Let's agree that both men were sinners hence both men would be unable to offer a perfect doctrine that would in essence peek in to the mind of God as if they could know it perfectly. They can't. If they could, God would not be sovereign. If God is sovereign it allows him to change his own rules as he sees fit to his liking and no man created formula can alter that.



11. Away, then, with all ambiguity! Away with all expressions which only puzzle the cause! Let honest men speak out, and not play with hard words which they do not understand. And how can any man know what Arminius held, who has never read one page of his writings? Let no man bawl against Arminians, till he knows what the term means; and then he will know that Arminians and Calvinists are just upon a level. And Arminians have as much right to be angry at Calvinists, as Calvinists have to be angry at Arminians. John Calvin was a pious, learned, sensible man; and so was James Harmens. Many Calvinists are pious, learned, sensible men; and so are many Arminians. Only the former hold absolute predestination; the latter, conditional.

12. One word more: Is it not the duty of every Arminian Preacher, First, never, in public or in private, to use the word Calvinist as a term of reproach; seeing it is neither better nor worse than calling names? -- a practice no more consistent with good sense or good manners, than it is with Christianity. Secondly. To do all that in him lies to prevent his hearers from doing it, by showing them the sin and folly of it? And is it not equally the duty of every Calvinist Preacher, First, never in public or in private, in preaching or in conversation, to use the word Arminian as a term of reproach? Secondly. To do all that in him lies to prevent his hearers from doing it, by showing them the sin and folly thereof; and that the more earnestly and diligently, if they have been accustomed so to do? perhaps encouraged therein by his own example!

From the Thomas Jackson edition of The Works of John Wesley, 1872.

I totally agree! :yay:

It's time to drop the Arminian/Calvinism banter and proceed in proclaiming the Gospel of Salvation through faith in our risen Saviour Jesus Christ. That's what the world needs to hear and those are the answers we should be giving for why mankind needs to turn to Christ.



But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
(1 Peter 3:14-16)

:yahoo::yay::high5::clap::thewave:

It's time to drop the Arminian/Calvinism banter and proceed in proclaiming the Gospel of Salvation through faith in our risen Saviour Jesus Christ.
:shrug: This has been my contention since day 1 but, when I say it, I get a bunch of flack from the maggotry. All the fancy $64,000 words and all those so called "personal opinions" only cause more division. Stick with the Book; that's why it was written...

:shrug: This has been my contention since day 1 but, when I say it, I get a bunch of flack from the maggotry. All the fancy $64,000 words and all those so called "personal opinions" only cause more division. Stick with the Book; that's why it was written...

The maggotry? Come on, Brother, no need for that. We can drop it, yes? :buddies:

:shrug: This has been my contention since day 1 but, when I say it, I get a bunch of flack from the maggotry. All the fancy $64,000 words and all those so called "personal opinions" only cause more division. Stick with the Book; that's why it was written...
I thought a forum was for discussion of ideas, not the squashing of them?

And... Maggotry? Really? Is that what people who disagree with you are to you?

I thought a forum was for discussion of ideas, not the squashing of them?

And... Maggotry? Really? Is that what people who disagree with you are to you?

Since all the pertinent ideas and positions have been published, examined, dissected, sliced, diced, sorted, resorted, debated, argued, insulted, perverted, reverted, converted, dispelled and restored, can there be anything to gain in continuing this running skirmish? Come on, Brothers, there's no need for this to continue, and you know it. If you have something personal to sort out, that's what the PM is for.

It was a joke for Christ's sake! None of you remember the Grease Man using that word in the 80's? Guess you folks really can't lighten up, can you? See what happens when you've been soo uptight for soo long?

I thought a forum was for discussion of ideas, not the squashing of them?
As I've said before, if you'd have come in with a thread asking about our thoughts on Calvinism, it would have gone in a much different direction. You came in, guns a blazin', with: "Why I'm a Calvinist". :drama: Doesn't sound like you were into "learning" now does it?

So I said: It's never good to post unbiblical concepts and then try to defend them using the Bible. It is not good for the people who aren't very strong in their faith or for those who might be trying to learn something here...

It was a joke for Christ's sake! None of you remember the Grease Man using that word in the 80's? Guess you folks really can't lighten up, can you? See what happens when you've been soo uptight for soo long?

Dude, I don't think the joke was for Christ's sake, and you don't need to bring Him into defending your use of the word, and not all of us listened to the Grease Man in the 80's. I don't think I've been "soo uptight." Lightening up doesn't include calling people "maggotry."

Anyway, dropping the whole thing is still the best idea, and forgiving/forgetting "maggotry" is an outstanding idea.

As I've said before, if you'd have come in with a thread asking about our thoughts on Calvinism, it would have gone in a much different direction. You came in, guns a blazin', with: "Why I'm a Calvinist". :drama: Doesn't sound like you were into "learning" now does it?

So I said: It's never good to post unbiblical concepts and then try to defend them using the Bible. It is not good for the people who aren't very strong in their faith or for those who might be trying to learn something here...
Do I need to post a timeline with links to threads showing who fired first? It wasn't me or even you, although you were not far behind. Bearing false witness is a sin brother.

Do I need to post a timeline with links to threads showing who fired first? It wasn't me or even you, although you were not far behind. Bearing false witness is a sin brother.

Forgive and forget. Leave the rest up to God. Embrace and unite. There are too few of us to be able to afford divisiveness.

Let's agree that both men were sinners hence both men would be unable to offer a perfect doctrine that would in essence peek in to the mind of God as if they could know it perfectly. They can't. If they could, God would not be sovereign. If God is sovereign it allows him to change his own rules as he sees fit to his liking and no man created formula can alter that.

Sorry I cant go there, God dosent change or change his mind.

Sorry I cant go there, God dosent change or change his mind.

If god is sovereign then cant he be free to do anything?

Sorry I cant go there, God dosent change or change his mind.

If god is sovereign then cant he be free to do anything?

As I've said before, if you'd have come in with a thread asking about our thoughts on Calvinism, it would have gone in a much different direction. You came in, guns a blazin', with: "Why I'm a Calvinist". :drama: Doesn't sound like you were into "learning" now does it?

So I said: It's never good to post unbiblical concepts and then try to defend them using the Bible. It is not good for the people who aren't very strong in their faith or for those who might be trying to learn something here...

Hold on, stop drop and roll.
First off, saying they are unbiblical is your opinion and you have not given any strong defense for them or a convincing argument. I won’t attack you like you did me, but I would encourage you read Paul again.
How can you learn from those that aren’t able to understand, much less teach? Zguy is taking his schooling and personal beliefs and trying to engage in intelligent conversation that challenges one beliefs.

Starman is the one that made it all about Calvin, by making false statements about him being a murder of Michael S and acting as if we worship Calvin. I will credit him at least he gave effort to the conversation. But the doctrine is the doctrine of Paul that was taught by Paul as well as Augustine and what most of the reformers embraced. I think one of the videos you probably didn’t watch, made that very clear. Those videos are by some of the best evangelical minds out there. So anyone that wanted to learn certainly could and go be good Borreans and check the scriptures for themselves.

The Gospel is the most important thing and discussing how salvation takes place is prudent. With so many victims of the modern day gospel probably some in here, having a false assurance of salvation because they asked Jesus into their heart and resting in that false assurance provided by the deceiver himself, this is a good thing to discuss. Don’t worry none that the father has given him will be snatched from his hand. More damaging is a life that doesn’t reflect the power of the gospel in it.

Dude, I don't think the joke was for Christ's sake, and you don't need to bring Him into defending your use of the word, and not all of us listened to the Grease Man in the 80's. I don't think I've been "soo uptight." Lightening up doesn't include calling people "maggotry."

Anyway, dropping the whole thing is still the best idea, and forgiving/forgetting "maggotry" is an outstanding idea.

Actually its blasphemy.

If god is sovereign then cant he be free to do anything?

No, because he is also immutable, one attribute of God dosent out weigh another, in fact if he changed his mind that would indicate he is less than perfect.

A comon error is that people say God is Love, as if he was more loving than just. All Gods attributes are equal.

No, because he is also immutable, one attribute of God dosent out weigh another, in fact if he changed his mind that would indicate he is less than perfect.

A comon error is that people say God is Love, as if he was more loving than just. All Gods attributes are equal.
The immutability of God is a complex subject. We could have a whole 'nother thread on it.

I would suggest a few resources that do a good job of it:

Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem pp. 163-168
Christian Theology by Millard Erickson pp. 304-305

First off, saying they are unbiblical is your opinion and you have not given any strong defense for them or a convincing argument. How can you learn from those that aren’t WILLING to understand...?
My "opinion" comes from biblical context. Some on here have chosen to ignore biblical context by consulting many faulty "other sources". A few of us have given a very "strong defense" against Calvinism. Calvinism is NOT biblical and, anyone who says it is, is wrong. Not because I've said so, but because it does NOT reconcile with ALL the verses that speak against it.

Note the word change; it's closer to the truth.

The doctrine is the doctrine of Paul that was taught by Paul as well as Augustine and what most of the reformers embraced. Those videos are by some of the best evangelical minds out there. So anyone that wanted to learn certainly could and go be good Borreans and check the scriptures for themselves.
Again (in your mind) it's them over God...:shrug: It's not like we haven't given a credible argument to you, it's that you won't let go of yours, theirs and others beliefs so we're at a stalemate. Why go on about this?

With so many victims of the modern day gospel probably some in here, having a false assurance of salvation because they asked Jesus into their heart and resting in that false assurance provided by the deceiver himself, this is a good thing to discuss. Don’t worry none that the father has given him will be snatched from his hand.
Now I'll agree with that. There are a LOT of people living under a "false assurance" of salvation but, if they are destined to be saved, God won't lose them. If they're not going to be saved, oh well. We can't say that saying ANY prayer guarantees salvation. It's not in the words but in the intent of the persons' heart...

:shrug: This has been my contention since day 1 but, when I say it, I get a bunch of flack from the maggotry. All the fancy $64,000 words and all those so called "personal opinions" only cause more division. Stick with the Book; that's why it was written...

Maggotry? The Greaseman? Others quote Calvin and the ECFs and you ####e yourself....yet you quote the Greaseman for "Christs" sake? Feeling more and more isolated IS?

Maggotry? The Greaseman? Others quote Calvin and the ECFs and you ####e yourself....yet you quote the Greaseman for "Christs" sake? Feeling more and more isolated IS?

It's okay - pray for him but don't judge, after all he is a Brother. He knows what's up.