Beyond Five Points

A friend of mine invited me to hear Ernest C. Reisinger. He was teaching at a Reformed Baptist Church in the Lehigh Valley. He had some good things to say, but over all I was not impressed. What he taught would only be accepted in Five Point Calvinist Churches. It sure would not 'play' anywhere else. Over all I was not impressed plus he believes in a one covenant theory.

 

Covenant theologians believe that the mechanics bringing about salvation under the Old and New Testament are for the most part the same. There is a real sense that we are also connected to the Abrahamic faith.

These theologians don't recognize that the Holy Spirit only indwelled, baptized, annointed the saints under the New Covenant of grace. The try to say that the O.T. congregants also had these spiritual dynamics going on in their lives.

Only the priests, Israelite kings, prophets and some artisans who built the Temple were indwelled by the Holy Spirit under the former covenant.

This will give you some ideas of 'covenant believers.'

 

Count me out. I would suggest to those who believe in a one covenant theology to examine closely their beliefs - there is more that is passed down by man than can be backed up by a contextual reading of the Bible.

 

Once again, we see demonstrated before our eyes that "The way of every man is right in his own eyes."

Also, we see that the Light of Christ, Who is the Only Light of the World, and the Light of the Word of God, can be of no value to those who are blind. We are reminded that only "The LORD openeth the eyes of the blind."

While on earth He opened some blind eyes, yet when Jesus returned to the Father, there were still many blind on the earth. He does NOT open all the blind eyes.

The essential difference between the "5-pointer"
and the Arminian, of any stripe, is eyes that have been opened, and those still in darkness.

"God, be merciful to me, a sinner." And He has! According to His Grace alone, but not because. I "prayed the sinner's prayer." He was merciful to this sinner only because He was pleased to be merciful, but I do not know "Why". AND THEN, I PRAYED THE SINNER'S PRAYER!!

connieman

[ August 06, 2002, 01:12 AM: Message edited by: connieman ]

 

Connieman, while I think Calvinism isn't a perfect theology, I would never say they are in "darkness!" That's kind of mean to the Calvinists, wouldn't you say?

 

Scott...my sentence structure must have been faulty...

It is the first, the 5-pointer, whose eyes have been opened. The second, the Arminian, is the one still in darkness!! There are many more in darkness, than those who have been brought to the Light of the Gospel of Grace Alone.

Regards, connieman

[ August 06, 2002, 01:24 AM: Message edited by: connieman ]

 

Hello, there, connieman.
Haven't seen you posting for awhile. I trust the Lord has been taking care of you.
To Him be the glory !

 

Connieman,

I am warning you right off the bat that you are not going to be questioning people's salvation in this forum. While you might believe the "eyes being opened" line, to use it to imply that an arminian is unsaved is unacceptable.

You are invited to talk theology and discuss the relevant Scriptures. You will not be allowed to accuse those who disagree with you of being unsaved.

Moderator.

 

"So will not we go back from thee: quicken us, and we will call upon thy name." (Psalms 80:18)

"My soul cleaveth unto the dust: quicken thou me according to thy word." (Psalms 119:25)

I just would like to know what you other brethren think abou these verses. Is the word "quicken" being used in the same way as Ephesians 2:1 and Colossians 2:13 or not?

"Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy Holy Spirit from me." (Psalms 51:11)

If David did not have the Holy Spirit, why was he praying for God not to take it away from him?

 

Pastor Larry...I shake off the dust of my feet against you. If everyone who professes "faith" is to be accepted as genuine, without exception and without question, we can have no meaningful discussion here.

Regards, connieman

 

Or better yet, if he was worried that the Holy Spirit could get taken away, what does that say about losing one's salvation? (If we're talking about the same manifestation of the Spirit)

 

And what of the Spirit departing from Saul?

 

The Westminster Confession states:

"1. The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto Him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which He hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.
2. The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.
3. Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ ... ."

...two covenants there.

From a Calvinist perspective: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~sdgeard/ct.html

 

Oh yeah, I remember that passage. It is, um, um, um, well never mind. It is there. Two overarching covenants is as Scriptural as infant baptism. Only a heretic would deny such obvious truth. It says somewhere something about the covenant of works and the covenant of grace... I think.

 

The one covenant theory is true then just as God took the Holy Spirit from Saul, He has every right to take it from a genuine Christian if he or she strays. Right?

There was a distinct covenant between the O.T. and the N.T. , otherwise eternal security is more than flawed.

The N.T. tell us that the Holy Spirit remains in the born again believer. [I John 3:9} {for example}. This is not necessarily true under the former covenant.

 

One of the problems with covenant theology is that these covenants are superimposed on Scripture rather than derived from them. There is never a covenant of works mentioned in Scripture, or a covenant of redemption or grace. The closest you come is to an everlasting covenant in Hebrews. That seems a weak basis for the whole covenantal system, IMO.

Obviously, I disagree with Ray's arguments on this issue. I think he has not fully reckoned with the role of the HOly Spirit. God did not take the indwelling of the Spirit from Saul. I don't believe he ever had it. He took the theocratic anointing for leadership from Saul. I do believe the Holy Spirit indwelled and regenerated (not in that order) in the OT. I simply cannot find these covenants you talk about.

[ August 07, 2002, 09:55 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]