[George W. Bush]

I can appreciate your desire to defend those writing, but it is a common courtousy to cite passages so we do not have to hunt them down. I am sure in other threads it is done, but the group that I have dealt with so far has not.

I am not particularly enthused over defending some within this group of FR Calvinists. But the truth is still the truth.

More recent threads are admittedly not the best examples. However, the vast majority of Calvin threads will readily demonstrate that this group has diligently and ably cited scripture in context to support their positions. Some of the more recent slacking may be due to the fact that one sometimes tires of citing the same passages over and over and over...

However, my remarks really dealt with your apparent suggestion that this might be a deliberate obfuscatory tactic. I would not agree. You may not like the doctrine or some rhetorical tactics but that is not the same thing as deliberately avoiding citation in a dishonest way.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I can appreciate your desire to defend those writing, but it is a common courtousy to cite passages so we do not have to hunt them down. I am sure in other threads it is done, but the group that I have dealt with so far has not. ~~ ftD

I am not particularly enthused over defending some within this group of FR Calvinists. But the truth is still the truth. ~~ GWB

There is no reason that you should be enthusiastic at the prospect, GWB; you are plainly out of fellowship with "the_doc" and "Jerry_M" at the moment, and no fooling. Not without reason, either; no one can deny that harsh words were exchanged on both sides, and lest anyone should doubt my profound distaste for a layman behaving obstinately and disrespectfully towards a Biblically-ordained Elder, I would simply re-visit the point that I am Presbyterian (no more need be said, the fact speaks for itself).

Nonetheless, if we were to judge one's spiritual status by the spiritual honesty implicit in this kind of statement:

I am not particularly enthused over defending some within this group of FR Calvinists. But the truth is still the truth. ~~ GWB

It would be tempting (at least to me) to regard the speaker as Regenerate, no matter what doctrinal controversies and abrogations of fellowship have occurred. As such, it should be the conviction of all Regenerate parties to the disputations, to seek reconciliation if at all possible.

I do not say this out of any desire to "get into the matter" now. In fact, I don't think this is the time or the place, and expect it would be folly to try at the moment. I only want to express my desire that reconciliation could possibly be effected at some point, and my continuing desire that it should be sought when possible.

That's pretty much all I have to say, and I'll ask that any responses directed to those points be sent me by Private FReepMail.

Best,
OP

[fortheDeclaration]

However, my remarks really dealt with your apparent suggestion that this might be a deliberate obfuscatory tactic. I would not agree. You may not like the doctrine or some rhetorical tactics but that is not the same thing as deliberately avoiding citation in a dishonest way

If I thought these guys were honest I would agree with you. I noticed that OP took that snippet of my post accusing me of not believing in Omniscience and hasn't produced the whole post. I have seen the half-truths, double talk, misrepresentation and generally lack of Christian charity that this group engages in (even with you!)

Jerry was even bragging a while back that he had driven me off the threads.

I put nothing past this group.