Grace of Reformed Theology/R.C. Sproul

[AustinC]

As I said, what a twisting of Scripture you present. I note that you have no Scripture to support you. I have Scripture to support me.

But then, what does Scripture matter to you?

Quantrill

No twist. However, I can see you are stubborn on this matter and it's not worth my time to waste it on you.

 

[Dave G]

I had stated that I had observed that those who hold to Christ being able to sin are more likely to hold to grace/works salvation.

From a certain viewpoint, I can see why you come to that conclusion.

And, those who hold that Christ could not have sinned are more likely to hold to grace only salvation.

That would include me.

I have not read much on Sproul and his doctrine, but I do see he is Reformed in his doctrine. Therefore I assume he must hold to the Reformed understanding of Grace.

If by "Reformed" it is meant that one agrees with "TULIP", then I understand where you're coming from.
If by "Reformed" it is meant that one agrees with what "Puritanism" teaches, then I doubly understand.

I agree with "TULIP", but I do not agree with how the Puritans, for example, approached the Christian's walk in this life and how God looks upon and chastens His children.

Now, just because the term 'grace' is used, doesn't mean all are talking about the same thing.

I agree.

You can see it with the Roman Catholic's understanding of grace. They call it grace, but it isn't the grace that Protestants recognize.

I've observed that among the denominations, "Protestants" included, there is a wide variety of beliefs about what grace really is and what it encompasses.

It's my opinion that the grace of Reformed theology is the same. By that I don't mean it is exactly as Roman Catholic's understanding of grace. I mean, though it uses the term 'grace', it is not always the grace I recognize or understand in the Bible.

Again, I agree with you here, and I suspect I know where you're coming from.

 

[Dave G]

Most of what they believe about grace is correct. But, there is certain leaning towards works that i am not comfortable with.

And, understand, this will never be admitted by the Reformed believers. It is all about grace alone, they will say. But that grace alone that they preach has an air of legalism about it.

As I've mentioned above, I think you're talking about what I call "Puritanism", which is what I see Mr. MacArthur teaching.
Some might call it "Lordship Salvation" in that a person is mandated to perform at a certain level by the group, or they face being dismissed as not being saved.

In other words, instead of practicing church discipline and putting people out of the fellowship for living in sin, yet treating them as a brother or sister...
they "go overboard" and pronounce that anyone who does not actively show themselves, by their outward works, to be saved, isn't.

I find that it's the same mentality as that found in other types of holiness movements...
Not that we should not be holy, but that some groups look at outward holiness as something that a person must do right away ( instead of a work over time by the Holy Spirit ) in order to be considered as being saved.

This would put the Corinthians out of their own church, IMO.

And, understand, this will never be admitted by the Reformed believers. It is all about grace alone, they will say. But that grace alone that they preach has an air of legalism about it.

Again, I think it depends upon the group and how they understand grace.
To me, grace is not only totally unmerited favor with God, it is also a patience that is extended towards His children that gives them space to repent, and doesn't come down on them like a ton of bricks for the slightest infraction.

So, to answer you, @SavedByGrace, if Sproul is Reformed in his doctrine, I do not believe he meets your example. It is like John McArthur with his radio program, 'Grace to You',. It is called 'grace' but It, in my opinion, leans toward legalism, or a grace/works theology.

Once again I agree with you here.
As I see it, the Reformers were very much legalistic and some could be rather unforgiving when it came to outward stumblings in sin.

As examples, I've read stories about John Calvin in Geneva and later the Puritans and how they treated their congregations,
especially in the Massachusetts Bay Colony and other places.

The feeling I get is that, while they seemed to understand salvation by grace,
they didn't understand that the believer also walks by God's grace, patience and kindness in this life.

Simply-put,
He does not rule His own children with an iron rod... even though He rebukes and chastens them.
It's done in love and a hand that only extends itself with regard to harsher measures when all methods of correction don't seem ( to us ) to be getting through.

 

[Yeshua1]

Without a doubt the Holy Spirit was involved as God the Son was involved. As God the Son, Jesus always had the presence of the Father and the Holy Spirit. Until of course He was forsaken at the Cross. And He had not the Spirit just partially. Fully. (John 3:34) "...for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him."

In other words, Jesus, as God the Son, had what Adam didn't have. And even we who are born-again do not have the fullness of the Holy Spirit as Christ had. We have but a measure.

As to the 'sinless state', God has already placed us there. That which is born of God cannot sin. (1 John 3:9) "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."

Some may say, but I still sin, so how can God say that? Because God sees it all. We do not. We see all that we do as by ourself, one person. But God can see the old nature and that which is born-again. And He does not attribute sin to that which is born-again, our new nature.

Experientially you will never get to a sinless state here in this present life. Why? Because we have the old nature. And the old nature is full of sin and at odds with God.

Quantrill

We are right now perfect in the sense of the the Father seeing us as having the same righteousness as Jesus Himself, but also in this life we still choose way to may times to still sin!

 

[Yeshua1]

As I've mentioned above, I think you're talking about what I call "Puritanism", which is what I see Mr. MacArthur teaching.
Some might call it "Lordship Salvation" in that a person is mandated to perform at a certain level by the group, or they face being dismissed as not being saved.

In other words, instead of practicing church discipline and putting people out of the fellowship for living in sin, yet treating them as a brother or sister...
they "go overboard" and pronounce that anyone who does not actively show themselves, by their outward works, to be saved, isn't.

I find that it's the same mentality as that found in other types of holiness movements...
Not that we should not be holy, but that some groups look at outward holiness as something that a person must do right away ( instead of a work over time by the Holy Spirit ) in order to be considered as being saved.

This would put the Corinthians out of their own church, IMO.

Again, I think it depends upon the group and how they understand grace.
To me, grace is not only totally unmerited favor with God, it is also a patience that is extended towards His children that gives them space to repent, and doesn't come down on them like a ton of bricks for the slightest infraction.

Once again I agree with you here.
As I see it, the Reformers were very much legalistic and some could be rather unforgiving when it came to outward stumblings in sin.

As examples, I've read stories about John Calvin in Geneva and later the Puritans and how they treated their congregations,
especially in the Massachusetts Bay Colony and other places.

The feeling I get is that, while they seemed to understand salvation by grace,
they didn't understand that the believer also walks by God's grace, patience and kindness in this life.

Simply-put,
He does not rule His own children with an iron rod... even though He rebukes and chastens them.
It's done in love and a hand that only extends itself with regard to harsher measures when all methods of correction don't seem ( to us ) to be getting through.

The big problem with Lordship salvation is that it tends to place focus and emphasis upon how we act and behave, and not resting upon the finished work of Christ, Both Luther and Calvin would never agree that we should base our security in anything we do, it totally on what he did!

 

[Quantrill]

From a certain viewpoint, I can see why you come to that conclusion.

That would include me.

If by "Reformed" it is meant that one agrees with "TULIP", then I understand where you're coming from.
If by "Reformed" it is meant that one agrees with what "Puritanism" teaches, then I doubly understand.

I agree with "TULIP", but I do not agree with how the Puritans, for example, approached the Christian's walk in this life and how God looks upon and chastens His children.

I agree.

I've observed that among the denominations, "Protestants" included, there is a wide variety of beliefs about what grace really is and what it encompasses.

Again, I agree with you here, and I suspect I know where you're coming from.

Appreciate your comments.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

As I've mentioned above, I think you're talking about what I call "Puritanism", which is what I see Mr. MacArthur teaching.
Some might call it "Lordship Salvation" in that a person is mandated to perform at a certain level by the group, or they face being dismissed as not being saved.

In other words, instead of practicing church discipline and putting people out of the fellowship for living in sin, yet treating them as a brother or sister...
they "go overboard" and pronounce that anyone who does not actively show themselves, by their outward works, to be saved, isn't.

I find that it's the same mentality as that found in other types of holiness movements...
Not that we should not be holy, but that some groups look at outward holiness as something that a person must do right away ( instead of a work over time by the Holy Spirit ) in order to be considered as being saved.

This would put the Corinthians out of their own church, IMO.

Again, I think it depends upon the group and how they understand grace.
To me, grace is not only totally unmerited favor with God, it is also a patience that is extended towards His children that gives them space to repent, and doesn't come down on them like a ton of bricks for the slightest infraction.

Once again I agree with you here.
As I see it, the Reformers were very much legalistic and some could be rather unforgiving when it came to outward stumblings in sin.

As examples, I've read stories about John Calvin in Geneva and later the Puritans and how they treated their congregations,
especially in the Massachusetts Bay Colony and other places.

The feeling I get is that, while they seemed to understand salvation by grace,
they didn't understand that the believer also walks by God's grace, patience and kindness in this life.

Simply-put,
He does not rule His own children with an iron rod... even though He rebukes and chastens them.
It's done in love and a hand that only extends itself with regard to harsher measures when all methods of correction don't seem ( to us ) to be getting through.

Good points. Good post.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

We are right now perfect in the sense of the the Father seeing us as having the same righteousness as Jesus Himself, but also in this life we still choose way to may times to still sin!

Yes, we still sin. But God says that which is born of Him does not sin. And who can override that?

A quick story to illustrate. Told by a Bible teacher many years ago. A wealthy man bought a Rolls Royce to travel with in Europe. While travelling, the axle broke leaving him stranded for a while. He called the Rolls Royce company and they picked it up to repair it. It was later returned to him in good operating order.

The man expected some sort of bill for the repairs. He had called several times to inquire about it but never could get an answer. So he kept going up the chain as high as he could to tell them he wanted to pay his part of the bill. He finally got through to a high executive and told his story. The executive politely said, Sir, Rolls Royce do no break their axles.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

I have a certain rule of thumb I follow when I listen to preachers or teachers of the Bible. And it concerns the grace that Paul preached, that was revealed to him by Jesus Christ.

(Rom. 3:7-8) "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say, ) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just."

Paul didn't preach 'let us do evil that good may come'. But he preached grace to the extent that others blamed him for that. And it is my position, that if you have never been charged or accused of the same, then you haven't preached the grace that Paul preaches.

So, when I listen to a preacher or teacher of the Bible, I ask myself...Could I accuse this man with that which Paul was accused? Sadly, the answer is most always no.

Quantrill