🏆 Gala final del projecte #treballambvalors ProVP impulsat per @barcelonactiva i del qual en som partners junt amb @consorciedubcn i @femcat! Enhorabona a tots i totes les persones he heu participat en aquests 13 anys!🎉 #orientació #talent @celiaespanya

ProVP was *much* better. ProNL actually sounds like it could be anything, or even a company.

Five years ago, I coined the name “ProVP” (Progressive People’s Party) for a merger of GL and PvdA And today, it seems that the name and abbreviation of the new merger party will be ProNL (Progressive Netherlands) Close enough I guess!

🎯Avui participem a la 2a Conferència del #treballambvalors Projecte de Vida Professional #ProVP de @barcelonactiva amb dues emprenedores socials, 170 joves de 7 centres i amb els partners @consorciedubcn @femcat 🦾👏🏼

The person ProvP is replying to accused @rootcausesleuth of "pearl clutching" for taking umbrage at being called liar by him, itself very poor behavior, but worse, in his attempt to prove the lying, he literally changed what Root said. And he inadvertently told on himself, too.

yuck kaulaw. doctor na proVP Sara was making fun of Hontiveros in FB. consultants commenting making valid points defending Sen Risa. dzah, pilde lagi. nauwawan sa mga consultant nga gacomment. basta DDS kay kulto. bahala bright. doctor lagi pero ang utok kay ambot nalang.

🎯🧭 Avui a la inauguració de la 4a Escola d'Estiu, en el marc del ProVP impulsat @barcelonactiva @fundaciobcnfp @consorciedubcn @femcat

Hes tired of responding with substance only to be ignored and subsequently slandered I imagine. How many words has he shared with the likes of you and ProvP only to be ignored or told TLDR. And then told he is running from answers because he chooses not to engage further?

Avui a @barcelonactiva gala final #ProVP projecte que som partners junt amb @femcat #treballambvalors és el puntal del projecte impulsat per Barcelona Activa, que fomenta l' #emprenedoria com la recerca de respostes davant una necessitat, i les ganes d' aprendre Felicitats! 🏆

I didn’t say they held to Deism. I know they don’t. I’m asking why not just go that way seeing as each day I seem to see less and less that they are willing to place under God’s control. ProvP here, for example, doesn’t believe that God is the one who decides if someone gets cancer. That is merely the consequence of living in a fallen world and He doesn’t decide that. Does that sound like the imminent God of Scripture who sustains our life and health and decides the day we are born and the day we die? Not in the least. So, I’m not saying they believe this. But I have seen plenty of individuals within the group admit to God not having control over various things, and it seems the less He does control the more impressive He is to them. So I’m asking the question: why not go all the way?

Appreciate the response. I'm not sure if ProvP meant to use it as synonymous with ordain or not Further, all systems have a fair amount of differing ideas within it, which can make it hard for discussion. That's particularly true with the newer Calvinists and the older Reformed handling things differently and even openly disagreeing That God does not bring about all that He ordains in the same way or with the means is completely reasonable But as an interlocutor rightly moves forward and asks for a general view on how God providentially manages things, particularly if the other person ascribes to a determinist framework That will net a host of different responses ranging from mystery to God creates evil both directly and indirectly In terms of permission or the fact that God may not work positively or directly in and through creatures to bring about something He willed and ordained from eternity past opens up still more questions. Not all appreciate that, nor the exploration of entailments within the framework

This is a good write up, but unfortunately it has been provided to Drew (of ProvP) and many other Provisionists on many occasions. They won't bother reading it. Your post has that dreaded "Show more" link, so it's just far too long. And even if they did they would just respond to individual words or phrases and ignore the overall argument. They aren't interested in learning.

ProvP… actually put thought and consideration into the position he takes? Nah, that won’t happen. A Calvinist said it, after all, and we can’t be caught agreeing with those Calvinists on anything.

It is amusing to me that they will accuse Reformed folks of “equivocation” (ProvP has done this several times that I’ve seen, even against me) and yet he puts out stuff like this.

Here's the problem as I see it: You did the exact same thing that I am critiquing about ProvP. You are responding to one individual set of words within the whole argument and acting as if that's all Brenton said. He wasn't ambiguous at all. He clearly stated that evil is in the creation because God created and if God had not created in the first place then evil never would have existed. Why do you handle people's words so poorly? Why are you incapable of addressing the whole argument?

This is yet another, and perfect, example of these guys poorly handling what people are saying. First notice the last thing they said in the OP, that "this needs significant more nuance." And yet what have they done here (and elsewhere time and time again)? They have ignored the nuance. Here they are responding to a non-existent statement. In other places they have cropped screenshots to not show the context/nuance of a full quote. Or they'll underline specific/individual words within an argument and respond only to those words, ignoring the context/nuance. Or they will complain that a post giving nuance is too long. But they somehow still want to say that nuance is needed? Strange how that works. (Assuming they respond here, don't be surprised if they pull this same tactic against this very post: just wait and see if it happens as it will be pretty obvious.) Notice how Brenton never said "God created all moral evils." Brenton said that God created all things and that "evil is within creation." This is nuanced (and ignored by ProvP, ironically) when Brenton rightly says what every single Christian should be able to agree with: "Evil would not happen but for God creating." In other words, if God had never created in the first place, then evil would never have come into existence. This isn't even that complex (or controversial) of a nuance, but a reality affirmed by everyone who holds that God is purely and infinitely holy. But even this short little nuance is completely ignored. ProvP responds to this unstated idea "that God created all moral evils," when such a thing was never said. Brenton rightly responds that God doesn't create, or author, evil because evil isn't a thing. It is not a substance, because teaching that evil is a substance is a form of dualism which, he points out, would be a heresy. In the comments below you will find a link to two posts with many quotes from various Reformed theologians teaching exactly this. Will they take the time to learn this view? So far they haven't, so don't hold your breath. Will they argue against the stated claims and consistent teaching within the broader Reformed camp? Not a chance. And yet... they want stuff to be more nuanced...

Paul: I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions and hardships, for the sake of Christ. For I learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. ProvP: That's not the flex you think it is.

So far Derrik and ProvP have not realized that Chris is poking fun at all those cringe testimonials that Leighton keep posting of people finding much peace and relief after leaving Calvinism. 😂

Oh yeah, there's that too which started the conversation that led to Fisher calling me a "f***wit" in the first place. And ProvP had zero issues with this meme.

Read the screenshots below. Is this the language of someone who calls himself a Christian? Did you even bother clicking the quote to see that I had these screenshots? Did you know that ProvP is perfectly ok with citing someone using this kind of language as a theological source? Pay attention, bro. Stop speaking out of ignorance.