True motives?

[preacher4truth]

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.

:applause: :applause: :thumbs: :thumbs:

 

[Revmitchell]

You are acting just like my daughter when I used to confront her about doing something wrong. She would say, "Yes, Daddy, but...".

Wooe wait a minute here. You brought this up and in doing so you have misrepresented some things.

I have established with clear evidence that it is a predominate problem among Calvinists to be arrogant.

You have not established the same for non cals. It may be true for, as you say arminians, but I am not one nor do I know any and I have no dealing with them.

Now I know it is a bit beneath you to present some evidence but give it a try.

 

[Revmitchell]

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:

Bingo, of course they fully understand everyone else doctrine but no one clearly understands Calvinist doctrine unless they are a Calvinist.

 

[Revmitchell]

“I believe a too hasty assent to Calvinistic principles, before a person is duly acquainted with the plague of his own heart, is one principal cause of that lightness of profession which so lamentably abounds in this day, a chief reason why many professors [i.e. Christians who profess the doctrines of grace] are rash, heady, high-minded, contentious about words, and sadly remiss as to the means of divine appointment” (Newton’s Works, XI p. 278).

 

[Revmitchell]

I recognize that the opinions of many who post on this topic (Calvinism) are shaped by anecdotal experience, not fact.

And I have once again provided both.

 

[Revmitchell]

Elitist Thinking about evangelism

Thinking back, I realize that "love" was an expendable commodity in those days. While I really "loved" all on one level, on another level I didn't have to care too deeply about anyone. After all, hadn't God done the same, loved some and not others? A subtle elitism began to creep into my thinking. A hidden attitude of discrimination and partiality emerged against those who couldn't 'ascend to the higher truths’ of God due to His lack of concern about them. Since I had been given perception to know these doctrines of God's grace, I was secretly indifferent toward the slow and dull of learning. I feigned interest to hide my attitude of false sympathy toward them. If God didn't care enough to gift them with the capacity to understand, then I didn't have to concern myself with them either. I reasoned that to care would go against the will of God. After all, weren’t we supposed to fellowship with those of similar faith? Wasn’t there only one faith handed down to the saints? If some couldn't understand the purposes of God, then it was God's will. Predestination made God the cause of everything that happened. And if they couldn't understand the ‘truth,’ had God really elected them? Had they really and truly believed? Did they have a false conversion? Why were they stubbornly holding on to inferior beliefs such as faith coming from man’s heart?

By this point in my descent into Calvinism, my thinking had set like concrete. No one could have changed my mind. I was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt from the witness of scripture, scholars, pastors, leaders and other Christians that God’s predestinating purposes for man were true and beyond our human comprehension. I thought, 'to question the motives of God was to place myself above God'. Hence, supposed contradictions were relegated to ‘mystery’ as His ways were beyond finding out. It never occurred to me that this type of election skewed God's character or that God would ultimately be judging men for His own choice of a cruelty too unfathomable to reason upon. In my mind, God chose to enable some for salvation leaving the rest to be against Him. The ones so cruelly discarded would then be judged by God for their supposed choice. I reasoned the reprobate (those not elected) wouldn't know the difference anyway.

This insidious elitist attitude, pervasive within Calvinism, occurred without my notice. Mind control, operating by stealth, implanted these ideas through mere suggestion, deepening them with a false and superficial knowledge, to hold me both willingly and unwillingly. On one level I knew something was wrong, yet on another level, things appeared correct. The resulting confusion prompted queries, but sadly in the case of Calvinism, the answers were sought from the very people who imbedded the deception in the first place.

Looking back, all the answers to these questions prompted adjustments in my theology. The overarching presupposition, never doubted, was unconditional election. Every scriptural understanding I learned had to coincide with this type of election. As new information entered my mind, it had to fit with my previously constructed framework of thinking. I was synthesizing a spreadsheet of theology. I adjusted all doctrines to accommodate election. All my doctrinal entries assembled a system where ‘God sovereignly chooses.’ As one verse was understood more fully, other entries in my data sheet of theology would be adjusted so the whole system seemingly added up. New answers prompted more questions which kept me circulating in this theology. It became a quagmire of logic and rational interpretation without the freshness of the Spirit. One adjustment led to another and another and another and so on.


http://www.carylmatrisciana.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67:brendas..

 

[InTheLight]

http://www.carylmatrisciana.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67:brendas..

Wow! I just read that entire (lengthy) article in the link. What a fabulous story and testimony! Thanks for posting the link.

 

[Herald]

And I have once again provided both.

No. You have provided personal stories from individuals. You have not proven that Calvinism is an arrogant theology. You have shared stories of Calvinist. You are having a difficult time separating "isms" from individuals.

You are also trying to make a point that no one is disputing. There are arrogant Calvinists. No one said there were not. You are trying to offer proof that the entire Calvinist system is arrogant. You throw out terms like "typical" which is subjective and lacking in proof. I have not done that to you or those of you ilk. Can I? Sure. Why? Because I am not going to play at that level.

This thread is going to prove quite useful in the future. When an Arminian starts casting bombs, or should I say "displays arrogance", I am going to link to it as better proof than a Google, Bing, or Yahoo search. I will say, "Here you go. One of your own." And you know they are here. Yes. There are arrogant Calvinists on this board too. There is one in particular who drives me nuts. But once again, that is not a matter of disputation. It never has been. What is in disputation is the myopia of BB Arminians who are unable to be honest with others and themselves.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Glaag

Can't you guys figure out a way to address the issues without questioning the truthfulness, motives, intelectual capacity, the marital status of the other's parents, ect. of the other side?

Somehow, in other settings debaters get around the issues above.