Response to post #27 on the "Warning Thread" from the Sotoriogy section

[AndOne]

The Isa 6 passage shows that God is in control of the people's lives. And the passage speaks of God's discipline, which is ALL based on the choices people made per 1:19-20. Your point was not made.

Thanks - if God is in control of people's lives then it would be logical to assume that he is in control of their will.

Regardless of this being God's discipline - it still shows that God has ultimate control over the will. My point stands.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Thanks - if God is in control of people's lives then it would be logical to assume that he is in control of their will.

Please define what is meant by "control of people's lives".

This could mean that man has no choices to make. That everything he "chooses" to do is really God in control of his actions.

So, please clarify. That's a mighty big "if" at the beginning of the statement.

 

[Anto9us]

Sigh.

YOU PEOPLE

CHOOSE to be Calvinists of your own Free Will

and you KNOW IT!

 

[BryanW92]

Sigh.

YOU PEOPLE

CHOOSE to be Calvinists of your own Free Will

and you KNOW IT!

Only in the Methodist-taught version of Calvinism is the idea that "people are God's robots" ever taught. I was a Methodist for years and I know the lies they teach regarding Calvinism.

I used to be as vocal of a critic as you are. Then I listened to what Calvinists really believe.

 

[Anto9us]

like I said:

Nothing more ODIOUS than one who says "I used to believe as you do now -- but I since SAW THE LIGHT"

Sick.

And you have no idea how "vocal a critic" I have been.

You know NOTHING.

 

[BryanW92]

like I said:

Nothing more ODIOUS than one who says "I used to believe as you do now -- but I since SAW THE LIGHT"

Sick.

And you have no idea how "vocal a critic" I have been.

You know NOTHING.

I saw the light that both Calvinists and Arminians are Christians and the only real point of conflict is in whether regeneration precedes faith, or vice-versa. I understand both now. If that is odious to you...

You're right. I had no idea how vocal a critic you are. All I can say is "wow"!

 

[Anto9us]

And all I can say is :

Do you have anything to say or retract about alleging words that were supposedly posted by me that I did not post at all?

If not -- you have never SEEN the meaning of "vocal" or "critic" - like yo FIXIN' to see...

I PROMISE you.

 

[BryanW92]

And all I can say is :

Do you have anything to say or retract about alleging words that were supposedly posted by me that I did not post at all?

If not -- you have never SEEN the meaning of "vocal" or "critic" - like yo FIXIN' to see...

I PROMISE you.

Did I put those words in quotes or use your name?

 

[Anto9us]

"you teach that you threw the lifeline to him and all he does is catch it.

(Funny that you'd come over here today after your rant on the WP yesterday.) "

That's what you said.

All in one piece.

Was it "THE COLLECTIVE you OF 'ALL ARMINIANS' who would dare to "come over here today after your rant on WP yesterday"??

Get real.

You PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH THAT I DID NOT SAY.

See it.

Know it.

Live it.

 

[BryanW92]

"you teach that you threw the lifeline to him and all he does is catch it.

(Funny that you'd come over here today after your rant on the WP yesterday.) "

That's what you said.

All in one piece.

Was it "THE COLLECTIVE you OF 'ALL ARMINIANS' who would dare to "come over here today after your rant on WP yesterday"??

Get real.

You PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH THAT I DID NOT SAY.

See it.

Know it.

Live it.

Here's how English works. "You" is a pronoun. It can be used in the place of a noun in the singular or collective. I did not quote you on anything. If I put words in your mouth, it is because you assumed that I did. In this case, "assume" is only affecting "u".

It wasn't "all in one piece" either. Do you see the period? That is the punctuation mark used to end a sentence. Do you see how I moved to a new line? That is the indicator of a new paragraph, which is the signal that I was changing to a new thought or idea. Do you see the paragraph marks? They indicate that the new idea is an aside and not part of a the flow from one paragraph to the next. Grammar and punctuation are hard, but if you practice, they will come to you in time. So just stay calm.

 

[Anto9us]

"the signal that I was changing to a new thought or idea"

rofl

Bryan -- you DO NOT HAVE 'new thoughts or new ideas'

never had 'em - never will.

Now you seek to lecture me on Rules of antecedents of pronouns - but you must know that "a new line" or "a new paragraph" doesn't change the last referred-to antecedent.

Your elephant hubris has over-loaded your hummingbird brain.

If you come back into WP trying to disturb/teach/debate the POV of the Faith Group involved anymore -- I will be on you like stink on a stunk

got it?

 

[BryanW92]

"
If you come back into WP trying to disturb/teach/debate the POV of the Faith Group involved anymore -- I will be on you like stink on a stunk

got it?

I think that you are confused. The three Methodist pastors and I were having a nice conversation. It was the other Baptist guy that was causing all the problems.

 

[BryanW92]

"the signal that I was changing to a new thought or idea"

rofl

Bryan -- you DO NOT HAVE 'new thoughts or new ideas'

never had 'em - never will.

I have plenty of new thoughts and ideas. Is all this hate just from one thread or did I wrong you in the past?

 

[hedrick]

Folks, this is unedifying.

A thread with the title of “Arminians teach something terrible” (which seems to be where BryanW92 made the comment about the lifeline) is dangerous to begin with. I don’t think it belongs in CF, but at least you need to be very careful when posting in that kind of environment. I went back to see “you teach that you threw the lifeline to him and all he does is catch it” in its original context. It was a misrepresentation of Arminian belief. Arminians believe in prevenient grace. They are just as insistent as Calvinists that God comes after us and rescues us. Where they differ is in how they describe the relationship between our will and God’s in our response. (I've been a Methodist as well.)

But Anton9us is being unfair as well. "God decreed that I be in hell and there wasn't a damned thing thing I could DO ABOUT IT!!" is certainly not a reasonable characterization of Calvinist belief. And when he hasn’t gotten sucked into a confrontational thread, BryanW92 is thoughtful and capable of original thought.

As an Reformed elder in a Reformed group, I’d like to ask both of you to disengage from personal attacks, take a breather, and see if you can’t see each other’s beliefs in a more sympathetic light. Not that you have to agree, of course. Just as Methodists don't deny grace, Calvinists don't think of humans as robots. Both theologies are trying to find a way to do justice both to God's undeserved grace and human responsibility. They do so differently, and the differences have consequences, but many of the basic goals are shared.

 

[BryanW92]

see if you can’t see each other’s beliefs in a more sympathetic light.

I already do! The thread on the Wesley Parish forum that offended him so much was one where three UMC pastors and I were discussing the similarities in our theologies. I checked with them and they agree that we were having a good, respectful discussion and that I wasn't violating their forum rules at all.

 

[Anto9us]

ok Hedrick - I respect you as a Reformed elder in a Reformed group

I hereby disengage