For All you Calvinists, and otherwise

[Robert Snow]

Robert, I hope that you don't tire of me, but one more question: Were some or most of the hymns in the minor keys?

No, I don't believe any of these hymns were in the minor keys, and no I am not tired of you.

 

[Amy.G]

Great one, but isnt it a bit subtle?

You said be creative! He's smiling, so he means no harm. :laugh:

 

[kyredneck]

No, I don't believe any of these hymns were in the minor keys, and no I am not tired of you.

It's not uncommon for some PB Churches to sing a lot of hymns using traditional 'Old World' melodies, some of which are in the minor keys. I love it.

 

[webdog]

Like I said in another post above... Some people don't like the labels that their personal theological positions are tied to. Yet, their positions are just what they are.

You are welcome to be inconsistent if you like, but if you are inconsistent, how can any of the rest of us possibly engage you?

I'm completely consistent, and I don't mind labels...just apply the right one.

Ironic...I thought the reason you didn't have time to "engage" me on the BB was due to your time restraints...but since stating this you have been posting on here quite frequently. Let's talk about inconsistent.

I believe I called you out on your inconsistency with Hezekiah and you never had a "consistent" answer to that. I'm seeing a trend...

 

[kyredneck]

Ironically, the newest Southern Baptists are back to embracing that theology, and are being taken to task for it by all the other Baptists who've drifted in their theology. Of course, the discussion has been ongoing for 400+ years and I doubt that we'll settle it here in this thread or on this board.

Yea, I've caught wind of some rumblings going on there. I was raised SB, and I ran into a long lost cousin who is still SB at Walmart several months back, and she was telling me of the new assembly she was attending that had spun off from a large major SB Church in town. The split was, in her words, "on account of those evil Calvinists". She was shocked to find out the PBs that I attend were evil like them also, and she never talked anymore about it. Anyway, it was good to see her.

 

[RAdam]

My apologies. This gentleman IS a hyper-Calvinist under modern theological definitions (a person who adheres to the 5 points of the Doctrines of Grace, and is generally anti-evangelistic).

I agree that we don't "win souls" (this has already been done). Unfortunately, the Bible also speaks of people being "Saved through the foolishness of preaching." So they were both saved at the cross, and they are saved when they come to Christ through the preached word.

And, just so we are clear, the Biblical method for evangelism is Street Preaching, where we "Command all men everywhere to repent."
Just saying. :jesus:

If you would read the context of that passage you would know what Paul meant by being saved by the foolishness of preaching.

PB have never been anti-evangelistic. The problem is people confuse the man-created mission board system with evangelism. The Baptists never had a man-created mission board system until 1792 but had always been evangelistic. How, otherwise, do you think that the Baptists had spread all over the new world before Carey and Fuller created their organization?

The truth is, there was no need of a mission board. That's because the Lord Jesus Christ created the only organization He needed to spread His gospel across the entire globe - the church. He didn't need some englishmen in the 1790's to add something to the church in order to fulfill His commandments. God had used the church for that purpose for over 17 centuries before these men came along. How did the gospel spread from Judea into Asia Minor, then into Europe, and eventually into America? It wasn't using Fuller and Carey's system, but rather it was done by the church blessed and lead by the Holy Spirit of God. Would you be surprised to learn that PB preachers are crossing oceans to preach in places like Siberia, Tanzania, Kenya, India, etc? So much for anti-evangelism.

 

[Havensdad]

If you would read the context of that passage you would know what Paul meant by being saved by the foolishness of preaching.

PB have never been anti-evangelistic. The problem is people confuse the man-created mission board system with evangelism. The Baptists never had a man-created mission board system until 1792 but had always been evangelistic. How, otherwise, do you think that the Baptists had spread all over the new world before Carey and Fuller created their organization?

The truth is, there was no need of a mission board. That's because the Lord Jesus Christ created the only organization He needed to spread His gospel across the entire globe - the church. He didn't need some englishmen in the 1790's to add something to the church in order to fulfill His commandments. God had used the church for that purpose for over 17 centuries before these men came along. How did the gospel spread from Judea into Asia Minor, then into Europe, and eventually into America? It wasn't using Fuller and Carey's system, but rather it was done by the church blessed and lead by the Holy Spirit of God. Would you be surprised to learn that PB preachers are crossing oceans to preach in places like Siberia, Tanzania, Kenya, India, etc? So much for anti-evangelism.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Brother, you should really read a person's initial post, instead of looking at what they are responding to. In my first post, I stated that Primitive baptists were NOT all hyper-Calvinist.

No, my above response was to a particular individual, who stated that the Gospel call did not go out to all; that all are not invited. I stand on the street corner and preach; I tell people "God is commanding you today, to repent and believe the Gospel!" That command is going out to every man woman and child. And the gentleman I was responding to, seemed to be against this; thus, I was saying HE is anti-evangelistic, not that PB's are!

As far as the Missions organizations, we also see in the NT, local churches grouping together to fund the SAME missionaries; Paul received support from several churches. The Jerusalem council was a meeting of multiple congregations. Nothing wrong with banding together.

 

[pinoybaptist]

.......
No, my above response was to a particular individual, who stated that the Gospel call did not go out to all; that all are not invited. I stand on the street corner and preach; I tell people "God is commanding you today, to repent and believe the Gospel!" That command is going out to every man woman and child. And the gentleman I was responding to, seemed to be against this; thus, I was saying HE is anti-evangelistic, not that PB's are!

Well, now, from your many posts in this board I think you call yourself a Calvinist, so you answer this question: Is God fair to call every man, woman, and child to repent and believe the gospel knowing FULL WELL since He created man that man is a fallen sinner, dead in sin and trespasses, not in possession of the faith that pleases him, and therefore UNABLE of and by himself, unaided by the Spirit and drawn by the Father, to come to Christ ?

.......
As far as the Missions organizations, we also see in the NT, local churches grouping together to fund the SAME missionaries; Paul received support from several churches. The Jerusalem council was a meeting of multiple congregations. Nothing wrong with banding together.

And where in the Scripture does the Bible ever call Paul and Peter and the rest of the Apostles "missionaries" ? They are no more missionaries than Donald Duck is a marine (unless of course Walt Disney makes him one..:laugh

 

[kyredneck]

....No, my above response was to a particular individual, who stated that the Gospel call did not go out to all; that all are not invited. I stand on the street corner and preach; I tell people "God is commanding you today, to repent and believe the Gospel!" That command is going out to every man woman and child. And the gentleman I was responding to, seemed to be against this; thus, I was saying HE is anti-evangelistic, not that PB's are!.....

HD, I have to ask, is this gentleman you're referring to ME, per chance?

[edit] I ask this because of things that were said about/to me on another thread concerning my vehement objection to the notion of hoi polloi that the eternity of others rests in our hands. I vehemently deny that still. And this 'wrong notion' arises from the 'wrong application' of a passage that hoi polloi has deemed to be 'The Great Commission' of the Church. It's gone so far that they now accuse Saints of leading/sending others to hell by not adhering to their interpretation of the passage(s).

 

[pinoybaptist]

to Havensdad:

Looks like you didn't read my post well, or read what you wanted to read into it which is anti-evangelism.

here's what I said:

Now, as to evangelism, we believe the gospel needs to be preached, but preached as a gospel of FINISHED eternal salvation and redemption by a SEATED, RESTED, RESURRECTED, SUCCESSFUL Savior and Redeemer and to be preached to those whose ears the gospel is for - the redeemed of the Lamb, who alone will rejoice at their salvation and glorify God for it, a pearl not to be cast before swine.

Is the gospel good news of a finished salvation for every unregenerate man, woman, and child ?

 

[kyredneck]

pinoy [gasp], is it you? Are you the 'hyper'?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

How 'bout this one?

Thats perfect But this board needs more than just those. Good Work Amy & Quantum....may I call you Q? Sounds so Bond Like.

 

[psalms109:31]

to Havensdad:

Looks like you didn't read my post well, or read what you wanted to read into it which is anti-evangelism.

here's what I said:

Now, as to evangelism, we believe the gospel needs to be preached, but preached as a gospel of FINISHED eternal salvation and redemption by a SEATED, RESTED, RESURRECTED, SUCCESSFUL Savior and Redeemer and to be preached to those whose ears the gospel is for - the redeemed of the Lamb, who alone will rejoice at their salvation and glorify God for it, a pearl not to be cast before swine.

Is the gospel good news of a finished salvation for every unregenerate man, woman, and child ?

John 19:30
When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.



2 Timothy 4:7
I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.

Hebrews 4
The Promise of Rest
1 Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it. 2 For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them,[ NU-Text and M-Text read profit them, since they were not united by faith with those who heeded it.] not being mixed with faith in those who heard it. 3 For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said:

“ So I swore in My wrath,

‘ They shall not enter My rest,’”[ Psalm 95:11]

a. although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. 4 For He has spoken in a certain place of the seventh day in this way: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works”;[ Genesis 2:2] 5 and again in this place: “They shall not enter My rest.”[ Psalm 95:11]
6 Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience, 7 again He designates a certain day, saying in David, “Today,” after such a long time, as it has been said:


“ Today, if you will hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts.”[ Psalm 95:7, 8

 

[pinoybaptist]

pinoy [gasp], is it you? Are you the 'hyper'?

that's what he says, bro.

 

[RAdam]

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Brother, you should really read a person's initial post, instead of looking at what they are responding to. In my first post, I stated that Primitive baptists were NOT all hyper-Calvinist.

No, my above response was to a particular individual, who stated that the Gospel call did not go out to all; that all are not invited. I stand on the street corner and preach; I tell people "God is commanding you today, to repent and believe the Gospel!" That command is going out to every man woman and child. And the gentleman I was responding to, seemed to be against this; thus, I was saying HE is anti-evangelistic, not that PB's are!

As far as the Missions organizations, we also see in the NT, local churches grouping together to fund the SAME missionaries; Paul received support from several churches. The Jerusalem council was a meeting of multiple congregations. Nothing wrong with banding together.

Ok, first of all, the so called Jerusalem council wasn't a meeting of multiple congregations. It was a meeting of two congregations. Antioch church sent representatives down to Jerusalem church because some men had come in advocating errors from the Jerusalem church. They got together and it was learned that those individuals weren't sent by Jerusalem church neither did Jerusalem church agree with what those individuals were advocating. Acts 15 is a wonderful example of handing a difficulty between two congregations in an orderly manner. This chapter doesn't justify the creation of a separate organization designed to carry out a command given to the already existing organization of the church.

Now, let's talk about the gospel and what it is designed to do. The gospel call is not a call to accept eternal salvation. The gospel call is a call for the person to repent, believe what God said concerning His Son, and take up his/her cross and follow Jesus. Many are called, but few are chosen. Many are called in this way, but were not chosen unto salvation. This gospel call is separate from the internal call of grace made only by the Holy Spirit. Without the internal call the external call will not prosper. The external call can be resisted, but not the internal call. God calls one to salvation internally, and the preacher calls one to obedience externally.

We make the external gospel call in an indiscriminate manner simply because we do not know God's sheep on sight. If one believes and repents, we continue preaching to this person so that the person can be made a disciple and can grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord. If the person rejects, we move on. As Jesus said, shake the dust off your feet. Heaven is not offered through the gospel.

 

[quantumfaith]

IMHO, with the limited knowledge and reading I have done, I would "define"
"hyper -calvinists" as those who hold to the position that grace is not "offered" to the "non-elect". I think this is known as the "supralasarian" view. Before I am castigated though, know that I am not writing this with a pejorative tone, simply for me, a "defining" tone.

Some of the more well known adherents of this being: David Englesma, Herman Hoeksema and Joseph Hussey (at least according to my current source.)

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Oh No.... Please don do dat! Enn ma umble optonion! Izzz a not gooda.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yoz a wanta pepporona on dat?

 

[Luke2427]

to Havensdad:

Looks like you didn't read my post well, or read what you wanted to read into it which is anti-evangelism.

here's what I said:

Now, as to evangelism, we believe the gospel needs to be preached, but preached as a gospel of FINISHED eternal salvation and redemption by a SEATED, RESTED, RESURRECTED, SUCCESSFUL Savior and Redeemer and to be preached to those whose ears the gospel is for - the redeemed of the Lamb, who alone will rejoice at their salvation and glorify God for it, a pearl not to be cast before swine.

Is the gospel good news of a finished salvation for every unregenerate man, woman, and child ?

The command to repent is to all regardless of their ability to respond to the command.

 

[Luke2427]

IMHO, with the limited knowledge and reading I have done, I would "define"
"hyper -calvinists" as those who hold to the position that grace is not "offered" to the "non-elect". I think this is known as the "supralasarian" view. Before I am castigated though, know that I am not writing this with a pejorative tone, simply for me, a "defining" tone.

Some of the more well known adherents of this being: David Englesma, Herman Hoeksema and Joseph Hussey (at least according to my current source.)

Partially right. One must be a supralapsarian to be a hyperCal but supralapsarians are not of necessity hypercals.