Sig by Durango
-Oscar WildeNow that the House of Commons is trying to become useful, it does a great deal of harm.
Calvin decided that since God was all powerful then EVERYTHING must be according to his direct will. Ergo, evil acts must be something God ordained as part of his Divine Plan.
Further, God decides who he wants to save and inflicts upon them his "Special Grace" which compels them to love him, as opposed to "Common Grace" which is what everyone else gets, does not allow them to love God, condemns them to Hell, but makes their Earthly life bearable.
Such is Calvinism.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
I read about Calivinist thought during my Humanities class and I also checked on him during my ethics class. I'm struggling to remember but... wasn't he really into the fire and brimstone kind of sermons? Or am I mixing him up with someone.
You know, I'm going to look him up right now. He was interesting to say the least, and not in a positive way as I recall.
#Winstontoostrong
#Montytoostronger
It's not so much that they dissauded me, more it would have been embarassing, yeah I know I need some backbone.
I didn't come here to argue about creationalism, for now I'll just hold my hands up and say I'm not sure, if you re-read the first post you can see I'm not taking an argumentative tone. The only time I ever presented any sort of argument on the matter was when I asked (not stated) if it is possible that DNA similarties equated to common descent, something Sigurd also asked in more detail.
I started arguing more when things got off topic and people started telling me I don't know the Bible. I dind't read the whole thing and works of lots of other theologians to get told that. In fact, things like ATPG has said that I have made up are not actually my ideas. Take for example the non-eternal hell issue. I didn't come up with that, the Jehovas Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists did - two of the scrictest fundamentalist sects of there (with the former of course adding a word here or there).
Who's views did I censure? If I wasn't trying to learn I wouldn't have made a thread asking for other people to present their views. And on the original topic of evolution, I didnt' even argue against it, I just questioned if it could fit with the Bible! As for the thread on homosexuality... that is something I have always believed, that children should be raised by heterosexual parents. I'm not judging them, I'm not doing a Fred Phelps, I'm just saying that I don't think that such an environment would be good for a child. That's just what I think, a gut feeling, do I have to be an expert on stuff just to give an opinion?
I'm a puritan with a small 'p'. Please don't go down that road of calling all non-Catholics/non-close-to-Catholics as non-Christian, its not very nice and I could do the same to Catholic views but it's not what this thread is for.
Is there any other kind of Puritan (if we're using capital P's)?
At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.
That depends on the arguments you use. If you appeal to nature, the Bible or history in support of your opinion, you better make darn sure you cover those bases.Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
I remember I was totally delighted the first time my oldest son started talking to me. I mean talking as in: making sense of an issue by using his own brains, his own imagination, instead of preconceived notions handed to him by adults, including me.
I asked him what made Odysseus a hero, expecting the standerd kiddy answer that Odysseus was a winner. Instead, my son said: 'Because he was smart.' So I asked him what made Odysseus smart, expecting something along the line of: because he out-smarted his adversaries. Instead, my son said; 'Because he knew his own limits.'
Boink!
In his eleventh year of life, my son hit the fount of all wisdom. Just like that, between two bites of a sandwich. And thanks to a children's version of Homer, of course. It made him discover something about himself. That's what the good books are for, if they serve any useful purpose at all. Same goes for nature or history: in the end they are sources of self-knowledge for us, not of (natural) history or jurisprudence.
Last edited by Adrian II; 05-22-2009 at 17:15.
The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott
Louis, I will assume that was a joke.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
When I was 11 all I was reading about was stories like how in a town in Mexico they dig a pit, but then people fall in so they need to fill it, and so they did another pit, etc.
Never mind your fancy continental education systems about philosophy and other such renaissance quirks, here you learn what you need to learn.
At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.
The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott
You don't interpret though, you just absorb. I've said this to you before, if you aren't willing to make your own judgements just don't ever touch theology, don't read the Bible, don't ever think about it. As to reading Theology, JW SDA are not reputable. Read Augustine, Boethius, Aquinus, Wesley, Hooker, Crammer, Wyclif, Luthor, and for some modern flavour try the last and current Popes, Rowan Willians and Alistair McGrath for starters.
It's your tone, not your content.Who's views did I censure? If I wasn't trying to learn I wouldn't have made a thread asking for other people to present their views. And on the original topic of evolution, I didnt' even argue against it, I just questioned if it could fit with the Bible! As for the thread on homosexuality... that is something I have always believed, that children should be raised by heterosexual parents. I'm not judging them, I'm not doing a Fred Phelps, I'm just saying that I don't think that such an environment would be good for a child. That's just what I think, a gut feeling, do I have to be an expert on stuff just to give an opinion?
You look like a Puritan, not a puritan (what ywould hthat be anyway). As to the link with Calvinism, that is what the rest of Christianity finds disturbing, not your mode of worship.I'm a puritan with a small 'p'. Please don't go down that road of calling all non-Catholics/non-close-to-Catholics as non-Christian, its not very nice and I could do the same to Catholic views but it's not what this thread is for.
Is there any other kind of Puritan (if we're using capital P's)?
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Bookmarks