calvinists are arrogant is intellectually dishonest.

It matters not if it is a biased search. Of course it is a biased search. What matters is that there are Calvinists who themselves are admitting to the problem among Calvinists. Of course we need to distract from that fact by claiming intellectual dishonesty.

There is no intellectual dishonesty. Such a claim makes no sense.

 

[Herald]

The Google searches linked to articles written by prominent Calvinists who admit their theology comes off as arrogant. The Calvinist themselves are stating they are arrogant.

You are missing the point. When you do a Google search on the word "Calvinism" you come up with this: Calvinism

When you do a search on "Calvinist Arrogance" you come up with this: Calvinist Arrogance.

I should not even need to comment on the difference between the two. Should I go through the exercise of doing the same search on Arminianism?

The fact is that if you are convinced of something no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind. People back themselves into a corner with their bias and inflammatory rhetoric. Both sides do it. Once in that corner it is hard to get out. It takes a honest admission that you were wrong. It is much easier just to keep believing and doing the same thing.

 

[Revmitchell]

The fact is that when even Calvinists themselves are consistently over time addressing the issue, even prominent Calvinists, then there is facts to back it up.

 

[Herald]

It matters not if it is a biased search. Of course it is a biased search. What matters is that there are Calvinists who themselves are admitting to the problem among Calvinists. Of course we need to distract from that fact by claiming intellectual dishonesty.

There is no intellectual dishonesty. Such a claim makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense since the whole premise of such a search is to advance a line of thinking without considering one's own foibles. If I do a search to find arrogant Arminians, do you think I will find some positive results? Of course I will. Why not just state that both sides have individuals who are arrogant? Answer: because it will not make the person's point.

This is why constructive debate is difficult for some people. They cannot separate the idea from the person. If you start off a debate with the premise that your opponent is arrogant, nothing your opponent says will be received with serious consideration. I have seen Calvinists and Arminians go into formal debates with that presupposition. The debates were a waste of time. The same thing happens here.

 

[Winman]

You are missing the point. When you do a Google search on the word "Calvinism" you come up with this: Calvinism

When you do a search on "Calvinist Arrogance" you come up with this: Calvinist Arrogance.

I should not even need to comment on the difference between the two. Should I go through the exercise of doing the same search on Arminianism?

The fact is that if you are convinced of something no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind. People back themselves into a corner with their bias and inflammatory rhetoric. Both sides do it. Once in that corner it is hard to get out. It takes a honest admission that you were wrong. It is much easier just to keep believing and doing the same thing.

Put it to the test for yourself, google "arrogant Arminians" and then google "arrogant Calvinists". You will find articles mentioning arrogant Calvinists outnumber articles about arrogant Arminians at least 5 to 1, if not MUCH higher.

You may not like this, but many Calvinists are truly arrogant. You can deny all you want, but Calvinists have a known reputation for being arrogant.

 

[Herald]

The fact is that when even Calvinists themselves are consistently over time addressing the issue, even prominent Calvinists, then there is facts to back it up.

You are making my point. You mind is made up. Nothing...NOTHING anyone says will change your mind. I am not trying to be mean, Rev. Even if I provided volumes of data to the contrary your mind is made up that Calvinists are arrogant. You are free to walk around the cabin and believe that, but understand that the same charge can be made against your camp.

 

[InTheLight]

You are missing the point.

Point: Are Calvinists arrogant? They ADMIT they are. Case closed.

Should I go through the exercise of doing the same search on Arminianism?

Please do. In fact, I speculate that you already did and didn't find anything, otherwise you would have posted it.

It takes a honest admission that you were wrong. It is much easier just to keep believing and doing the same thing.

Calvinists ADMIT they are arrogant. I'm sensing arrogance in you imploring that you are right and I am wrong. Funny, that.

 

[Revmitchell]

It makes perfect sense since the whole premise of such a search is to advance a line of thinking without considering one's own foibles. If I do a search to find arrogant Arminians, do you think I will find some positive results? Of course I will. Why not just state that both sides have individuals who are arrogant? Answer: because it will not make the person's point.

You are ignoring facts and selectively focusing on what you want to. That in and of itself is an example of what you are saying. Let's look at one single fact that destroys eveyrthing you are saying. Here are some prominent Calvinists who have dealt with this issue:

John Piper

Tom Ascol

Ed Stetzer


Killing Calvinism: How to Destroy a Perfectly Good Theology from the Inside

 

[Herald]

I'm sensing arrogance in you imploring that you are right and I am wrong. Funny, that.

Do you know that I was just waiting until this accusation was made? Thank you for not disappointing.

I am truly saddened that some of you have decided that Google is the arbiter of theological debates.

And as to why did I not post my findings on Arminians? I left that exercise up to you to see whether you, and those like you, would be honest enough to say, "We are prone to be just as arrogant." That type of admission would be an honest one and may just allow us to dialog with an eye on ourselves first. That is what our Lord would have us do (Matthew 7:5).

 

[Revmitchell]

You are making my point. You mind is made up.

Sure it is because of both personal experience and research. Do you ever come to conclusions after both?

Nothing...NOTHING anyone says will change your mind.

This is an assumption on your part.

I am not trying to be mean, Rev. Even if I provided volumes of data to the contrary your mind is made up that Calvinists are arrogant.

The problem with that is I have already researched this and experienced this. But the truth is you are now currently ignoring data to prove my point. Your mind is closed itself.

You are free to walk around the cabin and believe that, but understand that the same charge can be made against your camp.

But it is not known in public circles as a common trait as it is with Calvinists.

 

[Revmitchell]

I am truly saddened that some of you have decided that Google is the arbiter of theological debates.

This is not a rebuttle but a false characterization. Sad.

 

[Herald]

Rev., I know full well that individual Calvinists can be arrogant. Nothing I posted in this thread denies that. When Calvinists police their own that is a good thing. My issue is with Arminians ignoring their own problems. You are acting just like my daughter when I used to confront her about doing something wrong. She would say, "Yes, Daddy, but...". As soon as the word "but" came into play I knew she was not ready to take responsibility for her actions. I am not giving you a "but". I personally know arrogant Calvinists; and not from a Google search. I personally know arrogant Arminians; and I did not have to go to Bing or Yahoo to find them. Arrogance is a character issue, not a theological one. If both sides just admitted that we would all be better off. Unfortunately even those admissions come with a finger being pointed.

 

[Revmitchell]

And as to why did I not post my findings on Arminians?

Because like the typical Calvinist it is beneath you to have to actually back up what you say.

 

[Herald]

Because like the typical Calvinist it is beneath you to have to actually back up what you say.

Please stop making my point for me or I will have to start charging you royalties.

 

[InTheLight]

Do you know that I was just waiting until this accusation was made? Thank you for not disappointing.

Did you know that this statement of yours is condescending and arrogant?

I am truly saddened that some of you have decided that Google is the arbiter of theological debates.

Hmmm...Mischaracterizing an opponents position. Classic Calvinist tactic.

And as to why did I not post my findings on Arminians? I left that exercise up to you to see whether you, and those like you, would be honest enough to say, "We are prone to be just as arrogant."

I did the search and found scant returns, certainly much, much less than the Calvinist search.

 

[Revmitchell]

And if Calvinists have to defend their position to much to do opposition then they will destroy their opponents as much and as publicly as they can. It is beneath them to have to defend their doctrine to much but somehow it is not beneath them to attack and tear down their opposition.

 

[Winman]

double post

 

[Winman]

Arrogance is a character issue, not a theological one.

I disagree, theology has EVERYTHING to do with the arrogance of Calvinists. Calvinists will often quote long lists of scholars to argue they are correct. Calvinists consider themselves intellectual, and their common rebuttal to anyone who disagrees with Calvinism is to tell that person they do not understand Calvinism. I would love to have a dollar for every time I've heard that one. :thumbs:

I can think of one Calvinist here who openly says that any person who does not listen to and follow these Reformed scholars is STUPID or IGNORANT. Actually, I can think of several Calvinists that have said things like this. Calvinists believe they hold the intellectual high ground, and only Calvinists are able to exegete or interpret scripture properly.

And whether they will admit it or not, I believe many Calvinists pride themselves that they are the chosen "elect".