Posted on 07/04/2011 8:49:43 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
of course in contrast your cult worships it’s founding prophet Machen. Tsk, tsk...
That must be the Jim Crow version of Christianity that Calvinists practice. We are all equal, separate, but equal and some more equal than others...LOL How can you keep a straight face when you post that nonsense.
Hardly -- Limited Atonement says that Christ's salvation was not sufficient to save the entire world and denies the Bible itself as the Bible asserts that Christ was the Savior for all mankind. Double Predestination is refuted in Ezekiel 33:12-16 -- God is the one who does the saving, but man damns himself from his own hands -- God does not, as followers of Calvin believe -- pre-program someone to do evil and then pre-damns them to hell
Calvin did not evangelize France. Remigius did that in 496 AD -- repeated again, Calvin didn't evangelize anywhere, he just set up a police state in Geneva
you stated that in one year Calvin sent out 142 folks to go "around the world" -- firstly, saying that Calvin sent out more folks then than the modern day Pentecostals/Methodists/Baptist do today is wrong secondly, this is speculation and thirdly "around the world" -- that's not even clarified, Calvin didn't send any folks to convert folks outside Europe did he?
As I said The missionary movement was founded by Christ. There is no such thing as "modern missionary movement" indicating a discontinuation with the original message to spread the Word of Christ -- the commission given by Christ Himself. followers of Calvin did not "start a modern missionary movement" unless you acknowledge that Calvinism is separate, distinct and different from Christianity.
err.. your post means “fellow cult members”, right?
Interesting -- NONE....
Interesting -- NONE....
In fact the majority of founding fathers were Episcopalians (and probably rolling in their graves when they hear Genie Robinson squeak)
| "Calvinism is the Gospel and to teach Calvinism is in fact to preach the Gospel." Arthur C. Custance, The Sovereignty of Grace, 1979. |
| "Calvinism is evangelicalism in its purest and only stable expression." B.B. Warfield, Calvin and Augustine, ed. Samuel G. Craig, 1956. |
| "We believe with the great Baptist preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, that Calvinism is just another name for Christianity." John H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism, 1991. |
now the followers of Calvin want to claim that they are the only real Americans? That's funny....
Actually BD -- your posts went off the topic starting from the first, in post 12 and then post 27. Please refrain from giving others advice that you do not follow yourself.
Though it would be interesting to know if you BD, believe that Charles TAze Russell, Joseph Smith, Ellen G White etc. are reformatters, continuing in the same tradition as the original reformatters
You wrote: “I was speaking specifically of the Puritans who settled the NE, not the Framers who were a couple of generations later.”
You only needed to go to the link in my previous post. There you would have found your answer.
Here it is again:
Primary Source Documents Pertaining to Early American History
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/primarysources.html
Oh yeah? Then what is this;
which were your own words directed at me. I objected to your accusation of me being, in your own words, in some sort of "open war". I was simply discussing the issues.
More false smokescreen lies from you here;
What's up with that garbage? I've never said such a thing, much less "blathered on about so often".
Never alluded to such here, or elsewhere BUT, I see the false accusations as being employed to divert attention from your own failure to refute the points I've raised. I assume that's the goal. Like I said, you're the master here, of that sort of deceit. You have yourself fooled? I guess that's a start...
The more you post, the more you prove me right!
What a smokescreen. I pointed out that the idea of freedom from the tyranny of earthly kings, didn't flow from some pope of the time preceding the likes of Calvin. To the contrary, the papacy of that time was vehemently against such an idea. (Unless perhaps some king or another was on the outs with them, in which case, hey, all bets were off, hehheh...)
I challenged one and all "name that pope!". You claim (or wish to imply) that one of these earlier popes (of the time period I was discussing) were all for "freedom"? (that was the criteria, mind you)
When you attempted that, using the example you did, I pointed out that that pope was only against slavery of Roman Catholic (converts mainly, for this particular discussion). Slavery was quite all right with them, otherwise. In fact, popes of the time period even went so far as recommend it! (as outlined in post#103)
You still have failed to name one pope of that time or era that fits the set criteria --- that of advocating that men are desired by God to live free from the tyranny of earthly kings.
I called you on the insults and lies (having nothing to do with the subject matter), then you accuse me of having a "martyr complex" (which is itself a form of insult) while you otherwise busy yourself heaping yet more insult and false accusation my way.
Then continuing, you otherwise insinuate I have no case because, as you say;
What utter garbage. It doesn't matter one wit what my background is, or is not.
None of this is "about" me, no matter how hard you try to make it that way (to distract others from uncomfortable truths).
Truth stands independent of any relationship on my part, or lack thereof, with some corrupt Roman clown from centuries ago.
So you obviously are not an English major (we've ruled out History and Theology too). In in Modern English the word "You" is a second-person personal pronoun, both singular and plural, and with both nominative and objective cases. Would you (singular) have felt more comfortable had I used "ya'll" or would your regional dialect require me to be more specific and use "all ya'll" for the plural?
Do you even listen to yourself talk?!?
I guess not. That must be somebody else's job. Like everyone or anyone other than yourself. My, my, aren't we lucky to hear from you? We're all luckier than you. You don't "hear" so good...
I'm counting my many blessings as we speak...
You were directing the comment towards me. There was nothing else in context in this thread, no discussion with others to suggest a greater "you", as a group, being in "open war" with your clergy, nor have I identified myself as being part of some group in "open war" with that which you desperately protect--as you dish out insult left and right, all along the way. (it's your style)
Save your self-important, sneering lectures for your own children. I'm sure they'll love you for it.
But hey, you win again. You've succeeded in dragging the discussion off into the bushes.
It's a technique frequently employed in internet discussions by those not wishing to discuss issues on their merits, in an effort to distract bystanders from the various evidences.
You're a master at that, too. Congratulations.
Nope. Stayed right on topic, when not deflected by rude insult. Try reading the article.
I was directing it to all ya'll whiny Calvinists. If ya'll want to consider yourself a subset of that group I would agree.
In the hole you insisted on digging for yourself, that's where. Loser.
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.