Faith Cometh By Hearing......

Pioneer, it's one thing to believe the T.U.L.I.P doctrines, though I think it constitutes a deadly flower in and of itself.

It's quite another thing to think that the "preached word has nothing to do with saving faith imparted to them". I simply can't understand that statement in the light of Scripture.
Examples: 1 Corinthians 1:18 "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God"
1 Thessalonians 2:13 "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."
1 Peter 1:23 "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever"

That leads to your other statement that "all power is not given to scripture, but to the Lord Jesus." When you say that, you denigrate the authority of the Scriptures. I understand that Jesus is "the fullness of the Godhead bodily"(Col.2:9) and he has "all power in heaven and earth"(Matthew 28:18) but you can't divorce the Scriptures from the source of their power.

Example: Hebrews 4:12-13 "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do"
Both Jesus and the Scriptures are called the Word of God, the written word and the Incarnate word. The Bible isn't God, I realize, but he works in and through it because it's inspired by God.

I wouldn't call you a false prophet, but I do think you have a big misunderstanding of the role of the Bible and the role of preaching. I may as some others be less of a Calvinist than you but you need to explain how the above scriptures do not negate your position as shown by your 2 statements.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>... if I was a Calvinist I would probably come to the same conclusion: We don't need any preaching to the lost to get them saved because God will save them no matter what if they are the elect.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are lying again. Calvinism (biblical soteriology) doe not believes this. Get your facts straight.

Study 1 Thess 1. Paul, who staked his life on the doctrine of election, clearly talks about the necessity of the word.

I know lying is a strong word but I use it purposely. Those who continue to spout misinformation, after having been told differently, can only be accused of intentional lying. Steve is not allowed to come to his own conclusions about what his opponents believe. He has been told the truth time and time again and he consistently refuses to accept it.

Steve, I realize that if you give up your false position on what Calvinists believe, that much of your argument falls away. However, it is incumbent on you to be honest in your facts. The truth is that once people understand what Calvinism, or biblical soteriology, is all about, they are left with very few or no arguments against it. So they of necessity must hold to false ones in order to keep their objections alive.

[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

(My apologies to Pioneer, I mean't to address my comments to changed like saul--which I'll do now)

Based on your interpretation of I Cor 1:18 you seem to say that the Word of God works as the power of God in a believer's life but has absolutely no power to influence an unbeliever. My contention is when you say the preached word hasnothing to do with the giving of faith. I agree that saving faith is purely a gift of God and preaching doesn't profit those who reject God according to Pioneer's quote of Hebrews 4:2

But you can't say preaching doesn't do anything for the unbeliever or nonelect. You haven't commented yet on the other 3 passages I gave yet, I'm especially interested in your explanation of 1 Peter 1:23 (you could compare it to James 1:18)

Preaching the word will accomplish what only God can do. It doesn't save in and of itself because the person receiving it must open their heart to receive it by God's grace. Read Isaiah 55, esp, verse 11--sounds like a promise of God to me. God convicts the worldof sin, righteousness and judgment according to John 16:7. You mean to tell me that the preached word has no part in this at all?? Then why do we need preachers, evangelists and missionaries? God can save the elect all by himself!! I really hope you don't believe that anyways

Read also Romans 1:16 and I Corinthians 1:21. As Pastor Larry correctly says, the preached Word is paramount.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:

I know lying is a strong word but I use it purposely. Those who continue to spout misinformation, after having been told differently, can only be accused of intentional lying. Steve is not allowed to come to his own conclusions about what his opponents believe. He has been told the truth time and time again and he consistently refuses to accept it.

Steve, I realize that if you give up your false position on what Calvinists believe, that much of your argument falls away. However, it is incumbent on you to be honest in your facts. The truth is that once people understand what Calvinism, or biblical soteriology, is all about, they are left with very few or no arguments against it. So they of necessity must hold to false ones in order to keep their objections alive.

[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very well stated, PL.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Temple:


Very well stated, PL.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Chris and Pastor Larry,

I agree that some non-Calvinists on this board have used "heretic" and other terms when they should not in referring to Calvinists. However, you are using the term "liar" in referring to non-Calvinists every time they have trouble with a "logical conclusion" of Calvinism. Yet you insist on saying that non-Calvinism MUST logically lead to universalism. I do not think you are lying, I think you are confused. You also repeatedly insist that any form of non-Calvinism IS Arminianism. I do not think you are lying, but I think you are confused.

ALL sides would do well to remember something C. S. Lewis said: "The modern method is to assume without discussion THAT he is wrong and then distract his attention from this (the only real issue) by busily explaining how he became so silly.....I call it Bulverism. Some day I am going to write the biography of its imaginary inventor, Ezekiel Bulver, whose destiny was determined at the age of five when he heard his mother say to his father---who had been maintaining that two sides of a triangle were together greater than the third---'Oh you say that BECAUSE YOU ARE A MAN.' 'At that moment, E. Bulver assures us, 'there flashed across my opening mind the great truth that refutation is no necessary part of argument.'"

Examples: "Oh you say that because you are a heretic."
"Oh you say that because you are an Arminian." or "liar" or whatever.

Karen

[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: Karen ]

 

Karen,

The point I am making is this: Steve continues to say things that he has 1) been told are inaccurate, and 2) have been shown from Scripture not to be an accurate representation of Scripture. Yet he continues to say them. Someone who willfully persists in falsehood can only be called a liar. He is no longer confused; he has been told and shown from Scripture what we believe. He does not have to agree necessarily. But he certainly needs to quit making intentional (and oft refuted) false statements.

On the other side of the equation, some have pointed out why universalism is the logical end of their arguments. Yet they do not answer them from Scripture. Just answer the questions from Scripture. It is that simple.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pioneer:
I was not misrepresenting what Calvinists believe, I was only agreeing (in a mocking way) with what changed_like_saul said in his original post.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you understand that Calvinists do believe that the preaching of the Word is necessary for salvation?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>By the way, why is it when I come to a logical conclusion (in my own mind) about Calvinism, I am called a liar and I am told that I am misrepresenting the facts? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>\

Because you need to let your thoughts be corrected by those who hold the position you think you can refute. It is like you saying that my shirt is blue. When I correct you and say that it is red, you refuse to accept that and continue to say that it is blue.

You can throw out an idea of what you think we believe. But when we refute that idea and show from Scripture why your idea is wrong, you need to drop that point and move on to something else. If you have legitimate arguments, then make them. Do not continue to spout stuff that has been refuted from Scripture.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Bible says let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind (unless you are going to tell me "every man" doesn't always mean "every man"). I am fully persuaded that I am right and you are wrong.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I am going to tell you that you are using that verse out of context. It has nothing to do with deciding what other people believe. And being fully persuaded in your own mind that my shirt is blue does not change the fact that it is red. Depth of persuasion is not the measure of truth; conformity to reality is.

[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: Pioneer ][/QB][/QUOTE]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by changed_like_saul:
Okay folks,

See, I believe in the finished work of Jesus Christ. The work that Christ did on the Cross 2000 years ago redeemed or paid the price for each of those chosen by God, the elect. Whether or not all the elect hear the gospel or not makes no difference. If they are part of the elect, then Christ died for them.

Elder Chris Folsom
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would agree with you in this paragraph until you said, “Whether or not all the elect hear the gospel or not makes no difference.” I’m afraid it is these types of statements that really cause confusion. I’ll show in a moment why I see your position as being out of balance. I’ll quickly share how I was out of balance the other direction.

After graduating from a Baptist Bible college, not knowing much better I left with distaste for election, predestination, etc. Basically I was taught that salvation was really up to man. God paid the price for the gift and man basically decides to take the gift or not. In the past I saw people like Abraham, Moses, David, Paul, etc as examples of people who made the right choice to believe or follow God.

After getting to the mission field I became frustrated with why people could turn down God’s free gift of salvation. Even those who did pray, “ask Jesus in their hearts, calling out to God” type of prayers showed no interest in the person they professed as their savior. To make a long story shorter, I followed the steps of missionary Trevor Mcllwain and started teaching the Bible chronological, starting at Genesis. I am now almost through with Romans as a part of this study and it is clear to me that I was way out of balance before. God’s election and choosing of sinners to service or salvation saturates the pages of scripture. Instead of finding God’s sovereign choice and election distasteful, as before, I see it as the greatest demonstration of God’s love and patience with Adam’s race. Thought it would be good that you understand the log that was in my eye before I start picking at your splinter of imbalance.

If I was Pioneer or Trueliberty etc, I’d feast on your comment of, “Whether or not all the elect hear the gospel or not makes no difference” like Paul Hadik’s Micronesian sharks go into a frenzy over blood in the water. Just like I used to ignore God’s sovereignty, election, etc, you are neglecting a huge host of Biblical evidence to make that statement. As many non-Calvinists would ask then, “Why is a guy like PackerBacker out on the mission field sharing the gospel message with others, if it does not matter if people hear it?” Better yet, why did Jesus waste His time telling His disciples to take the message into all the world, if it does not matter? Why stop Christ’s #1 enemy, Paul, on the way to Damascus and call him to take the message of Christ to the Gentiles, if it does not really matter? It sure seems to me that the “elect hearing the gospel” makes a difference to God.

It is clear to me that salvation is 100% of God. It is also clear to me that God’s way of saving sinners is through the gospel message being shared. There is only one way of salvation (Jn,.14:6) and only one name given among man to be saved (Acts 4:12). Let me offer one of many places in the Bible that I see as giving a good balance.

“Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city. And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.” (Acts 18:9-11 KJV)

God told Paul to not be silent and to speak for what reason? There were still more people in the city that were God’s. Let’s face it Paul has no idea who God plans to have mercy on, any more than we do. Regardless of God knowing who were His in the city, God wanted Paul to continue preaching the gospel of Christ. If Paul were out of balance, he would have said to God, “What’s the difference God, you’re going to elect them anyhow.”

God does elect who he will have mercy on, but his way of saving man is by faith in Christ’s substitutionary death in their place. Humanly these two thoughts may not fit like we want them to, but they are both clearly taught in scripture. I encourage you to seek balance, even if you do not understand it, rather than ignore one truth to support another.

[ December 02, 2001: Message edited by: PackerBacker ]

 

Ste...uh PackerBacker:

I tend thee a standing ovation. Much the same thing happened to myself even down to McIlwaine's Firm Foundation. Hope to meet you someday.
It will of course shock some on this thread that there are Calvinists out there who actually hold to the belief that we should obey God and witness to the world around us.
Ironically, some of the greatest evangelists I have met were Calvinists. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that in seeing the incomprehensible sovereignty and holiness of God and yet realizing that He called us in spite of our sin we are then doubly overwhelmed with the idea that He even wants to use US to further His kingdom.
All glory to God our savior.

 

Hey, I like this, There actually is some decent Christian conversation and discussion on this thread. Doesn't mean I can take off my rubber boots though!

PakerBacker, with a username like that, how could anything you say be incorrect!

Actually, It parallels my own journey to spiritual enlightenment rather well. I also was not force fed election at a Baptist College, although it was taught, and really was leaning toward a more man-centered view of Salvation. Having grown up in a Christian environment, it is harder to see the reality of the depravity of man. I never had a chance to get way out there before salvation, but did recognize my desires were not for the things of God.

A thorough study on the character and Nature of God got me thinking about how I could choose anything, really. A somewhat metaphysical study became a Biblical one as I dug out my old notes on Calvinism, and the Doctrines of Grace, Salvation, etc. I began reading verses, and began to see a pattern in scripture. Man's will is always subservient to God's. And clearly the Bible teaches election. Amen to your post, it is right on. And obviously, Election is a separate issue from the commands to spread the gospel. Someone who believes that preaching or the Bible is unneccesary, and that those who believe in Election do not believe in witnessing, obviously doesn't have a clue about what scripture says about either matter.

Saved Like Saul,
I do tend to agree in concept with you, the Scriptures possess no mystical power unto Salvation. They point us to the perfect Word, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit uses the truth of the Word to show us our need and the provision of Christ's substitutionary death. At that point, we no longer have a choice. The irresistable grace of God draws us to himself. But from Man's limited perspective, the Gospel must be preached to every man, because that is the vehicle he chose to use to spread his truth. Your statement may cause some to stumble, but a true Biblical study will show that their is no contradiction, merely a doctrine that is critical to the "by faith alone" stance of Baptists, and a command of God to spread the Word of God to all men, so that they might believe.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pioneer:


My point was this: If I was a Calvinist I would not do a blasted thing for God since God has already determined (long before I ever got here) who would be saved and who would be lost.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Pioneer,

Did you get a chance to read the reply I sent to saved-like-saul, a couple posts earlier? Just curious. Reading your posts kind of remind me of where I used to be a few years ago, not saying that I’ve got it all figured out by any stretch of the imagination. I’m still learning and I honestly don’t know that I’d call my self a Calvinist, Armenian, or whatever else yet. I’m still trying to figure it all out and have appreciated your input as well as the other folks. Anyhow, after breaking the ice a little, I’d like to comment on your last post.

I must admit that with the exception of one guy who says he is a Calvinist (but seems different from the others), I don’t recall any of the other Calvinist guys taking the position or perhaps attitude you ascribe Calvinists to have. It’s almost funny but I used to think the same thing until I began to see that most guys with that Calvinistic name seem to be very dedicated to the Lord and concerned about evangelism, etc. I think it is probably more of a stereotype than for real.

A person could call himself a Calvinist, Christian, or any other name for that matter, but could surely not call himself a child of God if they took the attitude; you jokingly say you would have if you were a Calvinist.

I’ve heard that kind of attitude before but actually from those thinking salvation is a prayer and pat on the back. That thinking and logic is often found in "easy-believism" or better said, "prayer for salvationism." The person is told that if they believe what the evangelist says and pray a prayer asking Jesus in their heart they are eternally secure and can never lose their salvation. It does not take a real genius to figure out that "they don't need to do a blasted thing for God" under this kind of teaching. After all they did all they needed by making the right one time /one moment choice, under that system. I'd be willing to bet you'll find far more people with the attitude you described, not holding to a Calvinistic position.

After spending a great deal of time speaking about God's wonderful choice to have mercy on some sinners, Paul tells those in Christ that it is only their reasonable service to live their lives as a living sacrifice to God (Rom 12:1). Regardless of the name for a belief system, I fail to see how any wretched sinner understanding they have received God’s mercy and grace through Christ Jesus, could turn around and take the attitude you mentioned. I know your conclusion sounds logical but it is actually illogical that a real recipient of God’s wonderful mercy would turn on his savior and say, “I’m not doing a blasted thing for you.”

By the way I know you do not hold that position or attitude. I just don’t think the other guys do either. Just my two cents.

[ December 06, 2001: Message edited by: PackerBacker ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PackerBacker:


It is clear to me that salvation is 100% of God. It is also clear to me that God’s way of saving sinners is through the gospel message being shared. There is only one way of salvation (Jn,.14:6) and only one name given among man to be saved (Acts 4:12). Let me offer one of many places in the Bible that I see as giving a good balance.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

PackerBacker:

Bravo, to your whole post.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pioneer:
My point was this: If I was a Calvinist I would not do a blasted thing for God since God has already determined (long before I ever got here) who would be saved and who would be lost.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you knew anything about being a Calvinist, you wouldn't say ridiculous things like this.

If you were a Calvinist you would be committed to biblical obedience which includes preaching the biblical message of salvation.

If you were a Calvinist, God's grace and sovereignty would not be an issue of disrespect for God but rather one of worship and adoration.

If you were a Calvinist, you would not feel compelled to fit God into the logical constrictions of the finite human mind.

But take heart: one day you will be a Calvinist, right along with the rest of us.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:

But take heart: one day you will be a Calvinist, right along with the rest of us.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>