[xzins]

Ref 28 & 30

I said it doesn't characterize your position. I do think, however, that it DOES characterize classic calvinism.

You would probably classify yourselves as some kind of neo-calvinist, right? Where do you modify what calvin said? Do you think he'd accept the modifications?

Also, you are now engaged in a personal attack of your own; will I be as gracious as Whitfield? I suspect its because you can't deal with the argument, so, therefore, you must attack me. You should reconsider.

Matthew 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, "It is only by Beelzebub the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons."

Pharisee.......hmmmmmm!

[stuartcr]

Why do either of you have to be named, Calvinist, neo-Calvinist, pro-Calvinist, etc.? What is wrong with just being a human being that believes in God? Why do you feel Calvin (or anyone) was right or wrong? We're dealing with God here, no one knows for sure about God? I would think anyones unprovable opinion about God, would be as valid as any others.

[Jerry_M]

"You would probably classify yourselves as some kind of neo-calvinist, right? Where do you modify what calvin said? Do you think he'd accept the modifications?"

Not at all. I hold to the traditional, classical Calvinist theology, same as Jesus, same as the Apostle Paul, same as Augustine, same as John Calvin, same as John Owens, same as Jonathan Edwards, same as C.H. Spurgeon, same as John Piper. You would have a difficult time coming up with a dime's worth of difference between us.

As far as your thinking tht we are mounting some type of personal attack against you, let me say this: Just because you think someone is out to get you doesn't mean that they are. (I know, there are a slew of jokes that can be made with this as a starting point.)