Those who are not Calvinists understands that God acts sovereignly when he wants to.
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!
Those who are not Calvinists understands that God acts sovereignly when he wants to.
I agree that men who disobey God are doing it willfully and are solely responsible and cannot blame God for their sin. In the context of a forum debate format I think it's OK to argue my views on Calvinism or God's sovereignty. I think it is stimulating and leads me to know more about other writers and other scriptures I have not considered. But in real life, I owe too much to men like John R. Rice, Billy Graham, John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, John Bunyan, Richard Baxter, Wesley and to groups like Campus Crusade for Christ, to dismiss anyone based on what I might disagree with on their theology.What does this mean? It means that men who disobey God willfully and do their own things are acting in sovereignty. Why do you think Jehovah calls on gods to repent?
The Reformed, including the best teachers such as Lloyd-Jones, do not merely get all biblical doctrines wrong with the so called doctrines of grace, they get them backwards. I do not recommend trusting them with your spiritual well-being.
Absolutely! They are all just men living in a set time, with limited vantagepoints, and most were responding to some error or problem that we may not be aware of. But I can promise you, grab some sermons and papers from Owen or Bunyan, from on-line (where they are free) and you will be greatly blessed. Same with Baxter and Wesley.I do not recommend trusting them with your spiritual well-being.
I don't know much about Pink.
Would you want to learn theology from this man?
Thus, IMO, Arthur Pink was a terrible, disobedient Christian, and no one should learn theology from him. Period. End of story.
People have their difficulties, and he was right about quite a bit. End of story.
Pink was certainly a strong Calvinist, but he was no Hyper.
So, you're okay with someone claiming to be a believer but not going to church for 15 years, and never fellowshipping with other believers? (I don't want to misrepresent you.)What you see described is a man.
Nothing to cry about. Although, I do see that as all it is you're saying. Why don't you just cry about it? For real.
He was a human being.
Yeah, Pink was a People.
The wolves are now circling.
Perhaps he considered it apostate.How odd. In his essay on "Evangelical Obedience," Pink says nothing about the local church and attending there.
"Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching" (Heb. 10:25).
I am reminded of the man who said to his friend, "There are only two good Christians left in this town, and I'm worried about you."![]()
Actually, he did consider all churches to be apostate, and so he told believers not to attend perfectly good churches! I don't think you would want him to be living in your town. He'd talk against your church, call it apostate, and tell the members to stop attending there.Perhaps he considered it apostate.
I would want him to back up his statement with evidence.Actually, he did consider all churches to be apostate, and so he told believers not to attend perfectly good churches! I don't think you would want him to be living in your town. He'd talk against your church, call it apostate, and tell the members to stop attending there.
He was “admonishing people to withdraw from their local churches” (p. 111 of the biography).
Certainly!!I would want him to back up his statement with evidence.
He was not inspired, far better to trust in the statement concerning this subject from the inspired scripture writerActually, he did consider all churches to be apostate, and so he told believers not to attend perfectly good churches! I don't think you would want him to be living in your town. He'd talk against your church, call it apostate, and tell the members to stop attending there.
He was “admonishing people to withdraw from their local churches” (p. 111 of the biography).
fellowshipping
Perhaps he considered it apostate.
Wait, so you think we must never criticize dead authors because they are not here to defend themselves? Really????Pink has been dead for 70+ years, so he's not here to defend himself.
"The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones." [Shakespeare, Julius Caesar]
His books stand or fall on their own merits. IMHO, they stand.
Never had any, don't know what it is.This can be rough, if people are rejecting you. I've looked at my cost and tie and didn't have the Christianity at times to force myself to put them on to go where I was not really welcome. People telling each other I was a heretic for one thing or another. Both of us being in the flesh didn't help matters a bit.
That's sin, clearly though, too.
Pink and I both needed some Jolt Cola, I guess.
No, just London, where he lived at the time. Pretty sure there were churches there that were not apostate, such as the Metropolitan Tabernacle after SpurgeonRight. Just Spiritual Adultery.
If there wasn't a sound church around he should have searched the world over, right?
Yes, he could have, and no it doesn't.With a call to ministry, he could have started a work for the Lord.
The excuse he winded up using doesn't play well does it.
My objections to Pink have nothing to do with his doctrine. I even posted at one point on this thread that folks should find other Calvinist theologians, and read them not Pink.There is an instance of poor judgment that may have been able to mitigated more honorably to God, but he is gone and his sins forgiven, which are definitely sins, but am I going to throw him and his work under the bus because he didn't address his issue more consistently with God's plain Revealed will?
Having no one locally he could fellowship with in what he knew to be like faith and order is a drag. So, there was the opportunity to take some other position and the weight of his writing call was just a temptation he settled for.
All this, "how could you stuff", is probably more to do with people who don't want to believe the God Honoring Doctrines he wrote about though, mighten it be possible?
That's your privilege. I believe in the priesthood of the believer.Any excuse they have to reject someone will do them, too.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Maybe three?
I give him latitude. As a fallable sinner.
The remarkable thing is that in 1949, there was quite a remarkable revival in the Isle of Lewis where Pink was living. Is it possible that he knew nothing about it? I don't know. He died while it was still going on. Accounts say that the churches in the Isle of Lewis were very dead, but for a period, at least, they were revived in a very remarkable way. 1949 Hebrides Revival-2"He labored faithfully for his remaining twelve years of life, writing and producing the periodical while he lived in virtual isolation, not even attending a local church.
"He justified this behavior by explaining that the admonition not to neglect the assembling of ourselves together does not mean that the sheep of Christ should attend a place where the goats predominate or where their attendance would sanction that which is dishonoring to Christ."
No, I don't think that at all, but I do think that they shouldn't be cancelled. Let their works speak for them.Wait, so you think we must never criticize dead authors because they are not here to defend themselves? Really????I do respect you for what I've seen you post on the BB, but that's just weird.