Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

[Foxfyre]

If I am telling the truth, how am I either dodging questions or insulting anyone?

Telling somebody they don't understand and shouldn't be debating it for that reason sound pretty insulting to me whether or not it was intended to be. And so far you have yet to answer a single one of my direct questions. Just my two cents.

 

[Foxfyre]

You make accusations which put two members here in a very bad light, and then when asked for proof, you can't be bothered to offer it?

What bad light? I've just been informally judging the debate, that's all. There's always a winner and loser in a debate--rarely is it judged a draw. Old debate coach and judge here. Sorry.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

What bad light? I've just been informally judging the debate, that's all. There's always a winner and loser in a debate--rarely is it judged a draw. Old debate coach and judge here. Sorry.

Glad you're retired.

Putting forth straw men, as what has transpired here, isn't debate.

 

[Foxfyre]

Glad you're retired.

Putting forth straw men, as what has transpired here, isn't debate.

I'm retired? Hmmm. Didn't know that. Sorry if I offended. It was not my intent. My intent actually was to encourage a member who I thought was doing a really good job in his/her position on a somewhat complex topic.

 

[Hammster]

You make accusations which put two members here in a very bad light, and then when asked for proof, you can't be bothered to offer it?

Seems about right.

 

[Hammster]

Every time I have asked a specific question I am either presented with a non answer, a link to scripture that does not address the question, or get some version of the I don't understand so I am not qualified to participate answer.

You should be able to track down one of your own posts. That can't be too difficult.

 

[Hammster]

I'm retired? Hmmm. Didn't know that. Sorry if I offended. It was not my intent. My intent actually was to encourage a member who I thought was doing a really good job in his/her position on a somewhat complex topic.

By quoting me and insulting two members?

 

[Foxfyre]

You should be able to track down one of your own posts. That can't be too difficult.

No it wouldn't be too difficult but I prefer to use the last couple of pages of the thread as an adequate example.

One question though that I would still like a logical answer for, in your or jimmyjimmy's own words--not a cut and paste, not a link, not quotation of scripture:

If those who are called were called before the beginning of the world, and others are unable to join the party, why did a loving God create the 'others' in the first place? Why were they allowed to be born? What is their purpose?

 

[Foxfyre]

By quoting me and insulting two members?

I didn't insult you. All I said is you insulted the other member, and in so doing, my opinion is that you lost the debate. Just my opinion. Not intended to be insulting.

Or is it in the CF rules somewhere that we aren't supposed to judge who has the better argument?

Anyway I have obviously offended you and jimmyjimmy and I apologize. That was not my intent.

 

[Hammster]

No it wouldn't be too difficult but I prefer to use the last couple of pages of the thread as an adequate example.

One question though that I would still like a logical answer for, in your or jimmyjimmy's own words--not a cut and paste, not a link, not quotation of scripture:

If those who are called were called before the beginning of the world, and others are unable to join the party, why did a loving God create the 'others' in the first place? Why were they allowed to be born? What is their purpose?

That's actually one I struggle with because I can't find an emotionally satisfying answer. Biblically it's to show His glory through His wrath. But then I ask, why not me? But in the end I have to go with what scripture says.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I'm retired? Hmmm. Didn't know that. Sorry if I offended. It was not my intent. My intent actually was to encourage a member who I thought was doing a really good job in his/her position on a somewhat complex topic.

You said that I was dodging questions and insulting someone.

Is it OK for a Christian to say such a thing without proof? Do you understand what bearing false witness is?

Doing a good job is a debate means representing your opponents position weak, first and foremost, because unless you do that, you haven't won a debate. You've defeated a straw man.

I have not, and would not dodge any honest question regarding my position of Reformed theology, nor would I insult anyone, other than some banter, or sarcasm. Even Christ used sarcasm to make a point.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

If those who are called were called before the beginning of the world, and others are unable to join the party, why did a loving God create the 'others' in the first place? Why were they allowed to be born? What is their purpose?

Romans 9 addresses this. Also, Arminians have to answer the same question. Why did God create people who He knew beforehand would use their "free will" to not choose Him? Who they are what their makeup is, was clearly known by Him, yet He created them. . .

 

[Foxfyre]

That's actually one I struggle with because I can't find an emotionally satisfying answer. Biblically it's to show His glory through His wrath. But then I ask, why not me? But in the end I have to go with what scripture says.

And it simply doesn't compute with me.

The Lord I know, the Lord I have a relationship with, the Holy Spirit who leads me, loves you as an adopted son, loves jimmyjimmy as an adopted son, loves me, and I believe does not will that any should perish but all should come to him. And that is why I can't accept the Calvinist doctrine on that point even though I was a staunch member and teacher in a Calvinist denomination all during college and have intermittently worshipped with Calvinists now and then. Fortunately I was not required to teach that particular point of doctrine because I wouldn't have been able to do it.

Anyway I apologize again for having offended. I did not intend to do so. And thank you for answering the question. I accept it as your belief and will wish you a pleasant evening.

 

[Foxfyre]

You said that I was dodging questions and insulting someone.

Is it OK for a Christian to say such a thing without proof? Do you understand what bearing false witness is?

Doing a good job is a debate means representing your opponents position weak, first and foremost, because unless you do that, you haven't won a debate. You've defeated a straw man.

I have not, and would not dodge any honest question regarding my position of Reformed theology, nor would I insult anyone, other than some banter, or sarcasm. Even Christ used sarcasm to make a point.

I am sure you believe that. The perception however is somewhat different as you have dodged my question to you and did it again in Post #312. But I have no intention of quarreling with you and again apologize for offending and will wish you a pleasant evening.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I am sure you believe that. The perception however is somewhat different as you have dodged my question to you and did it again in Post #312. But I have no intention of quarreling with you and again apologize for offending and will wish you a pleasant evening.

Maybe you missed it. Here is my answer. Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

Romans 9. It's not a long chapter, and read God's word is good for you.

 

[Hammster]

And it simply doesn't compute with me.

The Lord I know, the Lord I have a relationship with, the Holy Spirit who leads me, loves you as an adopted son, loves jimmyjimmy as an adopted son, loves me, and I believe does not will that any should perish but all should come to him. And that is why I can't accept the Calvinist doctrine on that point even though I was a staunch member and teacher in a Calvinist denomination all during college and have intermittently worshipped with Calvinists now and then. Fortunately I was not required to teach that particular point of doctrine because I wouldn't have been able to do it.

Anyway I apologize again for having offended. I did not intend to do so. And thank you for answering the question. I accept it as your belief and will wish you a pleasant evening.

Then your issue is with scripture, not with Reformed Theology.

 

[Hammster]

I get it if folks disagree with Reformed Theology. I really do. What I don't get is why we aren't challenged on what we actually teach and believe. That part makes no sense, especially coming from other believers. I thought that integrity in these discussions should be paramount. Otherwise, it's not iron sharpening iron. It's something else.

 

[Foxfyre]

Then your issue is with scripture, not with Reformed Theology.

As if the two have not been presented as one and the same?

My quarrel isn't with Scripture because in its full context I believe it is quite clear that the scriptures acknowledge that many do not know the Lord, but it is also clear, to me, that the Lord loves all and does not wish for any to perish but wants all to be saved. I can't believe anybody is born who is beyond redemption. So we can amicably agree to disagree on that one.

 

[Hammster]

I should start a thread on straw men.

 

[Hammster]

As if the two have not been presented as one and the same?

My quarrel isn't with Scripture because in its full context I believe it is quite clear that the scriptures acknowledges that many do not know the Lord, but it is also clear, to me, that the Lord loves all and does not wish for any to perish but wants all to be saved. I can't believe anybody is born who is beyond redemption. So we can amicably agree to disagree on that one.

Well, it might be clear to you. I cannot argue against your impressions. But your view simply isn't biblical.