Question about forum interaction

[Reformedguy]

I received a special "love note" first hand this morning from one of them, but somehow I "lost" it. That right there shows us where the love ain't. I swear people don't think they'll stand before the LORD and go on acting like that. Christianity appears to them to be a game, a hobby, where they attack, insult, ridicule, and encourage one another in it.

I have one of them following me over the secular, political board cheerleadering prochoice atheists. Their obsession knows no bounds. We're getting to them.

 

[preacher4truth]

I have one of them following me over the secular, political board cheerleadering prochoice atheists. Their obsession knows no bounds. We're getting to them.

They're angry at us because we give God all the glory in salvation and expose their message for the humanism that it is. Merited grace and/or election, it's all part of their false beliefs.

 

[His clay]

Here is what I have noticed. Posters often dig into bitter feuds with both convinced the other is lying and being devisive.

And often when I have caught the beginning of these fights, it's really arguing over Different understandings of the same words and neither is likley lying.

It's easy to mistake a lack of ability to comprehend with being divisive.

And I think there are a fiew here that need ignoring. But most here acting divisive would not being doing so had then been treated gently.

And It's easy goad someone into frustration and so they lash put, and then you point the finger and cry DIVISIVE!!!!! Seen it many times here.

Yes, being charitable in our disagreements is important. There's a way of telling someone that they are wrong, that is done in the wrong manner. I've seen it many times, and I've probably been the culprit many times. Many here are like Pavlov's dog; they have seen or received so much caustic garbage that it is now their mode of communication. I appreciate your points here. Thanks for responding.

Regarding conditioning: I think that it is incredibly important for one to limit his/her time in the forum precisely because of this issue. For every hour spent in the forum, we need to spend another 4 either in prayer, reading our Bibles, in good Christian fellowship, reading good Christian literature, etc. In other words, our main source of input needs to be good, wholesome sources; and I think that this would strongly counteract the extreme, godless hostility that I've been seeing.

 

[SteveB]

I don't like looking in the mirror. It's to easy to fall in love.

Then that is a serious problem.
Because James tells us that we need to be daily focused on Jesus, and the mirror of liberty.

Jas 1:21-25 WEB 21 Therefore, putting away all filthiness and overflowing of wickedness, receive with humility the implanted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be doers of the word, and not only hearers, deluding your own selves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man looking at his natural face in a mirror; 24 for he sees himself, and goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. 25 But he who looks into the perfect law of freedom and continues, not being a hearer who forgets but a doer of the work, this man will be blessed in what he does.

We're all in this same boat.
We all have to look into the perfect law of liberty, and continue therein.
Exactly as Jesus said in John 8- if you continue in my teachings, you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.
So, I'd say that you're talking about a different mirror than I am.

I did not label anyone.

Actually, this whole "anti-calvinist, provisionist, molinist, arminianist, calvinist" routine are a series of labels that act to separate us.

Paul describes the problem in 1 Corinthians 3. Jesus also had something to say about it too!

1Co 3:1-11 WEB 1 Brothers, I couldn’t speak to you as to spiritual, but as to fleshly, as to babies in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not with solid food, for you weren’t yet ready. Indeed, you aren’t ready even now, 3 for you are still fleshly. For insofar as there is jealousy, strife, and factions among you, aren’t you fleshly, and don’t you walk in the ways of men? 4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” aren’t you fleshly? 5 Who then is Apollos, and who is Paul, but servants through whom you believed, and each as the Lord gave to him? 6 I planted. Apollos watered. But God gave the increase. 7 So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase. 8 Now he who plants and he who waters are the same, but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. 9 For we are God’s fellow workers. You are God’s farming, God’s building. 10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another builds on it. But let each man be careful how he builds on it. 11 For no one can lay any other foundation than that which has been laid, which is Jesus Christ.

That's the title they have chosen for themselves.

There are only two labels I've ever chosen for myself as a follower of Jesus.
1- follower of Jesus
2- dead to my sin, raised IN Christ.

All the others relating to my position in Christ, on this forum have been applied to me by people who have been acting quite maliciously.

It's been made quite clear that unless I walk lockstep with people who are labeling themselves as calvinist, I am an anti-calvinist.

I never said I considered them my enemies.

Your posts show something entirely different.

They declared war on Reformed theology, not I

Are your beliefs so weak that you need to consider the exchange of ideas on an internet forum warfare?

Have you ever read Ephesians 6:10-18?
Take a really close, long hard look at verse 12.

Then commit it to memory.
Eph 6:12 WEB For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world’s rulers of the darkness of this age, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

In light of this, I'd say that you are being played like a fiddle.

So when a Provisionist asks where is the love in Calvinism I think it's perfectly legit to throw it right back at them.

Whose are you?
If you claim the name of Jesus, you are no longer your own! You, like me, have been bought with a price!

1Co 6:19-20 WEB 19 Or don’t you know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.

I'll be among the first to acknowledge that this is not easy. I've been talking with atheists since 2000-2003. But we need to remember WHOSE we are.

2Ti 2:19-26 WEB 19 However, God’s firm foundation stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness.” 20 Now in a large house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of clay. Some are for honor and some for dishonor. 21 If anyone therefore purges himself from these, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified, and suitable for the master’s use, prepared for every good work. 22 Flee from youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23 But refuse foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing that they generate strife. 24 The Lord’s servant must not quarrel, but be gentle toward all, able to teach, patient, 25 in gentleness correcting those who oppose him. Perhaps God may give them repentance leading to a full knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may recover themselves out of the devil’s snare, having been taken captive by him to do his will.

Where is the love in declaring war on your brothers and sisters in Christ?

Who says that you have to respond in kind?

Why do you think that I wound up blocking 2 members?
It became pretty clear early on that my questions, my ideas, etc.... were fodder for warfare. I came to the point where I simply wasn't interested in either becoming a casualty or making others casualties.

Last I checked, we are following the King of the Cosmos.
Infighting is not how we're to engage one another.
Family squabbles are one thing. But even I grew weary of the fighting my family and I engaged in growing up and walked away.
Now we engage in conversation from 250 to 500 miles away from each other, over the general safety of the internet.

And don't think for a single heartbeat that I'm saying these things from the position of innocence or naivete.
I'm exceedingly skilled at the craft of sarcastic witticisms and jabs.
I'm saying this as one who has been both the perpetrator and the victim.
I've lost dear friends because both of us didn't know how to stop, and verbally assassinated each other with sarcasm. I'm saying this from 16+ years out from the incidents, and over a decade of learning to see the fallout, and come to terms with my own culpability in it.

Watch where you walk. Sometimes there's simply no recovery.

 

[eternomade]

Actually, this whole "anti-calvinist, provisionist, molinist, arminianist, calvinist" routine are a series of labels that act to separate us.

Where do you draw the line though? LDS, JW?

 

[Reformedguy]

Then that is a serious problem.
Because James tells us that we need to be daily focused on Jesus, and the mirror of liberty.

Jas 1:21-25 WEB 21 Therefore, putting away all filthiness and overflowing of wickedness, receive with humility the implanted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be doers of the word, and not only hearers, deluding your own selves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man looking at his natural face in a mirror; 24 for he sees himself, and goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. 25 But he who looks into the perfect law of freedom and continues, not being a hearer who forgets but a doer of the work, this man will be blessed in what he does.

We're all in this same boat.
We all have to look into the perfect law of liberty, and continue therein.
Exactly as Jesus said in John 8- if you continue in my teachings, you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.
So, I'd say that you're talking about a different mirror than I am.


Actually, this whole "anti-calvinist, provisionist, molinist, arminianist, calvinist" routine are a series of labels that act to separate us.

Paul describes the problem in 1 Corinthians 3. Jesus also had something to say about it too!

1Co 3:1-11 WEB 1 Brothers, I couldn’t speak to you as to spiritual, but as to fleshly, as to babies in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not with solid food, for you weren’t yet ready. Indeed, you aren’t ready even now, 3 for you are still fleshly. For insofar as there is jealousy, strife, and factions among you, aren’t you fleshly, and don’t you walk in the ways of men? 4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” aren’t you fleshly? 5 Who then is Apollos, and who is Paul, but servants through whom you believed, and each as the Lord gave to him? 6 I planted. Apollos watered. But God gave the increase. 7 So then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase. 8 Now he who plants and he who waters are the same, but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. 9 For we are God’s fellow workers. You are God’s farming, God’s building. 10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another builds on it. But let each man be careful how he builds on it. 11 For no one can lay any other foundation than that which has been laid, which is Jesus Christ.


There are only two labels I've ever chosen for myself as a follower of Jesus.
1- follower of Jesus
2- dead to my sin, raised IN Christ.

All the others relating to my position in Christ, on this forum have been applied to me by people who have been acting quite maliciously.

It's been made quite clear that unless I walk lockstep with people who are labeling themselves as calvinist, I am an anti-calvinist.



Your posts show something entirely different.

Are your beliefs so weak that you need to consider the exchange of ideas on an internet forum warfare?

Have you ever read Ephesians 6:10-18?
Take a really close, long hard look at verse 12.

Then commit it to memory.
Eph 6:12 WEB For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world’s rulers of the darkness of this age, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

In light of this, I'd say that you are being played like a fiddle.




Whose are you?
If you claim the name of Jesus, you are no longer your own! You, like me, have been bought with a price!

1Co 6:19-20 WEB 19 Or don’t you know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.

I'll be among the first to acknowledge that this is not easy. I've been talking with atheists since 2000-2003. But we need to remember WHOSE we are.

2Ti 2:19-26 WEB 19 However, God’s firm foundation stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness.” 20 Now in a large house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of clay. Some are for honor and some for dishonor. 21 If anyone therefore purges himself from these, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified, and suitable for the master’s use, prepared for every good work. 22 Flee from youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23 But refuse foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing that they generate strife. 24 The Lord’s servant must not quarrel, but be gentle toward all, able to teach, patient, 25 in gentleness correcting those who oppose him. Perhaps God may give them repentance leading to a full knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may recover themselves out of the devil’s snare, having been taken captive by him to do his will.


Who says that you have to respond in kind?

Why do you think that I wound up blocking 2 members?
It became pretty clear early on that my questions, my ideas, etc.... were fodder for warfare. I came to the point where I simply wasn't interested in either becoming a casualty or making others casualties.

Last I checked, we are following the King of the Cosmos.
Infighting is not how we're to engage one another.
Family squabbles are one thing. But even I grew weary of the fighting my family and I engaged in growing up and walked away.
Now we engage in conversation from 250 to 500 miles away from each other, over the general safety of the internet.

And don't think for a single heartbeat that I'm saying these things from the position of innocence or naivete.
I'm exceedingly skilled at the craft of sarcastic witticisms and jabs.
I'm saying this as one who has been both the perpetrator and the victim.
I've lost dear friends because both of us didn't know how to stop, and verbally assassinated each other with sarcasm. I'm saying this from 16+ years out from the incidents, and over a decade of learning to see the fallout, and come to terms with my own culpability in it.

Watch where you walk. Sometimes there's simply no recovery.

??

 

[His clay]

Good thoughts on a genuinely important issue.

The question I find myself wondering is- who's the people who are in the "excluded" class?

To the calvinist, anyone who doesn't agree with them should be kicked out.
Unless you become a calvinist, you can't actually become a follower of Jesus.

Apparently it's not possible to become a follower of Jesus and not be a calvinist.

Earlier, last month, I was accused of being a molinist. I'd never actually heard of that before, but apparently it's a real thing. I had to go look it up.

So, according to this passage from Titus, are we all supposed to exclude one another from our particular system of belief, in spite of the fact that Jesus said that it's our love for one another that demonstrates to the world that we are his followers?

The problem I find myself curious about is.... just how far do we all push away from one another?

Because it's become quite clear to me that each of us, once we're in our particular clique will then start looking around at each other and start looking for more ways to exclude those whose views didn't match up with our own. This dynamic will continue until the only person left in our particular system of belief is ourselves. Everyone else is an heretic on some level.

So, in the rush towards orthodoxy and doctrinal purity, remember the 7 letters to the 7 churches in Revelation 2 and 3.

It's curious that Ephesus had been praised for their doctrinal orthodoxy, and rebuked for their lack of love, and then warned that unless they returned to their first love, they would have their candlestick removed.

As it's been made clear to me that there are several people in this forum who view me as a heretic because I have challenged their views, with biblical truth, I find myself wondering....

At what point do you find yourself in your very own room, all by yourself, decrying all those heretics? Many of whom used to be your dear, and close friends.

Remember, while doctrinal orthodoxy does indeed matter, love is still more important.

Rev 2:1-7 WEB 1 “To the angel of the assembly in Ephesus write: “He who holds the seven stars in his right hand, he who walks among the seven golden lamp stands says these things: 2 “I know your works, and your toil and perseverance, and that you can’t tolerate evil men, and have tested those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and found them false. 3 You have perseverance and have endured for my name’s sake, and have not grown weary. 4 But I have this against you, that you left your first love. 5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I am coming to you swiftly, and will move your lamp stand out of its place, unless you repent. 6 But this you have, that you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. 7 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies. To him who overcomes I will give to eat from the tree of life, which is in the Paradise of my God.

1Co 13:1-8 WEB 1 If I speak with the languages of men and of angels, but don’t have love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but don’t have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but don’t have love, it profits me nothing. 4 Love is patient and is kind. Love doesn’t envy. Love doesn’t brag, is not proud, 5 doesn’t behave itself inappropriately, doesn’t seek its own way, is not provoked, takes no account of evil; 6 doesn’t rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things. 8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will be done away with. Where there are various languages, they will cease. Where there is knowledge, it will be done away with.

First of all, thanks for taking the time to respond. I invited everyone to respond to my post, and I made it clear that I was unconcerned with doctrinal persuasion. So, thank you for taking the time.

Second, I wish to remind you of what I wrote in the opening post, for what I wrote there already answered many of the issues you raised. Underlying nearly all of what you wrote is the issue of identifying the "divisive person." Please note what I said about verse 9 and how it connects to verse 10.

-"a person who stirs up division" The prior verse (v9) points out a more Jewish aspect of division over the law, genealogies, etc. However, the prior verse (v9) speaks toward certain topics. It is topically focused. In contrast, verse 10 is specifically focused upon "a person." His admonishment concerns a person who stirs up division. Most obviously, this person would be the kind to raise the topics just mentioned (v9), and the person would not just raise them but also persist in them. The main descriptor of the person is that he is divisive. BDAG gives the following definition of the first word (in Greek) αἱρετικὸν "pert. to causing divisions, factions, division-making".

Hence, the immediate context defines the topics of the divisive person mentioned in verse 10. Also, take note of what I wrote in the opening post. I placed it at the end in the critical application questions.

While the passage itself is fairly specific as to the topics of this divisive person (note v9), are there other biblical criteria that could also be applied to divisiveness? For example, is a person who lies about others, and persists in spite of warnings, a divisive person? Is a slanderer, who persists in spite of warnings, a divisive person? I've listed what I think are the two most common sins in this forum.

Please note that this is largely looking at the passage and asking application questions. I have not pointed out any poster in particular, and I have not pointed fingers at certain theological persuasions. The forums, and the topics therein, are the occasion to bring out the depravity in each of us. Note also, I have no problem with posters who disagree with me, and who are willing to be corrected, for we all are in need at times to receive reprimand. Iron does sharpen iron. Those who have a repentant, teachable spirit are not in the cross-hairs of the "divisive person" scope. My focus is more upon the person who is a habitual, unrepentant liar (straw man after straw man), and my focus is more upon the one who slanders others and even God himself by making false accusations.

The first paragraph asks the critical question about opening up the definition of the divisive person with respect to perpetual lying and perpetual slander, both of these are clearly sins in the Bible, and they are the two most common sins I see in this forum. Note, these sins are sins regardless of what theological persuasion you may have.

The second paragraph cuts off the path that I would expect others to mistakenly go down. I for one, in the opening post, made it explicit that I was not pointing fingers at theological persuasions. The underlying problem is the sinful approach many have taken in their manner of discussion over these topics. I also pointed out that I have no problems with posters that disagree with me. As I said, "Those who have a repentant, teachable spirit are not in the cross-hairs of the 'divisive person' scope." I even underlined the word "not" for extra emphasis. Then I restated the main problem, "the person who is a habitual, unrepentant liar (straw man after straw man), and my focus is more upon the one who slanders others and even God himself by making false accusations."

Third, you raise the issue of love. I will simplify this to the mere basics. Love has boundaries. Example: husbands are to love their wives within the boundaries of a monogamous, Christlike marriage. Husbands do not love their daughters or sons in the same intimate manner as their wives; nor do husbands love their neighbor's wives in the same intimate sense. In the broader sense, these boundaries are called doctrine and commands. Love has boundaries. Example: the imprecatory Psalms, chastisement from Jesus, and Peter's verbal butchery of false teachers all ought to teach us this. The very fact that we are to love God, above all else and with all that we are, ought to teach us that idolatry is wrong. Paul's letter to the Corinthians is loving and also heavily critiques their pagan, prideful assumptions. So I will repeat, love has boundaries.

I think that you understand and agree with the above paragraph, for you write the following. "Remember, while doctrinal orthodoxy does indeed matter, love is still more important." I agree that doctrinal orthodoxy isn't everything, but both (love and orthodoxy) are to be held together. We cannot allow them to have a competition, for both are indispensable to true Christianity. Doctrinal orthodoxy (. . . with all your mind . . .) is actually tied to our love for God, but we also ought to be humble enough to listen, for sometimes we are wrong, and we are commanded "let everyone be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath."

A critical boundary is sin, and that is precisely where we need to draw the line. I have already addressed two key sins, where if a person persists in them in spite of warnings, then I really think that perpetuating discussion with that person is under biblical scrutiny.

Can we agree that the "end" does not justify sinful means? If the end is doctrine, then we ought not utilize sinful means to arrive at the end. Can we at least agree on this issue?

 

[SteveB]

Labels help to identify what someone believes.

It's only effective and beneficial if the party doing so is labeling themselves.
I only chose to state that my affiliation was with Calvary chapel so I could give context to my "status" in the discussion regarding calvinism and arminianism.


Especially when terms I'd never heard of before were bandied about in an accusatory manner, as though I was a criminal of deep corruption.

But you are correct, that they can be used in a negative or insulting way, which Christians should not be doing.

In my mind, when a label is applied by one's self, it's to facilitate a better understanding in an environment where labels are applied by others who seek to separate and isolate themselves.
If labels are applied to others, it's been my observation that they are being weaponized to vilify people who think differently.

I was helped knowing that you attend a Calvary Chapel. That, I would consider to be a label.

I applied that to myself.
I then presented an OP which provided the background I hold in regards to calvinism and arminianism.

Others have called me a molinist, humanist, anti-calvinist, and a handful of other terms in what struck me as a derogatory manner.

I label myself as an apprentice/student/disciple/follower of Jesus.

Just like I am labeled a "Calvinist" although I have never applied the term to myself.

Then why would you use it?
As I recall reading from your posts over the past few weeks, you do not view yourself as a calvinist.
Have I misread your comments?

In my descriptions of my own views, I view myself as neither arminian nor calvinist, and both arminian and calvinist.
According to a few others, that appears to make me anti-calvinist.

It helps me understand what you believe about Christ.

What I believe about Jesus is contained in the bible.
It's why I consider myself a student, an apprentice,...
I used to consider myself far more advanced than that, but the past 45 years of experience and learning have taught me that I will be a student and apprentice of Jesus until this body ceases to function and I am welcomed into heaven.

I don't know if Provisionism is a negative label or not, but it is a label, and it helps me understand what someone believes when they say this.

It's not whether you view yourself as a provisionist.
It's about someone else's application of that to your views.
Paul describes the problem in 1 Corinthians 3. Jesus made it a point when the 12 told him that they saw someone who didn't travel with them casting out demons in his name.

Sectarianism is still as much a sin today as it was 1960+/- years ago.

Similar to someone saying they believe in the Trinity, that creates distinctions, which are good.

They've applied that too themselves.
Over the past decade of my time on this forum, when someone else calls me a trinitarian, it comes across as an epithet, as though they are vomiting the term out when they say it.

I do indeed believe that the bible is quite clear about YHVH (God's name) being Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as the One, True and Living God.

But those who seek to argue against it are as vociferous and vitriolic in their opposition as the calvinists who oppose any other view.

It's literally like walking through a minefield.

To me, if you're not able to provide a biblical perspective on what you claim to believe, you shouldn't apply that label to yourself.

I think that it's really important to be able to start with a biblical description, using bible verses to explain it.
Then, in the course of conversation about the topic, if someone comes along and says- well, that's thus and such.... you then should go examine sources that further explain and elaborate on that idea.

It goes back to the point of what Peter says-- being able to give a defense for the hope that lives within you.

It does indeed sound like a tedious and time-consuming process.

But if you can't actually explain it, you're not helping yourself, your faith, or those to whom you're trying to explain it.

 

[SteveB]

Where do you draw the line though? LDS, JW?

I'm neither LDS nor jw.
Nor have I ever once stated any doctrines that would show me as such.

The bible is the line.
Or weren't you ever taught that?

 

[Reformedguy]

?
What, you thought your opinion was a requirement for me to think as I do?
Sounds like you're too lazy to think rationally.

Have a nice day.

And your to lazy to provide quotes of Calvinists kicking people out of the kingdom because their not Calvinists.

Have a nice day as well

 

[eternomade]

Then why would you use it?
As I recall reading from your posts over the past few weeks, you do not view yourself as a calvinist.
Have I misread your comments?

I don't use it for myself, but others do. I don't take offence though to being called a Calvinist. I affirm that the doctrines of grace are true. Typically those who agree with the 5 points there, are considered "Calvinists". Those who don't agree with the 5 points are considered "Arminians". You can read about there here if you are interested at all in the history of the "names".

It was unfair to say you are Pelagian, I apologize. I did not know that you affirmed the doctrine of "Total Depravity".

In my descriptions of my own views, I view myself as neither arminian nor calvinist, and both arminian and calvinist.
According to a few others, that appears to make me anti-calvinist.

It's just I hear this VERY often. At least you shared your views of Calvary Chapel though, instead of making me guess. I would say those who don't hold to the doctrines of grace, are not Calvinists.

What I believe about Jesus is contained in the bible.
It's why I consider myself a student, an apprentice,...
I used to consider myself far more advanced than that, but the past 45 years of experience and learning have taught me that I will be a student and apprentice of Jesus until this body ceases to function and I am welcomed into heaven.

If everyone said this, we would all be in agreement, but we aren't. Once we start to describe Jesus, the differences come out quickly. That's why labels help.

It's not whether you view yourself as a provisionist.
It's about someone else's application of that to your views.
Paul describes the problem in 1 Corinthians 3. Jesus made it a point when the 12 told him that they saw someone who didn't travel with them casting out demons in his name.

Sectarianism is still as much a sin today as it was 1960+/- years ago.

This is concerning the Gospel though, its not some secondary issue.

To me, if you're not able to provide a biblical perspective on what you claim to believe, you shouldn't apply that label to yourself.

I think that it's really important to be able to start with a biblical description, using bible verses to explain it.
Then, in the course of conversation about the topic, if someone comes along and says- well, that's thus and such.... you then should go examine sources that further explain and elaborate on that idea.

It goes back to the point of what Peter says-- being able to give a defense for the hope that lives within you.

It does indeed sound like a tedious and time-consuming process.

But if you can't actually explain it, you're not helping yourself, your faith, or those to whom you're trying to explain it.

I agree completely.

 

[eternomade]

I'm neither LDS nor jw.
Nor have I ever once stated any doctrines that would show me as such.

The bible is the line.
Or weren't you ever taught that?

Yes, I understand that, and I think you would agree with me that they are not Christians. It seems you want unity, and I am trying to understand where you draw the line between unity and division?

I am asking about whether or not to call one a brother or sister in Christ. How do we make the determination whether to evangelize them or call them brethren?

 

[His clay]

For others, I have been reading the posts in this thread. I'm out of time for now. Next time I hope to cover a few more posts.

 

[Theo1689]

In my descriptions of my own views, I view myself as neither arminian nor calvinist, and both arminian and calvinist.

That's nonsensical, because it's an oxymoron.
You can't be "both" and also "neither'.
That's just worthless word salad.

According to a few others, that appears to make me anti-calvinist.

No, it's your constant attacks and misrepresentations of Calvinism and your instulting of Calvinists that makes you "anti-Calvinist".

What I believe about Jesus is contained in the bible.

EVERYONE says that.
That's why it has limited use in describing yourself to others.

They've applied that too themselves.
Over the past decade of my time on this forum, when someone else calls me a trinitarian, it comes across as an epithet, as though they are vomiting the term out when they say it.

It seems to me that you are taking more offense at terms directed your way than those using the terms.

It goes back to the point of what Peter says-- being able to give a defense for the hope that lives within you.

That's about the gospel.
Do you need us to explain the gospel to you?

 

[Theo1689]

Sounds like you're too lazy to think rationally.

Where is the love?

 

[Theo1689]

I'm neither LDS nor jw.
Nor have I ever once stated any doctrines that would show me as such.

The bible is the line.
Or weren't you ever taught that?

He wasn't accusing you of being LDS or a JW.
He was asking you where do we draw the line in using descriptive labels.
You seem very quick to take offense at just about anything.

 

[Simpletruther]

Yes, being charitable in our disagreements is important. There's a way of telling someone that they are wrong, that is done in the wrong manner. I've seen it many times, and I've probably been the culprit many times. Many here are like Pavlov's dog; they have seen or received so much caustic garbage that it is now their mode of communication. I appreciate your points here. Thanks for responding.

Regarding conditioning: I think that it is incredibly important for one to limit his/her time in the forum precisely because of this issue. For every hour spent in the forum, we need to spend another 4 either in prayer, reading our Bibles, in good Christian fellowship, reading good Christian literature, etc. In other words, our main source of input needs to be good, wholesome sources; and I think that this would strongly counteract the extreme, godless hostility that I've been seeing.

Good thoughts. I have slowly backed off my time here over the years thinking the same thing.

 

[His clay]

I am leaning towards we are to reject these types much sooner than when we do, according to Scripture.

Their twisted ways and words are to be cut short of spreading. I think continuing to engage them merely spreads their errors, and they become more twisted in their teachings the longer they are engaged, deceiving themselves and others, 2 Timothy 3:13.

I think we get caught up in trying to withstand them over and over instead of obeying this text. It would save us a lot of grief and add to more time well spent. Continuing to engage them is not profitable.

Matthew 7:6 and Romans 16:17 also come to mind.

I appreciate your thoughts here. First, I looked up all of the different references you mentioned. They are helpful to observe. I've been searching for a few more verses on biblical separation, and those verses are scratching that itch.

Second, profitability is sometimes hard to judge. I prefer the standard of faithfulness to God, His word, and being obedient. I have no problem with posting the issues wrong with an argument, but what I've seen is on this forum often appears to be pointless, long, immature exchanges. I don't find them profitable, and I usually just stop reading when the discussion moves to arbitrary accusations of fallacy. The key here is the word arbitrary. It's fine to point out the fallacy, but one needs to say why it is a fallacy. I just read a poster who said that the opening post was just a bunch of ad-hominem, but the poster was too lazy or thoughtless to even say why (i.e. arbitrary accusation). That kind of dialogue is unprofitable. No understanding is promoted. At any rate, those are a few quick thoughts on profitability.

Third, the ability to listen is a dead give-away. The technique of a troll is to only listen enough to misrepresent. Their goal is not to deal with your argument, but rather to get you angry and upset so as to attack your morals. I've watched one person post a critique of Calvinism; I respond with the fallacies and why the critique is false. But in the next breath, nothing is done to address my argument, but rather the topic is shifted to another straw man or misguided argument. I respond to that, and then the poster just ignores the critique, and move on to another straw man or misguided argument. The pattern is really easy to follow, and it all goes back to the basic issue of failing to follow James 1:19. The other person is really not listening. Such exchanges are easy to see as fitting into the unprofitable category.

Sadly, I've watched my mom, who has Alzheimers, demonstrate the same inability to listen. But this is different for family and people who have been diagnosed with that mental disease. She is profoundly scatter brained, and she often hears her own thoughts rather than my words. She jumps to false conclusions much the same as the troll, but she will at least listen to loving correction. I told her today, "Please hear why I'm actually saying." And then I repeated my statement again, and she responded positively to it. My main point, can the other person listen? The responses of many on this forum are a dead giveaway that they cannot and will not listen.

Those are a few thoughts that came to mind. Thanks again for your post. I'll add one last thought. I'm currently reading through 1 Corinthians and a commentary on it because the Corinthians were well known for their factionalism, so it seems like a good idea to read Paul's inspired technique at cutting through that issue.

 

[preacher4truth]

I appreciate your thoughts here. First, I looked up all of the different references you mentioned. They are helpful to observe. I've been searching for a few more verses on biblical separation, and those verses are scratching that itch.

Second, profitability is sometimes hard to judge. I prefer the standard of faithfulness to God, His word, and being obedient. I have no problem with posting the issues wrong with an argument, but what I've seen is on this forum often appears to be pointless, long, immature exchanges. I don't find them profitable, and I usually just stop reading when the discussion moves to arbitrary accusations of fallacy. The key here is the word arbitrary. It's fine to point out the fallacy, but one needs to say why it is a fallacy. I just read a poster who said that the opening post was just a bunch of ad-hominem, but the poster was too lazy or thoughtless to even say why (i.e. arbitrary accusation). That kind of dialogue is unprofitable. No understanding is promoted. At any rate, those are a few quick thoughts on profitability.

Third, the ability to listen is a dead give-away. The technique of a troll is to only listen enough to misrepresent. Their goal is not to deal with your argument, but rather to get you angry and upset so as to attack your morals. I've watched one person post a critique of Calvinism; I respond with the fallacies and why the critique is false. But in the next breath, nothing is done to address my argument, but rather the topic is shifted to another straw man or misguided argument. I respond to that, and then the poster just ignores the critique, and move on to another straw man or misguided argument. The pattern is really easy to follow, and it all goes back to the basic issue of failing to follow James 1:19. The other person is really not listening. Such exchanges are easy to see as fitting into the unprofitable category.

Sadly, I've watched my mom, who has Alzheimers, demonstrate the same inability to listen. But this is different for family and people who have been diagnosed with that mental disease. She is profoundly scatter brained, and she often hears her own thoughts rather than my words. She jumps to false conclusions much the same as the troll, but she will at least listen to loving correction. I told her today, "Please hear why I'm actually saying." And then I repeated my statement again, and she responded positively to it. My main point, can the other person listen? The responses of many on this forum are a dead giveaway that they cannot and will not listen.

Those are a few thoughts that came to mind. Thanks again for your post. I'll add one last thought. I'm currently reading through 1 Corinthians and a commentary on it because the Corinthians were well known for their factionalism, so it seems like a good idea to read Paul's inspired technique at cutting through that issue.

Well, I certainly appreciate your post. We are observing the same sad patterns, it is a drain on our time and spiritual life. Nothing is lost in not going back and forth with these types, though some beg to differ.

However, I cannot find a biblical reason to practice the definition of insanity. It may all come down to an addiction to the www, electronics, and quarreling. That's up to each person to decide.

I am going to go the route of less time spent on forums, and perhaps step in once in awhile to respond to some of the posts that are doing what we describe. But back and forth bickering to ad nauseam? No. Generally I read and ignore the trollish posts from the anti-Calvinist side looking for an opportunity to quarrel and act callow.


@His clay I shared some similar thoughts over here and tagged you.

- Putting Things Into Perspective: Getting Our Priorities Right

Well, I hope this will bless someone, yet at the same time while posting this I am fully aware of the disdain for myself and for other Docrtrines of Grace brothers and sisters, and for the Biblical teachings themselves from the anti-Calvinist crowd. Much time is spent from the latter in making...

forums.carm.org

 

[David1701]

It can be applicable; if you had Authority; CARM Forums is not the Church. In the Church, you can cast the person out through Church Discipline. Leaving a Poster alone HERE, then taking a step back; makes them THE lone teacher...

Follow your Conscience...

We have individual, not only corporate, responsibility to obey the word of God.

I was thinking about the very Scripture that His clay quoted, on another forum, without having seen this thread. I realised that I'd been disobeying God, by omitting to obey this command, so I separated from the heretics (I believe that it refers to divisive false teachers (edit: those who create factions, e.g. Provisionism), rather than divisive people in general). Then I came back here and saw this thread... What a confirmation!