Where is the IFB Sytematic Theology?

This ain't about you being accepted; it's about what you say being accepted. As has been pointed out to you many, many times, people aren't getting the message because they can't get past the delivery.

Um...would you please point to a single post where I've agreed with, or promoted, "coddling"?

Should be easy to find; just look for any posts where I've debated against the "calvinism is the only way to go" point of view. I've also posted, in times past, against the charismatic viewpoint.

Luke, is there any possibility that you'll go back and read your own words with an open mind? Trying to view what you've said from someone else's viewpoint?

You remind me of the guy who continues to beat the dog until it whimpers in the corner, and only approaches humans with its tail tucked between its legs. Just keep bashing away, and demolishing, until there's no resistance left.

If that's your method of choice, well, I've given you my opinion on your methods. I'll continue "demolishing" bad theology, like pentacostalism and 7th day adventism, with the gifts and talents God has given me.

 

You mean, doesn't work for you. There are many of us who have just as many successes as you, with different methods. And that, my friend, is where I do have scripture on my side; because, as I've attempted to point out to you before, but you're too proud to realize it, scripture clearly indicates that if we are to minister, we do it as of the gifts that God has given us, that Christ may be glorified; whether it be the gifts of helps, healing, teaching, or others. If we need to be harsh, we be harsh; if we need to be sweet, we be sweet. As Paul said, I am all things to all men, that all may be won to Christ. As the Old Testament tells us, to everything there is a season. I commend those that are harsh, and I commend those that are sweet, because in the very same scripture that says we are each given different gifts, it also says the different gifts work together for the same reason. To imply that "all" the apostles, or even "MOST" of the church fathers, did things the exact same way, is to deny the fact that we are all given different gifts, and scripturally ordered to use those different gifts as they have been given to us.

So you go on saying that we should all do it the same way, but be ready for people to continue to challenge you on it, because scripture contradicts that position.

There. Said my piece. Backed it up with Scripture. Highly doubt that Luke will accept anything I've said, because he sees things only one way. Done. Next subject?

 

Against my better judgment....

Luke, I can't believe I'm having to explain this to you. There is no one way to reprove evil. Where do the verses I referenced come into play? Because God created a special ability in you that's different than what He created in the rest of us. He created the woman next to me with a much sweeter spirit, who will tell people that they're doing wrong, who will reprove the works of evil, but doesn't come off as mean-spirited in the process. That's who God made her.

The reason I once asked you about whether you thought you were the head, or an eye, or the hand -- because each will reprove evil in the way that God made them, and none of them can say that they're better than the other, or that the other should do it their way.

You keep bringing up history; all of the people you mention as references all reproved evil. But can you definitively say they all did it exactly the same way?

No one said you're wrong, Luke; all they've said is, you don't have to be a jerk about it.

Or maybe you do, because God made you that way. But the rest of us don't, because God didn't make us that way.

There. Can't make it any clearer. Maybe someone else can.

 

Don,I am in agreement with you if that matters.

 

Think that main thing that I see regarding this discussion topic is that we have to make sure that we are "attacking" others based upon coressential Christian doctrines that are misintepreted in a heretical fashion, NOT based upon preferences/convictions, or areas can disagree on, such as Modes baptism/second coming etc!

 

Basically, Luke is the only one here that is 100% doctrinally correct. And everyone that disagrees with him is in darkness and subject to Luke's rebuke. He has been commanded by the scriptures to attack everyone that doesn't agree with him until they submit to his beliefs.

And he can prove it with scripture. So what's the problem? Shouldn't we all be like Luke?

John

 

And my point is: We trace our core beliefs back to the N.T. church - the roots of the baptist distinctives came from the N.T. church, NOT FROM ROME!!

There were real Christians all along, getting burned, fed to the lions, being persecuted, but the real church continued, despite ROME.

 

we can prove our roots as CHRISTIANS do go all the way back to to the Apostles, but were known as Christians, as baptists as a distinctive sub group within Church started up much later...

Christian church for centuries, than formal organized RCC, with "real" christianity as sub groups, and than after reformation formal known protestants, including all we baptists!

 

Luke2427 just traded in IFB KJVO for CalvinismO. He has the same spirit and it shows in every post. Having come out of extreme IFB KJVO myself I understand. Some of these people are not happy unless they make others angry and uncomfortable. It gives them a feeling of being superior, although they deny this. They love to mention that the godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution, but they fail to realize they are not being persecuted for Christ, but for their prideful, unscriptural approach to others.

I remember going to bible conferences where everyone there was IFB and KJVO. Yet, seldom could two pastors discuss anything without getting into an argument over which one was the most separated and therefore more godly. It usually ended up in some storming out and going home.

One time a IFB pastor and his only deacon stepped out in the front of the church after the morning service and had a fist fight in front of God and everyone. I believe Luke2427 would fit right in to these types of people and this type of behavior.

 

Actually, in this thead, Luke2427 raised some valid and interesting questions that most who consider themselves insiders in the IFB movement cannot seem to address.

It is not the questions, nor Luke2427 that is the problem, but rather a theology that is build on something other than what it purports at face value.

Point for Luke2427 in this round. :thumbsup:

Additionally, we should consider the fact that a non-Doctrines of Grace perspective was never the earliest nor the majority view at any time in church history, except (perhaps) our own, right now, when men who should be students of the Scriptures and of church history turn instead to tradition. Peter, who wrote of this (I believe) in his 2nd epistle, was right.

Especially, God's authority, which Peter held as preemminant in his doctrine, replaced by the promise of human freedom...

 

I agree with you. He condemns IFB for being dogmatic and tyrantical, but he is worse than any IFB preacher I have ever seen.

John

 

Every camp has it's doctrines that they have adopted. Even Calvinism has adopted doctrines from other religions, like RCC for instance. If IFB pastors agree with a doctrine from another camp should they reject it anyway because it wasn't their original idea? Of course not.

Everybody adopts some doctrines and rejects others. Basically, in my IFB church, we don't follow any creed or confession. We don't have a church covenent. Our beliefs are those passed down and evolving for hundreds of years. Along the way, light has been shed where it wasn't before and therefore doctrines have been added or dropped. But the basic Baptist doctrine of saved by Grace, and believer's baptism has endured for hundreds of years.

Luke has picked a fight here that is non-existent, so how can he win a round when there is no fight in the first place?

And how can any IFB respond to the ridiculous questions he has asked? All he has done is used some twisted logic in order to try to show how much smarter he thinks he is than the average IFB.

This whole thread is just a sad attempt by a hater to bash IFB.

John

 

Is that supposed to prove to me that DoG is biblical?

John

 

Let me add that the only doctrine that my church and Reformed churches don't have in common is 4 points of Calvinism. All the rest is the same.

Where did the DoG churches get the rest of their theology?

Same place we did?????

John

 

Here's what the Calvinist Spurgeon had to say about it

Spurgeon made the following statement on April 2, 1861 in a great Baptist conference hosted by the Metropolitan Tabernacle.

"We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were reformers before Luther and Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel under ground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor, I believe, any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with Government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men."


If you don't believe what Spurgeon said here, then how can you believe any of his theology?

Luke, I would think that Spurgeon had studied this much more in depth than, and was way more knowledgeable than you.

John