Why the vitriol?

[doulous]

Originally posted by Tom Butler:
If anyone is weary over the 2000-year-old debate over the Biblical way to come into a right relationship to God, they are free to retire from it.

Because we are discussing matters of eternal importance, we cannot do it impassionately. Sometimes that passion crosses the line into vitriol. When it does, two things happen: Other posters will call them on it, or the moderators will step in.

If this is too rough-and-tumble for tender feelings, the group hug categories are further down this board.

In the meantime, I want our discussions to be robust and passionate and arguments strongly articulated.

Tom, in my OP I stated:

No one is saying we cannot debate. No one is saying we should not stand together and refute heresy. No one is saying we cannot passionately defend what we believe is the right view of scripture. But the personal attacks, insults and caustic remarks have no place.

I will debate the Reformed position without equivocation. I would expect the Free Will position to do the same. But does one need to insult and personally attack another? Tear my position apart. Show me in scripture where it wrong. I will do the same to you, but I will not call a person names or question their character (at least not publicly).

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by doulous:
I will do the same to you, but I will not call a person names or question their character (at least not publicly).

Yeah. It's much more satisfying to make fun of them behind their backs.

(I shouldn't have to say this, but just kidding, folks.)

 

[saturneptune]

The man made "debate" that infects just about every thread of this board in one fashion or another has no eternal consequences. The only consequence of this debate is to the pharmacutical companies to sell more high blood pressure medicine.

What does have eternal consequences is a right relationship with God through faith and trust in Jesus Christ.

As for the tense debate that everyone talks about, that is fine for this board and other such forums or private conversations. Where I would draw the line as long as I have a voice, is that I would never allow this and other such minor debates threaten the unity of the church in which I serve. It would be history before it got started.

Armenius and Calvin are deader than doornails. So, you guys slug it out. Have a ball. But lets be Christian about it.

 

[Brother Bob]

Reminds me I better check mine.

 

[genesis12]

Count me out of this "never ending story." I have better things to do (communion with God the moment I wake up, feeding on things spiritual, loving His Word, meeting Him in prayer).

I'll hang around for non-Calvin, non-Arminian, and non-everything in between discussions (not debates ~~ all scripture is spiritually discerned ~~ if we are "in the spirit" there is no room for debate).

 

[doulous]

Originally posted by genesis12:
Count me out of this "never ending story." I have better things to do (communion with God the moment I wake up, feeding on things spiritual, loving His Word, meeting Him in prayer).

I'll hang around for non-Calvin, non-Arminian, and non-everything in between discussions (not debates ~~ all scripture is spiritually discerned ~~ if we are "in the spirit" there is no room for debate).

Well I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Debate can be healthy. It can show us where we may be wrong and force us to re-think our position. It seldom has the desired effect immediately, but it works on a persons mind (and soul).

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by genesis12:
if we are "in the spirit" there is no room for debate

1. Is this "I'm in the spirit so I must be right and you're wrong" disease catching?

2. This is the Baptist DEBATE Forums. What are you doing here?

 

[saturneptune]

npet,
While not being able to speak for Genesis, maybe he would like to see a debate or discussion of a subject that makes a difference or is important.

 

[doulous]

Originally posted by saturneptune:
npet,
While not being able to speak for Genesis, maybe he would like to see a debate or discussion of a subject that makes a difference or is important.

Actually the sovereignty of God is so pervasive that it is a subject that makes a difference to many. Not to all, but to many. Thankfully each member of the BB can participate (or not) in threads that interest them and ignore the others.

 

[rsr]

Originally posted by npetreley:
1. Is this "I'm in the spirit so I must be right and you're wrong" disease catching?

I'm not sure if it's actually infectious or if people with the disease just naturally tend to gather together as if they are forced into a pest house by some providential force.

I think in one sense it is contagious: Otherwise well-mannered folks tend to succumb to it when they see it practiced ad nauseum by other folks.

 

[JackRUS]

Originally posted by saturneptune:
npet,
While not being able to speak for Genesis, maybe he would like to see a debate or discussion of a subject that makes a difference or is important.

Personally I would like to see a Calvinist here debate some theological point here for more two posts without turning it into a Calvinistic debate. Or even, I must be joking to even suggest this, start a thread that has nothing to do with any of the five points of Calvinism.

I have the feeling that if we started a thread about the weather it would turn at the hands of the Calvinists by the bottom of page one into a sovereignty matter, or to that todays weather was predestined to be sunny, etc., etc.

 

[doulous]

Originally posted by JackRUS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by saturneptune:
npet,
While not being able to speak for Genesis, maybe he would like to see a debate or discussion of a subject that makes a difference or is important.

Personally I would like to see a Calvinist here debate some theological point here for more two posts without turning it into a Calvinistic debate. Or even, I must be joking to even suggest this, start a thread that has nothing to do with any of the five points of Calvinism.

I have the feeling that if we started a thread about the weather it would turn at the hands of the Calvinists by the bottom of page one into a sovereignty matter, or to that todays weather was predestined to be sunny, etc., etc. </font>[/QUOTE]Jack, honestly now...isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? Do you want me to reference the posts where those on the F.W. side have done the same?

 

[JackRUS]

Originally posted by doulous:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JackRUS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by saturneptune:
npet,
While not being able to speak for Genesis, maybe he would like to see a debate or discussion of a subject that makes a difference or is important.

Personally I would like to see a Calvinist here debate some theological point here for more two posts without turning it into a Calvinistic debate. Or even, I must be joking to even suggest this, start a thread that has nothing to do with any of the five points of Calvinism.

I have the feeling that if we started a thread about the weather it would turn at the hands of the Calvinists by the bottom of page one into a sovereignty matter, or to that todays weather was predestined to be sunny, etc., etc. </font>[/QUOTE]Jack, honestly now...isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? Do you want me to reference the posts where those on the F.W. side have done the same? </font>[/QUOTE]I would much rather that you show me all the threads that the Calvinists here started that had nothing to do with Calvinism and stuck with the subject.

Would you care to look at this board?

Hmmmm....

Does God have two wills. Calvinism.
This thread. Calvinism.
And Ode to Me. Calvinism.
Where do you line up? Calvinism.
those that he called He also justified. Calvinism.
Calvin the man. Calvinism.
101. Calvinism.
What is First? Calvinism.
The fruits of Calvinism.

All started by Calvinists. And the board before this one was just as bad even suggesting that Christ was a Calvinist.

The Arminian responses to this onslaught on this board are:

Does God adopt His own children?
Fruits of Calvinism Pt 2

Samarelda's opening line here was (and I'm not sure he is even a free-willer BTW):

I have been reading with interest many of the Calvanist/Arminian discussions here. To say the least, I find Calvanism very confusing. It also seems that most Calvanist's entire goal in life is to promote Calvanism.

Why do you suppose that he/she came up with that conclusion?

You will notice that several threads on the board have been started by non-Calvinists to debate such issues as the Temple, Hell, Revelation, etc., and the subject of sovereignty and election don't come up. You will also notice that precious few Calvinists such as you, Rippon, Calvi, whatever, npetreley, Bill Brown, etc. ever contribute to those discussions. Why is that do you suppose?

I'll tell you why. It's because Calvinists are obsessed with Calvin and his doctrine to the point that they can barely think about anything else.

There's also one neutral site where a fellow asked about Calvinism and Arminianism.

So when do you suppose that you Calvinists are going to start an interesting thread about anything other than your obsession and not drift to Calvinism?

Interestly, Calvi tried that with "Together for the Gospel and it lasted about four posts until the subject went to their obsession.

 

[Brother Bob]

I will amen all of that post Jack.

 

[whatever]

JackRUS,

1. Why do you expect one who holds to Calvinistic theology to discuss theology apart from Calvinism? You may be able to separate your theology from your theology, but I cannot.

2. My post on "teaching you in public and from house to house" had nothing to do with Calvinism, and got exactly 8 responses, including 0 from you. Why is that do you suppose?

3. My post on "those that he called He also justified" was simply intended to find out how non-Calvinists interpret that verse, but that topic got very little response from non-Calvinists, including 0 responses from you. Why is that do you suppose?

Do you want to discuss theology or personalities?

 

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by JackRUS:
You will notice that several threads on the board have been started by non-Calvinists to debate such issues as the Temple, Hell, Revelation, etc., and the subject of sovereignty and election don't come up. You will also notice that precious few Calvinists such as you, Rippon, Calvi, whatever, npetreley, Bill Brown, etc. ever contribute to those discussions. Why is that do you suppose?

I'll tell you why. It's because Calvinists are obsessed with Calvin and his doctrine to the point that they can barely think about anything else.

I would have to disagree with you, especially on your last paragraph. There are a few threads that I have posted in on this section of the board and a few on 3 other sections on the board that have nothing to do with Calvinism. Sometimes I stay out of threads specifically (and just read) in order to keep it away from any C/A debate. It seems that I disagree with a few people on just about every subject and the presupposition is that it involves Calvinism. I doubt that presupposition, however.

There are also quite a few end times threads that I stay out of because there is so much assumption and jumping around by the posters that I would spend all day trying to understand where they are coming from and what I should say in response. So I just stay out of them.

As far as Calvinists, especially Baptist ones, being obsessed with Calvin and his doctrine, you couldn't be further from the truth. I, for one, am obsessed with the glory of God and Him alone. I believe the Bible is saturated with His glory displayed in His sovereignty over all of creation, including man and salvation. The soteriological aspects that you call Calvinism play only a part in that over-all sovereignty.

So when do you suppose that you Calvinists are going to start an interesting thread about anything other than your obsession and not drift to Calvinism?

There have been quite a few threads in my last few months here that were started by both Calvinists and non-Calvinists alike that were eventually turned to C/A debates by Me4Him, Helen, and others.

Interestly, Calvi tried that with "Together for the Gospel and it lasted about four posts until the subject went to their obsession.

Have not yet seen the C/A stuff there. Just comments about people realizing who people were and a joke about a supposed Calvinist take-over. Has nothing to do with any pre-conceived obsession.

 

[Calvibaptist]

Originally posted by Brother Bob:
Hi johnp;
One was repenting the other one not.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />When he spoke up for Christ he was already saved.

(Then why, if he was already saved did he then turn to Jesus and say "remember me".}


Luke, chapter 23
"40": But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? (First he feared God, which is the beginning of wisdom.)

"41": And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. (Then he confessed with his mouth)

"42": And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. (Then he ask Jesus to forgive him, which Jesus did "ask and ye shall receive, believe with thine heart and confess with thy mouth".) To read this any other way you have to "suppose"


Calvinbaptist;
You have no Scripture at all for that statement and you know it. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you seriously suggesting, Brother Bob, that if the thief had only believed these things, but never said a word he would not have been saved? What about mute persons? Can they be saved in your view?

You have absolutely no Scripture to suggest that saying those words is what saved the thief. It is not a formula of words that saves us but faith. This is what the Reformation was all about - Justification by faith alone. Are you, with one copy and paste ready to take us back to Rome?

 

[doulous]

Originally posted by JackRUS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by doulous:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JackRUS:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by saturneptune:
npet,
While not being able to speak for Genesis, maybe he would like to see a debate or discussion of a subject that makes a difference or is important.

Personally I would like to see a Calvinist here debate some theological point here for more two posts without turning it into a Calvinistic debate. Or even, I must be joking to even suggest this, start a thread that has nothing to do with any of the five points of Calvinism.

I have the feeling that if we started a thread about the weather it would turn at the hands of the Calvinists by the bottom of page one into a sovereignty matter, or to that todays weather was predestined to be sunny, etc., etc. </font>[/QUOTE]Jack, honestly now...isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? Do you want me to reference the posts where those on the F.W. side have done the same? </font>[/QUOTE]I would much rather that you show me all the threads that the Calvinists here started that had nothing to do with Calvinism and stuck with the subject.

Would you care to look at this board?

Hmmmm....

Does God have two wills. Calvinism.
This thread. Calvinism.
And Ode to Me. Calvinism.
Where do you line up? Calvinism.
those that he called He also justified. Calvinism.
Calvin the man. Calvinism.
101. Calvinism.
What is First? Calvinism.
The fruits of Calvinism.

All started by Calvinists. And the board before this one was just as bad even suggesting that Christ was a Calvinist.

The Arminian responses to this onslaught on this board are:

Does God adopt His own children?
Fruits of Calvinism Pt 2

Samarelda's opening line here was (and I'm not sure he is even a free-willer BTW):

I have been reading with interest many of the Calvanist/Arminian discussions here. To say the least, I find Calvanism very confusing. It also seems that most Calvanist's entire goal in life is to promote Calvanism.

Why do you suppose that he/she came up with that conclusion?

You will notice that several threads on the board have been started by non-Calvinists to debate such issues as the Temple, Hell, Revelation, etc., and the subject of sovereignty and election don't come up. You will also notice that precious few Calvinists such as you, Rippon, Calvi, whatever, npetreley, Bill Brown, etc. ever contribute to those discussions. Why is that do you suppose?

I'll tell you why. It's because Calvinists are obsessed with Calvin and his doctrine to the point that they can barely think about anything else.

There's also one neutral site where a fellow asked about Calvinism and Arminianism.

So when do you suppose that you Calvinists are going to start an interesting thread about anything other than your obsession and not drift to Calvinism?

Interestly, Calvi tried that with "Together for the Gospel and it lasted about four posts until the subject went to their obsession. </font>[/QUOTE]Jack, I can't speak for anyone else but I will happy to tell you why you haven't seen my posts on some other threads. Currently here are the active threads on the board:

Comparative Analysis
Together for the Gospel
Why the Vitriol?
An Ode to Me
Does God have two wills?
The next temple
Order of Events in Revelation
End Times
Where do you line up?
Does God adopt His own children?
Can the non-elect come under conviction?
A question about hell
God is in control but not all events are pre-determined
New to the Baptist Religion
Calvin, the man
Starting Over
The Lake of Fire
A small country church
Fruits of Calvanism
The Role of Ruah HaKodesh in the People of G-d
The Fruits of Calvinism
101
What is first?

Right or wrong the majority of these threads either started or wound up debating free will or election. Doesn't matter who started it...it just happened. The other threads? I have avoided all the eschatological threads (Order of Events in Revelation and End Times just to name two) because I am not a dispensationalist and would be in the distinct minority. I have posted in some of the other threads. Again, I can only speak for me. If the thread is interesting, I will post in it.

 

[Rippon]

I have not posted on the C&A threads exclusively . These are a sampling of some I have participated in . I started many of them .

The Lake of Fire
Konglish
Dumb Things Done As A Child
What is the generally accepted definition of " Evangelical "
Famous Last Words
Why We Must Preach Expositionally

And I really have posted a lot in the Bible Translations section . I have tried to stay clear of the KJVO issue , for the most part .

 

[Tom Butler]

I have visited a couple of other Baptist discussion forums, and if you think things get rough here, you need to know that even the hardest-hitting of us are lovable little fuzzballs compared to what goes on there. I'm telling you, personal attacks are the norm, not the exception. It is slash and burn.

That doesn't make it right, but it does put things in perspective.