I had already noticed that he had been talking about the theological pitfalls common to both Arminians and hyper-Calvinists. Not everyone steps into these traps. No one who knows church history would try to deny the evangelistic zeal of, say, the early Wesleyan Methodists.
***
How many sinners have been brought to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ through the FreeRepublic ministry of the Calvinists
Jean called this a great question on your part, but I don't read it in the same way as he does, Corin.
Gosh, it would be stupid of the Calvinists on this forum to try to use this forum primarily for converting non-professors to Christ. (For the most part, only reasonably zealous churchgoers visit these threads.)
But we are still doing some important things. As it turns out, these threads are the first step for many of our typically religious lurkers to realize that the true gospel is more profound than today's too-carnal Christians have realized. We have had significant success in reaching people like that. And we think that is immeasurably important.
Of course, we do run into our share of evidently lost professing Christians. The problem is, a lot of today's carnal Christians are obviously not saved anyway. They don't really know the Lord. They are just proud of their denominational backgrounds. They are like the Pharisees. They are unscrupulous slanderers. They are self-deceived liars.
They are stuck in the Fall. They are stuck in the Lie of Eden. And that, Corin, is primarily the problem of Arminianism in our day. Read the Genesis 3 Thread.
You should also read John 8:30-59. It is a strongly Calvinistic text. Ask the Lord Jesus how many people He converted in that passage. (You see, John 8:30f was recorded for the benefit of people who would read it as "lurkers." These lurkers would notice what many lurkers have noticed on our threads. Jean Chauvin mentioned one such lurker. I am aware of others who have said the same thing about the people who have raged against us Calvinists.)
And yet your Calvinist brethren have no problem trashing the Wesleyan-Arminians for taking the exact same approach.
Which, although you've apparently all missed it, was the point of my question.