Post History
Yikes, I can see how I was misinterpreted there. I was interested in hearing more, including from the Calvinist perspective (or if that's the wrong term, from the perspective of those who don't see...
Answer
#1: Initial revision
Yikes, I can see how I was misinterpreted there. I *was* interested in hearing more, including from the Calvinist perspective (or if that's the wrong term, from the perspective of those who don't see humanity as having as much "free will" (whatever that means) as I tend to think we have), and was just trying to explain how it made me feel in the hopes of getting more information on the viewpoint. (And for what it's worth, I have upvoted that answer, as well as all the others given so far, as I *have* found them to be helpful perspectives for understanding the question.) Now definitely, I can see how what I said, even in the way I intended for it to be, could lead to this being more "discussion" and, sure, even "debate", rather than just "Here's how an answer could be improved" like Somewhere Else says they intend for comments to be. I think the line may sometimes (or often?) be a bit blurry, though, between "here's what I'd like to learn about more from your answer" and "here's why your answer has wrong doctrine", and it's definitely something to be wary of. I guess when I saw this site being created I was hoping for a place of open discussion among a small group of interested people, similar to some sort of Small Group study of Christianity. And maybe that kind of style is just not doable on the Internet, as (hopefully) the community won't stay small. But if the consensus around here is that comments shouldn't be for discussion at all, I'd abide by that. And I'll certainly try to be more mindful of how I phrase my comments in the future.