They still preach and teach that one is a sinner, must be born again, done by accepting Jesus thru faith alone grace alone, Jesus has been resurrected, so same as we do, its just they do not understand it fully in a biblical way!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
If a Calvinist Preached on the Gospel from your Pulpit
- Thread starter Reformed
- Start date
- Status
Not necessarily unless one doesn't accept responding to the Gospel call.
Hebrews 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
HankD
Those who are the Lord's though always will respond!
I know what was preached in my church and it wasn't any social gospel... Brother Glen
1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
This is the type of preaching I'm talking about, here's a sermon from Spurgeon... Christ Crucified
http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols46-48/chs2673.pdf
Last edited:
I know what was preached in my church and it wasn't any social gospel... Brother Glen
1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
This is the type of preaching I'm talking about, here's a sermon from Spurgeon... Christ Crucified
http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols46-48/chs2673.pdf
That's nice. What does that have to do the the OP?
There is no model bearing the name of a dead man by which we are saved.
Revelation 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
Revelation 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;
HankD
I'm not saying that some, or even much, of the content might not be the same, but the difference lies in the emPhAsis being on the wrong sylLABles, and, that is what distorts the message. A synergist's gospel is not completely false in content, but it is false in emphasis; therefore, in application.
This difference may seem insignificant, but the result is anything but.
.
The word of God is what is used by the Holy Spirit, not some method or some view.
The very bible one holds in their hand may be printed and bound by heathens but as it is spoken it is used by the Holy Spirit.
Out of the heathen heart of one who merchandises the Scriptures for profit or gain when speaking the Scriptures the Word is used the Holy Spirit.
If God raised up the stars to proclaim as in Abram’s day or the rocks to praise, yet the Holy Spirit would use the Word.
What has been interesting to me is that a person who is Calvinistic in their thinking can tolerate and more often listen to a non-Cal preaching and teaching and be grateful, but the typical non-Cal has little tolerance and cannot last long under the preaching and teaching of a Calvinist.
Why?
Because, generally speaking, imo, the sovereignty of God. The non-Cal will desire some interest and emphasis upon human aspiration rather then the Word of God bringing respiration.
The very bible one holds in their hand may be printed and bound by heathens but as it is spoken it is used by the Holy Spirit.
Out of the heathen heart of one who merchandises the Scriptures for profit or gain when speaking the Scriptures the Word is used the Holy Spirit.
If God raised up the stars to proclaim as in Abram’s day or the rocks to praise, yet the Holy Spirit would use the Word.
What has been interesting to me is that a person who is Calvinistic in their thinking can tolerate and more often listen to a non-Cal preaching and teaching and be grateful, but the typical non-Cal has little tolerance and cannot last long under the preaching and teaching of a Calvinist.
Why?
Because, generally speaking, imo, the sovereignty of God. The non-Cal will desire some interest and emphasis upon human aspiration rather then the Word of God bringing respiration.
You said, "Synergists have an errant foundation. Everything they build on it is errant."
So according to you they have an errant position on salvation. Yet they are saved. Explain.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
Is this not what Paul addressed?
Philippians 1:15-18 15 Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; 16 the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; 17 the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. 18 What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice.
Imo, one of the reasons that the heathen strive to remove the Word, be it from the walls of memorials, from the bookshelves of the libraries, from the classrooms to the cathedrals, is to remove the power and ability of the Holy Spirit.
Yet they do not comprehend the Word, and the vain attempts to remove the Word ultimately fail.
Wouldn't that mean that all who came from the Synergistic thinking were errant?
So, calvinistic thinking is errant by having a foundation first in non-cal?
Something is wrong with that presentation, imo.
That presupposes the heathen understands that the Holy Spirit has power. The actual comment of yours I was responding to was:
Regardless of the motive of the one preaching, if the gospel is presented it still contains the power of God unto salvation (Romans 1:16).
I want to be clear. I am not accusing Synergistic preachers of improper motives. Most of them are sincere in their desire to see sinners converted. I believe those that are able to deliver a biblical gospel message do so because of a happy inconsistency. "Happy" because the Gospel is presented truthfully. "Inconsistency" because they are presenting the gospel in a manner that is incompatible with their larger synergistic theology. I am not going to get into the differences I have with improper Synergist gospel presentations. That is fodder enough for another thread. It is enough for this thread that I rejoice as the Apostle Paul rejoiced when the Gospel is properly proclaimed.
While I agree, it is also true that the lack of understanding that the power of God extends beyond the limits of synergistic preaching or those that oppose the Word by removing evidences is an everyday event.
The Gospel is not hindered by humankind, for it is the power of God, not of humankind.
Where the synergist would see and often even declare someone or something as hindering the Gospel, no such hindrance is realized.
If Jonah had continued to his last breath in the belly of the fish, God would have raised another in his place. For the repentance of Nineveh did not rest upon human effort, but upon God's willingness to show His power.
The presentation of the Gospel does not depend on human effort or human will, HOWEVER, the human effort and the Godly will is what God has put into place. The jailor of Philippi was presented the Gospel by a couple of men who didn't really want to be were they were. The Macedonian was presented the Gospel by a man who had been conflicted about the direction to travel.
I know firsthand that this is true because the Lord called me using the reading of the Sermon on the Mount by a man who lead cult! While channel surfing I came across his program wight as he began reading the text.
Much non-Cal preaching is Christ-less/gospel-less. Even if it begins well, it quickly degrades into moralism, and your last two sentences explain why.
I don't mean to say that Christ is not spoken of or that the gospel is not touched upon. What I mean is that the "punchline" is always man-centered which destroys the gospel, if there were any gospel in the message in the first place.
I fully agree with that, and I wonder if this view isn't just a little inconsistent with Baptistic thought in regards to baptism.
I do not see any inconsistency. If credo-only baptism is not the biblical baptism position then there just is not an inconsistency, credo-only baptism would fail. The only argument I can see being made is the same argument paedobaptists make against others in their fold when it comes to Roman baptism. Some accept Roman baptism as valid since it is a trinitarian baptism even though the Roman system is heretical. Of course, that presupposes paedobaptism is a valid form of baptism which it is not.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
"Could" that Calvinist preach the message of Paul in 2 Cor 5 "We BEG you on behalf of Christ be reconciled to God" or would he spend his time telling us why we should not preach it?
Is it a 4 point Calvinist that believes in "live like the devil and still go to heaven as long as you were ever saved in the past"??
There are a lot of 3 point and 5 point Calvinists I like the listen to - like Swindoll and MacArhtur but it does not mean I agree with every single thing they say.
May we have an example of this kind of preaching and who it is that preaches thusly (since you put quotation marks around the statement) to back up your accusation?
HankD
Last edited:
- Status