Apologies as I wasn't aware that it was censored when I used such and only refering to myself in the sense that it is what certain individuals have addressed ALL calvinists collectively (which included me). My link is to another calvinist evangelical site from me a calvinist. Yes it is regrettable that certain individuals can post such but is it not they who are 'crude' rather than that word? Why not ban the persistent 'crude' individual instead?
Used in the right context the word is as legitimate as 'spiritually dead' By banning the term (as used by 'Calvinist haters' in the wrong context) then true believers are unable to prove the false attacks by making reference to such comments attacking God's people, whilst 'they' continue to attack God's people with the legitimate langauge eg of 'heretic'- which is far more unacceptable than the banned word if rightly considered.
If all Calvinists are 'heretics' then sermonaudio is in trouble from Spurgeon's daily reading to the majority of those sound ministries that contribute sermons. Why not ban all who claim those who hold to the doctrines of grace are HERETICS? Far more serious and 'crude'
'Another ***** **** Calvinist, Thank you for your post but please do not use the censored term in your moniker...