Reformation Sunday

If "send a reformation" means you want me to accept DoG, then NO THANKS, I'll stick with the truth of the Gospel

John

 

I am not Arminian for one.

And if you deny that the Gospel was given for every living soul, then you are not teaching the truth of the Gospel.

I am not saying you are not saved, but I am saying that your selfish gospel that you preach is crippling to the spreading of the gospel, and denying the oppurtunity for many to be saved.

John

 

I for one am thankful for the great event that took place in October of 1517. The reclamation of the true Church from the bondage of the corrupt Church has meant renewed vigor for the true Gospel.

Though we might disagree over some relatively minor points of theology, what we hold in common is far greater than what divides us.

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

We ALL need to be ernestly praying for revival; let the LORD decide what it will be.

 

Excellent read Luke, you write very well, and I totally agree with you. Thanks.

 

Nearly every Protestant church in existence today owes a debt to the Reformation. The first Reformers were almost exclusively believers in the DoG. As the footprint of the Reformation grew, so did diverse theological convictions such as Arminianism. Some of those diverse convictions remained under the blanket of orthodoxy; while still others, such as the Anabaptists, adopted radical and dangerous views that threatened the welfare of the church. As we look back at the events of nearly 500 years ago, we see God's faithfulness in preserving His church. That is the story of the Reformation. Calvinists and Arminians alike share a common heritage.

 

Any proof? I belong to a SBC Church. Most churches in our denomination are not Calvinistic. Yet these same churches who take your attitude toward Calvinists can't raise enough money to send out enough missionaries to fit the needs. There are people waiting in line to go to the mission field but the IMB doesn't have the money to fund them. So what is crippling, Calvinists or non Cals who speak one way on a message board and an opposite way when it comes to the check book.

How is Calvinist denying the opportunity for many to be saved?

Sadly this is a good example of the typical anti-Calvinist.

 

I like Halloween better; it's less scary.:tongue3:

 

Missions?

How much of your dollar that you give in the SBC church is eaten up by the administration of the mission board?

The church i go to is independent. We have no problem finding missionaries to support, AND every penney of every dollar i give gets to them, not a mission board!

If I was lost and I heard the message of Calvinism, I would be very discouraged and very intimidated about even approaching Christianity if I was told it it is a special group that God chooses a very few to invite.

John

 

BTW, I am not ashamed to be anti-Calvinist. I believe it is right and biblical to oppose unbiblical doctrines.

John

 

I am neither Calvinist nor Arminian.

I am also not protestant.

I am Baptist, with a church heritage that is proven to date back to the second century, and believed to date back to the New Testament Church in Acts.

I do agree with the historical significance of breaking free of the RCC, and and how that led to the settling of our country. But none of that justifies a false doctrine.

Jesus is the author of my doctrine, not Luther or Calvin.

John

 

So you're intimidated by the Sovereign God of the Scriptures doing all things according to His purpose?

Paul believed this special group was out there. He talked about it. They are scattered out in this world, we preach, and only His elect are saved, and none other.

I marvel at non-cals as yourself who bicker about "how do we know who is elect and who isn't?" Guess what, you're not supposed to know, you're supposed to preach.

By the way, "predestined" means "to limit in advance" and that is exactly what God did in calling and saving only His elect.

God doesn't do things your way, in other words this isn't "Burger King Theology," so no, you can't "have it your way." He does things His way only, and in the midst of His Sovereign regin in choosing, electing, thwarting mans plans, using all things for His Glory, choosing whom He wills to choose prior to said person every doing anything, His sheep simply trust in Him in it, and glorify Him for it.

God's bigger than your logic and your reason against these revealed truths within Scriptures which you fight against. Those who embrace these truths bask in His Glory in them and trust Him totally. Either He is God, or He is not.

Also, I used to as you, question these truths. After agonizing with them, and God in them, and not looking at Calvin, not even at the time knowing Spurgeon was Calvinist or not, not even knowing MaCarthur to be reformed, and listening to none of these for pointers. Instead, I found these truths in the Word of God alone and one day accepted these marvelous truths of who God is and of what He does. Now I stand in awe of Him and His workings and desire to know more of Him.

Note Moses experience with God in Exodus 33, after seeing His Sovereign ways revealed, doing how He wills with whom He wills to do so, yet he wanted to know more about God.

He knows what He's doing. Your logic, and unfavorable opinion about these truths make no difference whatsoever, nor do they effect all He has planned to do.

 

John,

Good morning.

I was not aware that you were a Landmark Baptist. I'll leave your view without a response on my part; not because it is not a worthwhile topic to discuss, but because I've found it to be an emotionally charged topic that is best left for another venue. I consider the discussion of theology and Scripture to be a much higher priority.

I am glad to hear that Luther and Calvin are not the authors of your doctrine. God forbid that any Christian should look to another man as the author of infallible truth. Luther was used by God to initiate a break with Romanism. For that I am grateful. Augustine, and later Calvin, were fallible men who eloquently explained difficult teachings. The same can be said for faithful ministers, scholars, and theologians throughout the centuries. Each man's teachings are to be examined in light of Scripture. If those teachings are faithful to Scripture, then they can be used to strengthen the church. Isn't that was a preacher does? He examines Scripture and prepares message. If that message passes scrutiny it is of value to the hearer.

By the way, Calvin never used the term "Calvinism." Calvinism was first a pejorative term, much like the term Christian in the first century. Calvin was the author of the DoG. Some point back to Augustine, claiming he was the first apologist for the DoG. But even if that were so, Augustine did not create the teaching. Yet, we see their names used to describe a method of theological thought; Calvinism and Augustianism. Is it then fair to accuse those who hold to the DoG that they are following men rather than God? No. It is not fair. It is intellectually dishonest to do so. When Charles Spurgeon called himself a Calvinist, he was not casting his lot with everything Calvin taught. Calvin believed in infant baptism. Calvin was also a theonomist. Spurgeon disagreed vehemently with both of those positions. How then could Calvin be the author of Spurgeon's doctrine? Obviously, he wasn't. But Spurgeon gladly wore the label "Calvinist" because John Calvin so eloquently wrote on the DoG. To carry the argument further than that is create a straw man argument.

John, in regards to my comment about Arminianism; the belief that man has a free will, independent from any influence by God, in salvation is consistent with Arminian theology. Unlike the misplaced criticism against those who believe in the DoG; if I use the term Arminian, I am not supposing that an individual believes all that Jacobus Ariminus believed and taught. But, to the degree that they concur with his view on free will, they would be in agreement with him, whether they choose to wear the title of "Arminian" or not.

 

Thanks for reminding us of Reformation day, Luke.
I think it's rather sad that we can't remember such an important day without bickering. Whatever sort of Baptist you are, you are a child of the Reformation, whether you admit it or not.

In 6 years time, it will be the 500th anniversary of Luther's 95 theses. We should be planning a big celebration and some good books on the subject. Most people in Britain think the Reformation was all about Henry VIII and his divorce.

Steve

 

I believe in eternal security, so I cannot be labeled Arminian.

In all honesty, the theology of myself and my church would fit closer to Calvinism than Arminianism except for a couple of HUGE points.

John

 

Also Herald

We are not Landmark Baptists. We do believe that our heritage goes back to the New Testament church, but we do recognise the universal church (body of believers). And our communion is open to all believers, not just our local members. And we do accept believer's baptism from other denominations if it is admistered scriptually.

John