"just" calvinist

[Rippon]

Some think they are the elect because they were chosen.

Rip: Chosen=Elect. There is no appreciable difference.Some people think birds fly because they have wings.:laugh:

The elect are the elect because the remain in Jesus,

Rip: The elect are the elect because God made it that way.Nothing can separate us from the love of God. Take a gander at Romans 8:31-39 among other passages.

All men are elected to salvation,

Rip: That's a completely unbiblical statement. Please demonstrate just one place in Scripture where this is the case. You need to be rooted in the Bible.

 

[Jerome]

in one of my first posts after joining the Board, I replied to J.D., who had written: "A baptist that is reformed or calvinist does not typically follow John Calvin's and other reformers' teachings beyond the doctrine of salvation," I replied, "Yes, that is probably why baptists on this side of the Atlantic who hold to the "Doctrines of Grace" are more likely to describe themselves as "reformed baptist" or "grace baptist", rather than "Calvinist"."

When did you begin referring to yourselves as "reformed baptist" or "grace baptist"? In America, "Reformed Baptists" were a Canadian Arminian group that merged into the Wesleyan Church in the 1960s. Ernest Reisinger's new Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid movement then began using that designation.

 

[skypair]

But I disagree with you when you say that on this forum, "We know we are saved/regenerated conditionally predicated on faith and repentance rather than upon election." Some believe that - I know you do. Others do not. If that were not so, most of the "friendly difference" posts from you to me and vice versa would never have been written, would they? :laugh:

And therein lies the tale, right?

I actually do enjoy our repartie and like to examine other views as I grow in grace. I probably oughtn't argue as much as I do because there is plenty of other stuff I need to discover as I try to "pile up" the "gold, silver, and precious stones" for my "mansion." I really believe we will lay all our "wisdom" before Christ at the Bema and find out then whether it is "flamable" or whether He was able to use it to build New Jerusalem! :jesus:

skypair

 

[skypair]

So far, I am finding I can work much better with non lordship salvation calvinists than I can lordship salvation dispensationalists or lorship salvation calvinists.

You're very spiritually discerning, nodak. LS is, I believe, an offshoot of Calvinism. And I can understand John Mac's thrust. But because he expects "works," many will believe it is easy to identify those who are saved. It, to me, kinda follows the mentality of the Masons. You don't ever have to tell someone you are a "Christian/Mason." They know by a Mason's behavior and ask them to "give an answer for the hope..." That might ever be the way to "rope" someone into salvation, eh?

So it is an interesting journey.

It certainly is! "Ear hath not heard nor eye seen ... what God has prepared for those who love Him." 1Cor 2:9 But if we keep growing in the right direction, we have a sweet, sublime joy in what we do see and hear!

skypair

 

[Rippon]

In America, "Reformed Baptists" were a Canadian Arminian group that merged into the Wesleyan Church in the 1960s.

Rip: I have never heard about that before Jerome.Can you elaborate some?


Ernest Reisinger's new Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid movement then began using that designation.

Rip: Why do you say :"Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid"?The specific designation of Reformed Baptist may not be more than a few decades old, and RB's do share many commonalities with conservative Presbyterians, but "P-B"? The 1689 Baptist Confession ( Some call it The London Confession)did use much of the Westminster Confession of Faith -- with acknowledgement.

The Banner of Truth is kind of a joint operation of conservative Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists.

I think that American version of Reformed Baptists got started around the early 1960's.It was a combination of A.W.Pink's works being gladly received, the influence of Dr.David M-L-Jones ( he was not a Baptist per say), and the preaching of Rolfe Barnard, Henry Mahan, and Ferrell Griswold etc.

 

[Rippon]

You Have No Shame

And I can understand John Mac's thrust. But because he expects "works," many will believe it is easy to identify those who are saved. It, to me, kinda follows the mentality of the Masons. You don't ever have to tell someone you are a "Christian/Mason." They know by a Mason's behavior and ask them to "give an answer for the hope..." That might ever be the way to "rope" someone into salvation, eh?

Rip: You never tire of saying stupid things. This time John MacArthur "follows the mentality of the Masons".You can only hope to have a shred of the orthodoxy of John MacArthur when you have repented of your lies and slandering ways.

 

[skypair]

If a person refuses to acknowledge that Christ is Lord and Master, are they truly saved?

No. However, we do not press that upon ourselves as Johnny Mac would seem to suggest. A hypocrite can do that quite handily and then claim to be saved. It's like "applying" the 5 "tests" in 1John to yourself to decide whether you are "elect" or not. We are SO objective when we are evaluating ourselves, aren't we? :laugh: And how "objective" do you think that makes us regarding others?

Furthermore, there is a "learning curve" to one's salvation. I studied learning curves for my Masters Degree and know that the "acknowledgement" of Christ as Lord is fairly slow at the beginning. And there are a lot of doubts on one's salvation then as well. But the curve increases exponentially as one begins to receive the truth and apply it to one's life. That has been my personal experience as well, Bob. I am sure John would agree on that count.

Leave the "legalism" for the Galations experience. Trust an honest profession and help that person grow.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Thanks. I certainly can take away a few things from your comment.

But with the label I never thought of myself as following any man. My lead in the Spirit through the pages of Scripture.

But I too subscribe to the doctrines of grace like David Lamb

I love you, brother! You have been on my heart as one who has integrity of spirit. You have been open to all my approaches and helping me to understand without recrimination. Sadly, I have not always met the measure of your kindness.

I believe Paul said it best -- we ought to get beyond the "doubtful disputations" and move on to the real "main course," the "meat" of the word. raying:

skypair

 

[Jarthur001]

Let me suggest those recommending him go back and read Ryrie's books on the subject, or "Absolutely Free" by Zane Hodges, or go on the web and read Dr. Bing's dissertation on lordship salvation.

Many, if not most, members on this board see Zane Hodges and his group as teaching heresy. This goes for Calvinist and non-Calvinist alike. Webdog use to like the guy (non-Calvinist), but now knows of some heresy held by Hodges. Lou wrote a book on Hodges too, if I remember right. I cannot recommend either book, for I have not read them.

 

[Jerome]

In America, "Reformed Baptists" were a Canadian Arminian group that merged into the Wesleyan Church in the 1960s.

Rip: I have never heard about that before Jerome.Can you elaborate some?]

Atlantic District of the Wesleyan Church

"The Holiness Movement and Canadian Maritime Baptists"

Ernest Reisinger's new Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid movement then began using that designation.


Rip: Why do you say :"Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid"?The specific designation of Reformed Baptist may not be more than a few decades old, and RB's do share many commonalities with conservative Presbyterians, but "P-B"? The 1689 Baptist Confession ( Some call it The London Confession)did use much of the Westminster Confession of Faith -- with acknowledgement.

The Banner of Truth is kind of a joint operation of conservative Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists.

I think that American version of Reformed Baptists got started around the early 1960's.It was a combination of A.W.Pink's works being gladly received, the influence of Dr.David M-L-Jones ( he was not a Baptist per say), and the preaching of Rolfe Barnard, Henry Mahan, and Ferrell Griswold etc.

Yes the latest movement to use the name Reformed Baptists (early Campbellites also were so known) are Baptists who in the late twentieth century adopted/adapted much from Presbyterianism (not just soteriology but covenant theology, elders, etc.).
Ernest Reisinger was uniquely involved in fostering many branches of the new Reformed Baptist movement:
Grace Baptist Church, Carlisle, Pennsylvania
Banner of Truth Trust
Founders Ministries

Many pastors have been blessed by Reisinger's blueprint for turning a Baptist church Reformed. Among his "practical suggestions" are to:

Establish spiritual credibility in the church before making your move.
Don't tackle the whole church, first just initiate a select group of men into the doctrines of grace; they will back you up later.
Avoid using the terms Calvinism, Reformed, etc. from the pulpit.
Introduce a carefully screened book table.
Stand behind old Calvinist creeds, etc, culled from your church's archives.

 

[Rippon]

Atlantic District of the Wesleyan Church

"The Holiness Movement and Canadian Maritime Baptists"

Rip: Well, whadda' ye' know? I wasn't aware that non-Calvinists used the term before.

Yes the latest movement to use the name Reformed Baptists (early Campbellites also were so known) are Baptists who in the late twentieth century adopted/adapted much from Presbyterianism (not just soteriology but covenant theology, elders, etc.).
Ernest Reisinger was uniquely involved in fostering many branches of the new Reformed Baptist movement:
Grace Baptist Church, Carlisle, Pennsylvania
Banner of Truth Trust
Founders Ministries

Many pastors have been blessed by Reisinger's blueprint for turning a Baptist church Reformed. Among his "practical suggestions" are to:

Establish spiritual credibility in the church before making your move.
Don't tackle the whole church, first just initiate a select group of men into the doctrines of grace; they will back you up later.
Avoid using the terms Calvinism, Reformed, etc. from the pulpit.
Introduce a carefully screened book table.
Stand behind old Calvinist creeds, etc, culled from your church's archives.

I know about the now-deceased Ernie. I wasn't disagreeing about his influence in the Calvinistic Reformed Baptist Movement.

But the R-B's don't have a Presbyterian Church structure and there's no synod, with all that entails. Each congregation is independent. The denomination is really a collection of like-minded fellowships.

I think the word Reformed may be used more than you think, even though the word Calvinism may be down-played.

 

[Rippon]

Sorry. Duplicate post.

 

[Jerome]

But the R-B's don't have a Presbyterian Church structure and there's no synod, with all that entails. Each congregation is independent. The denomination is really a collection of like-minded fellowships.

Which is very problematic, as pointed out by John Reisinger:

"...some present-day Baptists (mostly Reformed Baptists) have departed from both the Bible and their Baptist forefathers. They have adopted the Presbyterian view of eldership and put the authority of the church in the hands of the eldership, thereby rejecting congregational rule. However, they have also rejected the idea of a Presbytery, or any authority, beyond the local church. They have destroyed the checks and balance established by the Presbytery. This is a hybrid view of authority of recent origin. It is really 'Baptist' Catholicism. The evils that Shepherding God's Flock is fighting are the 'good and necessary consequences' of such a mixture of contrary principles.

Here is the problem in this hybrid system: (1) If the authority of a local church is in the eldership and not the congregation (Presbyterian eldership), and (2) if there is no authority past the local congregation (Baptist congregationalism), then (3) to whom can an appeal be made when an elder acts like a tyrant? In such a situation, the eldership is a law unto itself with no accountability to anyone but its own conscience! In such a system, if several families come to the pastor with a sincere concern and he either refuses to listen or is not convinced that they are correct, those individuals are not allowed to even talk to another person after they leave his office. To do so is to be 'guilty of rebellion against God's duly authorized leadership.' Such a system is nothing but Roman popery. There is no check and balance because the eldership is ultimately responsible to no one but itself. A tyrant can have a field day and be untouchable in such a system.

As previously mentioned, either the Presbyterian view of authority or the Baptist view of authority will work very well. The object of this article is not to state which view is biblical or preferable. I have long believed that a combination of the two would be the best. However, a hybrid system that adopts a Presbyterian view of eldership and then denies both congregationalism and a Presbytery has, even if unknowingly, created an eldership that has all of the unchecked authority of an infallible pope. Eldership rule without a Presbytery is Roman Catholicism."

 

[PilgrimPastor]

I have read John MacArthur, have his study Bible, and find him thoroughly unbiblical. He confuses discipleship and salvation in my humble opinion.

LHonestly, I think sometimes we are so afraid that if we preach and teach free grace people will have no inclination to follow what WE consider good morals. We seem to forget the Holy Spirit is still on the job

Those are good words and I would tend to agree with you on basically all counts. It occurs to me that it is just as easy for the Lordship Salvation camp to fall into legalism as it is for the Free Grace camp to fail to recognize the fruit of the spirit as evidence of salvation and sanctification as an important part of the Christian walk.

I must say that I also find it rather curious how a proponent of Lordship Salvation can hold to the doctrine of Eternal Security. Does it not logically follow that if I MUST show fruit in order to provide evidence for salvation that if at some point I stop bearing fruit then I may lose salvation? Or is the point exactly that this would be evidence to my never having accepted Christ as Lord?

 

[David Lamb]

When did you begin referring to yourselves as "reformed baptist" or "grace baptist"? In America, "Reformed Baptists" were a Canadian Arminian group that merged into the Wesleyan Church in the 1960s. Ernest Reisinger's new Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid movement then began using that designation.

That sounds very odd to me, as I know the words "reformed baptist" are used in America to mean what they mean here. Just a few examples: Heritage Church in Fayetteville, Georgia, says on its web site, www.heritagerbc.org concerning the word "reformed" (which it applies to itself):

Reformed refers to the heritage of the teachings of our Lord and His Apostles which were recaptured at the time of the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century by such men as Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Knox, among many others. These "reformers" were given grace to see that the Word of God had been encrusted with centuries of human traditions and the gospel obscured. The saving message of the grace of God revealed in Jesus Christ in the gospel had been lost. But these men, who had their own souls reborn by the power of the gospel of free grace, preached from the pulpits of Europe with tremendous power and blessing by the Holy Spirit and whole nations were changed. The key ideas of the Reformation were captured at that time in five Latin slogans:

• SOLA SCRIPTURA - The scripture alone is our final authority in every area of life, because it is the Word of God;

• SOLA CHRISTI - Christ alone, in his perfect life and atoning death in the sinner's place, is the basis for our acceptance by God;

• SOLA GRATIA - The grace of God alone in Christ, not works of human merit or effort, is how God saves sinners;

• SOLA FIDE - Faith alone is the means by which sinners receive or appropriate this grace of God; and

SOLI DEO GLORIA - To God alone be the glory for saving sinners and for everything else in this life and the life to come, eternal.





​

Tampa Reformed Baptist Church in Florida, http://tampareformedbaptistchurch.com ; Reformed Baptist Church of Topeka, http://reformingworship.org/main/common/home/ and many more American baptist churches that consider themselves "Reformed" (whether or not that word appears in the church name) are listed at the "Reformed Reader" church directory page: http://www.reformedreader.org/rbchurches.htm Incidentally, if you click on "Canada" there, you will find a number of Canadian Reformed Baptist churches that are nothing to do with Wesleyanism or Arminianis.

There is an evangelical sermon by Pastor Al Martin (American), at: http://reformedcovenanter.wordpress.com/2007/07/05/repent-or-perish-by-pastor-albert-n-martin/ where the "blurb" says: "Here is a short Evangelistic sermon by the Reformed Baptist minister Al Martin. If you have ever heard Al Martin preach (I have, on audio cassette) you cannot possibly imagine that he is Arminian!

I could give similar examples of the use of the phrace "Grace Baptist" in America.

I have never heard Ernest Reisinger's stance as being a "Presbyterian-Baptist hybrid".

I'm confused. (Yes, I know, it doesn't take much to confuse me! )

 

[skypair]

I have read John MacArthur, have his study Bible, and find him thoroughly unbiblical. He confuses discipleship and salvation in my humble opinion.

Actually, I think he confuses "sanctification" with "justification" but I won't split hairs on that issue. Preach on, nodak!

Let me suggest those recommending him go back and read Ryrie's books on the subject, or "Absolutely Free" by Zane Hodges, or go on the web and read Dr. Bing's dissertation on lordship salvation.

FWIW, "libertarian freedom" would be the topic of Hodges (from what I have read about it in John Frame's book).

Bob House--free grace people DO believe in regeneration changing the person from the inside out. The issue is do people have to consent to that change BEFORE Jesus will save them, or is it a RESULT OF salvation.

I look at this way: when I witness to someone really thoroughly owned by a sin (such as addiction) the GOOD NEWS is that they can come to Jesus JUST AS THEY ARE. They probably are honestly going to ask me "what if I lose the battle with the bottle. What if I CANNOT change?" And I can tell them that Jesus Christ came to save SINNERS, not call the righteous to repentance.

As with me a cigarettes 45 years ago! I couldn't afford to wait until I quit. And furthermore, I would not have had the power on my own to do so without Christ. This is a very important point because when I did quit 13 years later, the Spirit was working with my all the way through the rather traumatic experience that accompanied it.

skypair

 

[skypair]

No one is elect because they are church members, that's complete silliness.

So you would also say that no one was "elect" because they were OT Jews? That circumcision, for one, didn't identify them as "elect?" That Israel was not an "elect" nation to bring forth the Savior? That there is no difference in "election" between the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael nor between Jacob and Esau??

Absolutely, the church is "elect" for God's purposes during this intra-advent age, whether they are believers or just "carried along" by the direction of the church!

skypair

 

[psalms109:31]

Salvation

Salvation is for all men because God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, so salvation is for all men and we are the messenger. It is very biblical. But to those who lean on thier own understanding.

Praise be to Jesus.

Nothing can seperate a believer but we can walk away from our salvation only those who are in Christ are the elect. Period.

The young rich ruler was chosen, elected to salvation and walked away.

 

[skypair]

Establish spiritual credibility in the church before making your move.
Don't tackle the whole church, first just initiate a select group of men into the doctrines of grace; they will back you up later.
Avoid using the terms Calvinism, Reformed, etc. from the pulpit.
Introduce a carefully screened book table.
Stand behind old Calvinist creeds, etc, culled from your church's archives.

Wow! And these guys wonder why Baptist churches might want to steer clear of Calvinist preachers and leaders! :tonofbricks: No "conspiracy theory" here! This is a well choreographed "action plan!"

Thanks for thw warning, Jerome.

skypair

 

[Rippon]

Absolutely, the church is "elect" for God's purposes during this intra-advent age, whether they are believers of just "carried along" by the direction of the church!

The members of the true Church which Christ purchased with His own blood are indeed elect. In the visible Church weeds are growing up alongside the wheat. But those weeds ( tares) are certainly not elect. No one merely being carried along in their earthy lives within a local Church is saved, hence, not elect.