Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
We don't need to argue over whether the text says something and means something else. We know we differ on this.hupo:
I know, because that is what it means.
yes.The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ ...
I've often wondered. Is the Gospel any less the Gospel without our response? This is probably just semantics.and what you will do with that.
Uh, back up a verse.Yes it should.
2 Cor 5:15
and He died for all, that they who live should no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.
We don't need to argue over whether the text says something and means something else.
An appeal to emotion...... or even more directly an argumentum ad populum
I think that's the kind of closed-minded arrogance the previous writer was referring to. The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ and what you will do with that.
We all know the gospel was around before Calvin enlightened us, and before those who followed him and exaggerated his teachings enlightened us further.
I am simple folk, and somehow I believe the gospel can be seen in the scriptures without an arminian or a calvinist telling me how to interpret it before I read it.
Perhaps people would be better off just reading the gospel of John and deciding what they will do with it instead of listening to us.
Just a thought.
Most Calvinists just find non-Calvinists less precise about their theology, and thus not as accurate. It's when anti-Calvinists propose to accuse Calvinism of being wrong or heretical at specific points that my response is raised. I've no beef with non-Calvinists for being non-Calvinists. It's that specific anti-Calvinists propose to attack Calvinism on 500-year-old allegations that weren't true in the first place.
So... does this follow for all minorities? I mean it must if that is the reason why there are minorities in the first place. What about Christianity in general? We are a minority of the world population. Is that because we are wrong, or maybe less credible?
Terrible argument, IMO. If anything, being in the minority and constantly being lashed out against (for ridiculous claims...) assures me even more that this is the right place to be.
you quoted me out of context. its a small part of a post I made to what another poster said.
Well, my beef is with people who accuse other people of departing the faith when they're not. But that crosses many, many lines.What about those Calvinists who accuse non-calvinists of being wrong and heretical? That is where my beef comes in...
I've seen so many different people object to so many different gradations of Pelagianism, it's not really a factor for me. Is it Pelagius' whole program of sanctification? His level or empowerment? How about semi-Pelagianism as represented in 529 AD?I object to the not-so-accurate labeling of pelagianism of christians...
For me, I guess it would depend on the circumstance. When I see a member call another mber a heretic just because they have different views, I report it. But there have been some pretty heretical stuff said on here, so I can't make a blanket statement about that.What about those Calvinists who accuse non-calvinists of being wrong and heretical? That is where my beef comes in...
you quoted me out of context. its a small part of a post I made to what another poster said.
I know that I didn't quote you out of context. I just asked a question. But I did go back an reread your post. I don't see how he took what you said out of context. Maybe you can explain further by explaining the purpose of pointing out the minority status of Calvinists. In context, of course.
I've seen so many different people object to so many different gradations of Pelagianism, it's not really a factor for me. Is it Pelagius' whole program of sanctification? His level or empowerment? How about semi-Pelagianism as represented in 529 AD?
Y'won't get past it. It's a terminology issue.
The fella equated the gospel of God = Calvinism...among other similar type statements.
so what about those christians outside of Calvinism? at best it means that they are 2nd class christians, not enlightened enough. at worst it means they aren't saved and aren't really christians to begin with.
but christianity is bigger than any one group. and I think just about every group within christianity is a minority, except maybe the catholics. christianity is bigger than calvinism. its bigger than those who speak in tongues, bigger than those who say they are members of THE church of Christ, and so on. Understand?
The eastern orthodoxy never condemned semi-Pelagianism, nor Pelagianism. It's a question of who you consider authoritative.Its more than that. nobody calls themselves semi-pelagian. To accept that semi-Pelagianism was condemned as heresy in 529 and then turn around and call someone else a semi-pelagian is to call them a heretic. So to me its a sophisticated method of just calling someone else a heretic...
Then to the point: anthony55 is not a Calvinist.The fella equated the gospel of God = Calvinism...among other similar type statements.
Actually, we have some hypers here who did. I reported them. But I guess I should have had them hanged.My elderly mother isn't a Calvinist, she's saved. No one here is saying non Calvinists are "2nd class Christians" or are not saved.
Actually, we have some hypers here who did. I reported them. But I guess I should have had them hanged.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?