Anyone been persuaded?

[LamorakDesGalis]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?


LDG

 

[Rescued One]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?


LDG

I love online discussions and, yes, I've been influenced.

 

[MamaZ]

well I can say I have a deeper conviction after the discussions..

 

[Van]

I was raised in a Calvinistic Church, but when I tried to defend the view in discussion with an Arminian, I found I could not support Calvinism biblically. But the Arminian views on some doctrines such as loss of salvation, I also found to be unbiblical. So yes, my view of Soteriology was changed by on-line discussion.

As I developed my view, and expressed it, many posters from both sides of the controversy pointed out flaws and I revised my view over a period of perhaps 18 months until I think I got it right. So yes, my understanding of my view of Soteriology grew deeper because of On-line discussion.

Naturally my most trusted source for biblical doctrine is the bible. Since my view is a hybrid, I find support for facets of my doctrine both from the on-line articles of Calvinists and Arminians and middle of the roaders. For example, many articles attempt to demonstrate the election referred to in Ephesians 1:4 is corporate rather than individual. I adopted the arguments that seemed valid that supported that the election was not of individuals, but did not find the "corporate election" as presented in the papers compelling.

The key to helpful discussion to to present views, not as absolute truth, but simply as our individual understanding of truth, and therefore just offer them, without effort to compel them via bully tactics or disparagement of those who hold differing views.

 

[holyrokker]

On-line discussions have been a significant help in encouraging me into deeper study and better thinking.

 

[MrPolo]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

Depending on how accurate the representatives of Calvinism I was speaking to, it seems I have learned that they avoid the term double-predestination. They teach that God withholds grace from the "reprobate" who, de facto, go to hell. So my view of that teaching took a turn for the worse.

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?

My trusted source is, if you cannot tell, the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

 

[heymikey80]

Online debates have definitely focused and refocused me on what's important about Calvinism, how it deals with issues, and exposes what arguments tend to contradict the Apostles in Scripture.

It's where I recognized Presbyterianism's longstanding evangelicalism.

It's where I discovered why Calvinistic orders of salvation operate the way they do.

It's where I learned about theologians who were intently focused on exegesis and history: Calvin, Vos, and Wright.

 

[drstevej]

I once was blind but now I see....

 

[holyrokker]

I once was blind but now I see....

So... You're no longer a Calvinist?

 

[drstevej]

So... You're no longer a Calvinist?

Nah,

Arminians sing it

"I once was blind but still could see"

 

[Stinker]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?


LDG

I have found that I had to change my views on a number of things. Started out with an Arminian view and now hold a version of Calvinism.


Most definitely one will see other's views better because of online forum participation.

Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, really help.

 

[Photini]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?


LDG

1. The only views I've been persuaded to change are political ones. And that wasn't by direct interaction, but by lurking.

2. Yes, I have come to understand the RCC much better. I no longer have RCC paranoia, but have come to understand where our true differences are, and where our true similarities are.

3. The Tradition of the Orthodox Church (which the Scripture is a part of, as well as the collaborative voice of the Church Fathers) and my own God-given ability to reason.

 

[A New Dawn]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?


LDG

1. Yes. I was a member of a Christian cult all my life till 3 years ago, and after posting here for about 15 months, I converted to real Christianity (with the help of drstevej (Rep Daddy) and Phoebe Ann. ) I went from being a free-willer to being a Calvinist, also, a few months later.

2. Yes, I understand my view better, and despite having been a free-willer in the past, I can no longer understand that position.

3. The Bible, mostly. And Spurgeon, Rep Daddy, Dave (my Bible study teacher), Pastor John, etc.

 

[frumanchu]

I'm curious,
1. Has anyone been persuaded by online forum arguments to change their views? (especially the changing of views regarding Arminianism and Calvinism).

Yes. I originally held a very doctrinally Arminian view (though I did not at the time know what historical Arminianism was). My discussions and debates in the FreeRepublic.com religion forum were instrumental in bringing me to an acceptance of the Reformed doctrines. Those were some deeply intense and passionate debates over Scripture.

2. Has anyone understood their view better or other views better because of online forum participation?

Absolutely, both through what I've received from others and in the studying I have done in response to the arguments of others.

3. What - or who - do you consider your trusted sources regarding views on soteriology?

Scripture alone. To be sure, the Spirit has taught me much about the deeper things of God through preachers and teachers such as R.C. Sproul, Art Azuria, D. James Kennedy, David Jeremiah, John Piper and so many other lesser-known men of God. But it is only in the context of the Scriptures that they bring any wisdom.

 

[cygnusx1]

I haven't been changed by online debate over soteriology because I was pretty solid when I arrived. ... Solo Deo Gloria.