Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why I am a Calvinist
http://www.apuritansmind.com/TULIP/WhyIAmACalvinist.htm ^ | 7/27/02 | C. Matthew McMahon

Posted on 07/27/2002 8:46:57 PM PDT by RnMomof7

Why I am a Calvinist

by C. Matthew McMahon

    There are a variety of theological persuasions in the world. One might say there are too many of them. We may go through denomination after denomination and find a great variety of beliefs and doctrines concerning things about God, things about Christ, things about man and so on. Yet these ideologies are but ripples from the great stone of the Gospel which was plunged into the lake of humanity.

    All theological persuasions are not perfect. It is impossible that any theological system of doctrine be perfect for if it was perfect it would be the Scriptures themselves; for only the Word of God is inerrant, or without error. Man has undertaken the task, as commanded by God (2 Tim. 2:15), to understand God’s Word in spite of his lack of ability to understand it perfectly. He strives to apprehend what he can because a good theologian knows he cannot comprehend (or understand totally) everything about the Scriptures. But that gives us no excuse not to try.

    In the endeavor to ascertain right doctrine, various systems have come up throughout church history. There have been the Arians, the Socinians, the Gnostics, the Roman Catholics, the Epicureans, the Docetics, the Pelagians, the Mormons, the Arminians, the Manicheans and so on. These though, should not be considered to be a true systems of right doctrine since each of them denies a major tenant of the Christian religion. One denies the deity of Christ, where another denies the humanity. One says heaven is attained by knowledge alone, another denies that people are sinners. One says God is not sovereign, and another says man is the measure of all things. One says man is God, and another says God is not all powerful. These systems of doctrines are clearly false. They remove or exalt a particular essential attribute, or many essential attributes of Christianity, not to mention adding many things which the Scriptures never teach. So it would rightly be said that they are systems, but it would also be equally fair to say that they are wrong systems.   

  So what is the right system of doctrine? From study, contemplation, and meditation and upon the Word of God, from assessing church history and the movements contained therein, from hearing hundred of speakers on varying subjects, and listening to a plethora of viewpoints on every aspect of the Bible, I rest upon the system of doctrine called "Calvinism."     It is unfortunate for Calvinism that it is called Calvinism. Charles Spurgeon rightly stated that "Calvinism is nothing more than a nickname for Biblical Christianity." He was right. The name is often a warrant for despisement though. People say because we follow a man named Calvin, we are not following God. Does not Paul say in 1 Cor. 1:12, "Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or I am of Christ." is Christ divided?" Paul is right. We are not to follow after men. We are to follow after God for sectarianism is a sin rebuked by the 1st chapter of 1 Corinthians. But do Calvinists really follow Calvin? No. It is actually wrong to call Calvinists "Calvinist" because they are doing nothing other than using the same body of doctrine that Calvin used, who in turn copied Augustine, who in turn copied the church fathers and they, who in turn, followed Christ and the Apostles. The early church fathers, who lived between 95 AD and 200 AD are just as much Calvinists, for understanding grace, as Augustine was a Calvinist, and as John Calvin was a Calvinist. Calvinism is nothing more than a label to show what view one holds upon the Scriptures, not upon a certain man. Someone may say, "That is not true. If you are a Calvinist, then you follow the teachings of Calvin and his interpretation of the Bible." Let us see if this is a worthy set of propositions. Because at the outset, they prove of necessity, nothing of the kind.

    When I was 21, I had finished 2 years of Bible college. I went to an Arminian School, learned Arminian doctrine, and read Arminian books. I had no previous learning in religion until I attended that school, so I was indoctrinated in that theology without ever knowing whether it was true or false. In my naïveté I believed what I was taught (Surely not to question doctrine was my own mistake, but being indoctrinated in that way helped me to understand more about what I believe now. So it was the providence of God which kept me in my sin of false doctrine for a time.) Not too long after my second year, a friend of mine, who believed the doctrines of grace Calvinist began to challenge me on many of my "biblical" doctrines. I had a well rounded handle on the doctrine I possessed and propagated it thoroughly among my friends at school. But when this young man challenged me as he did, I was not able to refute him. The reason I was not able to refute his arguments had nothing to do with not understanding my own doctrine, for I did. But he came at me with something I did not expect; the Bible. He proposed a whole new system of doctrine which ran completely contrary to my own beliefs. My understanding of sin was so unbiblical that when he told me to read Romans 3:10-18, I was taken back by Paul’s poignant words. I was challenged by the very book I thought I understood. My views of man, Christ, God, salvation, sin, sovereignty, the will, and others were so warped and twisted that my young friend didn’t even need to rebuke me, for the Scriptures were doing it quite well. I had understood doctrine, it was just not the doctrine of the Bible.

    So over the next summer, because of that day and that particular challenge of my friend, I devoted my time to reading through the entire Bible and endeavor to take it as it stood rather than what I wanted to read into it. My prayer was that the Lord would teach me His word by the power of the Holy Spirit so that I would know what it said rather than what I wanted it to say. After three months my views on man, Christ, God, sin, salvation and the like were radically transformed. (you would be amazed at what the Spirit of God will do with such a prayer and a simple reading of the Bible.) The point is this, my theology came out Calvinist without ever knowing what Calvinism was. I had not known what Calvin taught or that he was even a person. But my theology reflected nonetheless. The study of the Word of God transformed me. The Scriptures taught me, instead of me trying to teach it. So we see that being a Calvinist is not following after one man, but submitting under the authority of the Bible.

    Why would someone want to be a Calvinist? Calvinism is not adherence to a person, but to a set of beliefs which are rightly in accord with the Bible. People who want to be right in their understanding of the doctrines of the Bible, adhere to Calvinism. Calvinism is not perfect. It is a system of doctrine worked over and over by countless men since the time of Christ. It will never be perfect because it is not inspired by God. So why should we believe Calvinism over and above other systems of doctrines? Because if we were to determine what system of doctrine hits closest to the bulls-eye of the Scriptures, Calvinism would be the first outer ring. Any system of doctrine which does serious damage to the doctrines of man, Christ, God, sin and salvation, cannot be considered worthy of our attention as Christians. And there is no system of doctrine which covers all these so Biblically as Calvinism.

    What does Calvinism teach? Calvinism can be divided up into hundreds of points. There are a variety of propositions and ideas which are woven into the fabric of Calvinism. But if we were to concisely describe the simplistic form of Calvinism, we would look at the acronym T.U.L.I.P.: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints.

    The first doctrine of grace is Total Depravity.  Total depravity keeps us humble. It states that man is totally and completely a sinner; heart, soul, mind and body, who can do no righteous deed. The image of God is so marred and twisted by the fall of Adam that every person who is conceived is at that point at enmity with God. They are enemies of God, they hate God, and they would even kill God if he showed up in their living room. As a matter of fact, when the Lord Jesus Christ came down to earth, they killed him.

Total Depravity is proven by both the Old and New Testaments: Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-18. After one understands that he is a sinner who cannot by his own power come to faith, and that he has lost everything which would enable him to come to Christ because of the Fall and of his sin, then he comes to see Unconditional Election (Second doctrine). Man, being sinful cannot choose to follow God because he hates God. So God must remove the heart of stone and replace it with a heart of flesh. God chooses man. He unconditionally, not based upon anything a man can do which is good or evil, elects people to everlasting life. Its God’s job to save, and our job to praise Him for saving us. The Scriptures shows this doctrine emphatically: Malachi 1:2; Romans 8:29; Romans 9:1ff; Ephesians 1:3ff.

    How does God save us? Yes, He elects us, but what is the basis for our election? It is not our work, but Christ’s work. God sends His Son to die for everyone whom He elects. The Son pays the price, and the debt is removed. When Jesus dies on the cross He secures salvation for everyone He dies for. And the work of Christ’s death and resurrection is transferred at that time to the account of all those who will be saved through Him. Jesus comes to die for God’s chosen people, His treasured possession. In this way the atonement is limited in scope but not in power (Third Doctrine).   The Scriptures teach us this doctrine as well; Isaiah 53:1ff; Matthew 1:21; John 10:1ff; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 5:25.

    The fourth doctrine of grace, or Calvinistic doctrine, is Irresistible Grace. If Jesus dies for the elect, and God unconditionally elects all those depraved people whom He calls His own, the regenerating power of the Spirit of God will not fail. Regeneration is where the Spirit changes the old heart of stone to a beating heart of flesh. And He does this prior to our faith. We believe on Christ after our sinful depraved souls are given the new capability to believe through the renewing power of God’s Spirit. His grace is then called irresistible, not because we believe against our will kicking and screaming, but our hearts are inclined to believe, so we love to believe and we go to Christ willingly. The Scriptures show us this in Psalms 51:10; 110:3; Jer. 31:33ff; John 3:2ff; Romans 2:29; Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 1:29; and 2:13.

    The last main point of God’s grace seen so vividly in the doctrines of Calvinism is Perseverance of the Saints. All who are redeemed from their depraved states, all whom Christ came to ransom from death and pay the price to redeem from God’s wrath, all whom the Spirit irresistible touches with His grace, and all those who are unconditionally elected to eternal life will persevere to the end. They will sin, yes. But they will never fall away from grace. This does not give us a license to sin, for those who are truly changed are changed and have a new desire and new nature which releases them from the that the old depraved nature had on them. These saints persevere because God continually upholds them through the grace of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit. They are God’s temples, His residing place. God dwells in the spirit of a man’s renewed heart. This, in and of itself, is an amazing thing!! And does the Scripture show us this doctrine? More than we could imagine: Phil. 1:6; Romans 8:30; John 10:28-29; John 17:2, 6, 9, 24; 1 Thess. 5:23.

    What doctrines am I rejecting as a Calvinist? I am rejecting everything that "changes the truth of God for a lie, and denies Jesus Christ as our only Sovereign and Lord (Jude 4)." I am rejecting anything which would rise up and call itself a Gospel which is no gospel at all. I reject anything which exalts man to a place and position where he ought not to be, and decreases the grace of Christ. I reject anything which makes God a cosmic bell-hop tending to the commands and demands of sinful men as another gospel.

I reject anything which removes God’s sovereignty to place man as the Sovereign as another gospel. I reject anything which denies the sovereign decrees of God and His electing grace to put salvation into the hands of sinful men as another gospel. I reject anything which denies man’s total depravity and exalts his fictitious free will as another gospel. I reject anything which places the perseverance of man to glory in the incapable hands of a sinful man as another gospel.

I reject anything which endeavors to treat God as the great Grandfather in the sky beckoning and pleading with man to be saved as changing the true God into a pitiable wimp. This is another Gospel. I reject anything which denies the atonement of Christ for what it is; a substitutionary atonement on behalf of the elect. If we deny this, we deny the Gospel. I reject anything which makes the cross less than definite salvation for the elect, as another Gospel. I reject anything which is contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as it is preached by Christ in His Word. It is to these Calvinistic doctrines and teachings which all Biblical Christians hold. It is these Calvinistic doctrines of grace which wild horses could in no way drag from me. Especially the wonderful doctrine of Christ’s atonement for His people. And what does Paul say about those who preach, teach, and believe another Gospel? Galatians 1:8 is emphatic, "If we, or an angel from heaven, preach to you any other Gospel than what we have preached, let him be anathema, (or accursed.)" They are not slapped on the wrist and sent to their heavenly rooms. They are cast into the deepest, darkest, hottest section of hell for perverting the truth of God’s Word. We see that the Gospel is something to contend about, and is something we need to be right about.

    When I was 21, I had a form of godliness but I denied its power. I had a system of doctrine which denied Jesus as the only Sovereign and Lord. Yet, God in His mercy forgave that heinous sin of wrong belief. He allowed the scales to fall from my eyes. He allowed me, if you will, to be "born again, again." My mind has been renewed and my life transformed by these doctrines of grace. It is absolutely true what Spurgeon said, that Calvinism is nothing other than a nickname for Biblical Christianity. And until a person understands these doctrines, his walk with God will be a superficial walk. The doctrines of God’s grace, which are the doctrines of Calvinism, plunge us deep within the fountain of God’s mercy and power. Without understanding God’s election of depraved people, how can anyone understand what grace is really about?—they can’t.

Why am I a Calvinist? Because God will not allow me to be anything else. He has opened my eyes to depth beyond my wildest aspirations. He continues to humble me, the rebellious sinner, before His awesome majesty and power. May it be that all of God’s people would be humbled by His grace.

 


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: calvin; godsglory; grace; sounddoctrine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-244 next last
To: JesseShurun
how can you possibly know what goes on in the churches?

I cannot speak for others here, but judging by your posts, I'd be willing to bet I've spent more time in protestant churches than you've spent in Catholic Churches.

You have preconceived ideas which really are akin to bigotry and hatred

I read through all your posts since you signed on. Look in the mirror and pull that log outta yer eye before you point out the speck in mine.

221 posted on 07/29/2002 5:54:44 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun
Augustine said

There are so very very many Church Fathers who repeatedly assert the Real Presence, and none that deny it, yet you take Augustine out of context to try to disprove the totality of the belief of the early Christians.

Even folks who speak "mystically" and smatter their speech with hebrew and patronize the rest of us and our "lower" understanding of scripture, are often no more than charlatans themselves.

222 posted on 07/29/2002 5:58:13 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
Proud: Main Entry: proud
Pronunciation: 'praud
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English prud, probably from Old French prod, prud, prou capable, good, valiant, from Late Latin prode advantage, advantageous, back-formation from Latin prodesse to be advantageous, from pro-, prod- for, in favor + esse to be -- more at PRO-, IS
Date: before 12th century
1 : feeling or showing pride: as a : having or displaying excessive self-esteem b : much pleased : EXULTANT c : having proper self-respect
2 a : marked by stateliness : MAGNIFICENT b : giving reason for pride : GLORIOUS <the proudest moment in her life>
3 : VIGOROUS, SPIRITED <a proud steed>
4
223 posted on 07/29/2002 6:06:15 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
"Theresa I do not mean to be hurtful or disrespectful to you."

I know. I appreciate that too.

"BUT YOU think it is repugnant to allow God to do as HE will with HIS creation..."

There are many, many Christians who reject the docterine of Calvin. I do not think Calvinists are in the majority, now or in the past. God can do anything he wants to do with his creation. ANYTHING. The question is would he DESIRE to see to it that at least half of the human race dies in their sins. Does the bible say that he wants this and does this. It does not say that. It says God desires that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. I don't know what else to tell you. Why do you need to believe in this horrible God who creates people simply to insure that they are thrown into hell for all eternity? I guess if you think you are infallibly saved it's an irresistable docterine. But the self deception of thinking you are infallibly saved is also unbiblical. For as Saint Paul says, I who preach to you can be cast away.

"but it is just fine to pray to other gods (saints) instead of to Him..you think it is fine that the blood of Christ has no effect ..and still call your self a follower of Christ.."

Saints are gods? Saints are not gods, saints are with God. Besides, praying to the saints WORKS! If not for the blood of Christ there would be no saints to pray to.

"I see the catholics here treat the Pope like HE is GOD and the Church as if IT is God."

I see people honor the flag and die for their country. By your logic they should die only for God and never honor or love anything or anyone, except God alone. But it would be a fallacy to say that loving one's country is the same as caring more about your country than God. In the same way it is a fallacy to say that honoring the pope and loving the church Christ founded, and even being willing to die for them if need be, is caring more about the Church and the pope than God. I mean I think it is just plain old boasting to say that you care for nothing and no man but only God. I think it is a lie too. Of course we care deeply about other things and people. That's just the truth and I refuse to be intimidated into denying that I have other loyalties even though I must always put God first.

"There is only ONE God..and those that hate Him hate predestination and election because it means their gods are false useless gods and they are damned"

There is only ONE God and those who know him, know that he is not hateful.

224 posted on 07/29/2002 6:11:05 PM PDT by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
As I showed one of the other RC's Peter believed in election, predestination and the preservation of the saints..so did Paul and John. So where do you think it changed?

     1Pe 1:1   Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,   

  1Pe 1:2   Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.   

  1Pe 1:3   Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,   

  1Pe 1:4   To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,   

  1Pe 1:5   Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

 

John

2Jo 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth;

Paul

Tts 1:1 Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;

Why do you need to believe in this horrible God who creates people simply to insure that they are thrown into hell for all eternity?

I believe it is a marvel that God chose to save ANY of us. He could have destroyed the earth ,He could have thrown all men into hell and asked no questions. Instead He made a way for many to be saved.

No man will be in hell that did not choose to be ..all men are held responsible for what they do know and the choices they do make.

Theresa we have a hope and a promise

    Mar 13:25   And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.

     Mar 13:26   And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

     Mar 13:27   And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.

Theresa most of the world does not give Christ or salvation or heaven or hell a second thought..why do you think we are interested in it? Are we smarter, Holier? more clever? Our has the grace of God marked us in a way that makes us hunger for Him?

Personally I am no great shakes. I have no clue why God would have any interest in me at all.....

225 posted on 07/29/2002 6:36:52 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
No where does this scripture say these men were saved

What is being saved if not "escaping the pollutions of this world"?

that is the purpose of the parable of the wheat and the tares

You don't need to tell Catholics about tares at this moment in history!! ;)

To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you

Quite - its the inheritance that is incorruptible and undefiled - we and our faith in Christ are capable of corruption and defilement. What is so objectionable about the "once saved always saved" attitude is that it presumes final perseverence, when in fact this is something that is only known by God. Even the greatest saints did not take their salvation for granted:

1 Cor 9:27 But I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway.

Now this sounds to me like the "first Pope "believed in election , predestinatiopn and the persaverence of the saints!

Of course he believed in election and predestination of the saints. I only said that those verses didn't support your theory!! The Catholic Church has always believed in the election and predestination of the saints, but at the same time, holding the mysterious determination of God in balance, we do not believe that predestination takes away free will. Perseverence is a free gift of God dependent absolutely on grace, but again we do not believe that grace violates nature, but rather builds on nature.

So tell me Tantumergho..what kind of a Calvinist were you? I was singing Tantumergio while you were in diapers I bet

I was a Presbyterian. I really hope you were not singing Tantum ergo when I was in diapers because then time would be really running short!!! ;)


226 posted on 07/29/2002 6:53:48 PM PDT by Tantumergo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun
You have said some interesting things that I will reply to but its 3.00 a.m. here and I really need my bed so I will respond later today.

God bless.
227 posted on 07/29/2002 7:04:44 PM PDT by Tantumergo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: Tantumergo
Of course he believed in election and predestination of the saints. I only said that those verses didn't support your theory!!

Ohh no this is what you said

It is obvious that the first Pope didn't believe in your doctrine of "once saved always saved".

And it is obvious that he did believe . (psss I am a Saint, as are all the saved :>)

The church is full of people that have a kind of faith ..that believe they are saved..that is who Peter is talking about and I think you know that

  Mat 7:21   Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22   Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23   And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity

I was a Presbyterian. I really hope you were not singing Tantum ergo when I was in diapers because then time would be really running short!!! ;)

Well my pre Vatican II Latin singing should give a hint

So what kind of Presbyterian were you?

228 posted on 07/29/2002 7:10:07 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Tantumergo; Dr. Eckleburg; drstevej; RnMomof7
".... obviuosly the curse in the Apocalypse relates to anyone who would add or subtract from the Apocalypse. It says nothing at all about anyone adding to or subtracting from the canon of Scripture!!"

"In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...". [Heb. 1:1-2]

God's speaking to us by his Son is the _culmination_ of his speaking to mankind and is _his greatest and final revelation_ to mankind.

(The exceptional greatness of the revelation that comes through the Son, far exceeds any revelation in the Old Covenant as noted over and over again in the first and second chapters of Hebrews.)

Once the writings of the New Testament apostles and their authorized companions were completed, we have everything that God wants us to know about the life, death, & resurrection of Christ, and its meaning for the lives of believers _for all time_. In this way Hebrews 1&2 shows us why no more writings can be added to the Bible after the time of the New Testament. The canon is now closed.

It is not accidental that the apostle John wrote that warning (about adding or subtracting to the words of Scripture) in the very last chapter of the very last book of the Bible. [Rev.22:18-19]

For many books, their placement in the canon is of little consequence. But just as Genesis must be placed first (because it tells us of creation), so Revelation must be placed last (because its focus is to tell us of the future and God's new creation). The events described in Revelation are historically subsequent to the events described in the rest of the New Testament and require that Revelation be placed where it is.

Thus, it is not appropriate for us to understand this exceptionally strong warning at the end of Revelation as applying in a secondary way to the whole of Scripture.

Placed here, where it must be placed, the warning forms an appropriate conclusion to the entire canon of Scripture. Along with Heb.1&2 and the history-of-redemption perspective implicit in those verses, this broader application of Rev.23:18-19 also suggests to us that we should expect no more Scripture to be added beyond what we already have.

The warning God gave through John in Rev.22 shows that God himself places supreme value on our having a correct collection of God-breathed writings, no more, no less. He's quite able to see to it that we have them. The closed canon we have today is God's doing. What we have didn't depend on men.

In fact, some of the earliest writers CLEARLY distinguished the difference between what they wrote and the writings of the apostles. In A.D.110, Ignatius said, "I do not order you as did Peter and Paul; THEY WERE APOSTLES, I am a convict; they were free, I am even until now, a slave".

Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would see to it that the disciples would be able to remember and record without error all that he had said to them when he was with them. [John 14:26; 16:13. See also: 2 Pet.3:2; 1 Cor.2:13; 1 Thess.4:15; and Rev. 22:18-19].

So in compiling the canon of Scripture, the work of the early church was not to bestow divine authority or even ecclesiastical authority upon some merely human writings --- but to RECOGNIZE the divinely authored characteristics of writings that already had such a quality.

This is because the ultimate criterion of canonicity is divine authorship --- (as Jesus promised) --- NOT human or ecclesiastical approval.

CAVEAT: I realize that unless one has "the mind of Christ" he will consider the infallible Word of God (Scripture) as "foolishness" and won't be able to discern spiritual truth from error, so what I wrote above is only for those who have "ears to hear".
229 posted on 07/30/2002 5:37:14 PM PDT by Matchett-PI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Who you trying to kid, RnMom. That's your signature debate tactic.

Trust me poly IF I wanted to be hurtful I really could be..I have a pen that can cut steel if I choose..

230 posted on 07/30/2002 5:45:59 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
CAVEAT: I realize that unless one has "the mind of Christ" he will consider the infallible Word of God (Scripture) as "foolishness" and won't be able to discern spiritual truth from error, so what I wrote above is only for those who have "ears to hear".

That seems to be a real issue here MPI.

The number of the deaf overwhelm the hearing.

231 posted on 07/30/2002 5:50:31 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Trust me poly IF I wanted to be hurtful I really could be..

I've seen too much of your posts to think otherwise.

Come home.

232 posted on 07/30/2002 8:09:11 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Trust me poly you have never seen me throw a punch with my full force.
233 posted on 07/30/2002 8:11:53 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
That is a two way street mom. Trust me.
234 posted on 07/30/2002 8:30:51 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
That is a two way street mom. Trust me.

I believe it...sometime not showing your teeth helps you keep them. I word play and I will be truthful ..........but much remains unsaid..and I am sure it is the same with you

Poly I will NEVER "return" but thanks for the invite :>)

235 posted on 07/30/2002 8:35:44 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Poly I will NEVER "return"

You're in for a big surprise then.

236 posted on 07/30/2002 8:42:05 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I believe it...and I will be truthful ..........but much remains unsaid..and I am sure it is the same with you

Oh well, honestly, I've learned to never say the things I really want to say. So I might try to sound tough but anymore I just walk away. Fighting, verbal or physical, is not worth it. And words can cause greater harm the the hardest physical blows.

237 posted on 07/30/2002 9:10:12 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp
Yea . I am tough for a woman. But mostly rhetorical stuff. I really do try not to be personal.(sometimes I am with "friends " like xzins:>) but usually I try to be on topic. And not hit an individual.

I like you poly..We could sit and have coffee ...in my kitchen.

But I will say what I think on doctrine on the threads. but it is never "personal" I like lots of the RC posters a lot. But that will not stop me from being critical of the pope...or a doctrine if it comes up...

Just as you would Luther or Calvin.

Peace to ya Poly

238 posted on 07/30/2002 9:29:08 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
We could sit and have coffee ...in my kitchen.

Great...strong, lots of cream, lots of sugar, and keep it coming...looks like this will be a long discussion ;-)

peace to you too, RnMom.

239 posted on 07/30/2002 9:47:17 PM PDT by Polycarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; Polycarp
Hmmmmmmm. Looks like you guys may need a referee. I am impartial because I was RC, but I don't buy the Full Calvin Monty either. And, I love you both :) (isn't this special?).

Can I have coffee too in your kitchen mom? I like mine black.

240 posted on 07/30/2002 9:57:39 PM PDT by Ex-Wretch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-244 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson