fallacies of "non-cals"

Just interjecting here on this...

Would you agree that what is being listed here as the "process" would tend to be more in line with what stricy reformed teach, rather than what many baptists beieve on this subject matter?
As I know that they do teach and hold that an elected person could even have regeneration start in infant/young child stage, and be confirmed/ratified as an adult...

Would they see regeneration as being "new Birth/Born Again?"

From the perspective of a Baptist holder to this...

Wouldn't it be:
God quickens/wakes up a person that has been elected by God to treceive eternal life in Christ
receive Gospel place faith in jesus
regenerated/Holy Spirit indwelt/sealed/confirmed as an elect
sanctifing process life long
Death/Second Coming whichever happens first

seems that some of what reformed and Hyper cal teach is interesting , in that it does seem almost like catholic lite, as they say god elects them but need to "prove" it by betting sactified enough to receive it at death, never fully persuaded assured of real salvation!

 

And Luther didn't?

 

Better be careful about tossing that word around so lightly Mister Mod. Your other fingers will point back to you.

You have been dismissive of Luther,but you apparently have no grasp of those times.

Was Thomas Bradwardine,John Wycliffe,John Huss and Jerome of Prague also fools in your narrow little rule book?! Shame on your head.

 

When Paul was saved, he left what he was doing on behalf of the Sanhedrin and worked against it, not for it. He did not try to reform the Sanhedrin, as Luther foolishly tried to reform the RCC. Not until Luther stopped being a reformer and started becoming a "Protestor" did he start acting more wisely. There is a difference between the two words. As a Protestant he protested from the outside, not the inside.

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

You have no interest in following this discussion but to find fault and point fingers. Again I will toss out your remarks into file 13 where all such foolish posts go.

 

Yes, but you have the benefit of hindsight.....Luther did not. Besides he was born & raised Catholic & the world at the time....for all intents & purposes, was RC. His Emperor was RC, His King & his Dukes that ruled the lands were RC. All the intellectuals were RC, all his neighbors were RC, his teachers were RC..... but he was of an Augustinian order. Those teachings & doctrines rubbed the greater RC church the wrong way. You might say Luther was a product of Augustine before you call him a fool......being foolish is relative:tongue3:.

 

Since you wont answer whether Paul had a choice, did Luther?

 

Yes, from viewpoint of man, No from Viewpoint of God, all worked together in the end!

 

That was my point (mostly). After he realized that the RCC was wrong (he saw the light and got saved), as a priest he tried to reform the monstrosity of the organization. We do have the advantage of hindsight. IMO he should have known that he would have been kicked out for even trying, however noble his intentions may have been. Simply leaving and protesting from the outside would have been a better way to go.

 

Would you say ANY who happen to attend member in a Church that has decided to 'water down" Bible and Gospel need to depart from, not remain in it to 'fight the good fight?"

Or wait awhile, to see if people can be persuaded by God to "see the light" and turn back?

 

You must be a member of a church that you agree with. No sense in staying in a church that you don't agree with. Quietly leave and find another.

There are many who have a testimony something like this.
I was saved at a Billy Graham Crusade (or some other place). I went back to my Catholic Church. I am still there as a witness trying to win others to Christ. I believe I can do more good from within than from without.
--I believe that is wrong. God never calls us to infiltrate; but always to separate--that is to separate from unbelievers. Come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord.

I was a Catholic for 20 years. It was through an interdenominational organization that led me to the Lord. They never put any emphasis on baptism or the local church. Thus I remained in the Catholic Church for another two years. The Lord providentially led me to an IFB church two years later where I was baptized. Once I knew the truth I separated from the error that I was involved in and began to grow as a Christian ought to grow.

 

Interesting contrast:

"The work of regeneration and the act of faith which brings justification to the penitent sinner are simultaneous and must, in the nature of the case, always be so." —Charles Spurgeon

 

Good quote.
Spurgeon was less a Calvinist than those on this board.

 

You talk about Calvinism as if it were a dirty word.

 

DHK.... you should have a dialog with Ann then since she is going thru something like this as we speak.

 

There have been some very unorthodox positions taken on this board, even to the denial of the bodily resurrection of our Lord, and those positions essentially come from the Calvinist camp.

Spurgeon rightly states that regeneration and salvation take place at the same time, a position that is almost universally denied by the Calvinists on this board. That is the position of the non-cals, not the Calvinists--as far as I have been able to ascertain.