Sovereign Grace as it should be!

[Rob_BW]

Well, let's see.


The Canons of Dordt

FIRST HEAD OF DOCTRINE
Of Divine Predestination

Article 1. Romans 3:19,"that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." And verse 23:"for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." And Romans 6:23:"for the wages of sin is death."

Article 2. But in this the love of God was manifested, that he sent his only begotten Son into the world, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life. I John 4:9.John 3:16.

Article 3. Romans 10:14, 15:"How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach except they be sent?"

Article 4. The wrath of God abideth upon those who believe not this gospel.
John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Article 5. "By grace ye are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God," Ephesians 2:8."And unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him," etc. Philippians 1:29.

Article 6. "For known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world," Acts 15:18."Who worketh all things after the counsel of his will," Ephesians 1:11.

Well, you get the idea.

Now, you may say "that is just how they interpreted the scripture." But if nobody can know for sure what the bible is saying, then we are all in darkness, and the Holy Spirit has failed in His mission of guiding us into Truth. John 16:13.

View attachment 563

Lol, thief!!! Biggrin

I don't want to speculate, but I reckon we must have done some pretty evil stuff to be doomed to repeat the same arguments over and over.

 

[JonC]

Lol, thief!!! Biggrin

I don't want to speculate, but I reckon we must have done some pretty evil stuff to be doomed to repeat the same arguments over and over.

Nah....the Church has been talking about the same 66 books for a couple thousand years.

 

[TCassidy]

Jon, so are you saying God is unjust to allow unbelievers to go to hell? After all, both Sovereign Grace, and whatever you want to call the others, believe the unsaved will go to hell. Is that God's fault? If God could save them is He obligated to do so, according to your "theology?"

 

[Internet Theologian]

Theology can never become the cornerstone and the church remain the Body of Christ.

Sound doctrine IS theology and is foundational as the church is centered on truth, and The Truth.

Christ will not be second to our understanding

Oh that sounds so spiritual! To the unititiated. It's actually perfunctory and hollow without the truths of His Person:

Which Christ? Describe Him. Describe His attributes. Describe what is His True Person.

and the gospel itself will never be dependent upon our interpretations.

Then what is it dependent on if its interpretations aren't important? Care to describe this Gospel? Where did you get your descriptions? More perfunctory thought on your part.

Theology helps us understand and interpret our faith, but it does not define our faith.

More shallow thought...

 

[JonC]

Jon, so are you saying God is unjust to allow unbelievers to go to hell? After all, both Sovereign Grace, and whatever you want to call the others, believe the unsaved will go to hell. Is that God's fault? If God could save them is He obligated to do so, according to your "theology?"

No. I was speaking of the nature of theology in general being inclusive of human reasoning (and that Calvinists at Dort were influenced by Beza's double predestination).

(Again - Scripture is objective truth. The gospel is objective truth. But when we venture out and develop doctrines involving things not directly contained in Scripture - like double predestination - then those doctrines are relying heavily on human reasoning).

I do not believe that God is obligated to save anyone. But I also do not believe that those who perish are merely unintended consequences of divine election (they are not merely "passed over" as if God simply chose out of a sea of people a certain number...they are purposed and predestined as well). I believe in "double predestination" in that I believe God endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. We are all created for the purpose of magnifying God's own glory. Those who are not saved were still made for a purpose.

 

[JonC]

I said that our theology cannot become the cornerstone and the church remain the Body of Christ. You said:

Sound doctrine IS theology and is foundational as the church is centered on truth, and The Truth..

No kidding Sherlock. How long did it take you to figure that one out?

But what I said was that our theology is not the cornerstone of the church. Our understanding...sorry...my understanding does not take the place of God in my faith. The cornerstone of the Church is Christ (I know..."how shallow of me"). It is not our theologies, or even our doctrines (which may vary from church to church). That doesn't mean that theology and doctrine are not important (I've already said they were vital).

I said that Christ will not be second to our understanding. You said:

Oh that sounds so spiritual! To the unititiated. It's actually perfunctory and hollow without the truths of His Person:

Which Christ? Describe Him. Describe His attributes. Describe what is His True Person....

I don’t mean it to “sound spiritual” but it is a bit odd that you can’t grasp the truth that Christ is not dependent on our understanding of Him. God is God regardless of what you think of Him. Your reasoning and interpretations have absolutely no effect on His being. It sounds as if you are trying to usurp God with you own intellect. E.g. – “God cannot have sent Christ to die in any sense for the lost because I don’t agree with that doctrine.” How foolish a method it would be to suppose that our own theologies determine Truth.

I have already stated that Christian theology (all Christian theology) has at its core the gospel of Jesus Christ. That is not what separates or creates various beliefs.

I said that the gospel is not dependent on our interpretations. You said:

Then what is it dependent on if its interpretations aren't important? Care to describe this Gospel? Where did you get your descriptions? More perfunctory thought on your part.

As I have already stated that the gospel is central to all Christian theology, part of this is already covered. So….what is the gospel dependent on if it is not dependent on our interpretations? It is dependent on God. Our interpretations are important, but the gospel is not dependent on our interpretations.

And finally, I said that theology helps us understand and interpret our faith, but it does not define our faith. You said:

More shallow thought...

I understand it is shallow to you, but perhaps that is because your theology (your understanding, reasoning, and interpretation) does define your faith. We, apparently, differ there. The object of my faith is a bit more transcendent and much less subjective than either of our interpretations.

 

[TCassidy]

No. I was speaking of the nature of theology in general being inclusive of human reasoning

Isn't all understanding a function of human reasoning? Don't both testaments teach us that human reasoning is required, even commanded, as we study God's Self-revelation?

I do not believe that God is obligated to save anyone.

That is good to know.

But I also do not believe that those who perish are merely unintended consequences of divine election (they are not merely "passed over" as if God simply chose out of a sea of people a certain number...they are purposed and predestined as well).

So you have decided that God must predestine the lost to hell, even though we are all hell bound before God's intervention on our behalf? And who has ever suggested that anything is an "unintended consequence" beyond the knowledge of God? In what way did God intervene in the lives of the lost that destines them to hell? I thought that was caused by sin. Are you saying that God is the Author of sin and predestines sinful disobedience?

I believe in "double predestination" in that I believe God endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.

And how does that equate to double predestination? Is there some sort of "anti-grace" that God forces on the non-elect that results in their condemnation? I always thought they were "condemned already." Is that wrong?

We are all created for the purpose of magnifying God's own glory. Those who are not saved were still made for a purpose.

Yes, they were, and they do so as examples of the Justice of God. But that does not equate to double predestination, unless you see God as the author of moral evil.

 

[JonC]

Isn't all understanding a function of human reasoning? Don't both testaments teach us that human reasoning is required, even commanded, as we study God's Self-revelation?

Yes. I never said not to interpret and reason. I said that we should not lean on our own understanding but should be aware that human reasoning can be flawed. You disagree?

So you have decided that God must

No need to go further. The answer is "NO" to anything that would follow. Smile



I explained what I mean by "double predestination" in my last post. You can examine the definition there, if you'd like. If we disagree on definitions then you are more than welcome to simply interpret my statement to mean I don't believe in "double predestination" but believe what I said in that post. I don't care what term you use....I typically wouldn't use "double predestination" either.

And, like you pointed out, just believing that God decreed some to condemnation (as explained in the Canons of Dort) is not really "double predestination" anyway because that isn't a Calvinistic belief. Thumbsup

 

[Internet Theologian]

Isn't all understanding a function of human reasoning? Don't both testaments teach us that human reasoning is required, even commanded, as we study God's Self-revelation?

Exactly. What was it Jesus asked of Nicodemus? Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things? John 3:10.

IOW Nicodemus was held both spiritually and intellectually responsible. "Nicodemus, tell me about your theological understanding of salvation, revealed truth and etc".

This all reminds me of a fellow who said he didn't need theology, just Jesus. I asked him to tell me about this Jesus, and he had to use Scripture. Jonc is on the same unsustainable path. Sounds spiritual, but the thing is there can be no sound belief without theology, and all beliefs must come from the Word.

What I am gathering from this thread is this:

Sovereign Grace theology is amiss, in error, and held in contempt. Those who adhere to it are foolish, asinine, gnostic and cult-like. And more. I'm just going by the applied implications given in this thread toward those in this camp.

Jonc's study, and input, and theological understanding is to be taken seriously while he reduces others theological understandings all the while telling of his understandings. Other theological disciplines are to be dismissed. But we're arrogant and cultic. Hmmmmm.

 

[TCassidy]

I said that our theology cannot become the cornerstone and the church remain the Body of Christ.

Who has claimed our theology is the cornerstone of the church?

But what I said was that our theology is not the cornerstone of the church.

Yes, we all know that. Is this a smoke screen?

The cornerstone of the Church is Christ (I know..."how shallow of me").

As we all know that, I suspect it is more a divergence than merely a shallow statement. Although my 7 year old grandson, when asked "Can you tell me what the cornerstone of the church is" he immediately quoted Acts 4:11 in his 7 year old manner.

It is not our theologies, or even our doctrines (which may vary from church to church).

Again, we all know that.

I said that Christ will not be second to our understanding.

Who has claimed He is?

I don’t mean it to “sound spiritual” but it is a bit odd that you can’t grasp the truth that Christ is not dependent on our understanding of Him.

Why do you say he can't grasp it? Has he ever claimed that Christ is dependent on our understanding of Him?

God is God regardless of what you think of Him.

I think we all know that. Has anyone claimed otherwise?

Your reasoning and interpretations have absolutely no effect on His being.

Again, who has claimed otherwise?

“God cannot have sent Christ to die in any sense for the lost because I don’t agree with that doctrine.”

So God could not elect whom He chooses because it disagrees with your doctrine?

Oh, and every one of the Sovereign Grace people in this thread believe Christ died, in some sense, for all, but specifically to atone only for believers. So I just have to ask, Who has claimed otherwise?

 

[TCassidy]

I said that we should not lean on our own understanding but should be aware that human reasoning can be flawed.

And we all know and agree to that. I am beginning to suspect this is just a straw man erected to avoid the real issue. "Do our disagreements have a basis in truth or only in our own minds?"

And if only in our own minds, does that mean salvation by grace through faith is also untenable? In fact doesn't that mean all the Baptist Distinctives are wrong and we are being hateful, unloving, and schismatics by believing them? If all of our beliefs are just figments of our own fevered imaginations shouldn't we either just go back to Rome, or throw the whole thing in the garbage and live for self, and pleasure, and profit?

And, like you pointed out, just believing that God decreed some to condemnation (as explained in the Canons of Dort) is not really "double predestination" anyway because that isn't a Calvinistic belief.

No, it is not "double predestination" because those in hell were not predestined, individually, to hell, but were already lost in trespass and sin and condemned already. God decreed that those people, collectively, would suffer the consequences of their sin.

And it is not because it isn't Calvinistic belief, Calvinistic belief is what it is because double predestination is not taught anywhere in the scriptures.

 

[TCassidy]

I am sorry, Jon, but your arguments are starting to appear as mere sophistry. I can't help but think you are fighting a battle with yourself. An internal battle. Your basic honest nature is rebelling against the last vestiges of the Arminianism that still lurks in the old man.

I love you with the love of Christ, and as a brother in the faith, but this is going nowhere. It has degenerated into straw man arguments, sophistry, and even a touch of solipsism.

My MS is in relapse and I really don't have the energy, or the interest, to continue banging my head against the wall.

Please feel free to continue without me.

Good night and God bless.

 

[JonC]

Who has claimed our theology is the cornerstone of the church?

I never said that anyone did say “theology is the cornerstone”. I do not have to wait on someone to express a statement before I offer mine (I know…I know….”who ever said you had to wait…”). My point is that when we hold the gospel as dependent on our interpretation that is exactly what we are doing (and IT said that on post #127).

Yes, we all know that. Is this a smoke screen?

No smokescreen at all. I said that the gospel itself will never be dependent upon our interpretation. IT wondered what, then, if not our interpretation is the gospel itself dependent upon? Do you have the same objection (do you …. and I’m asking so you don’t need to ask when you said it….or I wouldn’t be asking….do you believe that the gospel itself is dependent on our interpretation?

As we all know that, I suspect it is more a divergence than merely a shallow statement. Although my 7 year old grandson, when asked "Can you tell me what the cornerstone of the church is" he immediately quoted Acts 4:11 in his 7 year old manner

You assume too much

Why do you say he can't grasp it? Has he ever claimed that Christ is dependent on our understanding of Him?

Because I believe that he cannot grasp it.

So God could not elect whom He chooses because it disagrees with your doctrine?
Oh, and every one of the Sovereign Grace people in this thread believe Christ died, in some sense, for all, but specifically to atone only for believers. So I just have to ask, Who has claimed otherwise?

I meant the “e.g.” to stand for exempli gratia. My hope was that people would understand that what followed was an example. Had I used i.e. (id est) then I could see your objection. But even if you missed that, I concluded that I was speaking of methods and not specific doctrinal claims….(towards the end of the sentence).

 

[JonC]

I am sorry, Jon, but your arguments are starting to appear as mere sophistry. I can't help but think you are fighting a battle with yourself. An internal battle. Your basic honest nature is rebelling against the last vestiges of the Arminianism that still lurks in the old man.

I love you with the love of Christ, and as a brother in the faith, but this is going nowhere. It has degenerated into straw man arguments, sophistry, and even a touch of solipsism.

My MS is in relapse and I really don't have the energy, or the interest, to continue banging my head against the wall.

Please feel free to continue without me.

Good night and God bless.

Sure, and good night. For summary -

My argument here is that our theologies are never completely objective as there is the human element in our understanding.

Christians who disagree with our theology are not necessarily confused or lack understanding. Believers can develop theologies and disagree while fully understanding other their own and other positions.

Christian theology has in common the gospel message. The Word of God is True and is objective truth. Our interpretations of that Truth have a potential of misunderstanding or error.

Scripture does not explain to our satisfaction every theological point that exists in our theologies. We fill in the blanks and need to know what is Scripture and what is interpretation.

My belief that I cannot rely on my own understanding does not represent an "internal struggle" as that realization is not a struggle at all simply because I don't rely on my own understanding but on the gospel of Christ. The gospel is clear. Christ is what I need to know, not whether or not God predestined those who perish to Hell or if the Church will be raptured before the tribulation.

And it is the same gospel....exactly the same gospel....in Spurgeon and Moody...in Whitfield and Wesley. Their theologies taught different things about that gospel, but the gospel itself remained Christ.

It is both disappointing and informative how much a minority position this seems to be on this forum.Frown

 

[Internet Theologian]

jon, you've offered ad hominem to ad nauseum.

We get it, you're brilliant, all others are foolish cultists unless they 'believe' as you do, or admit they are in abject error according to you.

I have to agree with TC on his assessment. There is an internal struggle and your postings and arguments give it away. If any person in this thread is leaning on his own understanding, it is you, as all others are dismissed in their beliefs, even soundly shown beliefs, and ridiculed, held in contempt, unable to grasp what you say (are intellectually inferior to you) with several more ad hominem insinuations.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I am sorry, Jon, but your arguments are starting to appear as mere sophistry. I can't help but think you are fighting a battle with yourself. An internal battle. Your basic honest nature is rebelling against the last vestiges of the Arminianism that still lurks in the old man.

I love you with the love of Christ, and as a brother in the faith, but this is going nowhere. It has degenerated into straw man arguments, sophistry, and even a touch of solipsism.

My MS is in relapse and I really don't have the energy, or the interest, to continue banging my head against the wall.

Please feel free to continue without me.

Good night and God bless.

And another is seeing what others have already seen.

 

[JonC]

jon, you've offered ad hominem to ad nauseum.

We get it, you're brilliant, all others are foolish cultists unless they 'believe' as you do, or admit they are in abject error according to you.

I have to agree with TC on his assessment. There is an internal struggle and your postings and arguments give it away. If any person in this thread is leaning on his own understanding, it is you, as all others are dismissed in their beliefs, even soundly shown beliefs, and ridiculed, held in contempt, unable to grasp what you say (are intellectually inferior to you) with several more ad hominem insinuations.

No, brother, you don't seem to "get it" at all. My last post is exactly what I have been saying on this thread. You are free, of course, to disagree and we could discuss those disagreements. But you have chosen not to engage what I've been saying, and instead to invent some "anti-Calvinistic agenda". Other than making a lot of noise and unsubstantiated claims, I cannot see where you've actually addressed my understanding of the role differing systematic theologies play with understanding Scripture.

My conclusion has been that no theology is objective truth. I stand by that claim.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning

Sometime after 1am Pacific this thread will be closed.

 

[tyndale1946]

Six Hour Warning

Sometime after 1am Pacific this thread will be closed.

Before you close this thread Squire let me sum of the whole discussion with scripture... Brother Glen

Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Considering the closing time is 1am Pacific, you probably have until 9am Pacific/12 noon Eastern. The matter isn't of such gravity as to cause me to stay up 'til the wee hours of the morning.

Before you close this thread Squire let me sum of the whole discussion with scripture... Brother Glen

Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.