Replies

Since you have thought it a good idea to present such an "awful" catalogue of quotes from me, I will thank you for your trouble--and defend each one of the quotes for the benefit of lurkers.

***

ROME'S PARTY LINE CONCERNING AUGUSTINE--which is, to put it bluntly, an outright LIE.

The standard Catholic references invariably imply that Augustine did not teach an absolute, double predestination. But Augustine did teach an absolute, double predestination. As to its "doubleness," its absoluteness, it was not different from Calvin's position.

OrthodoxPresbyterian proved this from Augustine's exposition of Matthew 11. Your refusal to believe this changes nothing. The ostrich who stuck his head in the sand before the Flood of Noah just drowned sooner than the rest.

In other words, your recent attaboy in #1432 to Squire's #1429 is a joke. (Ah, but we Calvinists are the only ones on FR who will catch the joke. See Psalm 2:4.)

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

a goat headed for the slaughter

This was a retrospective comment to the effect that Squire never stood a chance against OrthodoxPresbyterian in a debate over Augustine's doctrine of predestination. Squire did not know what he was talking about. And yet he incessantly bragged that he read and understood Augustine, that he even read Augustine in Latin. Well, OP and I warned him, to no avail, that he would be utterly destroyed in the debate. (We have seen this before. RCs do not know Augustine's position. They just assume they do. It's pretty funny.)

Sure enough, the debate quickly turned into a bloodbath ("slaughter" was actually OP's word). The fact that Squire never surrendered means nothing. He is dead in the debate. As a matter of fact, he is dead precisely because he didn't surrender. It is now too late. It's over. His #1429 means nothing except that he's dead.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

the Church of Rome was lying in the sixteenth century and has continued lying to this very day

Rome has never acknowledged that Augustine taught a rigid double predestination. Rome has always pretended that Calvin and Luther didn't understand Augustine. But Calvin and Luther did understand Augustine, just as OP and I understand Augustine. You RCs are the guys who don't understand Augustine. OP proved that in the debate with Squire. The whole thing was a painful black comedy.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

The Church of Rome really is apostate.

Rome has departed from the faith once delivered unto the saints. Augustine would have abhorred the position of sixteenth century Rome and the debauchery which pervaded the RC clergy. Even Bishop Jansen finally realized this.

Rome has never repented of any of its doctrinal prevarication. The article you posted at the top of this thread proves this. You just haven't been able to see this. But we Protestants say that's your own fault.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

certainly appear to be reprobate

I don't remember the exact context of this remark, but it's not worth looking up. I do know that I was alluding to the doctrine which Rome denies. Rome doesn't believe in real reprobation--the God-ordained, predestinarian kind--and will even go to distinctly absurd lengths to insinuate that Augustine didn't either. Is this sort of dishonesty typical of God's elect? No.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

smarmy theological garbage

Bouyer's article is a misleading mixture of half-truths and even more overt misstatements written in a completely phony ecumenical spirit--one in which Rome is designed to come out solidly on top. A consistent, thoughtful evangelical will utterly reject his rhetoric. (I do realize that there are a few chatty "evangelicals" on FR who do not care enough about the Truth to be offended by the article, but most of us do find it offensive.)

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

we regard Bouyer as a pagan sophist, not a Christian theologian

Bouyer has no credibility with FR's Calvinists. Gosh, we frankly don't assume that RCs are regenerate. And it is well-known that Protestants regard RCism as polluted with paganism, so this shouldn't even be news to you. Maybe you don't agree with us, but that's our position. You want to be accepted by us as brothers in Christ, but this is not going to happen unless and until you leave RCism. Our serious Scriptural convictions rule out any compromise with you on this. We will not betray the Truth with a phony kiss. Based on what we know, we can't.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

depraved pride in RCism--

This is a more pervasive problem than you have recognized. Your own screen name proves this. You think of yourself as objective, but no serious RC is objective--and your screen name actually says you are unabashed in your non-objectivity.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction

This is an important phrase from the Bible. It concerns the doctrine which you loathe. And I do dare to apply the phrase in the way of unctuous warning.

My point is that you need to re-think the doctrine of predestination. The RC doctrine is utterly false. There is a predestination unto damnation. And most people are doomed. They will freely choose hell. It is absolutely certain that they will.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

cast my exegetical pearls before someone who is acting swinish [OP]

I do not want to continue to kick Squire while he is down, so I will merely say that OP's complaint was correct.

So, my statement (quoting OP) was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

your arguments will be crushed. You will see them taken apart and cast down before your eyes. Of this, I have not even an inkling of doubt. But I'll not throw pearls into the slop.[OP]

OrthodoxPresbyterian and I gave Squire more than fair warning. And OP made good on his promise in the debate.

So, my statement (quoting OP) was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

untold numbers of Protestants were murdered by Rome

This is historical fact. You need to face it. Rome's moral record is actually atrocious. I think that this is the reason why you are so intent on bragging about Rome's stance concerning abortion and contraception.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

RC's refusal to face that murderous fact reminds me of the anti-semitic freaks

See my comments above. If you RCs are such lovely folks, why don't you loudly and clearly abhor the Inquisition and the Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre and the murder of literally millions of Christians who dared to disagree with you from the earliest centuries of the gospel?

Can't you see why I think you resemble the anti-semites who ignore what happened in the Holocaust? I don't see any meaningful difference. So, if you won't repudiate Rome, I am duty-bound to do so for you. (And I won't let you gloss over Rome's crimes by bragging about your stance concerning abortion or contraception.)

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

RCism is a pack of lies and has been so since well before the time of the Reformation

In view of everything I have said, in view of the way you have reacted to sharp but completely fair criticism, what do you expect me to say? This is just the nature of the conflict between us.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

malevolent, truth-hating spirit of the RCs on our forum downright Clintonian in its character of pride and vicious perjury.

Over and over you and the other RCs on FR have bashed evangelicals for daring to speak with conviction from the Scriptures. And we have repeatedly demonstrated the dishonesty in the RC approach, including Rome's dishonest approach to its own Patristic teachers. When we catch you RCs in flagrante, we evangelicals get blasted as bigots--for daring to expose your hypocrisies!

Squire even alluded to us Calvinists as Talibans. (Oh, great.) This mess really is Saul Alinsky stuff. It's right out of Hillary's Master's thesis.

So, my statement was appropriate. You just didn't like it. I can't help that. I'm telling you the truth.

***

proud2bRC, you have repeatedly scoffed at me, called me a coward, and have made also sorts of completely unsupported accusations against me personally. You have ignored substantive statements on my part and then turned around and grossly misrepresented me on this Forum.

I personally think that your less-than-stellar behavior, especially your pretense that you have been badly wronged, stems from the fact that you are getting clobbered by the Truth on this thread.

And like I said, your #1432 is a joke. Augustine did teach a double predestination. He got this doctrine in the same place Calvin got it. He got it from the Bible.

So, again, who cares if you don't like my "apologetics"? I don't give a fig for "apologetics" under the circumstances. I just have a responsibility to tell you the Truth. And that's precisely what I have been doing on this thread.