Also, GB, I think that in the shuffle I missed your post at 3:57pm yesterday. Something else to add the the laundry list of stuff to comment on if or when I get around to to.

(Completely weird side note incoming)

"If or when"... I love how in Greek the word "ean" can mean both. Makes me sad that I can't use a similar English word to be ambiguous when I want to be

Shamax wrote:

lord voldemort wrote:

As I have stated, both are wrong. Both have turned into intellectual idolatry.

(snip)

It is easy to dismiss what I have to say, as you just said. If what I have to say is a danger to you. If it is a danger to you, than you you need to address the issue.

I won't make this too long, because it's posts like this that are detrimental to my sanctification. But the fact that you make this statement alone shows that you have no interest in discussing the topic at all on a mature level, nor do you understand much of what Calvinists believe. Thanks for your contribution, though.

It is easy for someone to dismiss my comments, when one does not want to face the value of it.
If what I have to say is so dangerous to you, than you need to address the issue. Calvinism as it stands today is a belief system that is intellectually idolatrous.

The reason for that is, people call it "Calvinism" on that basis alone it is a system put in between the person and God, even though the system was meant to "understand" God, that there is when it became an Idolatry. Because, like the Catholic Church who started to dictate what and where a Catholic could do for salvation, Calvinism and Arminianism did the same thing for Protestantism.

As one of my professors states "Calvin has been out Calvined by Calvinist" which means they have taken what he meant and distorted it and pushed it further than it was meant to be. Now it is in a major part of denomination, along side "Evangelicalism" or "Protestantism" they are just two more "ism's" in Christianity. Two more ways to lead Christians under the idolatry of intellectualism.

Why do I have a problem with it? It is simple, it is a form of demarcation around Christians. "I am a Calvinist", I thought you were a Christian? Christian is one who follows Christ? If you are a Calvinist, that you follow Calvin, not Christ. As much as you want to claim you are following Christ, you are really following Calvin's understanding of God, not Christ. Thus, Calvins teachings have inserted themeselves between you and Christ.

The point of it being correct is beside the point, it is where you stand with Christ ALONE! Calvin is not going to save you any more than Luther or Arminius will.

So I do have an interest in it, otherwise I would not have made the statements.

And this is a serious and mature comment by me.

When one believes in an "ism" it turns into Idolatry. I am not concern with what Calvin believes, I am concern with what he believes has turned into and is Calvin and is Arminaianism biblical?

AS I HAVE STATED BOTH ARE FROM THE BIBLE, THUS BOTH CAN NOT BE RIGHT. As I just showed, shows how incompatible both systems are logically.

Why is it so hard for people here to understand what I am saying on a logical level with either one of them?

therockismighty wrote:

olias wrote:

therockismighty wrote:

So lots of rules and hoo haa....


Basic Gospel pawns all imho.

All this stuff gets in the way of Christs teachings and what we are here for.

It is not an addendum to Basic Gospel, but the interpretations of their theological implications.

You can act like you don't have them, but if you truly examined what you believed, you would realize that you also intepret scripture a certain way, even if it is without the denominational label.

againsttheantichrist wrote:

Olias....first two lines = not bright.

http://bible.cc/matthew/15-9.htm

I assume you are talking about John Calvin's teachings.

your right, still I do not need to attach a label to them.. they divide.. they cause arguments... if we can agree on the basics... that is what matters to me, unless there is heretical, false and distorted things being thrown about... it doesn't matter. Sick of denominations, labels.. divisions.. when at this point in time we need to rally around and stand together... not to continually nit pick and be proven right in one theory or another.

Because that would mean giving up our personal convictions. Sorry, but I believe what I believe because I think it is the truth. I agree on the basics, but I do not agree that just because of that, I should give up my interpretations of those beliefs. C.S. Lewis explains what I mean very well in "Mere Christianity".

lord voldemort wrote:

When one believes in an "ism" it turns into Idolatry.

I agree wholeheartedly. The thing is, people seem to automatically assume that because someone says they're a "Calvinist" that they have a little altar in the corner of their bedroom with a statue of a bearded French guy sitting on top of it, and that you believe that anyone that doesn't share your same point-of-view must be part of the irrevocably damned. I don't think I've EVER ran into a person that "believes" (ie, puts their faith in) Calvinism. I know people who put their faith in Christ and choose the term of Calvinism as shorthand to explain their particular views on soteriology and such without resorting to having to rattle-off the whole London Baptist Confession of Faith.

lord voldemort wrote:

I am not concern with what Calvin believes, I am concern with what he believes has turned into

..and this is where I think you and many others have a mental image similar to what I just stated. Maybe not so grandiose, but anytime the word "Calvin" is mentioned in polite company, it seems as though all manners of mental boogeymen are conjured.

lord voldemort wrote:

AS I HAVE STATED BOTH ARE FROM THE BIBLE, THUS BOTH CAN NOT BE RIGHT.

Correct!

Now, if both understandings can't be correct however, does that mean that one or the other must be (ipso facto) rank apostasy? No. It does mean however that one side can be more correct, more consistent, and more biblically grounded in their view. I don't think I need to state the obvious though in saying which view I consider that to be.

I am hard on both sides, so do not take it personal.

The way I see it is this:

Paul was the only person to create a theology that was not based on his personal opinion of how something should be. He managed to keep his gospel Christ centered.

No matter how you looked at Paul's position they came out to be Christ centered.

When I start to look at the other ism's including Calvinism, it is: Abraham to Moses/Law to Christ to Calvin (I am picking on him for this instance, but Calvin can be replaced by any ism), thus it is Calvin: Abraham to Moses/Law to Christ to Calvin. The ism surrounds the gospel message. So whatever the ism is, is the gospel.

Thus, both can be wrong, and they are wrong on that level. When you read the bible and all you see is "Traditional understanding" instead of biblical meaning, that is idolatry.

When you read the bible through the eyes of Dispensationalism, you are reading it through idol eyes.

The same is true for all things, because you are viewing the bible from that lens instead of the lens of Christ Alone. Christ Alone becomes with Calvin or Luther, or Arminius etc.

If Calvinism was a house and I tore through the house, would I find only the Living Christ in the house or will I find John Calvin's corpse buried in the basement? And this can be replaced by whatever ism you believe.

Lord, V. It seems you like to here yourself speak.

It's like your arguing just to argue and feel like your right about everything.

No one here uses Calvinism as idolatry. Move on---->

AS far as throwing stones at others.. why not look to yourself. IN the ism's.. you promote one as well... Prophetic SYmoblism on a profoundly silly level.

But do I think ti means that it is an idolatry for you? No.. not quite.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Lord, V. It seems you like to here yourself speak.

It's like your arguing just to argue and feel like your right about everything.

No one here uses Calvinism as idolatry. Move on---->

Dude. Don't start.

Olias, is Lord V your master? Why do you speak for him?

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Olias, is Lord V your master? Why do you speak for him?

Don't start with me, Ash. I am not taking your bait on this.

Symbolism is far from Calvinism or Dispensationalism or anything like that. The idea that you would even compare the two shows how desperate you are.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Olias, is Lord V your master? Why do you speak for him?

No. He is a friend though. I stick up for my friends. And you regularly try to attack him. So naturally, I am going to ally myself with him.

I say we rename the christian and theology discussion forums as

" May Lord V instruct us and guide us".

..Seriously.. that is all I see on these forums anymore. It's like a herd mentality that follows Lord V like he's a cult leader... and then when a few peoplel disagree... it is quick;ly unacceptable.


" may Lord V instruct us and guide us ".

olias wrote:

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Olias, is Lord V your master? Why do you speak for him?

No. He is a friend though. I stick up for my friends. And you regularly try to attack him. So naturally, I am going to ally myself with him.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

I say we rename the christian and theology discussion forums as

" May Lord V instruct us and guide us".

..Seriously.. that is all I see on these forums anymore. It's like a herd mentality that follows Lord V like he's a cult leader... and then when a few peoplel disagree... it is quick;ly unacceptable.


" may Lord V instruct us and guide us ".

Someone is jealous

"Lord V guide us. Lord V teach us. Lord V protect us. In your light we thrive. In your mercy we are sheltered. In your wisdom we are humbled. We live only to serve. Our lives are yours."

...Someone is stuffed full of self-conceit.


" may lord v instruct us and guide us".

Anyways...

At ease everyone. :p What were you saying before you were interrupted, Paul?

In all seriousness Ash, I state what I state because that is what I believe. I am sure of my beliefs, and I do not need to attack anyone just because they disagree with me. I am not jealous or upset because Shamax is a Calvinist, nor when Graybeard may disagree with a statement I make or BryneVampyr who may attempt to correct something I say or show a new way of saying something.

Iron sharpens Iron. The most mature person will see me as that. The immature will take his iron stick and poke me with it, because he seems not to know what to do with it.

I go to the root assumption of what people say and get them to think about what they believe, challenge their assumption, see that they are believing what they are believing for the right reason.

I would rather challenge Shamax and he walks away a better Christian or even a better Calvinist, than for me to ignore him and allow him to go down a path of self-delusion. I would rather challenge him and he becomes a better presenter of his argument and hopefully that will make him a better follower of Christ.

That is my statement. That is what I do, that is what I enjoy doing. I have had many people much smarter than you tell me I have made them rethink their position and they have walked away a better person, a better way to express their idea, because I challenged them.

Quote :

I have had many people much smarter than you tell me I have made them rethink their position and they have walked away a better person, a better way to express their idea, because I challenged them.

Or course, You are smarter than all of us.. and you never learn from anybodyelse.. they only learn from you.

" May lord v instruct us and guide us".

Quote :

I would rather challenge Shamax and he walks away a better Christian or even a better Calvinist, than for me to ignore him and allow him to go down a path of self-delusion.

Oh , poor Shamax. We can only hope he will learn of your infallible ways.. and not walk down that dark path of self delusion.


" may lord v instruct us and guide us:

Quote :

BryneVampyr who may attempt to correct something I say or show a new way of saying something.

Yes, well yo must forgive us mortal underlings for thinking could ever correct anythin gyou believe. One day we will all learn that from your wisdom flows all truths.

" may lord v insruct us and guide us"



Lord V.. be careful man. you are trully arrogant.. and as Scripture reaches. " Pride comes before a fall".

Holy mudslinging, Batman!

Keep it up, Ash. Show us your character, see if it helps your case. Paul is just a guy with a point of view, like shamax, bryan, me, everybody here. We were having a discussion about calvinism, and then you come bombing in bringing down a righteous ******* hammer. Go ahead. Keep it up. But don't complain when you are banned for constantly attempting to kill threads with your holy-*******-crusade against anyone you deem deserving of your almighty judgement.

Also, what is your reason for posting this off-topic crap? Contribute, or don't post at all.

LastFirstborn wrote:

Holy mudslinging, Batman!

I agree, he is loosing so much ground and he is very dirty to boot.

Lord V possesses is attesting to that thing that is the greatest danger to all Christians. Pious pride. Self righteous egotism masquerading as humble perfection.

It is the most dangerous pitfall because, like Lord V, they do not see what they are doing.. they believe they are simply professing truth and following Christ with teh utmost of piety... and in their own eyes, are like Paul.. a spirit lead infallible apostle.. who corrects all confusions and apostasies.. all while possessing the utmost humility.

Of course the truth is.. is that they are beaming with self righteous religious/spiritual arrogance.. and as such, are as blind as bats to their own state.

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Lord V possesses the greatest danger to all Christians. Pious pride. Self righteous egotism masquerading as humble perfection.

And you accuse him of this based on what?

Kamerad Ash wrote:

Lord V possesses the greatest danger to all Christians. Pious pride. Self righteous egotism masquerading as humble perfection.

It is the most dangerous pitfall because, like Lord V, they do not see what they are doing.. they believe they are simply professing truth and following Christ with teh utmost of piety... and in their own eyes, are like Paul.. a spirit lead infallible apostle.. who corrects all confusions and apostasies.. all while possessing the utmost humility.

Of course the truth is.. is that they are beaming with self righteous arrogance.. and as such, are as blind as bats to their own state.

This is coming from the one who took this seriously:

"Master Rahl guide us. Master Rahl teach us. Master Rahl protect us. In your light we thrive. In your mercy we are sheltered. In your wisdom we are humbled. We live only to serve. Our lives are yours."

This is from Terry Goodkind series Sword of Truth. This is not something I made up, but posted and you took it seriously.

I just switched out Master Rahl with Lord V. It fit your assumption of me, quite well. I find this funny.

Again, Lord V.. you assume to know what I think... and are wrong. I knew that post was a joke.

I'm basing my statement on the overall sentiment of your posts.

But you did indeed make a perfect example to show off your self righteous egotism for us.. within the last few posts.. here it is... anyone who is not blind can see the arrogance prevalent in this post-

Olias, based on this.. as one minor example-

Quote :

In all seriousness Ash, I state what I state because that is what I believe. I am sure of my beliefs, and I do not need to attack anyone just because they disagree with me. I am not jealous or upset because Shamax is a Calvinist, nor when Graybeard may disagree with a statement I make or BryneVampyr who may attempt to correct something I say or show a new way of saying something.

Iron sharpens Iron. The most mature person will see me as that. The immature will take his iron stick and poke me with it, because he seems not to know what to do with it.

I go to the root assumption of what people say and get them to think about what they believe, challenge their assumption, see that they are believing what they are believing for the right reason.

I would rather challenge Shamax and he walks away a better Christian or even a better Calvinist, than for me to ignore him and allow him to go down a path of self-delusion. I would rather challenge him and he becomes a better presenter of his argument and hopefully that will make him a better follower of Christ.

That is my statement. That is what I do, that is what I enjoy doing. I have had many people much smarter than you tell me I have made them rethink their position and they have walked away a better person, a better way to express their idea, because I challenged them.

I don't recall ever seeing Lord V rudely impose his views upon others (as you claim that he does)... which is exactly what you've been doing lately, Ash. No personal attack or animosity intended, but your anti-Lord V rants are not helping anything or anyone. It is fine that you take issue with his views and his approach to stating them; disagreement is an inevitable part of life. Heck, if you were voicing your disapproval without derailing the thread topics and in a way that is constructive rather than just plain inflammatory, I'd overlook it and let it be. But what you're doing buddy is very rude and not constructive to the topics that we're trying to discuss. I know you're trying to help which is a good intent, but, well, you're not helping, just mudslinging. Please be more tactful.