1. 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!

"Let him be accursed."

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Mark Osgatharp, Oct 9, 2002.

Top Posters
  1. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    Calvinism is often referred to by it's adherants as "the doctrines of grace." Let's explore this just a little bit.

    Paul rebuked the Galatian churches because they had forsaken the doctrine of the grace of God for Jewish legalism. Said he, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel."

    Furthermore, Paul told these churches that if he or an angel from heaven preached any gospel other than what he had preached, "let him be accursed." Now, "let him be accursed" can only mean one of two things. It either means, "consider him to be a lost man" or "do not have ecclesiastical fellowship with him."

    Since Paul included himself in this anathema, and since Paul was unquestionably to his own mind a saved man, I cannot conceive that he meant "consider him to be a lost man" when he said "let him be accursed." Therefore, I conclude that "let him be accursed" means not to have ecclesiastical fellowship with him.

    That is to say, if someone comes preaching another gospel don't let him in your churches and don't entertain his preaching. This viewpoint would be upheld by the fact that latter in the Galatian letter Paul said he wished the Judaizers were "cut off" from the fellowship of the Galatian churches.

    Now let's apply this to the modern day situation:

    1. Adrian Rogers does not teach Calvinism. As a matter of fact, Adrian Rogers openly teaches against Calvinism.

    2. Calvinism is, according to Calvinists, "the doctrines of grace."

    3. Ergo, Adrian Rogers does not teach the "doctrines of grace." As a matter of fact, Adrian Rogers openly teaches against the "doctrines of grace."

    4. Therefore, for Calvinists to be consistent with their assertion that Calvinism is "the doctrines of grace" and obedient to Paul's command to let him who teaches "another gospel" be accursed, they must let Adrian Rogers "be accursed."

    5. Practically speaking, this means they must either: a. Say that Adrian Rogers, along with all other non-Calvinists, is not saved or b. Break ecclesiastical fellowship with Adrian Rogers and all non-Calvinists.

    Which will it be, boys?

    Mark Osgatharp
     
    #1 Mark Osgatharp, Oct 9, 2002
  2. Robert J Hutton

    Robert J Hutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2002
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Warm Christian greetings!

    Responding to the post from our brother Mark I am not sure it is wise to push people into a corner like that.

    I don't see any need to condemn fellow believers because they are Arminian and speak out against Calvinism. Although I hold to Calvinistic theolgy (without the Limited Atonement - sorry!) I am very happy to fellowship and evangelise alongside our Arminian brethren.

    We can have a lively discussion on these issues without "disfellowshipping" one another just because we don't agree on every single point.

    Kind regards

    Robert J Hutton
     
    #2 Robert J Hutton, Oct 9, 2002
  3. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,072
    Likes Received:
    1,651
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have to admit that in my weaker moments I sometimes think that is the Biblical thing to do. [​IMG] And I do know of Calvinists who indeed believe that non-Calvinists are teaching a different Jesus than the Jesus of the Bible and a false gospel and have serious doubts about the salvation of non-Calvinists.

    For myself, I'll simply hold to the light that the Holy Spirit has blessed me with and trust in God to save whom He has ordained for salvation from this world. I would not be surprised at all to see non-Calvinists and Calvinists and hyper-Calvinists who think they are saved, but are not, end up in hell.

    Ken
    A Spurgeonite
     
    #3 KenH, Oct 9, 2002
  4. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think "anathema" is a bit more serious than disfellowshipping. So I disagree with you there. While I think there are arminians who will be in heaven, I would not have one to preach in my pulpit for the very reason that we differ so drastically on the nature and work of God. I have arminian friends who I associate with on a personal level. But I woulnd't have them in my pulpit to preach.
     
    #4 Pastor Larry, Oct 9, 2002
  5. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    If Calvinism is the "doctrines of grace" then non-Calvinism is not the doctrines of grace. The Lord, by the mouth of Paul, explicitly commanded us to "let him be accursed" who preaches not the gospel of the grace of God.

    I know that doesn't fit well with modern ecumenical ideas, but that is irrefutable scriptural reasoning.

    Mark Osgatharp
     
    #5 Mark Osgatharp, Oct 9, 2002
  6. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pastor Larry,

    What you describe here is what I mean by ecclesiastical disfellowshipping.

    I commend you for you consistent stand; that is the same stand I take toward Arminians and Calvinists. I think there are Arminians and Calvinists who are saved and I can associate with them on a personal level, but I would not consent to having one preach in the church I pastor.

    Furthermore, if some member of our church attempted to teach these doctrines, he would become the subject of church discipline. In fact, we have disciplined members in the past for embracing the Arminian heresy.

    Mark Osgatharp
     
    #6 Mark Osgatharp, Oct 9, 2002
  7. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,385
    Likes Received:
    23
    If you believe Calvanism is not the doctrine of grace, do you forsake fellowship with Calvanist?
     
    #7 Grasshopper, Oct 9, 2002
  8. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm with you, Pastor Larry. And to Grasshopper:
    Thank you. That was exactly the question in my mind while reading Mark's post. It sure is an assumption that can work both ways.
     
    #8 pinoybaptist, Oct 9, 2002
  9. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,072
    Likes Received:
    1,651
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Were these just pew-sitting members or teaching members?

    Ken
    A Spurgeonite

    [ October 09, 2002, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]
     
    #9 KenH, Oct 9, 2002
  10. Rev. G

    Rev. G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mark:

    Why do you have such a gigantic bur under your saddle on this issue?

    When Paul writes to the Galatians he is dealing with the issue of justification by faith alone. The Judaizers were corrupting the Gospel by advancing legalism (circumcision) as a means to earn God's favor. Paul declares that anyone not holding to sola fide is "anathema," which is to be "accursed" - lost eternally. Anyone preaching justification by human merit / achievement / works is NOT preaching the Gospel. Arminians are heterodox on this point in that they have introduced a human element in maintaining that faith is a human byproduct rather than a gift from God. The main difference between the Calvinist and the Arminian on this point is that the Calvinistic position is that justification is a monergistic work while the Arminian position holds that justification is a synergistic work. However, that does not deny sola fide by the Arminian. Therefore, the two may exist side by side and work together. It doesn't sound like you are willing to work with us, though, brother, and that is unfortunate. There is a world that needs evangelizing.

    By the way, if you are so dead set against us (Reformed folks), then there are some things you ought not to do. Such as:

    * Don't read or quote Luther, Zwingli, Knox, Spurgeon, Whitefield, Edwards, Augustine, Bunyan, Strong, Broadus, Manly, Mell, Boyce, Carroll, or a host of others.

    * Don't sing "Amazing Grace" in your church, or anything by Watts or Toplady.

    * Don't talk about William Carey being the "Father of Modern Missions."

    I could go on and on, but there is really no need. I'm not trying to antagonize you, I'm just trying to point out that the way you have painted "Calvinists" on a number of your posts is unwarranted, friend.

    Rev. G
     
    #10 Rev. G, Oct 9, 2002
  11. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Or any of Charles Wesley's hymns. The hymnal is getting thinner and thinner ...
     
    #11 rsr, Oct 9, 2002
  12. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,072
    Likes Received:
    1,651
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You wouldn't happen to be a Landmark Baptist would you?

    Ken
    A Spurgeonite
     
    #12 KenH, Oct 9, 2002
  13. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    We all may be tempted to wonder if Calvinists are not in fact preaching "another Gospel" other than the "God So Loved the World" Gospel that we find in scripture - but in the end, a difference of opinion should not require a break in fellowship.

    I think it is "MORE" to the point with dispensationalists - who themselves come up with a Gospel of works that applies for 4000 years and "Then" a Gospel of grace for 2000. That is certainly a "two gospel" model.

    But I don't think that Calvinism requires you to go that far.

    In Christ,

    Bob

    [ October 09, 2002, 09:29 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]
     
    #13 BobRyan, Oct 9, 2002
  14. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,072
    Likes Received:
    1,651
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wow, Bob. We find a teaching that we can disagree with together. [​IMG]

    Ken
    A Spurgeonite

    [ October 09, 2002, 09:35 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]
     
    #14 KenH, Oct 9, 2002
  15. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking as a committed dispensationalist, we do not believe in two gospels. There are some dispensatinalists who do, but it is not a part of dispensationalism.
     
    #15 Pastor Larry, Oct 9, 2002
  16. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rev.G,

    I've had this conversation before on several occasions; when Calvinists are debating non-Calvinists they charge them teaching salvaion by works and denying "the doctrines of grace" and the sovreignty of God and exalting the goodness of man and being full of pride.

    When Calvinists are defending the fact that they are in churches, associations, and fellowship which include large numbers of non-Calvinists, the differences are suddenly very minimal.

    Ken,

    Yes, I am a Landmark Baptist.

    Mark Osgatharp
     
    #16 Mark Osgatharp, Oct 9, 2002
  17. Rev. G

    Rev. G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, Mark, I think from the tone of your post it seems that you and I are done with this conversation.
     
    #17 Rev. G, Oct 9, 2002
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...