*Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DaveW last won the day on February 24

DaveW had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About DaveW

  • Rank
    Resident Aussie and general dumb bloke
  • Birthday 09/30/1968

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    I'm a West Aussie
  • Are you IFB?

Recent Profile Visitors

11,122 profile views
  1. Sorry mate - from two years ago?...... At the moment I have trouble remembering two weeks ago........ :lol:
  2. Nice double-talk, but if it can be lost it is not eternal in that instance, and cannot therefore be called eternal until the end..... In ANY instance........
  3. Simplest ppint to look at is what the Lord calls it - it is "eternal life" and "everlasting life" that God calls it. How can something be everlasting if it doesn't last forever? How can something be eternal if it can end? I know this is a simplistic argument, but that doesn't make it an irrelevant argument. This "simple point" must be answered by those who oppose "eternal" eternal life.
  4. Did you not read my second post? I am no fool - locking doors and locking cars is reasonable, but where I am I feel no need to arm myself for protection. I AM GLAD THAT I LIVE IN A PLACE WHERE I DON'T FEEL I NEED TO ARM MYSELF. I also feel sorry for you folks who live in places where you feel that you have to arm yourself. Ask yourself - where would rather live? In a place where you feel so threatened that you have to arm yourself, or in a place where you feel comfortable being unarmed? I COULD ARM MYSELF IF I WISHED, but I don't feel it necessary.
  5. If they don't have noses, how do they smell?????? Some of them smell terrible, that's how they smell.........
  6. I was referring to the stumblingblock part actually..... If you feel like that is being judgemental, then take it as you will. My reading: You know full well what his point of view is regarding such instruments, and you DIRECTED your post specifically at him, if you will, flaunting it right in his face. I see that as deliberately putting a stumblingblock in his path. You can disagree with his point of view - and in fact I do - but you have put a stumblingblock before him. Again, if you feel that is me being judgemental, then go for it - but I didn't WRITE THE VERSE.....
  7. Why is "abbreviated" such a long word?
  8. He uses a ruler like anyone else does when they get an itch under their cast.........
  9. Hmmmmm..... Knowing brother Stafford's position, I wonder why you posted this at all, and moreso since you specifically directed it at him? Rom 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
  10. G'day Bob, A couple of points: 1. You have already made the point - the Mods will have been made aware by your previous post and will be watching things. This post is not necessary. 2. There is a better way. There is a flag under the heading of each post (if viewing on mobile - can't remember right now how it looks on pc) which is to report a post. This gives you space to write your reasons for reporting and it is sent to the mod group, so you can be certain that they will see it. The mods here are pretty good, and whilst I personally do not disagree with you, the mods will have had a discussion and I assume at this stage have decided to watch but not act. Just for your info. Regards, Dave
  11. What does that even mean???????
  12. Appealing to "early church fathers" for support is not "Justifying and rationalising what I see in Scripture", it is following the teachings of men. "early church fathers" were men - not some sort of higher power with greater understanding that men today. And many of the so called "early church fathers" were plainly wrong in much of what they taught. Augustine for instance was a mystic who was part of the early CATHOLIC church - hardly a man to follow in theological discussion. The arguments should be ENTIRELY FROM SCRIPTURE without appealing to what "Early church fathers" taught. I will not take part in the general discussions of this thread, but I will point out this kind of irrelevant information put forward as "proof" of veracity of the doctrines. I could just as easily show men of old times who disagree with you, but so what? "What saith the Scripture?" is what really matters.
  13. I could get a licence and an appropriate firearm if I wanted to, but I don't feel like I need to. I am not a hunter, but I know people who are - with firearms, bows, and crossbows - and they have that freedom in the right places of course. Hunting is not a huge thing over here, but there are places where you are allowed to hunt, and there are many farmers who are happy to allow hunting on their land. Roos are the main targets, but I also know a few people who hunt goats (wild), and also there are some wild pigs that are good hunting - but you have to know where to go for them. Bunnies everywhere, but they more often trapped than hunted. I know of a few ranges and clubs where you can use your own firearms or they have them for hire for range use. At the ranges you don't have to have a licence to use them. We lock our cars and our doors at night, and you do hear on the news about home invasions every now and then, but I just don't feel the need to arm myself. One of the many good things about where I live.
  14. Don't want to derail that thread so..... I sure am glad that I don't live in a place where I would feel it a necessity to concealed carry at all times. I am glad I don't live in a place where I would feel it necessary to have a loaded weapon by my bedside or next to my front door. Whether or not YOU think I should anyway, I don't feel any need to be armed in my society - and I am glad of it. Please note thst I am not saying anyone is wrong to have or feel like they have to have a weapon for protection. I am saying I am glad that I don't live in a place where I would feel it a necessity. Praise the Lord for that about where I live.
  15. My reading of the OP for this thread, is that it was supposed to be for the simple STATING of pro-Calvinist arguments, not for the discussion of those arguments. One claim that is often made is that opponents don't really understand the arguments for Calvinism - so how about we allow a space for the statement and maybe quote a point into a new thread for discussion? Just my thoughts.