GOD'S OPERATIONS OF GRACE BUT NO OFFERS OF HIS GRACE

[AustinC]

This is a very foolish post. I am not calling you a fool, but you made a foolish comment.

You have made the false claim I (and others) do not understand Calvinism and were never really Calvinists. But you never have taken the time to see if your claims were true. I have posted my former belief. You were unable then (as you are now) to point to EVEN ONE "misunderstanding" I have regarding Calvinism.

All you do is linger among Reformed brothers looking for scraps and "atta boys". But when challenged you tuck your tail beneath your legs and look for another member to fight your battles.

You do this to me. You do this to @SavedByGrace . You do this to @Silverhair .

Sometimes you need to "man up". Stop looking through past threads to try and "expose" people, or "defeat" them. Stop trying to "trap" them. Stop trying to harm the breathen.

Just use your big boy words and ask questions. If you make a claim seek clarification.

Provide one aspect of Calvinism I do not understand. You can't, but ask anyway. The claim shows you are ignorant of your own theology as a whole.

Iron sharpens iron, but all you seem to want to do is post books without understanding, make comments without engagement, and falsely accuse the brethern without being challenged.

Jon, I have read enough of your posts to see that you are swayed by the extra-biblical books you read. You may have once been swayed by books you considered calvinist, but now you have moved on to other authors who have swayed you. Whether you ever actually embraced the doctrines of grace cannot be ascertained since I don't know you. I can only go by what I read and clearly you don't fit any traditional view and have leaned to a view that few have gone.

 

[JonC]

Jon, I have read enough of your posts to see that you are swayed by the extra-biblical books you read. You may have once been swayed by books you considered calvinist, but now you have moved on to other authors who have swayed you. Whether you ever actually embraced the doctrines of grace cannot be ascertained since I don't know you. I can only go by what I read and clearly you don't fit any traditional view and have leaned to a view that few have gone.

Members - This is what I mean by waiting on others (other "dogs") to pick a fight.

Austin,

You are wrong. You can name only a few extra-biblical books I have read (Mortification of Sin by John Owen, God in the Wasteland and No Place for Truth by David Wells, Fools Gold by John MacArthur, Chosen by God by RC Sproul, a biography of Dwight Moody, Spurgeon's notes and sermons, and Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis . . . Maybe a couple of others).

It is strange that you claim I hold such a unique understanding...that I learned from reading a bunch of books.

Name a few of these books I supposedly read.

You can't (because you just made that up as a way to slander the brethern who disagree with you).

 

[JonC]

Galatians 5

14 For the whole law can be summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 But if you are always biting and devouring one another, watch out! Beware of destroying one another"

I agree. Knowledge is easily obtained, but spiritual knowledge seems to evade many.

I can fall into this category at times. Others seem to live there.

One of the most spiritually knowledgeable Christians I have met was a Pentecostal woman who held a very poor theology. If asked a question her responces was often "I don't know, but I know Jesus". And her life showed she was speaking truly.

 

[DaveXR650]

One of the most spiritually knowledgeable Christians I have met was a Pentecostal woman who held a very poor theology. If asked a question her responces was often "I don't know, but I know Jesus". And her life showed she was speaking truly.

That is very true. It is also almost word for word what Martyn Lloyd Jones said about Wesley and he said it was one of the best proofs of the sovereignty of God and of Calvinism. (Page 208 from "The Puritans, Their Origins and Successors" D.M. Lloyd-Jones)

This thread makes you think. It seems that Calvinism is very broad and has factions also. I have said since I have been posting on this board that sometimes the preaching of famous Puritan preachers did not seem to match what I was seeing in some of the Calvinist posts on this site. In reading through this article Iconoclast posted I am beginning to understand a little more how this works. Now I know that there are several hyperCalvinists on this site, and some Primitive Baptists and followers of Gill. I wish they would get on here and contribute what they know. I have discovered that there is a big difference between the Gospel Coalition, MacArthur, Piper theology and the theology of Gordon Clark and the Trinity Foundation. This is somewhat new to me and I would like to hear from anyone that has knowledge of this.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I have discovered that there is a big difference between the Gospel Coalition, MacArthur, Piper theology and the theology of Gordon Clark and the Trinity Foundation. This is somewhat new to me and I would like to hear from anyone that has knowledge of this.

Calvinism is quite a broad church. One can be a Dispensationalist and a Calvinist like MacArthur, a Charismatic and a Calvinist like Piper or a Presbyterian and a Calvinist like Beeke. One can be a high Calvinist like Gordon Clark or A.W. Pink without becoming Hyper, and one can be an evangelistic Calvinist like Bunyan or Spurgeon (and me ) without becoming Arminian.

 

[JonC]

That is very true. It is also almost word for word what Martyn Lloyd Jones said about Wesley and he said it was one of the best proofs of the sovereignty of God and of Calvinism. (Page 208 from "The Puritans, Their Origins and Successors" D.M. Lloyd-Jones)

This thread makes you think. It seems that Calvinism is very broad and has factions also. I have said since I have been posting on this board that sometimes the preaching of famous Puritan preachers did not seem to match what I was seeing in some of the Calvinist posts on this site. In reading through this article Iconoclast posted I am beginning to understand a little more how this works. Now I know that there are several hyperCalvinists on this site, and some Primitive Baptists and followers of Gill. I wish they would get on here and contribute what they know. I have discovered that there is a big difference between the Gospel Coalition, MacArthur, Piper theology and the theology of Gordon Clark and the Trinity Foundation. This is somewhat new to me and I would like to hear from anyone that has knowledge of this.

I am interested in theology and how different views compare. It is more a hobby now. That said, what is perhaps more interesting is how men's understanding effects their spiritual life.

You are right about Calvinism being a diverse group.

Calvin's Calvinism was not Beza's Calvinism.

During James Arminius' lifetime Arminianism was considered extreme, but within orthodox Calvinism.

In the early to mid-17th century Calvinism was divided between what we would call hard vs moderate views.

In the early 19th century Calvinists denounced other Calvinists who were involved in the anti-missions movement.

Even today many Calvinists view Calvinism as incompatable with Baptist doctrine.

When I affirmed Calvinism I held the 5 points and reprobation. Tom Cassidy rejected reprobation. Others were more moderate.

But that makes discussions interesting. We learn nothing "preaching to the choir".

 

[JonC]

Calvinism is quite a broad church. One can be a Dispensationalist and a Calvinist like MacArthur, a Charismatic and a Calvinist like Piper or a Presbyterian and a Calvinist like Beeke. One can be a high Calvinist like Gordon Clark or A.W. Pink without becoming Hyper, and one can be an evangelistic Calvinist like Bunyan or Spurgeon (and me ) without becoming Arminian.

I thought Beeke was more in line with Puritanism (the HRC). Is he now a Presbyterian?

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC,

This is a very foolish post. I am not calling you a fool, but you made a foolish comment.

You insist On disrupting any thread I start. I suppose that turns you on .

You have made the false claim I (and others) do not understand Calvinism and we're never really Calvinists.

You never were. I asked you several years ago to perhaps show or produce a sermon you preached, or a recorded lesson you taught, and you could not produce anything at all. i asked you what church you taught these things and you would not say what church it was.
i would have visited and verified your claim. I could name 3 or 4 churches that could verify my beliefs.
I have recordings of me teaching over twenty years ago in several churches...i can prove my claims....



[QUOTE]But you never have taken the time to see if your claims were true. I have posted my former belief. You were unable then (as you are now) to point to EVEN ONE "misunderstanding" I have regarding Calvinism.[/QUOTE]

Your own posts and your hated for the doctrine proves it.

All you do is linger among Reformed brothers looking for scraps and "atta boys".

You seem to be jealous that several people like what I post and discount most of what you suggest. they see you disrupting posts, twisting words, and starting fruitless threads trying to do damage control , offering a different version of your bogus statements

But when challenged you tuck your tail beneath your legs and look for another member to fight your battles.

.

You and your small posse of anti cals offer no challenge at all.
I have no need to retreat at all. I just do not like posting to a slimy poster, who twists words, accuses brothers, and just opposes not only yourself, but the truth of God. I have tried to overlook your nefarious posts, but you go back to your evil posting. There is no other way to descrbe it.
I am not treating you like a brother, but rather an accuser of the Brethren as that is what you do 24/7.
This is like 5 times now I have tried to over look what you do, but you start it right back up. You go your way, i will go mine JonC.
Interaction between us does not work.

You do this to me. You do this to @SavedByGrace . You do this to @Silverhair .

Your little attack posse, got it.

Sometimes you need to "man up". Stop looking through past threads to try and "expose" people, or "defeat" them. Stop trying to "trap" them.

i could not believe you tried to pull that nonsense on post 35,lol
I told you a day or so ago, I have no need to do any such thing. but you could not resist taking another shot...nice try but an epic fail.

Just use your big boy words and ask questions. If you make a claim seek clarification.

No need, your posts clarify your intent, once we know what to look for.

Provide one aspect of Calvinism I do not understand.

I do not care what you believe, you are welcome to your odd liberal ideas.
You have discredited yourself several times now.
You might have a small posse of disciples that follow you. The rest of us have seen your act often enough to know exactly what you do,

You can't, but ask anyway. The claim shows you are ignorant of your own theology as a whole.

Yet another accusation, that's okay I have gotten used to your nonsense.
I at least understand Calvinism, you never have and never will.

Iron sharpens iron, but all you seem to want to do is post books without understanding, make comments without engagement, and falsely accuse the brethern without being challenged.

No one says you have to look at my posts. in fact just stay away. I can do without your accusations and skewed history, and false claims.
You offer little positive from what i can see.
Your cover up damage control posts hardly get any views, and almost no replies. Is that why you go one my posts to disrupt them?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I thought Beeke was more in line with Puritanism (the HRC). Is he now a Presbyterian?

Puritanism was never a denomination; it was a movement. There were Puritans who were Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Congregational and Baptist. The large majority were Presbyterian. The Dutch Reformed Church, out of which Beeke came, is Presbyterian. He certainly spoke of himself as one when I last heard him speak a few years ago.

 

[Iconoclast]

They do not need to. I wrote the post. I can tell them EXACTLY what I meant.

I was saying that the writer was allowing his understanding of election to be of more importance than sharing the gospel. That s is a poor philosophy (this is not how we witness).

Period.

You do not get to define my words, Icon. I'm not sure why you ever thought otherwise.

Simple
post 37 answered your post 35

Post 43 answered your post 40....
post 43 was not in response to post 35.
IF I HAVE TO START ATHREAD SHOWING IT, i WILL, BUT ANYONE WHO CAN READ WITH UNDERSTANDING CAN FIGURE IT OUT.

 

[Iconoclast]

Galatians 5

14 For the whole law can be summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 But if you are always biting and devouring one another, watch out! Beware of destroying one another"

The person who liked your post, does the very thing you posted.

 

[Iconoclast]

Puritanism was never a denomination; it was a movement. There were Puritans who were Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Congregational and Baptist. The large majority were Presbyterian. The Dutch Reformed Church, out of which Beeke came, is Presbyterian. He certainly spoke of himself as one when I last heard him speak a few years ago.

YES, you know what you are talking about, unlike the make believe historians on here.

 

[JonC]

I asked you several years ago to perhaps show or produce a sermon you preached, or a recorded lesson you taught, and you could not produce anything at all. i asked you what church you taught these things and you would not say what church it was.
i would have visited and verified your claim.

Exactly.

Had I posted a sermon (I don't have any recorded) you would have tried to dismantle it. Had I provided a church you would have visited that church to "investigate" me.

I do not answer to you and I have no desire to subject churches I care about to certain elements of the internet. You sounded then, as you do now, like a stalker.

@Reformed1689 knows the church where I was ordained and taught for years (if he remembers). I know where he preaches (or did preach). But that is private information (I mention him as he can probably see why I would never reveal that on the public forum).

Do you not understand how sick your post sounds (
i asked you what church you taught these things and you would not say what church it was.
i would have visited and verified your claim. )????


If you want to know what I understand of Calvinism then ask me. What do you think I do not understand about Calvinism?

If you want to know what I believe now, just ask me.

But stop making false accusations. You are better than that, brother.

We disagree. I once was a Calvinist and have come to reject it as error. You cannot grasp that many who were Calvinists, who understood Calvinism, have come to leave the position (just as many have come to accept it).

But that is your weakness, something just beyond your reach. That does not give you the right to falsely accuse the brethern. That does not give you the right to insult, to slander the brethern.

You were saved for better things than that, brother.

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC,

.

You sounded then, as you do now, like a stalker.

You stalked me to two different websites, and opposed every
thread and post I offered. You sided with Jw"s Mormons, and unbelieves against me. Anyone who goes on Christianityboard can read it for themselves.
Keep it up.

 

[JonC]

Simple
post 37 answered your post 35

Post 43 answered your post 40....
post 43 was not in response to post 35.
IF I HAVE TO START ATHREAD SHOWING IT, i WILL, BUT ANYONE WHO CAN READ WITH UNDERSTANDING CAN FIGURE IT OUT.

The context was the same. I only made 2 observations.

1. The author makes a mistake in placing one's view of election above sharing the gospel.

2. Our evangelism should be to all men, not conditioned.

That is all I have said

You took my views and tried to trick other members into believing I was saying or implying something all together different.

You know my view about election and predestination. You know I believe everything is predestined (the elect and the reprobate). So I don't know why you are going on with this foolishness.

You were wrong, it is that simple. You made a mistake. That's easy to do, especially if you get emotional or are trying to "expose" the brethern. No biggie.

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC,

Had I posted a sermon (I don't have any recorded) you would have tried to dismantle it.

Why would I try and dismantle a Calvinistic sermon? That makes no sense.

Had I provided a church you would have visited that church to "investigate" me.

that would vindicate your claims, people could say, oh yeah JonC taught here, but then changed his views.

I do not answer to you and I have no desire to subject churches I care about to certain elements of the internet. You sounded then, as you do now, like a stalker.

so no proof, bottom line.

Do you not understand how sick your post sounds (
i asked you what church you taught these things and you would not say what church it was.
i would have visited and verified your claim. )????

If I wrote to Trinity Baptist Church in Montvale NJ. and asked if Pastor Albert N. Martin ever preached or taught there, they would not think it was sick, no they would say, yes he did and here are some of his sermons, enjoy them.

If you want to know what I understand of Calvinism then ask me. What do you think I do not understand about Calvinism?

I have no reason to ask you anything. Your posts offer nothing to me.
If you want to know what I believe now, just ask me.

But stop making false accusations. You are better than that, brother.

Nothing false on my end...people read post 35-43

 

[JonC]

Why would I try and dismantle a Calvinistic sermon? That makes no sense.

You would.

Look at your responces here about election. You attacked me as if I was speaking of election, but I believe both the elect and reprobate are predestined (were before Creation, in "eternity past").

You would because you hunt down the brethern, those who disagree with you, and try to "expose" them by slandering their name. I have witnessed you do this before on this board (as have others).

So let me ask you, why would I expose the brethern to such abuse?

If you believe I do not understand Calvinism then by all means ask me questions. But for the love of Christ (literally) stop slandering the brethern. It is time to end the foolishness.

I look forward to your questions.

 

[Iconoclast]

He will give His efficacious blood and His Holy Spirit, after another manner, to whom He pleases. This is the Gospel of the Kingdom;

that Effectual Salvation by Christ, conveyed in the good news, must go no otherwise than according to, and shall come in no wise short of the Laws, Counsels, Settlements, and Eternal Decrees of Heaven!

Oh, now, this is Good News for me to wait under such a Gospel as comes accompanied with this powerful rod in Zion, Psal.110:2, till the Spirit of God clears it up to me, as an Effectual gift of the Grace of God upon me. ‘Tis the Gospel of the Kingdom of God,


and, therefore, not one strong lust in my heart shall master it. God's Spirit will be too hard for my unbelief, and for all my other corruptions, while I sit under this Unchangeable Gospel, which men and devils strike at it, and yet God hath said shall stand! This Gospel of the Kingdom of God and Christ satisfies me, whilst another meets with no delight in it. It makes out Salvation to me among ten thousands of men who are left to drown in sensuality, pride, covetousness, malice, and wrath; while the Gospel breaks ground, and maintains the field of battle, with the sword of the Spirit, against every false profession; and neither pulpit nor pew can stand before it!
‘Tis to me! To me a sinner! To me a vile worm! It is a melting thought within me that the Kingdom-Sceptre should be a Marriage-Sceptre unto me, which, in the hand of Christ as a Judge, is an iron sceptre unto others. {“But unto the Son he saith, thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.” Heb.1:8. “Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.” Psal.2:9.} The Holy Ghost now accompanies this distinguishing Gospel, because it is Truth. But he never goes along with men's sermonizing, because it's flattery and falsehood;

He speaks of the gospel of the Kingdom, but never the idea of any means or responsibility of Christians to be used in the spread of the truth.

 

[Iconoclast]

"JonC,

You would because you hunt down the brethern, those who disagree with you, and try to "expose" them by slandering their name. I have witnessed you do this before on this board (as have others).

You have done this for three years now. You try and project it on me to cover your evil posting. You (snip) attack at every opportunity

Projection tends to come to the fore in normal people at times of personal or political crisis but is more commonly found in narcissistic personality disorder or borderline personality disorder.
Psychological projection is a defense mechanism people subconsciously employ in order to cope with difficult feelings or emotions. Psychological projection involves projecting undesirable feelings or emotions onto someone else, rather than admitting to or dealing with the unwanted feelings. Have you ever disliked someone only to become convinced that the person had a vendetta against you? This is a common example of psychological projection. Luckily, there are methods you can use to identify why you are projecting your emotions and put a stop to this coping mechanism.
How to Stop Projecting
Unfortunately, most people do not realize that they have succumbed to psychological projection until it is too late. However, there are steps you can take to identify whether you are engaging in psychological projection in order to avoid doing it in the future.A good place to start is to examine the negative relationships in your life. Who don’t you get along with at work or in your family? Do you feel as though someone is out to get you? Try to determine where the animosity began. In some cases, you may find that speaking with a therapist will help you examine these relationships more honestly and openly than you are able to do by yourself.Once you have identified that you are engaging in psychological projection, you will become more aware of this tendency during future interactions. Try to face problems and disputes head on rather than becoming defensive. The key is to be able to recognize when you are using a defense mechanism and learn how to respond in a more positive manner.

So let me ask you, why would I expose the brethern to such abuse?

( 2 lines snipped)

 

[JonC]

@Iconoclast ,

I do not know what you are going through, and it is not my business. But it seems that you are allowing your personal life, or insecurities, to influence your conduct here. Your post is an emotional outburst, an uncontrolled temper tantrum.

As Christians we need to learn to control the flesh, not to be so sensitive.

You and I disagree about one primary thing (the reason I ceased holding to Calvinism). You have used that disagreement as an opportunity to sin.

Rather than telling me and the board what I do or do not believe why not just engage in an honest manner?

Why don't you ask me about Calvinism and see if I understand? I suspect it is because you realize your accusations are false, so you don't dare lest you be exposed.

I don't want to expose you. This is a safe environment. You don't need to be emotional. Set aside your insecurities. Ask to gain understanding, so that in the future you won't make the same errors.

When I was a child I thought as a child. But we are adults, brother. It is time to lay aside this childishness.

And we are Christians. Stop slandering the brethern. Stop being spiteful. I am not to you. We simply disagree on one point which affects our theology (which affects the rest).