A question about Calvinism

[preachinjesus]

I keep reading this false statement here on the BB...where did it originate from? A plain reading of SCripture CLEARLY shows different dispensations. You mean there were no believers until the 1850's who were able to see this?

This is not a false statement it is a bit of historical theology. I've read the Scriptures cover to cover, several times, and even with an eye towards theology. I just don't see it.

I was raised in a dispensationalist church and attended a dispensationalist school for college. After much prayer and study I have moved away from that position. Also, the argument gets confounded when reading early church fathers and every major theologian from the first century to the 19th century and you don't see the structure, forms, or even a hinting at a dispensationalist theology.

But then again it is only a theological framework and not the least bit salvific. Unless you suggest that to be Christian one must be dispensational...and I don't know anyone who would attempt that position.

 

[gb93433]

Eph 1:10, "with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth.(NASU)"

Eph 3:2, "if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace which was given to me for you;(NASU)"

 

[OldRegular]

Eph 1:10, "with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth.(NASU)"

Eph 3:2, "if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace which was given to me for you;(NASU)"

What is your point?

 

[OldRegular]

Hi OldRegular

You asked..........

Good question; And the answer is, “none of the above”.

Several years ago, I was looking through a dictionary of theology, and read about them;
And just like what every good Bible student should do, I went to the scripture(in my plain text Bible), and saw that the theory was indeed Biblical.

So you had read about the dispensations before you cleverly found them in Scripture.

The 2nd dispensation, is “called”, “The dispensation of conscience”, and the 3rd is “called”, “the dispensation of human government”.

God called Noah to build the ark, before there was a government around, to stop him.

How do you know there was no human government before the flood? Scripture tells us very little about life before the flood.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Calvinism is the name applied to a doctrine.

Response by Revmitchell
And calvinists is a term applied to people/

Just like dispensationalists is a name applied to people. Though I sometimes use the term Darbyites, though not to my friends who are unfortunately seduced by the Scofield bible..

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Obviously there is much bias among Baptists toward the term Calvinism and ignorance about the Doctrines of Grace he espoused,

Response by Revmitchell
I know. Reformed folks like to be superior and arrogant and think they are the only ones who understand their doctrine.

I don’t consider myself reformed. I don’t believe Baptists needed to be reformed. They should not be considered Protestants. There are no parctices in the Baptist church that I am aware of that mimic the Roman Catholics.

Sadly most dispensationalist I know are aware only of the pre trib rapture. Ask them about the parenthesis church and you get a blank stare.

Originally Posted by OldRegular
though historically this was the prevailing doctrine among Baptists.

Response by Revmitchell
Delusional. You need to study your history better. Both General and particular baptists have always been side by side.

I am not delusionsl. That is a mental condition that some suffer from through no fault of their own and it should not be used indiscriminately.

I believe that the Particular Baptists outnumbered the General Baptists. If you have facts to the contrary I would like to see them.

Originally Posted by OldRegular
I have on a number of occasions suggested that Baptists not use the term Calvinism to define that doctrine rather use the term Doctrines of Grace as Nettles does in his book [By His Grace and for His Glory].

Response by Revmitchell
That would be scripturally appropriate.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Furthermore, there are certain doctrines that Calvin held that Baptists reject. Be that as it may the doctrines of Calvin are certainly more Biblical than those of Darby/Scofield.

Response by Revmitchell
I am not a fan of Scofield.

Neither am I, or Darby, or Ryrie, or Walvoord. I do like some of the writings of MacArthur. Perhaps he will come to understand the error of dispensationalism.

 

[OldRegular]

I keep reading this false statement here on the BB...where did it originate from? A plain reading of SCripture CLEARLY shows different dispensations. You mean there were no believers until the 1850's who were able to see this?

Actually dispensational doctrine was invented by Darby about 1830, that is almost 180 years.

There have always been believers, just not in dispensationalism.

 

[gb93433]

What is your point?

Compare posts #20 and #22. I cannot even imagine using those verses in the KJV to prove dispensationalism. The NASU does not provide the right wording for dispensationalists but it does come from a study of the Greek text. Even a Greek concordance would show that. The idea of dispensational theology does not fit in at all with Eph. 2:19 as believers are called the household of God. Shall they be called the dispensations of God in fitting with what dispensationalists would use from Eph. 1:10 and 3:2? Ephesians 1:3-23 is the Proem (prayer of thanksgiving and/or intercession). In Eph. 3:2 was the seventh dispensation of God's grace given to Paul? I see nothing to indicate grace as a dispnesation but that Paul is a steward of God's grace not a time period.

 

[gb93433]

Just like dispensationalists is a name applied to people. Though I sometimes use the term Darbyites, though not to my friends who are unfortunately seduced by the Scofield bible.

Do you mean the gap theory perpetrated on Christians by Scofield.

There are no practices in the Baptist church that I am aware of that mimic the Roman Catholics.

Sure there are: denominational and convention politics, recently pedophiles who are leaders in local churches, most in the congregation do not know their Bible is to just name a few.

Sadly most dispensationalist I know are aware only of the pre trib rapture. Ask them about the parenthesis church and you get a blank stare.

Many are changing though. The older dispensationalists were good at eisegesis and sticking to the theological systyem to interpret. However the younger folks do not agree much with their predecessors and have drawn closer to the historical context.

I do like some of the writings of MacArthur. Perhaps he will come to understand the error of dispensationalism.

Remember that MacArthur strayed from being Baptist.

 

[Tom Butler]

Jesus did not write anything. So what does that make those who follow Him?

Calvinists

 

[historyb]

Amen!

 

[gb93433]

Calvinists

And before John Calvin? What I find interesting is how many so called calvinists have never read Calvin's institutes and do not know what Calvin actually wrote. When I read Calvin's Institutes I found some rather interesting views by Calvin of his own work often not claimed by "calvinists."

 

[gb93433]

Calvinists

so you do not claim to be a Christian but rather a calvinist? I do not find that in the book of Acts.

 

[Tom Butler]

But then again it is only a theological framework and not the least bit salvific. Unless you suggest that to be Christian one must be dispensational...and I don't know anyone who would attempt that position.

Back in the 1970s, eschatology was a hot topic and dispensationalism was the rage. Since dispensationalism requires a literal reading of the appropriate scriptures, those who held other views were suspect. They were, welll, uh, liberals. And it was broadly hinted that if you weren't a literalist, therefore were liberal, you might not be saved.

Any suggestion that some of the end-time scriptures might be allegorical or symbolic immediately made your salvation suspect.

Now, not every dispy held that view, but it was there.

 

[gb93433]

Back in the 1970s, eschatology was a hot topic and dispensationalism was the rage.

Take a look at their life now.

Since dispensationalism requires a literal reading of the appropriate scriptures, those who held other views were suspect. They were, welll, uh, liberals. And it was broadly hinted that if you weren't a literalist, therefore were liberal, you might not be saved. any suggestion that some of the end-time scriptures might be allegorical or symbolic immediately made your salvation suspect.

Remember how many of them interpreted so much of scripture allegorically. Some of them were heavily into spiritualizing the text of scripture. We have that among some on the BB too.

Anyone who has read C. H. McIntosh would easily see the spirtiualizing on the Pentateuch.

 

[Rippon]

Remember that MacArthur strayed from being Baptist.

Please elaborate. Although GCC does not have Baptist in the name it certainly is Baptistic.

You have the habit of making assertions without citing relevant information.

 

[Tom Butler]

so you do not claim to be a Christian but rather a calvinist? I do not find that in the book of Acts.

And you won't. My reply was tongue-in-cheek.

Partly.

 

[gb93433]

Please elaborate. Although GCC does not have Baptist in the name it certainly is Baptistic.

You have the habit of making assertions without citing relevant information.

Read the biography at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._MacArthur

He pastors a non-denominational church. His church is not a Baptist church and does not teach what Baptists have taught for four hundred years but rather MacArthur is dispensational which was the death of a career for a Baptist preacher at one time. He left his historical Baptist roots.

To say something is Baptistic means nothing. That can mean almost anything all the way from legalistic and knowing nothing about what the Bible teaches to being rather liberal and accepting little of what scripture teaches and advancing the kingdom through social gospel.

 

[Robert Snow]

Calvinists

Hardly. Although I don't doubt that many Calvinists are Christians, they certainly didn't get their Calvinistic beliefs from Jesus Christ!

 

[gb93433]

Hardly. Although I don't doubt that many Calvinists are Christians, they certainly didn't get their Calvinistic beliefs from Jesus Christ!

Do you mean those in that liberal denomination today?

 

[OldRegular]

Original Posted by OldRegular
There are no practices in the Baptist church that I am aware of that mimic the Roman Catholics.

Response Posted by gb93433
Sure there are: denominational and convention politics, recently pedophiles who are leaders in local churches, most in the congregation do not know their Bible is to just name a few.

I should have used doctrines instead of practices. Unfortunately you are correct.

Thanks for your explanation of the use of the passages from Ephesians. I had missed the earlier post by revmitchell [#20].