Romans Chapter 9

I've toured Greece, and there are MANY ruins of Temples to various gods. It seems that Greek philosophy would be somewhat ANTI-CHRISTIAN, though tolerative of it!

I certainly would not want to base my faith on that greek philosophy. Same with Rome by the way, been there too!

 

RC I used to attend a Calvary Chapel myself. In fact I became a Christian having attended a meeting and then going home and coming to Christ. I know many wonderful people who still attend there but unfortunately they do take a middle ground on so much stuff. I think I respect the arminians more because they at least know what they believe in. While Calvary Chapel does teach some truth, there is an awful lot they choose to dodge for reasons of not wanting to be divisive.

 

rc;

I disagree the freewill for the church came from it's creator.

Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

This is our calling and it's an invitation. not an appointment
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

Rich_UK,

I don't think CC takes a middle ground. I think they take the biblical ground. They essentially say, this is what the Bible says, beyond that is speculation. And I don't think they are seeking to avoid division. They are seeking to be biblical.

Calvinists always, and I mean always, create a false dichotomy. You assume that everyone must choose either Calvinism or Arminianism, that these are the only acceptable positions.

That would be like saying, you are either republican or democrat, tory or labor, conservative or liberal, fascist or communist. Those are the simple labels that come in handy in a fight. But in reality we know that there are a multitude of positions beyond these.

 

JohnB,

Boy, what a breath of fresh air you are. Thanks for posting here.

 

Wes,

Thanks for the encouragement.
Since I have recently moved, and am not teaching the Word regulary (for the time being) I have felt the need for an alternative outlet. This bulletin board is the best one I have found thus far on the net.

I know that most posting go in one ear and out the other, but perhaps some of what I say will stick. And perhaps it will encourage others.

 

I don't think people have to choose those 2 positions. What I mean is that I respect people more for believing something whole heartedley (let every man be convinced) , than a group who avoid teaching on certain subjects because it divides. Fair enough, a group can disagree with Calvinism or arminiansm, thats fine. But to avoid teaching on certain subjects simply because you might *lose half of your congregation* is silly. This is exactly what Calvary Chapel does at times.
Lets look at one article of their statement of faith.
We are not a denominational church, nor are we opposed to denominations as such, only their over-emphasis of doctrinal differences that have led to the division of the body of Christ

This in itself concerns me. If you have been a member of calvary chapel you might know what I'm talking about. Firstly, they have all the attributes of a denomination but masquerade as a non denominational church. Anyway, lets take calvinism and arminiansim for example and see what Pastor Chuck has to say.

Don't get polarized. Don't let the people get polarized. The minute you do, you've lost half your congregation because people are split pretty evenly on this issue. So if you take a polarized position you'll lose half of your congregation. Do you really want to lose 50% of your congregation?
You know the beautiful thing about being called Calvary Chapel? People don't know where you really stand. Put Baptist in your title, and people know where you are, and half the people will never come because it's a Baptist church. Put Presbyterian in your name, and they know where you stand, and half the people will never come because they know what the Presbyterians believe. Put Nazarene in your name, and immediately they've got you pigeon-holed. They know who you are, and they don't need to go.
But Calvary Chapel has a sort of mystique about it. 'What do these people believe?" "I don't know, but let's go find out." And the whole field is ours. You want to fish in as big a pond as you can find. When you're marketing something, you want the largest market appeal possible. So don't chop up the market and say, "Well, we're just going to fish in this little market here." Keep the market broad. Fish in the big pond. Fish where they are biting.

These are Chucks own words. To be fair, some Calvary chapels are sounder than others but having been part of one, my own personal opinion is that they panic on many issues and then avoid them, rather than deal with the fact that the some of the congregation might disagree (bearing in mind that most calvary Chapel folk have come from Baptist, pentecostal, prebsy backgrounds, where their doctrinal positions are far clearer.)

I could go on and on about what I dislike about the group(such as the way they keep the church government a closed shop...congregants have no idea where the church funds are going...elders and deacons and pastors are appointed willy nilly without the congregation even having a say. Calvary Chapel doesn't believe in congregational rule. The list is endless.
Theres
Just my 2 penneth worth.
Anyway, Welcome to the BB John, I'm glad you like it here. I'm sure you'll be a blessing to many and hopefully us to you.

 

Thanks for the followup Rich_UK. Sorry if I mischaracterized you views.

I see what you mean by the quote above. Where was it from?

However, I read their booklet on Calvinism and they do not seem ambiguous at all about their rejection of both Calvinism and Arminianism. I think that anyone should be able to read that and know that they take neither label. I also think they clearly lay out the biblical basis of salvation.

Given their clear rejection of Calvinism, I don't know why a 5 point Calvinist would want to go to a CC. Or for that matter, why a Church of Christ (Arminian) believer would want to go to a CC.

All I ask of a church statement is an affirmation of the Fundamentals(Biblical inerrancy, deity of Christ, Virgin birth, sinless life of Christ, substitutionay atonement, bodily resurrection, second coming.) And the mechanics of election are not fundamental.

 

The quote was taken from the book *Calvary Chapel Distinctives*
I appreciate your views John and respect what you believe.

 

Actually Calvinists believe there is only ONE acceptable position

Welcome to the board John

(From a Calvinist)

Dan

 

Wes... please.... JohnB's views aren't a breath of fresh air ... they are just your views....

I was an assisting pastor for CC for 7 years...
And I taught that pamphlet in their "interns" program for 5 years.... it's the most pragmatic book around... That's why Calvary Chapel's and most of the "mega" churches exist, it's pure pragmatism. Don't step on any toes and they'll walk towards you! They are purely Arminianist EXCEPT they believe in total security... this is why they say they are in the "middle"...hmmm 1 of 5 points... not to much in the middle to me... also if one is going to embrace only 1 of the tulip it should not be this one. By choosing security and choosing choice also... they contradict themselves... If you can have the free will to choose God, you have the free will to fall away... if they have this view, total security is mute... just a sign of their lack of accountability to theology..... They pride themselves as not being "into" theology anyways...

John B....
"clearly indicates that God calls on men, from Genesis to the book of maps, to choose righteousness by a volitional act of free will...believe, repent, choose this day, obey, etc."

You know by reading Luther to Erasmus that ALL these "CALLS" from God to man are in the IMPERATIVE. You implying the Pelagius was correct huh? "If man ought, man is able" You know if you believe if man has the ability to follow God's imperatives it follows that God gave the ten commandments and the other 360 commandments because man CAN follow all of them? You know the reason of the law is not to bring righteousness but to bring knowledge of sin!

 

TEACH IT BROTHER CHUCK! You have it exactly right!

You Calvinist's do not Like Calvary Chapel, and especially Chuck Smith because you do not understand the concept of UNITY OF THE BODY OF CHRIST! Chuch Smith does, and Teaches it!

 

Then you are a self proclaimed example of a wolf in sheeps clothing!

And your declaration quite simply and plainly states that man can change his mind. If man can change his mind, man can lose his faith! Clear and simple!

The pamphlet is not what is pragmatic, the teacher is!

 

If I see truth and realize that I was in error, I am humble enough to accept the truth... that's called growing....

I hope you'll grow up one day also Wes...

 

RC,

I never claimed that man could keep ALL the LAWS all the time. I understand Galatians and the tutorship of the law. As well as Romans 4. Are you saying that no one can obey any of the laws at any time? All orthodox Christians believe in degrees of punishment in Hell, right? And how could that be unless some sinned less than others?
And with Sproul's "free only to sin," how could that be unless even unbelievers are free not to sin constantly? Again, everyone will sin, but everyone does not sin all the time. All fall short, but all fall short in varying degrees.

Also, you draw the usual Calvinistic false correlation between the inability to be purely holy and the inability to repent. Total Depravity does not equal total inability.

I would be interested with your take on the story of Cornelius?

 

You, of course, presume that you are right and I am wrong! sad!

 

Wes I do like Chuck Smith, I've met him personally, he is a lovely man. I just don't agree with some of his teaching !
Wes his idea of Unity is avoiding issues so that people won't know where they stand and will flock to their meetings. It's called trickery!!

 

Man was created to give glory to God in EVERYTHING we do. Not some things but ALL things.

1 Corinthians 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
ESV 1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart . Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

Romans 3:11-12 11 no one understands; no one seeks for God. 12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good , not even one."

Unregenerate man does NOTHING BUT SIN.... He gives glory to GOD in NOTHING that he does.... EVERYTHING he does is sin... saving a baby from a burning house... sin...Jumping in front of a car to save a child and dying... sin...

Genesis 6:5 every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Matthew 7:17-18 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.

A man in sin CAN'T choose God... unless you think that "choosing God" is sin ... then he can!

 

Ah, the predictable verses. In particular, Pauls quotation of the poetic hyperbole from the Psalms.

Now, again, what about Cornelius? In particular Acts 11:14?

And of all those who expressed faith, the blind, the lame, the bleeding, the centurion of Matthew 8, the ten lepers (of which only one returned to thank Christ,) all their cries for help were sinful?

Or, they must all have been regenerated prior to calling out? They all received eternal life at or prior to, their healing? Even Nicodemus, who sought Christ, was sinning in doing so (no one seeks god?) Or, if he was already regenerate, then why would Christ need to tell him how to be saved?

The conflation of total depravity and total inability is derived purely from philosophical reasoning and not scripture. Total inability is eisigesis in it's purest form.

 

Are you implying Paul was wrong? No Man does good? No one seeks after God? Someone should of told Paul of his mistake so he could of edited it.

What were those expressions of faith for? Weren't they ALL self centered? Give ME sight, heal MY lameness, save MY dying slave, heal MY lepersy....

John 6:26-37 26 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves . 27 Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal." 28 Then they said to him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" 29 Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent." 30 So they said to him, "Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'" 32 Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." 34 They said to him, "Sir, give us this bread always." 35 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

Also John B,
I can take narratives and try to make doctrine out of them also!!

John 9:31 We know that God does not listen to sinners
Looks like unless that sinner is regenerated, his SINNERS prayer falls on deaf ears!