In Perils Among False Brethren;

[JesusFan]

2 Corinthians 11:26
In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;

Paul lists many dangers he faced, many enemies. Have you ever come across these former Christians, who post videos on why The have deconstructed the faith?
Or even worse, those who claim to be former Calvinists who have drifted off from the truth?
You can mark it down, it is going to be a non stop attack from the enemy of the Cross!

Have you experienced this?

just look at the likes of Rob bell, or Brian Mclaren, who seek to make Christian relevant in the post modern age by making sure their theologies reflect moving to heresy

 

[JesusFan]

Number 1

No... you have never studied it enough so far...I am speaking about people who say...I used to be a Calvinist, or I used to be a Christian.
2 tim4:
2 Timothy 4:10
For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.

on this list has to be

• • Leighton Flowers: A former Southern Baptist pastor who now argues against Calvinism and has become a prominent voice for the broader evangelical public on the topic of Calvinism, according to Facebook posts and Reddit users.

 

[JesusFan]

So are you suggesting that only calvinists can be saved?

Only two views of Calvinism
"If Calvinism is an error:
The reason most Christians reject it is because they have good discernment.
If Calvinism is true:
The ultimate reason most resist it is because God sovereignly and unchangeably decreed their resistance for His own glory.

The idea that God unchangeably predestines His own children to reject His own truth for His own glory is so intuitively false that we don’t need to refute it.
We just need to make sure that everyone understands that’s what Calvinism entails so they know to reject it."

So someone leaving calvinism is not an indication they have lost faith but rather that they have found calvinism to be a false teaching of God's word.

No, rather he is suggesting that sometimes those who either misunderstood what Calvinism really teaches, or else are very angry/bitter at it can at times go so far other way they embrace doctrines and theology counter to the Cross itself, ending up with a severe misunderstanding of Pauline Justification

 

[JesusFan]

Z all you do is parrot the teachings of other calvinists. Have you ever taken the time to look at the foundations of your religion? I doubt that you have.

Calvinism is not the gospel Z. That is your first mistake.

I have tried to point you back to the truth as found in the word of God but you keep rejecting His truth as it does not fit with your man-made religion.

But you take your stance on the full free will gospel, so did Jesus death to you be for a real salvation, or just offering a potential one, as in God looks down from heaven hoping someone can make the right choice and choose Jesus to save them?

 

[JesusFan]

It has been my experience that the opposite is true. Nearly every Calvinist whose testimony I have heard or read has said they were a so called Armenian before they saw the light of Calvinism and converted to it. What is your testimony?

ALL of us here who are saved were saved the same way, its just that Calvinism explains it much more from the biblical perspective on how and why God saved us

 

[JesusFan]

I disagree to an extent, @Zaatar71 .

Typically what is viewed as "attacking a position" is when those who do not agree with that position express their disagreement. But we should "attack" even our own positions in this way because if they do not stand up to the "attack" they are mot worth holding.

You also need to define "credibility".

For me, any Christian offers a credible argument if they are evaluating a position via Scripture.

People do not need to have a masters degree in theology to evaluate what a person says the Bible teaches against what is actually written in Scripture. Now, it may help when it comes to having studied historical theology and the biblical languages, but it is fairly simple to compare the biblical text against God's words. Often people define "credibility" as being those who have a formal education in theology AND agree with their positions. I believe that type of thinking is flawed (even though I do have a formal education in theology).

I do not believe that Scripture is God's revelation to the religious elite (often the religious elite, the scholars and theologians, are the ones who cannot accept what God has revealed as it falls below their standards and expectations). Instead I believe that Scripture was written for the "common man" of the time of its writing (like fisherman, tax collector, farmers) and has baffled those who think themselves wise for centuries.


Another issue of disagreement is equating "attacking" a position with "doing evil" to the person who holds that position. It is, I believe, the exact opposite in reality. If you look at my belief and point out that it departs from Scripture then you do me a favor rather than an evil.


That said, I have seen arguments against Calvinism that were based on stereotypes and misunderstanding. One of these is the "cosmic child abuse argument".

But having come out of Calvinism, having been a Calvinist, having taught theology, having studied theology, theogical development, and historical theology, I have some insights that those within Calvinism who never went to seminary may overlook (or simply not know). But this helps realizing what is presupposes in a position rather than judging whether those presuppositions are wrong.

Ultimately, however, every Christian has the ability and responsibility to test their faith against the words of God.

But when you conclusion in regards to theology proper end ups flying in the face of all the Creeds and Confessions, and the teachings of various expositors over the centuries, NOT just Baptist but across all conservative Christians theologies, that should give us pause to really check to make sure that we are not following just novel theology we made up ourselves

 

[JesusFan]

A forum like this is in part for that purpose. You can agree or disagree, as I will do shortly.

I believe that historically rooted positions that are denied, or called theory, or philosophy is an attack. When people have described biblically major portions of truth and others insist on denying that, or actually questioning God's revealed word. I see it as an attack, just as much as Satan asked "has God Said"?

Credibility is when a person offers their own personal idea, that no one else has suggested at any time in Church History, not in any Confession of faith. On these issues Confessional Churches agree on the Cross.

Sure, if they do not deny Biblical definitions which has to take place to deny these teachings.

I see that the poster Martin M, has done a solid job of offering the Historic teaching, and the Current understanding in Churches.

Martin and others have done that day in and day out.

Claims of a formal education are not conclusive, or necessarily true. The truth of such claims without biblical alignment to the truth once delivered to the saints shows a lack of credibility. I can claim to be a master auto mechanic, but if I cannot explain the basics of a car engine, I in turn would wipe away any credibility, no one would take me seriously. In the same way, when posters state things that no one else does. they cannot be a trusted guide.

This might be your stated opinion, but that is all it is. Why call educated and gifted teachers. the religious elite?
Jn.3:27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

It is, however God for some reason has given Pastors and teachers, to local churches, to preach and to teach the gospel of the Kingdom as we see in Acts 28:
30 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,

31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him. He does not say, He just kept saying, Just believe what was written, like I claim to do. He opened the scripture concerning the Kingdom for two years! The says that preaching, and teaching happened.


People have offered you help, you reject it. That is fine, but you stand alone.

yes, It is often attacked by caricatures and strawmen

Again, that is your claim, that we cannot verify. You do not give any evidence of that. Instead you are with those who oppose the se truths. That is your right to do so, but all the Cals, and those who are studying toward the position do not seem to accept your claim, based on what they se you post. These topics are not about, you and what you claim, they are about Jesus and the Cross.

We have no verification of that. That is your claim. Some might question that.

This is yet another claim that distracts from the discussion.

your view.

Yes indeed.

That said, I have seen arguments against Calvinism that were based on stereotypes and misunderstanding. One of these is the "cosmic child abuse argument".

yes, It is often attacked by caricatures and strawmen

Is not when anyone rejects Psa for the atonement they really are reacting to the concept of Jesus enduring the wrath of God for our sake as being "pagan concept? Indeed Cosmic child abuse?"

As have read various authors who used that very terminology when they went against Psa atonement view?

 

[Silverhair]

No, rather he is suggesting that sometimes those who either misunderstood what Calvinism really teaches, or else are very angry/bitter at it can at times go so far other way they embrace doctrines and theology counter to the Cross itself, ending up with a severe misunderstanding of Pauline Justification

So you have just proven that you really do not have good discernment.

Read what he said again but this time without the calvinst filters.

This is just understanding the truth of calvinism 101

"If Calvinism is an error:
The reason most Christians reject it is because they have good discernment.
If Calvinism is true:
The ultimate reason most resist it is because God sovereignly and unchangeably decreed their resistance for His own glory.

I understand that the truth is hard for you to accept but it is for your own good that you step back and take a clear eyed look at what your religion actually teaches.

 

[JonC]

A forum like this is in part for that purpose. You can agree or disagree, as I will do shortly.

I believe that historically rooted positions that are denied, or called theory, or philosophy is an attack. When people have described biblically major portions of truth and others insist on denying that, or actually questioning God's revealed word. I see it as an attack, just as much as Satan asked "has God Said"?

Credibility is when a person offers their own personal idea, that no one else has suggested at any time in Church History, not in any Confession of faith. On these issues Confessional Churches agree on the Cross.

Sure, if they do not deny Biblical definitions which has to take place to deny these teachings.

I see that the poster Martin M, has done a solid job of offering the Historic teaching, and the Current understanding in Churches.

Martin and others have done that day in and day out.

Claims of a formal education are not conclusive, or necessarily true. The truth of such claims without biblical alignment to the truth once delivered to the saints shows a lack of credibility. I can claim to be a master auto mechanic, but if I cannot explain the basics of a car engine, I in turn would wipe away any credibility, no one would take me seriously. In the same way, when posters state things that no one else does. they cannot be a trusted guide.

This might be your stated opinion, but that is all it is. Why call educated and gifted teachers. the religious elite?
Jn.3:27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

It is, however God for some reason has given Pastors and teachers, to local churches, to preach and to teach the gospel of the Kingdom as we see in Acts 28:
30 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,

31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him. He does not say, He just kept saying, Just believe what was written, like I claim to do. He opened the scripture concerning the Kingdom for two years! The says that preaching, and teaching happened.


People have offered you help, you reject it. That is fine, but you stand alone.

yes, It is often attacked by caricatures and strawmen

Again, that is your claim, that we cannot verify. You do not give any evidence of that. Instead you are with those who oppose the se truths. That is your right to do so, but all the Cals, and those who are studying toward the position do not seem to accept your claim, based on what they se you post. These topics are not about, you and what you claim, they are about Jesus and the Cross.

We have no verification of that. That is your claim. Some might question that.

This is yet another claim that distracts from the discussion.

your view.

Yes indeed.

Brother.

I get that people's emotions are tied up in their beliefs.

I can. and have, referenced my beliefs through the writings of the early church and more contemporary scholars. They are deeply rooted in history. But that does not make my beliefs correct, and their antiquity certainly does not cast a negative light on you for denying them. There are many historically rooted positions.


You and I agree on the text of Scripture (that the words writtdn in the Bible are God's words).

You and I agree that when God judges the people those who are wicked will perish but those who have been conformed into the image of Christ will be justified (you mentioned this last week when pointing out that we are predestined to that righteousness).

So the discussion is about justice in how it relates not to the saved (they will be re-created and in the image of Christ on Judgment Day) and not to the wicked (they will be condemned) but to God Himself.


If God truly "makes us new creations in Christ", "conforms us to the image of Christ", "removes our heart", removes our heart snd spirit, giving us new ones, etc., then we were never in need of Christ being punished instead of us. What we needed was Christ to reconcile mankind to God, Christ to be set forth as a propitiation in His blood, and Christ to become a life giving spirit so that we woukd be reborn, made in His image.

The whole idea of Jesus having to be punished instead of us for our sins has to do with how the law relates to God (not to msn).


If we hold that justice demands God punish sins then God cannot forgive sins without violating the law.

It does not affect us because the "old man" has to cease existing, we have to be made anew.

It has to do with God submitting to what the law requires of Him.

That was a common philosophy at one time (secularly...it comes from the Renaissance Huminianism movement reaching back to Stoic and Roman philosophy to "better" their judicial system).

BUT I do not hold that philosophy. Obviously I do hold a philosophy (we all do) in regard to justice. That just is not the one I hold.


I view justice as restoration of a just state. This may be via punishment (punish the criminal) or it may be via reform (make the criminal not a criminal). So I view God as able to be just via the law (punishment) but also apart from the law (recreating men so as to remove guilt, creating them in the image of Christ).

We simply disagree about justice.

 

[Zaatar71]

Brother.

Hello JohnC,What is on your mind?

I get that people's emotions are tied up in their beliefs.

Yes, Ithink to a certain extent they should be. We are not called to be dead fish, floating downstream, but we are to hold fast to the gospel of the kingdom among a world of lost people in a culture in decline, and see if we can bring light in the darkness.

I can. and have, referenced my beliefs through the writings of the early church and more contemporary scholars. They are deeply rooted in history.

You have offered what you can with what you have, yes. Not everyone shares your perspective, which is also ok. We each act based upon what we believe.

But that does not make my beliefs correct,

No, nor mine, or any other person. What makes a belief correct is only as it aligns with the revealed word of God.

and their antiquity certainly does not cast a negative light on you for denying them.

No it does not, that is true. The thing is when we go outside of scripture to look at historical writings, they are always subject to scrutiny, as the bereans searched things out Acts17:11

There are many historically rooted positions.

Again, I agree. Where it can be come contentious is if we have different perspectives on historical events that may or may not be biblically related , but you might not care for some of my source material, or links, and vise versa. I find your posts attempt to do this more often where from my point of view, you broad brush a theology according to your perspective on history. I and others might have different source materials, and have come to a vastly different conclusion.

You and I agree on the text of Scripture (that the words writtdn in the Bible are God's words).

2tim3:16-17, yes...however we differ in I believe the words in the verses need explantion, you suggest this is not necessary, I will develop this more later on, as I think this is an attempt by you to clarify ore seek out areas, where we agree, and differ. It is preferable to do this, without you suggesting I am a Cult member, or a RC devotee, or such things as you have done in times past. I react when you do it to martin, and other Calvinists brothers, unjustly

You and I agree that when God judges the people those who are wicked will perish but those who have been conformed into the image of Christ will be justified (you mentioned this last week when pointing out that we are predestined to that righteousness).

Agreed

So the discussion is about justice in how it relates not to the saved (they will be re-created and in the image of Christ on Judgment Day) and not to the wicked (they will be condemned) but to God Himself.

Yes, this is at the core os several of the areas of disagreement.... I have to do something now, but will get back to this in awhile.

If God truly "makes us new creations in Christ", "conforms us to the image of Christ", "removes our heart", removes our heart snd spirit, giving us new ones, etc.,

Ok, I am back, lol This list is the end result of salvation, based upon what the Great Salvation that has been accomplished. Now as we work back to the cross, based on previous posts we will differ here.

then we were never in need of Christ being punished instead of us.

I believe we were in 100% need of that very thing.

What we needed was Christ to reconcile mankind to God,

I believe that Jesus reconciles the elect scattered throughout the world, in particular, not a generic reconciliation.

Christ to be set forth as a propitiation in His blood,

Again, this is an actual propitiation for the elect scattered worldwide, not generic or protentional

and Christ to become a life giving spirit so that we woukd be reborn, made in His image.

These again are a result.

The whole idea of Jesus having to be punished instead of us for our sins has to do with how the law relates to God (not to msn).

Yes, The law of God is the basis of the final Judgment. I believe the ten Commandments are the basis of God judging all sin.

If we hold that justice demands God punish sins then God cannot forgive sins without violating the law.

This is a central part of the gospel itself. God's law/word , over all mankind, saved or unsaved.

It does not affect us because the "old man" has to cease existing, we have to be made anew.

I believe the old man has been crucified with Christ, in that the reigning power of sin has been broken. We are still able to sin but no longer bound by sin.

It has to do with God submitting to what the law requires of Him.

As our mediator, that is part of what he actually did as in Mt.3
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
This has direct bearing on who he was a substitute, for, or representative of.

That was a common philosophy at one time (secularly...it comes from the Renaissance Huminianism movement reaching back to Stoic and Roman philosophy to "better" their judicial system).

here is a subjective opinion, ie, how you see it. Others may or may not accept thiis, that is why much of this kind of comment is secondary to scriptural discussion which is our primary concern.

BUT I do not hold that philosophy.

We hold we we hold.

Obviously I do hold a philosophy (we all do) in regard to justice. That just is not the one I hold.

Fair enough and agreed.

I view justice as restoration of a just state.

I see it as bring the whole man, to the whole Christ

This may be via punishment (punish the criminal) or it may be via reform (make the criminal not a criminal). So I view God as able to be just via the law (punishment) but also apart from the law (recreating men so as to remove guilt, creating them in the image of Christ).

We simply disagree about justice.

Well, this was in my view our best interaction that we have had.

 

[John of Japan]

Hello JOJ,
This is a good and important question. Not all Christians are Calvinists. To be in the mainstream of what is known as A "Calvinist" is to be the same as a rank-and-file Christian in that they believe the fundamentals of the Faith, Triune God, The fall into sin and death, Necessity of the New Birth,
The reality of the Penal Substitutionary Atonement, Resurrection and return of Christ, etc.
There are Christians who have not studied themselves into these positions and still work on what is true, and what is false. They still wrestle over passages and seek to refine what they believe, Calvinists do also, they read views of those who have not yet came to see that position as the biblical truth. J.C. Ryle is a good example of just such a person. His works on Holiness and The Christian life are classic and welcomed reads for all believers. That being said, we see many who are similar, in that they could not agree with the L. for some reason, yet they have a godly walk, and can be agreeable on many things.,. What we see in our time is some who claim, "I used to be a Calvinist", but then they go against every text and teaching that Confessional believers have held. It is not only that they claim to formerly have held to these truths, but in posting about these issues, cannot actually give the mainstream position in a way that demonstrates they had a grasp on it to begin with.
This indicates that perhaps they were in an assembly that might have taught these things, they learned a rough outline of some of the things, some of the terms, a bit of History. However upon further investigation, their understanding was quite defective and in fact shows they were not the real deal. These other professed Christion's who now call themselves "Christian deconstructionists", who go on to say that they never really believed in the Trinity, or Jesus being raised from the dead. Where they real Christians at all, or religious professors who never were indwelt with the Spirit?

When someone attacks a position without credibility, they are enemies of the Cross of Christ.
1tim1:
19 Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:

20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

2tim.2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;

18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.


2tim.1:15 This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.

2tim4:10 For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world,

14 Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works:

You used 492 words, according to MS Word, and still did not answer my question. And you need not give me lectures on Calvinism. I've known about the system for over 50 years.

 

[Zaatar71]

You used 492 words, according to MS Word, and still did not answer my question. And you need not give me lectures on Calvinism. I've known about the system for over 50 years.

Hello JOJ.
I am sorry I did not seem to answer your question. Perhaps you are a much smarter person than I am, and I might not have understood the specific thing you were asking.? Sorry, if that was the case. As far as Calvinism goes, I am glad to find that you are acquainted with it, but I do not like to assume that someone has a solid understanding of what it teaches. You might, or you might have been influenced by pastors, family, or friends, to a skewed version of how Calvinists would define or present it. I am open to any scriptural correction, or discussion you would like to offer.
I am more concerned with truth, rather than signing up for a "team". Thanks for your response.

 

[JesusFan]

Brother.

I get that people's emotions are tied up in their beliefs.

I can. and have, referenced my beliefs through the writings of the early church and more contemporary scholars. They are deeply rooted in history. But that does not make my beliefs correct, and their antiquity certainly does not cast a negative light on you for denying them. There are many historically rooted positions.


You and I agree on the text of Scripture (that the words writtdn in the Bible are God's words).

You and I agree that when God judges the people those who are wicked will perish but those who have been conformed into the image of Christ will be justified (you mentioned this last week when pointing out that we are predestined to that righteousness).

So the discussion is about justice in how it relates not to the saved (they will be re-created and in the image of Christ on Judgment Day) and not to the wicked (they will be condemned) but to God Himself.


If God truly "makes us new creations in Christ", "conforms us to the image of Christ", "removes our heart", removes our heart snd spirit, giving us new ones, etc., then we were never in need of Christ being punished instead of us. What we needed was Christ to reconcile mankind to God, Christ to be set forth as a propitiation in His blood, and Christ to become a life giving spirit so that we woukd be reborn, made in His image.

The whole idea of Jesus having to be punished instead of us for our sins has to do with how the law relates to God (not to msn).


If we hold that justice demands God punish sins then God cannot forgive sins without violating the law.

It does not affect us because the "old man" has to cease existing, we have to be made anew.

It has to do with God submitting to what the law requires of Him.

That was a common philosophy at one time (secularly...it comes from the Renaissance Huminianism movement reaching back to Stoic and Roman philosophy to "better" their judicial system).

BUT I do not hold that philosophy. Obviously I do hold a philosophy (we all do) in regard to justice. That just is not the one I hold.


I view justice as restoration of a just state. This may be via punishment (punish the criminal) or it may be via reform (make the criminal not a criminal). So I view God as able to be just via the law (punishment) but also apart from the law (recreating men so as to remove guilt, creating them in the image of Christ).

We simply disagree about justice.

You still have never explained just where did our deserved wrath God had stored up to place upon us in judgement actually went to

 

[John of Japan]

Hello JOJ.
I am sorry I did not seem to answer your question. Perhaps you are a much smarter person than I am, and I might not have understood the specific thing you were asking.? Sorry, if that was the case. As far as Calvinism goes, I am glad to find that you are acquainted with it, but I do not like to assume that someone has a solid understanding of what it teaches. You might, or you might have been influenced by pastors, family, or friends, to a skewed version of how Calvinists would define or present it. I am open to any scriptural correction, or discussion you would like to offer.
I am more concerned with truth, rather than signing up for a "team". Thanks for your response.

What are your qualifications to teach me? (I teach theology in our college and seminary.)

 

[JonC]

Hello JohnC,What is on your mind?

Yes, Ithink to a certain extent they should be. We are not called to be dead fish, floating downstream, but we are to hold fast to the gospel of the kingdom among a world of lost people in a culture in decline, and see if we can bring light in the darkness.

You have offered what you can with what you have, yes. Not everyone shares your perspective, which is also ok. We each act based upon what we believe.

No, nor mine, or any other person. What makes a belief correct is only as it aligns with the revealed word of God.

No it does not, that is true. The thing is when we go outside of scripture to look at historical writings, they are always subject to scrutiny, as the bereans searched things out Acts17:11

Again, I agree. Where it can be come contentious is if we have different perspectives on historical events that may or may not be biblically related , but you might not care for some of my source material, or links, and vise versa. I find your posts attempt to do this more often where from my point of view, you broad brush a theology according to your perspective on history. I and others might have different source materials, and have come to a vastly different conclusion.

2tim3:16-17, yes...however we differ in I believe the words in the verses need explantion, you suggest this is not necessary, I will develop this more later on, as I think this is an attempt by you to clarify ore seek out areas, where we agree, and differ. It is preferable to do this, without you suggesting I am a Cult member, or a RC devotee, or such things as you have done in times past. I react when you do it to martin, and other Calvinists brothers, unjustly

Agreed

Yes, this is at the core os several of the areas of disagreement.... I have to do something now, but will get back to this in awhile.

Ok, I am back, lol This list is the end result of salvation, based upon what the Great Salvation that has been accomplished. Now as we work back to the cross, based on previous posts we will differ here.

I believe we were in 100% need of that very thing.

I believe that Jesus reconciles the elect scattered throughout the world, in particular, not a generic reconciliation.

Again, this is an actual propitiation for the elect scattered worldwide, not generic or protentional

These again are a result.

Yes, The law of God is the basis of the final Judgment. I believe the ten Commandments are the basis of God judging all sin.

This is a central part of the gospel itself. God's law/word , over all mankind, saved or unsaved.

I believe the old man has been crucified with Christ, in that the reigning power of sin has been broken. We are still able to sin but no longer bound by sin.

As our mediator, that is part of what he actually did as in Mt.3
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
This has direct bearing on who he was a substitute, for, or representative of.

here is a subjective opinion, ie, how you see it. Others may or may not accept thiis, that is why much of this kind of comment is secondary to scriptural discussion which is our primary concern.

We hold we we hold.

Fair enough and agreed.

I see it as bring the whole man, to the whole Christ

Well, this was in my view our best interaction that we have had.

Yes, this is probably the best interaction that we have had.

I sometimes get caught up in simply arguing (I enjoy looking at arguments, and am kinda contrary abd stubborn....if you have not noticed).

I think where we disagree is pure philosophy (not Scrioture but in how our philosophy affects our understanding).

I do not mean "philosophy" as a bad word. I mean that every person understands things within how they understand reality.


So we differ on what judicial philosophy is divine justice. We differ in the goal of justice.

We also differ concerning metaphysical concepts. I cannot understand how one can transfer sins and guilt (actions and having acted) except this be symbolic for a type of ledger (like accounting). But then the ledger would be different from reality. And in the end this would not address the problem (sins are manifestations of a greater problem - that is wickedness).

There may be other factors in our disagreement, but I think those are the two main ones that influence how we read Scripture.

Can this be resolved in such a way we agree? I doubt it. It does not have to do with Scrioture (we hold the same Scriptures).

 

[Zaatar71]

What are your qualifications to teach me? (I teach theology in our college and seminary.)

Not sure if I could help, but will be willing to try. What do you believe or teach that differs?
Do you have portions that you believe teaches differently? I am not that smart, but maybe I have heard or read something that you might have missed?

 

[Zaatar71]

How in the world is it worse to be a former Calvinist than a former Christian? That seems to say that only Calvinists are saved.

Many profess to Be Christians and then they come to deny the faith. In speaking with such people it does not take to long to discover where they never had a grasp of basic truths that are common to all Christians. If that is true, were they ever really Christians?
Sadly, I have met many people who believe they are Christians because they were born here in the USA, and their parents brought them into an assembly of Christians. Some have been in a habit of going among the church for years, but never were brought to a place where God has made himself known to them.
When a person says they were at one time a Calvinist, you would think they would know what that actually meant. They would be able to say what it is that Calvinists believe, and why they never really did believe it.
Do you think a person who is a Calvinist would know less than a person who is a professed Christian , who has never read a bible to any degree?
You have said you have been given the privilege of teaching many people at a bible college for many years. What a wonderful thing that is to serve the lord in that way. You have much to be thankful for, being in such a position to help so many people.
Along the way as God began to teach you things to qualify you to function in such a position, have you been helped by other Christians?
I am thinking of the many passages that speak of the reality that all who are called of God are called to be saints, and are called to all the one another passages, love one another, teach one another, exhort one another, watch out for one another.
1 Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:

Have you been helped in this way, by several other saints?
Or did you only receive help after you had the opportunity to be trained at the bible school?

Paul went on and said this;
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;

5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;

6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:

7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:

8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
You asked in one of your posts;

What are your qualifications to teach me? (I teach theology in our college and seminary.)

What a great thing it is to be able to spend time being instructed by other men at a school dedicated to really learn scripture in much detail.
As for as qualifications go, I was a great sinner and locked in unbelief, until God drew me savingly to Himself. I went from complete unbelief, to being granted the ability to welcome truth by the grace of God. That is no small thing, is it?
Paul goes on to say;
9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

Were these saints, called? What qualifications did Paul require of them?

God used Paul to address these saints. Paul was evidently well trained in the Ot. scriptures, and yet God used other saints to help him, saints who were called, as he describes here;
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

In 2cor 4;7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

Now, he does not say not to seek to be trained, but here indicates that the qualifications and power are from God. He uses trained men, he uses other men to help one another.

These saints we are told refreshed Titus; 2cor;7
6 Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus;

7 And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more.
THEN here;
13 Therefore we were comforted in your comfort: yea, and exceedingly the more joyed we for the joy of Titus, because his spirit was refreshed by you all.

15 And his inward affection is more abundant toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him.

16 I rejoice therefore that I have confidence in you in all things.
Romans 15:14
And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.
In gal6:
6 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

This looks as if it is part of Loving one another, that we help where we can even without formal qualifications if, God would desire to use us.
Have you ever been helped by saints who did not have formal qualifications?, Do you think this is valid?

 

[Paleouss]

I am speaking about people who say...I used to be a Calvinist, or I used to be a Christian.

Zaatar, Greetings to you brother. Hope and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Just my two cents regarding fault I find on both sides. On the one side I sometimes see a harsh scolding of Calvinism and anyone who holds to it. It reminds me of my father who was a former smoker. There is no critic of smoking worse than a former smoker. Likewise, there is sometimes no critic more motivated and harsh than a former Calvinist.

Sometimes this approach clearly goes too far in my opinion. I often think, at what point does proselytizing become simply bickering and character assignation. Calvinism, whether one wants to disagree with some of its formulations, is clearly Christian. Calvinism holds all of the core tenants of Christianity (the real core, meaning not all the second level stuff people want to say you also must agree with).

On the flip side I often see from the Calvinist, but by no means the primary view, that if you don't believe all of the Calvinist tenants then you are an enemy of Christ. This harsh accusation from the Calvinist is made very often by Calvinists against an Arminian (whoever they throw this label upon) regarding the topic of faith and how it relates to salvation.

Just my thoughts

Peace to you brother

 

[John of Japan]

Not sure if I could help, but will be willing to try. What do you believe or teach that differs?
Do you have portions that you believe teaches differently? I am not that smart, but maybe I have heard or read something that you might have missed?

Again, you refuse to answer my question. I'm serious. Why should I let you teach me? (Because that is exactly what you are setting yourself up to be, my teacher, esp. in post #32.) I have had many good teachers in theology, most with PhDs. (I've taken 11 credits in sys. theo.) But here you are, some random guy on the Baptist Board. I know nothing about you.

So please tell my I why should interact with you on Calvinism. How are you wiser than my teachers?

Many profess to Be Christians and then they come to deny the faith. In speaking with such people it does not take to long to discover where they never had a grasp of basic truths that are common to all Christians. If that is true, were they ever really Christians?
Sadly, I have met many people who believe they are Christians because they were born here in the USA, and their parents brought them into an assembly of Christians. Some have been in a habit of going among the church for years, but never were brought to a place where God has made himself known to them.
When a person says they were at one time a Calvinist, you would think they would know what that actually meant. They would be able to say what it is that Calvinists believe, and why they never really did believe it.
Do you think a person who is a Calvinist would know less than a person who is a professed Christian , who has never read a bible to any degree?
You have said you have been given the privilege of teaching many people at a bible college for many years. What a wonderful thing that is to serve the lord in that way. You have much to be thankful for, being in such a position to help so many people.
Along the way as God began to teach you things to qualify you to function in such a position, have you been helped by other Christians?
I am thinking of the many passages that speak of the reality that all who are called of God are called to be saints, and are called to all the one another passages, love one another, teach one another, exhort one another, watch out for one another.
1 Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:

Have you been helped in this way, by several other saints?
Or did you only receive help after you had the opportunity to be trained at the bible school?

Paul went on and said this;
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;

5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;

6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:

7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:

8 Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
You asked in one of your posts;

What a great thing it is to be able to spend time being instructed by other men at a school dedicated to really learn scripture in much detail.
As for as qualifications go, I was a great sinner and locked in unbelief, until God drew me savingly to Himself. I went from complete unbelief, to being granted the ability to welcome truth by the grace of God. That is no small thing, is it?
Paul goes on to say;
9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

Were these saints, called? What qualifications did Paul require of them?

God used Paul to address these saints. Paul was evidently well trained in the Ot. scriptures, and yet God used other saints to help him, saints who were called, as he describes here;
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

In 2cor 4;7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

Now, he does not say not to seek to be trained, but here indicates that the qualifications and power are from God. He uses trained men, he uses other men to help one another.

These saints we are told refreshed Titus; 2cor;7
6 Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus;

7 And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more.
THEN here;
13 Therefore we were comforted in your comfort: yea, and exceedingly the more joyed we for the joy of Titus, because his spirit was refreshed by you all.

15 And his inward affection is more abundant toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him.

16 I rejoice therefore that I have confidence in you in all things.
Romans 15:14
And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.
In gal6:
6 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

This looks as if it is part of Loving one another, that we help where we can even without formal qualifications if, God would desire to use us.
Have you ever been helped by saints who did not have formal qualifications?, Do you think this is valid?

Your post has 1149 words, yet you still refuse to answer my completely valid question, which was suggested by your own words.

"In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin: but he that refraineth his lips is wise" (Prov. 10:19).

 

[John of Japan]

Folks, if we are talking about the Christian life, sure, there are many better Christians out there who can help me with that. If we are talking about strict Bible knowledge, I've known many Christians, both full time workers and regular Christians in the pew, who can teach me much.

However, theology is a specialized subject, unknown to many in the pews. Others have only a superficial knowledge. That is why I get the "big bucks" for being a full time Bible/theology professor. It's not that I'm a better Christian, or have more out and out Bible knowledge. It is that I am fully trained, and continue to get training (working on another degree, reading lots), just like an electrician or a doctor continues to get more training to keep up with his profession.

I've seen so much bad theology here on the BB! Haven't you? This includes in the Cal/Arm battles. I have two great friends who are Calvinist, both well educated. Why then would I wish to be taught by a random person (perhaps a good Christian with great Bible knowledge) on the BB?