fallacies of "non-cals"

[JesusFan]

This really doesn't answer my question.
However the next part sort-of answers it.


So from the above I presume you agree that regeneration includes the following as having happened prior to salvation:

1. New heart and New spirit - (new creation - old things gone all are new)
...1a. Justified - something had to be done to remove and thus replace the old.
2. Sanctified
3. Indwelling of the Holy Spirit
4. Reconciled unto God

Does that accurately depict what you state happens at the regeneration?

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!

 

[kyredneck]

...Paul had the right attitude.

And Luther didn't?

 

[Rippon]

Luther was a fool to remain in the Catholic Church and try to reform it from within. That was my statement. The RCC was never going to reform. It was not going to change its doctrine and teach justification by faith alone. In fact it firmed up on its belief, called into action the Council of Trent, and decreed that any who would hold such beliefs as Luther held would be anathema. To this day those "anathemas" have never been rescinded. Was he a fool to try to reform the RCC from within? Yes, absolutely. You would be a fool to enter the RCC as a priest today and try and do the same thing. Do you think that you can go, be a member of the RCC and turn the entire organization into a Protestant one. Only a fool would think that they can do that. I make no apologies for using the word "fool."

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.

 

[DHK]

And Luther didn't?

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.

 

[quantumfaith]

Then what's your point?

What is the point of your posts on this thread???

You cannot be changed by your own admission. So what good would it have done for me to pet you rather than point out to you the cold hard facts?

NONE.

This is my point.

The goal is not to persuade everyone. The goal is to put the facts out there. Those who are interested in facts will be persuaded. Those who need to be politicked in are worthless anyway- in the sense that there position is meaningless. They got it because somebody made them FEEL good about it. What victory is there in getting such a person over to one's side.

If one will not listen to reason then I do not CARE if that person EVER sees the truth on these issues. Frankly, I think too many of us waste our time courting people who think with their emotions.

Reasonable people want it plain and blunt and clear.

That's what I offer.

The others- I do not care if I push them away. They are not a great catch anyway.


And one more thing. Your statement about seeing the Scriptures differently undermines the all important doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture.
I see it the way it is. Scripture is clear. You see it the way it suits you, I suppose.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[DHK]

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.

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.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You are either not following this conversation or did not read what I said.
You also took what I said out of context. If you are going to quote me quote the entire sentence and don't be foolish to quote half a sentence and change the meaning of it. That is what fools do.

Luther was a fool to remain in the Catholic Church and try to reform it from within. That was my statement. The RCC was never going to reform. It was not going to change its doctrine and teach justification by faith alone. In fact it firmed up on its belief, called into action the Council of Trent, and decreed that any who would hold such beliefs as Luther held would be anathema. To this day those "anathemas" have never been rescinded. Was he a fool to try to reform the RCC from within? Yes, absolutely. You would be a fool to enter the RCC as a priest today and try and do the same thing. Do you think that you can go, be a member of the RCC and turn the entire organization into a Protestant one. Only a fool would think that they can do that. I make no apologies for using the word "fool."

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:.

 

[webdog]

And Luther didn't?

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

 

[JesusFan]

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!

 

[DHK]

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:.

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.

 

[JesusFan]

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?

 

[Dr. Bob]

Whoa. Way past 10-page limit so have to close this down. Lots on interesting stuff.

 

[DHK]

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.

 

[Jerome]

Interesting contrast:

Do you believe a person can be regenerated for some time prior to coming to faith? For example, could someone be regenerated but remain unbelieving for hours, days, weeks, month or even years?

I'm glad you asked.

Yes.

Next question.

"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

 

[DHK]

"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.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

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

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

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

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.

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

 

[DHK]

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

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.