Why Do We Spend Time Debating Denominations of Unlike Faith and Order?

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Another dog fight I see. Shakes head.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Again, a nasty mouth but no substance, no evidence, nothing to support your charges except YOUR OWN APPARENT REJECTION OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST.

Nothing nasty about it, just the truth. Your post is what is nasty -- a nasty lie, the previous one and this one.

You'll have to answer for your false accusation against me -- and against all those who don't believe in OSAS.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Another dog fight I see. Shakes head.

I don't know why you are acting so innocent. You have been involved in and responsible for some of those yourself.

 

[The Biblicist]

Nothing nasty about it, just the truth. Your post is what is nasty -- a nasty lie, the previous one and this one.

You'll have to answer for your false accusation against me -- and against all those who don't believe in OSAS.

Answer what? You gave no response! All you gave is empty accusations! I would greatly enjoy the opportunity to answer your objections if you could post them!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I don't know why you are acting so innocent. You have been involved in and responsible for some of those yourself.

Brother, you have some type of chip on your shoulder that is huge. I dont know what it is but your constantly on your high horse. Why dont you climb down & debate the issues instead of your throwing accusations around. You might find things much more agreeable & perhaps learn something.

FYI, this commentary is not meant to be accusatory, rather an observation (and not one thats attempting to be hurtful).

 

[DHK]

Nothing nasty about it, just the truth. Your post is what is nasty -- a nasty lie, the previous one and this one.

You'll have to answer for your false accusation against me -- and against all those who don't believe in OSAS.

I just quickly looked over some of the posts in this thread. I read Biblicist's post and your response to it. Biblicist posted doctrine, doctrine which I consider clear-cut, well said, concise, to the point, and without malice.

Your remark was malicious and uncalled for.
If you want to refute the doctrine that he posted then do so. Otherwise such personal attacks will only gain you infractions in the future.

 

[WestminsterMan]

snip... I will guarantee if I took the fight to a Catholic or Lutheran forum, and posted correct Biblical doctrine, I would last anywhere from a few hours to a few days. Then I would be banned. The liberty and tolerance on this board for such concepts is unequaled.

Hmmm... it sounds as though you speak from experience. However, its probably more your attitude than scriptural doctrine that will get you (or has gotten you) banned. Most Catholic boards have a "Non-Catholic" section as well and, if you play nice with others, you would be probably be allowed to stay. That's been my experience anyway.

WM

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Brother, you have some type of chip on your shoulder that is huge. I dont know what it is but your constantly on your high horse. Why dont you climb down & debate the issues instead of your throwing accusations around. You might find things much more agreeable & perhaps learn something.

FYI, this commentary is not meant to be accusatory, rather an observation (and not one thats attempting to be hurtful).

I constantly debate the issues, but instead of being able to focus on that, I am constantly having to defend myself against vile and false charges.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I just quickly looked over some of the posts in this thread. I read Biblicist's post and your response to it. Biblicist posted doctrine, doctrine which I consider clear-cut, well said, concise, to the point, and without malice.

Your remark was malicious and uncalled for.
If you want to refute the doctrine that he posted then do so. Otherwise such personal attacks will only gain you infractions in the future.

LOL!!! That is simply untrue, but why am I not surprised on whose side you come down. What about the personal attacks he has made on me? Guess that's okay since he's your buddy. I thought it was against forum policy to question the salvation of another forum member. Yet that has been what he has constantly done since I became active on here again.

You might not need to give me an infraction. I'm about to leave you to your little playground and shake the dust off my feet.

If you can't be fair and truthful, you are disqualified as a moderator.

 

[Wittenberger]

I certainly hope that there are no non-believers reading this thread!

What an ugly picture of what it means to be "Christ-like"! While I point one finger at you all I am pointing at least three back at me. We ALL need to be more civil and Christ-like to one another!

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I certainly hope that there are no non-believers reading this thread!

What an ugly picture of what it means to be "Christ-like"! While I point one finger at you all I am pointing at least three back at me. We ALL need to be more civil and Christ-like to one another!

I hope there are non-believers reading it. Everybody needs to see that there are wolves in sheep's clothing -- even in the church.

I don't take kindly to constantly having my salvation questioned, being told I am teaching another Gospel and another Jesus, etc., etc.

 

[DHK]

LOL!!! That is simply untrue, but why am I not surprised on whose side you come down. What about the personal attacks he has made on me? Guess that's okay since he's your buddy. I thought it was against forum policy to question the salvation of another forum member. Yet that has been what he has constantly done since I became active on here again.

You might not need to give me an infraction. I'm about to leave you to your little playground and shake the dust off my feet.

If you can't be fair and truthful, you are disqualified as a moderator.

Michael I have no idea what you are talking about. He might as well written a statement of faith and why would you personally attack it.
Here it is:

Eternal security and substitutionary atonement are one and the same doctrine. Eternal security and justification by faith without works is one and the same doctrine. Eternal security and eternal life are one and the same doctrine.

1. Substitutionary atonement is Christ taking the place of the sinner and fully satisfying both righeous demands of the law - denial of eternal security is denial that Christ fully satsifed these demands but only conditionally satisfied them based upon their ultimate faithfulness - good works.

2. Justification by faith without works is faith in Christ for having satisfied the legal demands of the law thus receiving his righteousness by legal imputation and by having our sins removed by non-imputation to us and imputation of our sins to Christ - 2 Corl 5:21. Denial of eternal security is denial of substitutionary atonement by imputation.

3. Eternal life is not "temporal" life but "eternal" life and that by definition is "eternal security."

I don't find anything personal; no mention of you, your name, or anything personal about anyone. It is pure doctrine. What is there to be offended at? If you disagree with doctrine then say so! There is nothing personal in that which is written above. It could be taken straight from someone's statement of faith. What are you so upset about?

 

[Wittenberger]

I hope there are non-believers reading it. Everybody needs to see that there are wolves in sheep's clothing -- even in the church.

I don't take kindly to constantly having my salvation questioned, being told I am teaching another Gospel and another Jesus, etc., etc.

I grew up fundamentalist Baptist. THIS IS WHAT THEY SINCERELY BELIEVE! It is nothing personal against you.

If their positions offend you, you should move on to another site that is not so fundamentalist/conservative. Southern and American Baptists are much less hostile to Christians of other denominations.

 

[billwald]

Why? Because extremist fundamentalists must always be right and must always have the last word. I suspect that almost no one posting in this section of BB expects to learn anything. Even questions are intended to stir the pot. This includes myself.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I have decided that I will no longer respond to anyone who questions my salvation or charges that I am teaching another gospel and following another christ.

They may be allowed to say that here; there's nothing I can do about that. But I will not acknowledge such a person by commenting or defending myself.

So anyone can believe what he/she wants about me; I only have to answer to God.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I grew up fundamentalist Baptist. THIS IS WHAT THEY SINCERELY BELIEVE! It is nothing personal against you.

If their positions offend you, you should move on to another site that is not so fundamentalist/conservative. Southern and American Baptists are much less hostile to Christians of other denominations.

There are many good people here; I have made friends here and would hate to leave.

I now consider Icon my friend. We had some of the worst exchanges imaginable early on, but I PM'd him, and we worked things out. We still have disagreements but understand each other better. I hope he doesn't mind my telling this. Also, one of my closest friends here years ago was Jeff Weaver, a Primitive Baptist; he is in very bad health now.

I can get along and even become friends with those whose beliefs are diametrically opposed to mine. I actually like reading beliefs which are very different from mine. What I cannot and will not tolerate is being falsely accused.

 

[saturneptune]

Hmmm... it sounds as though you speak from experience. However, its probably more your attitude than scriptural doctrine that will get you (or has gotten you) banned. Most Catholic boards have a "Non-Catholic" section as well and, if you play nice with others, you would be probably be allowed to stay. That's been my experience anyway.

WM

I would not waste my time debating a denomination that has nothing in common with Scripture or Baptists. Catholics are not tolerant of other faiths. The remark was to point out how much freedom is given other denominations compared to how they would treat us. Having said that, I can see no purpose in goint to another faith's site, Catholic for example, and convince them to not use a priest to confess sins. Same could be asked of you, what is your purpose in triying to convince Baptists not to be Baptists.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

What about 1 Peter 3:15?

but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,

and couple that with Romans 10:14-17

14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?[c] And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

It seems to me that by debating people of other denominations that you are taking the opportunity to present your faith to people who (according to you) are not saved or their salvation is questionable in which case they may hear and come to believe. By your view the elect are already predetermined and by irresistable grace they will be lead to believe. Those who aren't elect no matter what will never believe. Therefore you are not responsible whether someone agrees with you but it seems to me that you must give a sound defense of your faith for that one opportunity which you know nothing about where God will use you to reach someone who is elect and will come to believe by your preaching and defense of your faith. To neglect your apologetic calling is to neglect and abuse God's plan for you.
Also it is an opportunity to properly evaluate the arguments raised against you and to strengthen yourself by application of the word of God and reason in your sound defense.
So I don't know what you are exasperated about. Non Baptist don't go to the Baptist sections of this board. Thus if you want to just build yourself up with those of like mind you can go to those without worry of debate (well little debate) and you can use this section to challenge those who don't hold to your beliefs in baptist distinctives yet still are called Christian.

:smilewinkgrin:

 

[saturneptune]

What about 1 Peter 3:15?

and couple that with Romans 10:14-17

It seems to me that by debating people of other denominations that you are taking the opportunity to present your faith to people who (according to you) are not saved or their salvation is questionable in which case they may hear and come to believe. By your view the elect are already predetermined and by irresistable grace they will be lead to believe. Those who aren't elect no matter what will never believe. Therefore you are not responsible whether someone agrees with you but it seems to me that you must give a sound defense of your faith for that one opportunity which you know nothing about where God will use you to reach someone who is elect and will come to believe by your preaching and defense of your faith. To neglect your apologetic calling is to neglect and abuse God's plan for you.
Also it is an opportunity to properly evaluate the arguments raised against you and to strengthen yourself by application of the word of God and reason in your sound defense.
So I don't know what you are exasperated about. Non Baptist don't go to the Baptist sections of this board. Thus if you want to just build yourself up with those of like mind you can go to those without worry of debate (well little debate) and you can use this section to challenge those who don't hold to your beliefs in baptist distinctives yet still are called Christian.

:smilewinkgrin:

The reason for the hope within us is the death, burial and Ressurection of Jesus Christ. That transcends all denominations.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The reason for the hope within us is the death, burial and Ressurection of Jesus Christ. That transcends all denominations.

Well see, I agree with your entire statement on this post that you just made!
:thumbsup: