One reason this forum hasn't worked yet...

[ittarter]

Here's my take.

Belief is a funny thing. If someone is seriously committed to a certain belief, then it is highly unlikely that any logical analysis demonstrating inconsistency or self-contradiction will effectively derail that belief. This is because belief is not born solely from a rationality defined by logic. The very idea of belief implies something beyond mere conclusion from factual evidence.

A lot of people come onto this forum expecting to be able to change people's minds. They are certain in their own minds that something is true, and they wrongly believe that a post on a forum can transfer this certainty from their mind to someone else's. However, the only people that are really affected in this way in such a short period of time are the fence-sitters, that is, those who are NOT committed in advance to a certain belief with respect to the topic of discussion.

The result? People aren't listening to each other. People who come onto the forum wanting to change people's beliefs (and this includes changing someone's belief about the avowedly contradictory nature of what you believe) have already formed a definable "view" they wish to deconstruct or debate. However, this view exists in their own mind; thus, while it seems obvious that you have crushed that opponent that exists in your mind, in that place where you hold all the keys and know all the facts and have complete control, when you erroneously suppose that this will be equally convincing to a REAL person who is COMMITTED (beyond mere logical adherence) to similar but far more complex beliefs (because they are real) this leads to, well, exactly what this poor sub-forum experienced.

Further, this poor sub-forum experienced what many sub-forums out there experience, but on a catastrophic level, due to how much more polarized this issue of Calvinism/non-Calvinism has become. There isn't enough middle ground and not enough people to represent it. A sizable middle ground helps people loosen up their pre-conceived notions of what other people believe. When the world is no longer divided into two camps, stereotypes don't absorb every approximation. There is more room for gray, and therefore more room for self-analysis and reflection -- that wonderful place of pensiveness where true thought exists.

In fact, with the present systems as they are, I am doubtful that this forum can do more good than harm. However, CF having not yet shut it down permanently, we'll see if people can do a better job of listening this time around.

Any thoughts?

 

[Faith.Man]

Here's my take.

Belief is a funny thing. If someone is seriously committed to a certain belief, then it is highly unlikely that any logical analysis demonstrating inconsistency or self-contradiction will effectively derail that belief. This is because belief is not born solely from a rationality defined by logic. The very idea of belief implies something beyond mere conclusion from factual evidence.

A lot of people come onto this forum expecting to be able to change people's minds. They are certain in their own minds that something is true, and they wrongly believe that a post on a forum can transfer this certainty from their mind to someone else's. However, the only people that are really affected in this way in such a short period of time are the fence-sitters, that is, those who are NOT committed in advance to a certain belief with respect to the topic of discussion.

The result? People aren't listening to each other. People who come onto the forum wanting to change people's beliefs (and this includes changing someone's belief about the avowedly contradictory nature of what you believe) have already formed a definable "view" they wish to deconstruct or debate. However, this view exists in their own mind; thus, while it seems obvious that you have crushed that opponent that exists in your mind, in that place where you hold all the keys and know all the facts and have complete control, when you erroneously suppose that this will be equally convincing to a REAL person who is COMMITTED (beyond mere logical adherence) to similar but far more complex beliefs (because they are real) this leads to, well, exactly what this poor sub-forum experienced.

Further, this poor sub-forum experienced what many sub-forums out there experience, but on a catastrophic level, due to how much more polarized this issue of Calvinism/non-Calvinism has become. There isn't enough middle ground and not enough people to represent it. A sizable middle ground helps people loosen up their pre-conceived notions of what other people believe. When the world is no longer divided into two camps, stereotypes don't absorb every approximation. There is more room for gray, and therefore more room for self-analysis and reflection -- that wonderful place of pensiveness where true thought exists.

In fact, with the present systems as they are, I am doubtful that this forum can do more good than harm. However, CF having not yet shut it down permanently, we'll see if people can do a better job of listening this time around.

Any thoughts?

My personal view is it all depends on where you place your faith. If you place your faith in the Bible (not a particular translation of the Bible), your faith is on solid ground. If you place your faith in a denomination, you are going to be less receptive to views that differ. I do not believe there's a perfect denomination, or a perfect belief system. But we all defend them as if they are. Why? We all want to be right. Personally, my belief system is constantly being refined by the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.

 

[pdudgeon]

Here's my take.

Belief is a funny thing. If someone is seriously committed to a certain belief, then it is highly unlikely that any logical analysis demonstrating inconsistency or self-contradiction will effectively derail that belief. This is because belief is not born solely from a rationality defined by logic. The very idea of belief implies something beyond mere conclusion from factual evidence.

A lot of people come onto this forum expecting to be able to change people's minds. They are certain in their own minds that something is true, and they wrongly believe that a post on a forum can transfer this certainty from their mind to someone else's. However, the only people that are really affected in this way in such a short period of time are the fence-sitters, that is, those who are NOT committed in advance to a certain belief with respect to the topic of discussion.

Any thoughts?

just a few........

first, there is the possibility that they have never heard of the specific theological position, or had it explained to them. So even if they have been taught one thing, that doesn't necessarily preclude them from examining other positions, and comparing/contrasting them to what they have been taught.

secondly, the possibility of spiritual enlightenment concerning scripture, even if it is familiar to them, when studied.

and lastly the working of the Holy Spirit in their hearts, which in turn brings about conviction, repentance, and a willingness to change.

a good example of the above can be found in Peter's maiden sermon...Acts 2:14-37

 

[ittarter]

just a few........

first, there is the possibility that they have never heard of the specific theological position, or had it explained to them. So even if they have been taught one thing, that doesn't necessarily preclude them from examining other positions, and comparing/contrasting them to what they have been taught.

I think I covered that possibility in my post, under "people who haven't already committed to a certain side or position on an issue."

secondly, the possibility of spiritual enlightenment concerning scripture, even if it is familiar to them, when studied.

I think that there are some nuances of this possibility (or lack thereof) that I explored in my post, and I would be interested if someone explored them with me.

and lastly the working of the Holy Spirit in their hearts, which in turn brings about conviction, repentance, and a willingness to change.

If we're thinking biblically here, we could talk about people who have hearts hard to the truth, or people who have ears not hearing, and so forth. Or we could talk about sowing the seed, and there are people who have rocks, weeds, or the birds come and eat the seed before it is sown. The Bible makes lots of room to categorize people impervious to the holy spirit.

 

[ittarter]

My personal view is it all depends on where you place your faith. If you place your faith in the Bible (not a particular translation of the Bible), your faith is on solid ground. If you place your faith in a denomination, you are going to be less receptive to views that differ. I do not believe there's a perfect denomination, or a perfect belief system. But we all defend them as if they are. Why? We all want to be right. Personally, my belief system is constantly being refined by the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.

First, no one should place faith in the Bible. The Bible itself directs us to something greater than itself, in which we are supposed to place our trust.

Second, wherever you place your faith, you are going to be less receptive to views that contradict it, for the simple reason that it's difficult to take everything you've believed and change it. People have based everything they do upon certain beliefs they hold, and if they admit that those beliefs are invalid, much of their lives (past, present, even future) appears meaningless, or at least threatened with meaningless, until they find a new (and better?) way of understanding it.

Third, I agree that everyone wants to be right. Therefore, people who don't know the truth about [insert controversial topic here] or don't believe that the question being asked in that debate is a useful or accurate one, are the very people who are not decided or not even concerned about who is right and who is wrong. Those are the people that change the entire arena of debate and allow it to be a palatable place. It is these people who are lacking in this subforum.

 

[pdudgeon]

If we're thinking biblically here, we could talk about people who have hearts hard to the truth, or people who have ears not hearing, and so forth. Or we could talk about sowing the seed, and there are people who have rocks, weeds, or the birds come and eat the seed before it is sown. The Bible makes lots of room to categorize people impervious to the holy spirit.

yes it does, but i think the most important thing to help maintain and grow this forum, is to remember what we do agree upon first.
then we can come together to discuss the other things while maintaining an attitude of charity towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

being a willing listener is a gift we can give to others here on this forum.
it's not necessary that we agree, but it is necessary that we first listen to make sure that what we believe about another member's position is what they actually do believe, and especially that the sources we all use in our posts do the same thing.

admittedly, many of us in the past have tended to shape our arguments and then look for sources which agree with what we believe.
Whether we post the source and then agree with it, or state our position and then find a sympathetic source, the result is the same. we go round and round with each other when it wasn't necessary, because the foundation of our disagreement with each other was wobbly in the first place.

that's not saying that one side or the other has a good foundation for their points. it is saying that when you choose a stone from your brother's field on which to lay a foundation course for the fence you are building, be sure to check that the stone you are using is true.

 

[Hismessenger]

Don't grow weary in doing good. If what is put forth was all true then Paul was wrong when He was talking to the Galations about their fall from grace. It isn't about trying to change any ones belief but rather putting out the word as truth to which either you accept it or deny it for what you want to believe. God has not left the error preached by some men to go unpunished. They reward is already waiting for them. But if you follow without searching out what they say. you have no excuse for God has already made sure His truth is here for all who seek Him to find. The problem is there are too many interpretations and not enough scriptural proof to back up what is said. Look for the things in the word which can't be interpreted and use that as the basis for finding the truth, They will lead you by the Holy Spirit to the spirit of truth which resides within each and every believer. CHRIST

hismessenger

 

[ittarter]

yes it does, but i think the most important thing to help maintain and grow this forum, is to remember what we do agree uapon first.

Agreed. Too bad the Forum caption doesn't read, "Soteriology: The forum to discuss the theological doctrine of salvation, in the context of our common Christian heritage." Even if that is implied by the "Christian only" rule, no one seems to take it seriously. People accuse each other of being false prophets, of being influenced by Satanic ideas, etc. Ugh.

being a willing listener is a gift we can give to others here on this forum.
it's not necessary that we agree, but it is necessary that we first listen to make sure that what we believe about another member's position is what they actually do believe, and especially that the sources we all use in our posts do the same thing.

Absolutely. Also, that the sources are relevant to what someone else is saying, rather than an imaginary enemy which we have constructed in our minds (which I described in more detail in the OP).

admittedly, many of us in the past have tended to shape our arguments and then look for sources which agree with what we believe.
Whether we post the source and then agree with it, or state our position and then find a sympathetic source, the result is the same. we go round and round with each other when it wasn't necessary, because the foundation of our disagreement with each other was wobbly in the first place.

Very wobbly, and for many reasons.

that's not saying that one side or the other has a good foundation for their points. it is saying that when you choose a stone from your brother's field on which to lay a foundation course for the fence you are building, be sure to check that the stone you are using is true.

Yes. The emphasis shouldn't be on winning arguments, but on discovering the truth, even if that involves less than a 100% win. We should enthusiastically admit that we are wrong or might be wrong, rather than grudgingly or reluctantly. Unfortunately, when people "believe" something (as I described in the OP) they are very reluctant to admit that their belief is not in perfect harmony with reality. People on this forum generally lack intellectual humility.

 

[ittarter]

Don't grow weary in doing good. If what is put forth was all true then Paul was wrong when He was talking to the Galations about their fall from grace. It isn't about trying to change any ones belief but rather putting out the word as truth to which either you accept it or deny it for what you want to believe. God has not left the error preached by some men to go unpunished. They reward is already waiting for them. But if you follow without searching out what they say. you have no excuse for God has already made sure His truth is here for all who seek Him to find. The problem is there are too many interpretations and not enough scriptural proof to back up what is said. Look for the things in the word which can't be interpreted and use that as the basis for finding the truth, They will lead you by the Holy Spirit to the spirit of truth which resides within each and every believer.

I'm sorry, I missed the Galatians reference. Could you clarify what you are saying there?

I'm sorry, but when Paul and other New Testament writers encourage us to speak the truth, they weren't thinking of a context (like CF) where "truth" is some disembodied, digitalized rant, or an endless series of proof-texts "proving" what you say is "biblical." If you want to share the truth with someone (in the sense that Paul intended), make sure you have an actual relationship with that person, otherwise you will (usually) do far more harm than good.

Finding someone on CF who says something you don't like, and then arguing with them for twenty posts about why they're "wrong" and you're "right" has NO BIBLICAL PRECEDENT WHATSOEVER. Except with the Pharisees arguing with the Sadducees, maybe. They were sad you see.

 

[Faith.Man]

First, no one should place faith in the Bible. The Bible itself directs us to something greater than itself, in which we are supposed to place our trust.

How do you know about God? Where can you go to find the truth about God? The answer is the Bible, not in the doctrines and principles of man.

Second, wherever you place your faith, you are going to be less receptive to views that contradict it, for the simple reason that it's difficult to take everything you've believed and change it. People have based everything they do upon certain beliefs they hold, and if they admit that those beliefs are invalid, much of their lives (past, present, even future) appears meaningless, or at least threatened with meaningless, until they find a new (and better?) way of understanding it.

I guess I'm different that way. The Holy Spirit has guided me away from false teaching and teachers and to rely upon the Word of God. If there is something there that I don't understand, I have countless books, commentaries, dictionaries, Hebrew and Greek lexicons, to help me arrive at a better understanding. And of course, I have the Holy Spirit to guide me.

Joh 5:38 "You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.
Joh 5:39 "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

Third, I agree that everyone wants to be right. Therefore, people who don't know the truth about [insert controversial topic here] or don't believe that the question being asked in that debate is a useful or accurate one, are the very people who are not decided or not even concerned about who is right and who is wrong. Those are the people that change the entire arena of debate and allow it to be a palatable place. It is these people who are lacking in this subforum.

Get real. You can't expect new believers or one's just learning about what it means to be a Christian in a Soteriology section? Or maybe you want people who are more easily swayed, or just wishy washy?

 

[LamorakDesGalis]

People aren't listening to each other. People who come onto the forum wanting to change people's beliefs (and this includes changing someone's belief about the avowedly contradictory nature of what you believe) have already formed a definable "view" they wish to deconstruct or debate. However, this view exists in their own mind; thus, while it seems obvious that you have crushed that opponent that exists in your mind, in that place where you hold all the keys and know all the facts and have complete control, when you erroneously suppose that this will be equally convincing to a REAL person who is COMMITTED (beyond mere logical adherence) to similar but far more complex beliefs (because they are real) this leads to, well, exactly what this poor sub-forum experienced.

I agree, I think that is an accurate assessment. However listening is a rare commodity. Understanding is even more rare.

Further, this poor sub-forum experienced what many sub-forums out there experience, but on a catastrophic level, due to how much more polarized this issue of Calvinism/non-Calvinism has become. There isn't enough middle ground and not enough people to represent it. A sizable middle ground helps people loosen up their pre-conceived notions of what other people believe. When the world is no longer divided into two camps, stereotypes don't absorb every approximation. There is more room for gray, and therefore more room for self-analysis and reflection -- that wonderful place of pensiveness where true thought exists.

Yes, the perception of only two polarized views along with disrespectful responses chase away many potential posters here. Developing a community where folks agree to disagree would be very helpful. Soteriology is always going to attract certain forceful types, but this can be overcome to an extent by having people who respect one another personally while disagreeing with one another's views. Personally I would love to interact in threads where individuals feel free to express or explore their own viewpoints or those of others.


LDG

 

[ittarter]

How do you know about God? Where can you go to find the truth about God? The answer is the Bible, not in the doctrines and principles of man.

When people IN the Bible want to meet God, they don't find him in a book. Yes, the Bible is an authoritative record of what people have seen an heard of God in the past, and yes, people should put faith in it as an authoritative record, but ultimately the revelation of God is located in a human being and a community of faith, not a book. Your view of the Bible seems ironically reminiscent of John 5:39, which you later cite.

I guess I'm different that way. The Holy Spirit has guided me away from false teaching and teachers and to rely upon the Word of God. If there is something there that I don't understand, I have countless books, commentaries, dictionaries, Hebrew and Greek lexicons, to help me arrive at a better understanding. And of course, I have the Holy Spirit to guide me.

Joh 5:38 "You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.
Joh 5:39 "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

I don't see how the brief description your provide of your experience of the Holy Spirit and the Bible has anything to do with the difficulty of giving up a strongly held belief.

Get real. You can't expect new believers or one's just learning about what it means to be a Christian in a Soteriology section? Or maybe you want people who are more easily swayed, or just wishy washy?

This is an example of a personal attack, and it happened in very much the way I described it in the OP. We hold mutually exclusive beliefs on a topic of controversy, i.e. belief and the process of determining the truth through discussion. You misunderstood me -- saying that I'm talking about someone uninitiated in the topic of conversation, when I clearly stated I was talking about someone undecided with respect to who is right or wrong. Then, you proceeded to suggest that my true intent was malicious -- that I simply wanted to talk to people "who are more easily swayed" or preferred "wishy washy" people or conversation (you don't specify which). Of course, since you did not even understand my original statement, your attack is completely off the mark.

Now, if I were a typical Soteriology poster, I might respond by implying something about your own intentions, or by suggesting that you are influenced by demonic powers or ideas. However, since I know nothing about who you are or what your intentions might be, it is better if I simply decline to continue this conversation, and recommend that you read the OP again, since our dialogue has basically exemplified the precise dynamic which I described.

Thank you for your contribution to this thread. Have a great weekend!

 

[ittarter]

I agree, I think that is an accurate assessment. However listening is a rare commodity.

Not extinct, though. The question for this subforum is whether people can be instructed to listen, or if it, as you put it, a "commodity" which only a select few are privileged to possess.

Yes, the perception of only two polarized views along with disrespectful responses chase away many potential posters here. Developing a community where folks agree to disagree would be very helpful. Soteriology is always going to attract certain forceful types, but this can be overcome to an extent by having people who respect one another personally while disagreeing with one another's views. Personally I would love to interact in threads where individuals feel free to express or explore their own viewpoints or those of others.

Do you agree with the connection I am making between the polarization of belief and the ultimate result of disrespectful responses?

The other thing I can't figure out is why it is really only Soteriology, out of all the forums on CF, that attracts such a high percentage of "forceful types." Is there really no unforceful way of dealing with the issue of salvation? Are we at the mercy of some historical dynamic that almost prevents intelligent and respectful discussion on this subject?

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Faith.Man]

First, no one should place faith in the Bible. The Bible itself directs us to something greater than itself, in which we are supposed to place our trust.

My pseudo-intellectual, atheist brother-in-law could construct a more logical argument than this.

Second, wherever you place your faith, you are going to be less receptive to views that contradict it, for the simple reason that it's difficult to take everything you've believed and change it. People have based everything they do upon certain beliefs they hold, and if they admit that those beliefs are invalid, much of their lives (past, present, even future) appears meaningless, or at least threatened with meaningless, until they find a new (and better?) way of understanding it.

Ditto. You've also based your argument on a fallacy. My life is living proof there are many exceptions.

Third, I agree that everyone wants to be right. Therefore, people who don't know the truth about [insert controversial topic here] or don't believe that the question being asked in that debate is a useful or accurate one, are the very people who are not decided or not even concerned about who is right and who is wrong. Those are the people that change the entire arena of debate and allow it to be a palatable place. It is these people who are lacking in this subforum.

I've lost interest in this post. Bye!

 

[ittarter]

My pseudo-intellectual, atheist brother-in-law could construct a more logical argument than this.

That's nice.

Ditto. You've also based your argument on a fallacy. My life is living proof there are many exceptions.

If only you were capable or willing to go into more detail, to demonstrate that you know as much about logic as you claim.

I've lost interest in this post. Bye!

Since my last post robbed you of the only means you saw fit to use to attack my ideas, I am not surprised, but instead entirely relieved.

 

[pdudgeon]

quoted for truth:
LamorakDesGalis said

Yes, the perception of only two polarized views along with disrespectful responses chase away many potential posters here. Developing a community where folks agree to disagree would be very helpful. Soteriology is always going to attract certain forceful types, but this can be overcome to an extent by having people who respect one another personally while disagreeing with one another's views. Personally I would love to interact in threads where individuals feel free to express or explore their own viewpoints or those of others.

the interesting thing that i find on here is that some of the most vocal proponents of Calvinism arguing for a different reading of the two points that i've found in here:Westminster Larger Catechism
the Westminster Larger Catechism:

Question 67: What is effectual calling?

Answer: Effectual calling is the work of God's almighty power and grace, whereby (out of his free and special love to his elect, and from nothing in them moving him thereunto) he does, in his accepted time, invite and draw them to Jesus Christ, by his Word and Spirit; savingly enlightening their minds, renewing and powerfully determining their wills, so as they (although in themselves dead in sin) are hereby made willing and able freely to

Answer: his call, and to accept and embrace the grace offered and conveyed therein.

Question 68: Are the elect only effectually called?

Answer: All the elect, and they only, are effectually called; although others may be, and often are, outwardly called by the ministry of the Word, and have some common operations of the Spirit; who, for their wilful neglect and contempt of the grace offered to them, being justly left in their unbelief, do never truly come to Jesus Christ.

to me that answer is a bit confusing. it doesn't seem to distinguish between
those who are called by ministries other than Calvinism and continue their whole life long in the word, and those who are called according to the Calvinistic method and yet may fail to continue.

instead it seems to imply that all those called by the Calvinistic method will continue, and those called by another ministry will ultimately fail to continue, because they fail to understand the true nature of the call (being justly left in their unbelief)?

so could someone of the Calvinist persuasion speak to this please?

 

[Van]

Hi Ittarter, I agree you have articulated in the OP one of the reasons this forum has not worked well. However there are various brands of "non-Calvinists" holding heart-felt beliefs that differ significantly, i.e. whether you can lose your salvation. In my experience, discussions and edification do frequently occur on this forum between the various non-Calvinist posters. These are folks that rely on their understanding of the Bible, and are therefore willing to consider whether their view may need to be adjusted to come closer to the truth revealed in scripture. On the other hand, in my experience discussions between hyper Calvinists and non-hyper Calvinists degenerate almost all the time. What is your experience?

What is the difference between believing in the name of Jesus and believing what the Bible tells us about Jesus? Is that not in effect putting our faith in the Bible as telling the truth about Jesus? Just saying...

The deepest theological thought ever expressed is this, "Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so."

 

[nobdysfool]

Discussion and edification occurs frequently between Calvinist posters on this forum, as well. Let's not try to make this one-sided, as though any one group of posters is to be seen as the culprits and scapegoats for the problems this forum has encountered. It comes down to exercising tolerance.

There are some who do not want to tolerate others, even their presence. When attacks are launched against others in the vein of impuning their motives, making subtle accusations of what amounts to willful sin, and intimating that a certain group engages in deceptive, sinful practices, the natural reaction by the group being maligned is to fight back. Most, if not all of such accusations and innuendo are false, and are just as sinful as what they accuse their opponents of. It is truly a "pot-kettle-black" situation, and Christians who live up to their beliefs would not and should not engage in such God-dishonoring practices. If someone believes that the only way they can promote their particular view is by tearing down and trashing the opposing view, there is a serious problem with that person's view. Truth is not established on the trashing or destruction of other views. Truth stands on its own, apart from other views.

I have said before that this forum is not a "last man standing" or "duel to the death" place. We don't have to agree on every jot and tittle, but our faith and the morals we profess to uphold do require that we show respect to those with whom we disagree, and affirm their right to hold their beliefs as they see them, all the while encouraging each other to study the scriptures, and listen.

Each of us is at a different point in our walk with Christ, and we need to respect that. It is God's job, through the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all Truth, not any one person in this forum. God may use whom He wants, how He wants, and when He wants, to accomplish that end. And, in the end, when we are with Him in Glory, we will all discover that we did not understand some things correctly, no matter how convinced we are in this life of what we believe. None of us are 100% correct, and the one who secretly thinks to himself that he is sure he is more correct than others, is probably the one who needs to hear and understand that statement the most.

 

[Philothei]

and those called by another ministry will ultimately fail to continue, because they fail to understand the true nature of the call (being justly left in their unbelief)?

There are many roads to salvation... Or then when Christ said for us not to judge for we will be judged did not apply...?? How can we say this ? I am either missunderstanding you here or this calls for saying that "others" would not be saved?

 

[nobdysfool]

There are many roads to salvation... Or then when Christ said for us not to judge for we will be judged did not apply...?? How can we say this ? I am either missunderstanding you here or this calls for saying that "others" would not be saved?

Joh 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

There are not many roads to Salvation, there is only one. Jesus Christ.