No. Owen was the only old one he said we had to read or we would be deficient of thought. The other was Sinclair Ferguson. I don't think Ferguson is dead (he should be in his mid-70's).
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Value of Books
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
That's not true. You often shift the focus and obfuscate when you get pinned. And you take advantage of the fact that the administration is old and tired.
I agree. But we are not defficient as Baptists if we don't.
He did not write a formal Systematic Theology, but many would still him as being a Theologian!JonC
I am not wasting time as you attempt damage control.
I know what you said, others read your posts and doubletalk.
Spurgeon was well read, his library of theology books was large.
He sometimes pushed the envelope trying to urge sinners to repent.
His theology was solid.
Jon, it's apparent that you are influenced mostly by modern theological theory in the newest books you have read. Based upon the comments you make, it is highly doubtful that you came to your views by only reading scripture. Instead, your posts smack of liberal thinkers from the 20th and 21st century who imagine they have unlocked a door that had been shut for centuries or millenia. You have lost much credibility with traditional Baptist Christians here at the BB, while finding support from people who do not understand grace. This should act as a red flag for you, but all I observe is you doubling down on not-traditional theology that removes you from mainstream fundamental Christian thought.
Carry on if that feeds your ego, but I find no value in what you are doing.
Not required to be read, true, but are a good supplement to the bible!
"Teeth are needlessly broken over the grit of systematic theology, while souls are famishing. To turn stones into bread was a temptation of our Master; but how many of His servants yield readily to the far worse temptation to turn bread into stone! Go thy way, metaphysical divine, to the stone-yard, and break granite for McAdam, but stand not in the way of loving spirits who would feed the family of God with living bread. The inspired Word is to us spirit and life, and we cannot afford to have it hardened into a huge monolith or a spiritual Stonehenge—sublime but cold, majestic but lifeless; far rather would we have it as our own household book, our bosom companion, the poor man's counselor and friend."
—Charles Spurgeon, Feathers for Arrows
I do not believe you arrived at Calvinism via Scripture. You just adopted what you read in the books you had at the time.
As far as me changing my view....what books are you talking about?
I told you what I believe, and it is what is actually written in Scripture. What I rejected is what you think Scripture teaches - not what is written.
I made sure my understanding was consistent with other Christians (that I was not a lone wolf) and it is. BUT those I have read also took for granted Scripture meant what it said (I have read no books expounding on the literal view, as it is self explanatory).
When it comes to Scripture and my faithfulness I don't care about credibility among men. You would do better to concern yourself with God more than pleasing men as well.
You must stop from stating that we Calvinists are not holding to what the scriptures teach, as we would hold that you are the one not doing that at times here!
No. Not a good supplement to the Bible. Just understandings to be considered.
No. I will adjust my view on this topic only to what is written in God's Word. Calvinism is extra-biblical (it is what a minority of Christians believe Scripture teaches).
But it hasn't. The last change I made was moving from Calvinism to Scripture.
What you guys call a change does not exist.
You say I posted that we should not read books and then changed my story. Your "proof" is I now say we can benefit from reading books.
The "lie" is in what you cannot defend - that I EVER said we should not read books.
When I saw @Iconoclast make the claim I was surprised if it's utter stupidity (as most here know I appreciate reading).
We have discussed books and authors for 20 years. What on earth makes you believe others will accept what you know yourself is a lie???
And here we stand. Your modernism vs traditional baptist belief.
Enjoy your deserted island, Jon.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Yeah it was a dumb comment wasn't it?
"Modernism"?????
You first accuse me of reading books and adopting their ideas.
Now you say I'm the only person who my view.
. 
If I may weigh in on this conversation. While I don't think it is necessarily evil to read theology books, I do think there is a danger in doing it. The problem it causes is evident many times on these type forums. Many people are trying to defend their theology by trying to remember what these writers have said about a subject because they are not very familiar with what the scriptures say. This happens a lot. These guys who write these books becomes the authority. Isn't that the point iconoclast was making when he suggested one must read certain of the particular books from whence he gets his authority?
The method that God has implemented by his word to teach his truths is in the assembly of the local church. There is no biblical instructions for any teacher outside the local church. Even the office of "evangelist" as we know it today is a non-office. The pastor teacher is simply admonished to do the work of an evangelist. Even our missionaries that we send out to the unwashed are to take the gospel and establish local churches.
God equips those men he calls into the ministry. Their authority is the apostolic writings and the words they wrote and that he preserved. They, the apostles and the original evangelists, are the foundation of the church when the church is defined as the collective. He has no instructions for collective preachers and deacons. He calls preachers to the local assemblies. This is the manner he has chosen to keep his doctrines pure.
I can see the wisdom in that. Men like John Calvin has been used by whoever called him to influence all of Christendom with bad doctrines and perversions of the word. Local pastors have accountability but these preachers of the collective have no higher authority than themselves. Look at how many years Calvin has been growing his collective church, long after he has died. A one world government or a one world church will not work. We all need just one pastor.
The method that God has implemented by his word to teach his truths is in the assembly of the local church. There is no biblical instructions for any teacher outside the local church. Even the office of "evangelist" as we know it today is a non-office. The pastor teacher is simply admonished to do the work of an evangelist. Even our missionaries that we send out to the unwashed are to take the gospel and establish local churches.
God equips those men he calls into the ministry. Their authority is the apostolic writings and the words they wrote and that he preserved. They, the apostles and the original evangelists, are the foundation of the church when the church is defined as the collective. He has no instructions for collective preachers and deacons. He calls preachers to the local assemblies. This is the manner he has chosen to keep his doctrines pure.
I can see the wisdom in that. Men like John Calvin has been used by whoever called him to influence all of Christendom with bad doctrines and perversions of the word. Local pastors have accountability but these preachers of the collective have no higher authority than themselves. Look at how many years Calvin has been growing his collective church, long after he has died. A one world government or a one world church will not work. We all need just one pastor.
"To think is admirable, but not if we mean thereby to supplement the teachings of Christ....The evil is that the wise men add their own inferences to the facts as if they were of equal authority. What, then, is to be done? Shall we alter the deductions of the fallible or try to shape the declarations of the infallible? The question is not hard to answer....Whatever others may do, it is the delight of those who have felt the overwhelming power of the divine Spirit to find in Christ the wisdom with which their intellect is more than content." —Charles Spurgeon, "Forts Demolished, and Prisoners Taken"
They would be additional books to read to indeed supplement the scriptures with though!
What someone like NT Wright and others in the NPP believe is non biblical!
There will never be any author not in the Bible that has perfect doctrines and theology, but Calvin was much better then vast majority of theology today, that ranges from fluff to outright heresy!
- Status