where are the Covenants of Works and between the Father /Son in Bible?

[preacher4truth]

When a member constantly harangues on a single subject, when that member cannot make a post without referencing his/her one, single, incessant theme, and when that member simply declines to discuss that theme from any aspect other than demanding to be recognized as the resident authority and as such offers opinion with condescending attitude -- opinion that was neither sought nor desired -- then there is nothing shameful, inflammatory, or personally affronting about telling him/her to simply not waste time and effort addressing someone who stopped listening long ago.

If you don't like what a person says, ignore it, and, don't engage yourself and then tuck tail with lame excuses as in your previous post. Since you don't like the incessant themes, prove it by not engaging the person. His opinion was sought and desired, that is why you involved yourself in it. The fact is you were rebutted and then came up with your personal assault afterwards.

Another thing, it wasn't that you 'simply told him not to waste his time', so stop with your blindness and disingenuous excuse above. What you actually did was state that He doesn't know God well enough to even share Him with others &c. What you're doing now is attempting to polish the flux you presented to Iconoclast. Your post was ridiculous and works of the flesh.

Yes. Rather than enlarging fonts and changing colors of others' posts in order to unnecessarily call attention to perceived "error",

Yes, I highlighted your inflammatory comments, and they were just that.

I choose to offer blessings even to those who don't believe they need them from other members of the board, even those with whom I disagree, and particularly with those who don't care whether I disagree with them or not, being so thoroughly convinced of their "rightness" that the opinions of others, or the likelihood that they are given much attention, matters little or not at all to them.

Your ending comments don't neutralize your inflammatory comments and personal insults. Out of your mouth came cursing and blessing, this ought not to be -- James 3:9-12.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

If you don't like what a person says, ignore it, and, don't engage yourself and then tuck tail with lame excuses as in your previous post.

I have neither "tucked tail" nor made lame excuses.

Since you don't like the incessant themes, prove it by not engaging the person.

Ever had to endure a constantly dripping faucet, a hissing radiator, or an incessantly screechy laugh? Ever not, eventually, said something? One can't see the constant "johnny one note" theme of the posts and not be compelled to say "enough already."

His opinion was sought and desired ...

How so, by merely posting a comment? I didn't address him, nor did I particularly care one way or another for any reply he might have made. He is obviously free to post, but as I didn't address him but he decided to address me, then I felt free to share my feelings.

...that is why you involved yourself in it.

I didn't. He chose to comment on what I said, not the other way around, initially.

The fact is you were rebutted ...

"Rebutted"? Hardly. His points don't begin to address the questions raised in Williams' article. It is the same old hyper-Calvinist rhetoric he constantly posts.

... and then came up with your personal assault afterwards.

If he took it personally, he should be the one to defend himself, don't you think?

Another thing, it wasn't that you 'simply told him not to waste his time', so stop with your blindness and disingenuous excuse above.

And yet agian, of what concern is it to you? I'm far from blind and certainly not disingenuous. I said what I think. If he is concerned about what I said, let him address me personally, since he felt free to do so without an invitation to begin with.

Your post was ridiculous and works of the flesh.

Then it should have been easy for you to overlook it as some silly sinner who doesn't know any better, shouldn't it?

 

[Rippon]

Iconoclast --

You waste your time addressing anything to me. I've seen enough of what you have to say on this board to know that nothing you say would be of interest to me.

That is totally uncalled for on your part.

You are sold out to an understanding of the Bible that is so far afield of the One True God that you don't know Him well enough to attempt to introduce Him to me or anyone else.

The above is utterly disgraceful. You should be ashamed of yourself.

God bless you and keep you

That's rank hypocrisy on your part.

 

[Rippon]

"Rebutted"? Hardly. His points don't begin to address the questions raised in Williams' article.

He specifically quoted and rebutted a number of things in Williams' article --laid them flat out and you didn't like it. So you respond with...

It is the same old hyper-Calvinist rhetoric he constantly posts.

That tired old pejorative which holds no weight. DHK and you should join the same club. You both like to bandy that term around like a tennis ball --yet no substance is behind that false charge. You use it when you have run out of a reasonable argument.

If he took it personally, he should be the one to defend himself, don't you think?

His hours vary. He can't be expected to defend himself when he is on the road. But his brothers can do so.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

That's a shameful post meant to be inflammatory and is a personal attack and insult. Ridiculous banter. Then you end it with God bless you?

Not shameful but informational.....should have been in a PM however. I would say though, let Icono fight his own battles.... we dont need to step in.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

That tired old pejorative which holds no weight. DHK and you should join the same club. You both like to bandy that term around like a tennis ball --yet no substance is behind that false charge. You use it when you have run out of a reasonable argument.

So tell me then, what is a Hyper Calvinist?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

He specifically quoted ...

Yes, but ...

... rebutted ...

Not at all.

--laid them flat out and you didn't like it. So you respond with...

From strictly an argumentative perspective, he did nothing but offer an opinion, itself without biblical support. To say he "laid them flat out" is not only a misrepresentation of his argument, but it is an effort to reframe a weak response to an opinion contrary one he holds dear.

That tired old pejorative which holds no weight. DHK and you should join the same club.

Hyper-Calvinsim is unbiblical. For that matter, four of the five points are unbiblical, and Calvin didn't support the extremes to which his students after him, and now their adherents 400 years later, take them.

You both like to bandy that term around like a tennis ball --yet no substance is behind that false charge. You use it when you have run out of a reasonable argument.

I have not begun to argue the Calvinistic misrepresentations. I don't believe the supporters of what passes for Calvinism today would want me to, because they would have no legitimate response. But then again, it's a waste of time, as most are more sold out to the false dogma than they are to the truth.

His hours vary. He can't be expected to defend himself when he is on the road. But his brothers can do so.

Then perhaps you and P4T would like to leave room for him to have his say, rather than making his argument for him? Just a thought.

To avoid further derailing the thread -- which had absolutely nothing to do with this tired, endless discussion -- I will bow out. Let Icon get off the road and contact me directly if he wishes. I will be happy to discuss this with him.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I also get tired of people continually bringing up the same subject so they can 'wax eloquent' on their hobby-horse or so they can continually blast others.

Calling by name sickens me.

And big print, colors, are marks of a first grader. I put them on the fridge when my grandkids bring papers like that.

Appreciate people NOT posting, NOT feeling like they have to comment on every thread, and NOT answering those who will never be satisfied with their answers. Waste of time.

 

[Yeshua1]

So tell me then, what is a Hyper Calvinist?

good question, as many ties it seems here on the BB that ALL calvinists would be lumped as being Hyper, while those holding to Supra position in the ordering of the Decrees of God get tagged that also...

think that Hyper Calvinism would be those who see the Gospel as ONLY to be preached to th Elect, and that since God will save his own in the end, no need to be evangelists, not missionaries!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I also get tired of people continually bringing up the same subject so they can 'wax eloquent' on their hobby-horse or so they can continually blast others.

Calling by name sickens me.

And big print, colors, are marks of a first grader. I put them on the fridge when my grandkids bring papers like that.

Appreciate people NOT posting, NOT feeling like they have to comment on every thread, and NOT answering those who will never be satisfied with their answers. Waste of time.

Well said, and point well taken. God bless.

Iconoclast, forgive me. I was out of line. I will never, ever agree with you, and have solid theological reasons for that position, but that is no cause to post insults, even those said in the guise and personal justification of "putting you in your place." That's not my job.

And truly, God bless you ...

... and you, P4T ...

... and you, Rippon. Done here.

 

[Yeshua1]

think that the bible would much more support the Doctrines of Grace then any other system, but that would be for another thread!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

think that the bible would much more support the Doctrines of Grace then any other system, but that would be for another thread!

I agree. God is sovereign. Man is responsible. Two truths that do not exclude one another, but do not have to be explained by one extreme or the other.

 

[percho]

Well said, and point well taken. God bless.

Iconoclast, forgive me. I was out of line. I will never, ever agree with you, and have solid theological reasons for that position, but that is no cause to post insults, even those said in the guise and personal justification of "putting you in your place." That's not my job.

And truly, God bless you ...

... and you, P4T ...

... and you, Rippon. Done here.

I would like to give you a Kudos for this post. Thanks.

 

[Rippon]

So tell me then, what is a Hyper Calvinist?

I have posted things about hyper-Calvinism so often because of the gross misrepresentations many here have of it. A lot of folks think it is merely anyone holding to the Canons of Dort for instance.

But I will just offer the concise treatment of Jim Ellis who said it "consists of two fundamental errors:A denial of duty-faith and a resultant denial of the universal call of the gospel."

 

[preacher4truth]

Not shameful but informational.....should have been in a PM however. I would say though, let Icono fight his own battles.... we dont need to step in.

Hey man he can fight him as well. I will stand up for my brothers.

 

[preacher4truth]

Well said, and point well taken. God bless.

Iconoclast, forgive me. I was out of line. I will never, ever agree with you, and have solid theological reasons for that position, but that is no cause to post insults, even those said in the guise and personal justification of "putting you in your place." That's not my job.

And truly, God bless you ...

... and you, P4T ...

... and you, Rippon. Done here.

Thanks brother. :thumbs:

 

[Iconoclast]

Rippon

Hello Brother....I would like to commend you and p4T for speaking up on my behalf. :love2: My hours do vary...i am taking a mandatory break here in Indiana....

He specifically quoted and rebutted a number of things in Williams' article --laid them flat out and you didn't like it. So you respond with...

Looking back at the quote by Mr Williams.... I saw no scripture to really comment more in detail. I just think it did not say much.

That tired old pejorative which holds no weight. DHK and you should join the same club. You both like to bandy that term around like a tennis ball --yet no substance is behind that false charge. You use it when you have run out of a reasonable argument.

This is always the default argument against the truths we hold.

His hours vary. He can't be expected to defend himself when he is on the road. But his brothers can do so.

Thank you once again for bringing a balance and light to the situation.:wavey:

 

[Yeshua1]

I have posted things about hyper-Calvinism so often because of the gross misrepresentations many here have of it. A lot of folks think it is merely anyone holding to the Canons of Dort for instance.

But I will just offer the concise treatment of Jim Ellis who said it "consists of two fundamental errors:A denial of duty-faith and a resultant denial of the universal call of the gospel."

'No need to receive jesus by faith, as that is a work, and God saves his own, and no need to preach to the ternally lost"

is that what he was saying?

 

[Iconoclast]

thisnumbersdisconnected

Hello NDC,

Iconoclast, forgive me. I was out of line.

No problem NDC. I do not have thin skin because if i did I would not come in this kind of forum.It looks like you overheated and blew a fuse.I have done this in times past. We can all learn even from this....we can hold what we believe as truth and contend for it. I will not shrink back from expressing what I see as truth,and that which opposes truth.No one posts what they believe to be in error...do they?

I can be glad that you are passionate enough for your position and by all means feel free to be critical of what i offer.....I just ask two things;

1] Do not bear false witness of me....do show evidence for your criticism

2] Offer scriptural correction...I am open to the scripture....not so much to what you"speculate" I might be thinking.

Sorry My posts have not been of any profit to you.Even if we do not agree at this point in time...I try to offer good verses,links or quotes for people to consider.

I will never, ever agree with you, and have solid theological reasons for that position,

NDC....I do not agree with your statement here.....One or both of us might be in error and God can grant repentance or modification toward positions we hold. Offer your solid theological positions....i will interact or not...as i see fit.

but that is no cause to post insults, even those said in the guise and personal justification of "putting you in your place." That's not my job.

If I offend you{or even if i do not...but you think I do}...by all means come right at me...I am okay with it. Each of us should be open to correction.

And truly, God bless you ...

... and you, P4T ...

... and you, Rippon. Done here.

[/QUOTE]

Listen...as i said... use this forum as a way to sharpen each other,Speak unto edification.Let's move forward:thumbsup:

 

[Iconoclast]

Dr. Bob

I also get tired of people continually bringing up the same subject so they can 'wax eloquent' on their hobby-horse or so they can continually blast others.

Calling by name sickens me.

And big print, colors, are marks of a first grader. I put them on the fridge when my grandkids bring papers like that.

Appreciate people NOT posting, NOT feeling like they have to comment on every thread, and NOT answering those who will never be satisfied with their answers. Waste of time.[/QUOTE

]

Hello DR.BoB,

When I post I use different colors....not so much to "shout"....but rather to highlight what I believe is being overlooked...or to be the key part of a verse or sentence..

It might be my "inner child" expressing itself:laugh: That might be why I drive a truck rather than work at NASA:laugh: what can i say...I like the colors:love2: