Dear Pilgrim,<br><br>In reply to,<br>"Then perhaps you would enlighten us as to the true history of Protestantism?"<br><br>I'm sorry, but I'm not the one making far-fetched claims that being a protestant means you are a Calvinist. Why don't you tell us why that is? Especially since John Calvin was only 8 years old when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Wittenburg church. Was Luther a Calvinist as well? That would be a real miracle. You also speak of Calvinism's dominance, I am from a very religious section of the U.S., I didn't even know what a Calvinist was until I was 20. The fact is that most protestant churches don't accept all of the doctrines of Calvinism. Among them are Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, Pentacostals, Full Gospel and many others -- traditional and contemporary. And to say that Calvinism is an offshoot of protestantism is not unfair, since Calvin simply followed in the footsteps of Martin Luther, who was not a Calvinist, nor did he accept all the doctrines taught therein. I have no clue as to what these mystical "accepted Church History texts" are, but I'm betting they would back me up as well.<br><br>You also make it sound as if it is my personal interpretation vs. everyone else's. Be assured, I am not alone in my beliefs. But let me ask you: If you don't base your faith on the uninspired writings of mere men, then why do you just gloss over what Revelation 22:19 clearly says in favor of what some scholar wrote 400+ years ago?<br><br>And yes, you heard it correctly: "Gaping holes." Among them are Acts 2:40, Luke 13:34, and of course Revelation 22:19. Instead of tossing out a red herring about the definition of being a protestant, why don't you actually address the issue: the fact that Revelation 22:19 clearly contradicts the doctrines of unconditional election and perseverance of the saints.<br><br><br>In Christ,<br>Josh