Christian Forums

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • We stand with Ukraine. Please consider supporting Ukraine through a qualified organization.
  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Calvinism

J

Jay T

Guest
RED BEETLE said:
Hey guys, I have just uploaded a series of lectures on Calvinism onto Google Video. I need some feed back. I was hoping some of you could find some time to listen to these lectures then give me some critical analysis.
I would appreciate honest criticism. Don't be afraid to unload your thoughts!
You actually promote Calvinism ?

Why ?


Don't you know that heresies (those that promote them, as well as those who believe them) will NOT INHERIT the Kingdom of God ?

Galations 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are [these]; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told [you] in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
 
S

Solo

Guest
And all this time I thought that Jesus Christ's work on the cross justified those that the Father gave Him forever sealed by the Holy Spirit while in the corrupt, mortal flesh until the day of redemption; and that the New Creature was that which was born of God at the born again experience of all believers.

I guess we should all attend the Seventh-day Adventist church because God is not as omnipotent, omnicient, omnipresent, and all loving as I had been brought to believe. I guess the Holy Spirit has lied to me all of this time, and Jay T's experience in the Ellen G. White school of thought is right. Move over God, Jay T and I are comin' to set you straight.
 

JM

Member
From
Canada
Messages
2,818
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Before you go patting yourself on the back, thinking I’m avoiding you, you should be aware that I haven’t been in this forum for a while. This thread is dead and I had nothing else to post. But since you want it so bad, lets debate. We can work out the rules over pm and yes, we will have rules.

No emotional pleas.
No getting into the Greek without posting your credentials and training in the Greek language FIRST.
No cut and pastes from heretical sources without listing that source.

And a few others.

STRUCTURE OF THE DEBATE

First post by each debater will define the doctrine.
Second post by each debater will be a rebuttal to the first post.
Third post by each debater will be a list of no more then 5 questions.
Fourth post by each debater will be a rebuttal to the answers given to the 5 questions.
Last post by each debater will be closing statements.

If you can't debate according to common debate rules I understand.

Send me a pm.
 
B

BenJasher

Guest
Be careful, I believe in sucker-punches and trick questions.
 

JM

Member
From
Canada
Messages
2,818
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
BenJasher said:

It should’ve been obvious that I hadn’t been follow this thread UNTIL you sent me the pm, as for avoiding you, yes I do tend to avoid heretics but not in this case…as I accepted the challenge.

We will need one person to act as a moderator, he will be the Judge. I would nominate Vic. The biggest reason being that this case will be tried on the forum he supplied. It is his forum, let him be the Judge.

Anyone of the mod will do, Vic is a fine with me, the admin's can remove my status as a mod of that forum if you wish until our debate is over.

Would you like a jury to be present to decide the merits of our discussion?

A jury? :roll: I really don't care.

Not that I want to debate with you so badly, but I really don't think you know as much as you claim to know about Universalism. I don't mind someone saying negative things about Universalism, as long as they are speaking from a precursory background knowledge of what they are talking about.

Rules are a good thing. But we will decide what they are here.

I know of three forms of UR so you'll need to post first so I have an idea of what I'm dealing with.

No emotional pleas. None will be needed, and therefore not used.
No getting into the Greek without posting your credentials and training in the Greek language FIRST.
I am qualified to use the Greek. And I don't need to present any credentials to you. As they say, the proof is in the pudding.
No cut and pastes from heretical sources without listing that source.
The term heretical would be a subjective term in this context. And I will cut and paste anything I wish as long as it meets the requirements of #2 as I stated in an earlier post.

If you haven't studied Biblical Hebrew or Greek, you need to post the source, can we at least agree on that? I don't want any half baked exegesis based on faulty Greek. There is no proof that you know what you're talking about without posting your background in the topic you're discussing.

Read the next point again, I didn't say we couldn't use cut and pastes, only that you list your souces...as for the use of heretical...historically speaking your view is heretical.

No need to be insulting. But I know you can't help yourself. You naturally perceive yourself to be of superior intellect to most others you encounter.

Assertions are not facts.

I have another idea. Let's ratchet the stakes up a notch or two. let's put this discussion into a courtroom setting shall we? I will even let you take the position of prosecutor.

You present your opening statement using any type of information you see fit. Use emotionalism, fairy tales, traditions of men...whatever. Just remember the 5 minute rule. Then I will do the same.

Nope. We need a level playing ground...and I reject the 5 min. rule. I could spend 5min on one passage. I suggest no more then 10,000 - 15,000 words using word count from MircoSoft Word.

Once the opening statements are completed, present your questions. I will answer your questions one at a time.
I know that right now I could ask you 25 question in the presentation of the defense. So why stop at 5 questions? Let's put a cap on the number of questions at 15.

15 Questions are fine with me. See, I can be fair.

After I have answered your questions, you can present any scriptural exegetical evidence you think may be pertinent to your case. When that is done, you will rest your case. At that time I will present the defense under the same guidelines.

I would like to modify my original guidelines to include not only exegetics of scripture, but to also include historical evidence as well.

I thought you didn't want to include historical evidence...but I say sure, lets.

j
 

JM

Member
From
Canada
Messages
2,818
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Your statement on equal playing fields needs to be clarified.

One will not be given more room then the other to attack the doctrines presented. [see STRUCTURE OF THE DEBATE]

None of them will be necessary. Vic offered the use of his forum, we'll use it. And you will go first. You are laying the charge against Universalism that it is based on human reasoning. That is the stated reason of this dispute. You are the prosecutor. I am the defense. I cannot go first.

You asked for the debate, you go first, I only started posting again to answer your call. I've said my farewells in pm's a few days before you sent me a pm, you want the debate, you post first. The "charge" is echoed by a rule made on the forum, the forum is making the charge.

My use of the Greek in this discussion will not go beyond simple etymology in a few instances. You should be able to easily verify the validity of what I say. Usage of the Greek stays. Limited to simple etymology. As far as proof, the proof is in the pudding.

Fine. :wink:

You are going into this discussion with a handicap, aren't you?

No comment needed.

Like I said, I need you to clarify the level playing field thing.

The 5 minute rule is fine. If it can't be read in 5 minutes, it is too long. But then I have a very high reading speed, and a high level of comprehension. I don't make that stipulation for my own sake. I make that stipulation for the sake of those who would be interested in following this debate. Most people will not read anything if it takes more than 5 minutes to do so. It is like eating oatmeal that is so thick it won't come off the spoon. Plus, if I agree to a 15,000 word stipulation, I will have to wade through 15,000 words everytime you respond to one of my questions.

Can't do a 5 min. rule, sorry. I'm already over 3 pages and I'm only a quarter of the way through typing up my presentation. Now that I've gotten you to agree with using the Greek [you're not the only one to use a sucker-punches or question to lead] it'll run another page or so from what I've thought. A 5 min. post won't convince anyone of the merits of an argument, anyone willing to read and consider what is posted.

I am a Linux user, and I have never heard of MircoSoft Word. Is that a new software that just hit the market? Is it open source? Can I install it from the command line in binary form?

No comment needed.

I promise not to turn this into some kind of circus where I waste your time as I endlessly poke fun at you.

The "STRUCTURE OF THE DEBATE" I suggested would limit just how much time you would waste.

As for the forum, we can do it here in the formal debate section, I'm not signing onto another forum.

Either follow the structure of a formal debate or give it up. I've been more then ready to quit this forum, so I'll give you a few days to agree. If you don't agree by Sunday I'll be gone by then.

j
 

JM

Member
From
Canada
Messages
2,818
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
BenJasher said:
Jm,

In all sincerity, there is no need to try to drown someone in a blizzard of words. You may think your superfluity of words are necessary to get your point across, it isn't, unless you are of diminished intellectual capacity. Jesus rebuked the pharisees for their abundance of words, the same goes for you. Say what you need to and cease.

I will stop reading after 5 minutes. I will not respond to anything in your posts beyond that. Pare your presentations down. I don't feel I have to bend on that. It is actually to your benefit.

Sure, sure, I understand. lol Spoil the well by calling me a pharisee and claim I have "diminished intellectual capacity." If you can't remained focused to read a post that's longer then a 5min scan, it's you with the lack of intellectual capacity. To sum up a Biblical doctrine in 5 min. is sad and telling.

I don't intend to give anyone any more of a chance at anything. Are you afraid of what I call "Courtroom settings"? Will your evidence not stand up in court? I don't understand your reticence.

Make your opening statements. I will make mine.
Present your 15 questions. I will answer them.
Present any evidence you may think bolster your position.
I will consider that evidence.
When you have finished, rest your case.
I will present my 15 questions, which you will then answer.
(I will have already made my opening remarks)
I will present evidence to bolster my case.
Then I will rest my case.

It is actually very straightforward, and no one has any advantage over the other.

Just present your case, I’ll present mine. Follow the structure or shut up and rest your case now.

I think not.

You said it.

You made the charge that Universalism is based on human reasoning, prove it! You go first. And don't be one of the Chippendale squirrels about this. You go right on ahead and take the floor first. I insist on that.

The forum didn't make the same charge you did. I don't agree with the position the forum has taken, but I respect it. You are different. You didn't say Universalism was unscriptural. And you don't own this board. You therefore don't have any right to take pot-shots at something you don't understand. You said it was based on human reasoning. I am not required to sit back and allow you to slander my beliefs.

UR is secular in nature, it has been rejected by the Church and this forum for that reason...it's unBiblical...therefore it's secular. I know the hairs on the back of your neck are standing on end, I really don't care, you believe a doctrine that was invented by man to make'em feel better about those who parish outside of the faith. UR is secular because it starts outside of the scriptures instead of with the scriptures. It's secular and you believe it. Your beliefs are wide open to slander.

:-D Who is sucker-punching who here? Go for it!

no comment needed

There will be two conditions met for me to debate with you here on this forum. I want clearance from Judy that this debate is approved. I will debate you on this forum in a courtroom structure. Without both of these stipulations being met, we take it somewhere else, or we don't have an agreement. And I would hate to miss out on the chance to shove your "human reasoning" allegation down your throat.

We don't have an agreement. The debate structure is based on common debate structure...I think you watch too much Law and Order. As for human reasoning...that'll be the rebuttal post where I expose you for what you are. You last line reminds me of something the infidelguy once said.

Waddaya say, big boy, ya wanna come out and play?

You’re as emotional as a child. If you haven't started the thread by Sunday afternoon forget, this is my last post.

 
B

BenJasher

Guest
stranger said:
Hi BenJasher,

Are you a Jehovah's Witness?

blessings: stranger

No, I am not a Russellite. But I like what the Millenial Dawn people have said in the past.
 
B

BenJasher

Guest
UR is secular in nature, it has been rejected by the Church and this forum for that reason...it's unBiblical...therefore it's secular. I know the hairs on the back of your neck are standing on end, I really don't care, you believe a doctrine that was invented by man to make'em feel better about those who parish outside of the faith. UR is secular because it starts outside of the scriptures instead of with the scriptures. It's secular and you believe it. Your beliefs are wide open to slander.
Save it for the debate.

You actually posted a response before I was finished getting my thought out in my last post. I made a concession in the interest of good faith. You should consider it.

Sure, sure, I understand. lol Spoil the well by calling me a pharisee and claim I have "diminished intellectual capacity." If you can't remained focused to read a post that's longer then a 5min scan, it's you with the lack of intellectual capacity. To sum up a Biblical doctrine in 5 min. is sad and telling.

If it is so sad, why don't you just finish me off with a good round of meaningful debate?
Forget the 5 minutes. Let's go to 7500 words. I am willing to make a few concessions to get this thing started. And I wasn't calling you a pharisee. If you read that into what I said, you need to re-read what I said.
I have no problem with long posts. But most of what most people put forth in long posts could have been said just as clearly with a lot fewer words. Pare your statements down. Tersify your statements.

Just present your case, I’ll present mine. Follow the structure or shut up and rest your case now.
I will follow you. We have a structure. It is slightly modified from what you originally asked for. But we have a clear structure. We have a clear outline of what we are to accomplish. Proceed. I will respond. I don't care about common debate structure. As you may have noticed, "Formal Debate" is not something I have much education in. As a matter of fact, my buddies and I used to beat up the guys that were on the debate team. Proceed. I will respond. Ad hominem responses are not a form of meaningful debate.

UR is secular in nature, it has been rejected by the Church and this forum for that reason...it's unBiblical...therefore it's secular. I know the hairs on the back of your neck are standing on end, I really don't care, you believe a doctrine that was invented by man to make em feel better about those who parish outside of the faith. UR is secular because it starts outside of the scriptures instead of with the scriptures. It's secular and you believe it. Your beliefs are wide open to slander.

You don't use a spell checker do you?
You might be surprized what was invented by man, or for what reason. You may even be surprized at what may surprize you.

(There are 516 words in this statement. That word count does not include footnotes, headers or footers)
 

Vic C.

Member
From
Central NJ
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Messages
18,230
Joined
Mar 16, 2003
You really are self-righteous and pompous, aren't you?
C'mon, let's not go there. Keep it clean.

You guys can use my forum if you want, I don't care, except for name calling and cussing. You all want to set up debating guidelines, cool. Unfortunately, my Mod duties during the day will be restricted to the 123 site, but I will be available to Mod my site after hours. So, if anyone wants to know of this site, PM or email me. Please don't give out the url, I will give it out at my descrection. I need to limit bandwidth. If anyone cares to Mod it during the daytime (EST) let me know, I will make it so.
 

Judy

Member
Messages
1,836
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
You guys can use my forum if you want, I don't care, except for name calling and cussing. You all want to set up debating guidelines, cool.

No, we have a debate forum just for that.... Debates. I would rather any one on one debates go there.
 

Judy

Member
Messages
1,836
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
I thought we all agreed that that would be the only place for that topic.
 
S

Solo

Guest
Vic C. said:
C'mon, let's not go there. Keep it clean.

You guys can use my forum if you want, I don't care, except for name calling and cussing. You all want to set up debating guidelines, cool. Unfortunately, my Mod duties during the day will be restricted to the 123 site, but I will be available to Mod my site after hours. So, if anyone wants to know of this site, PM or email me. Please don't give out the url, I will give it out at my descrection. I need to limit bandwidth. If anyone cares to Mod it during the daytime (EST) let me know, I will make it so.

Surely you did not miss this portion of dear Jasher's post. I noticed that he wasn't warned and this portion was not edited:

Ben Jasher wrote: "It wasn't til I PM'ed you calling you a yellow-bellied coward that you came back in here with your over-inflated B.S. (BTW: B.S. isn't to be misconstrued to be Bachelor of Science)"
 
Top