-
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!
Spurgeon anyone?
- Thread starter Iconoclast
- Start date
preacher4truth
Active Member
Years in a church prove nothing of wisdom or knowledge. Some have been in church 40-60 years and have only 1 year experience 40 or 60 times in a row. Take a look around in churches for a week and you'll discover this to be true. Also, respect? It is earned, not a given, and is not given solely due to ones age.
Oh, and by the way, I have actually done this in a SS setting and they've done exactly as I have described; they rush to man and his choosing and run away from the fact it is God who chose us, and say things like you have such as "monster" or employ other the scapegoat statements as pejoratives to truth. So Spurgeon is telling us we should be real leary of those who rush to exalt man, and I am and will remain leary of anyones theology that puts man on a pedestal. Funny how non-cals are quick to paint man as a saint, good, righteous, seeking, among other fallacies within their theology, against the Biblical Gods-view indictment (in non-cal theologies) and subsequently desire to paint God as a monster in calvinist theology because we seek to have Him expressed in all His glorious Sovereignty and in total control as He is in the Scriptures. How interesting that non-cals tend to do this.
No man can "make" God into anything, so that right there is your falsehood. He is who He is, and if you want to call Him a monster in that aspect that's on you. Part of the problem here lies within the fact you're turning a blinded eye to the truth of Sovereignty, and to the truths Spurgeon pronounced upon a theological camp. He's dead on in what he's said.
I would invite you and any of your SS teachers along for a debate anytime. That you very rarely have anything to add as theological insight, biblical passages or Scriptural insight, of any kind tells me what I would be up against in the debate.
Last edited by a moderator:
Robert Snow
New Member
Years in a church prove nothing of wisdom or knowledge. Some have been in church 40-60 years and have only 1 year experience 40 or 60 times in a row. Take a look around in churches for a week and you'll discover this to be true. Also, respect? It is earned, not a given, and is not given solely due to ones age.
Oh, and by the way, I have actually done this in a SS setting and they've done exactly as I have described; they rush to man and his choosing and run away from the fact it is God who chose us, and say things like you have such as "monster" or employ other the scapegoat statements as pejoratives to truth. So Spurgeon is telling us we should be real leary of those who rush to exalt man, and I am and will remain leary of anyones theology that puts man on a pedestal. Funny how non-cals are quick to paint man as a saint, good, righteous, seeking, among other fallacies within their theology, against the Biblical Gods-view indictment (in non-cal theologies) and subsequently desire to paint God as a monster in calvinist theology because we seek to have Him expressed in all His glorious Sovereignty and in total control as He is in the Scriptures. How interesting that non-cals tend to do this.
No man can "make" God into anything, so that right there is your falsehood. He is who He is, and if you want to call Him a monster in that aspect that's on you. Part of the problem here lies within the fact you're turning a blinded eye to the truth of Sovereignty, and to the truths Spurgeon pronounced upon a theological camp. He's dead on in what he's said.
I would invite you and any of your SS teachers along for a debate anytime. That you very rarely have anything to add as theological insight, biblical passages or Scriptural insight, of any kind tells me what I would be up against in the debate.
If you could ever learn to stop lying about others, you would be doing well. You do this on a regular basis by attempting to put words in people's mouths that they never said. Problem is, you know this, yet you continue to spread the same lies, knowing they are lies! This is despicable!
I said:
I never said God was a monster. Look at what I said, if you will. I said that bible believers don't believe these types of things. Can't you read and comprehend English?
As long as you view God and scripture through the false lens of Calvinism, you will continue to have no idea what God's plan of redemption is actually all about. By attempting to give God sovereignty, you actually rob Him of much of His greatness. It's too bad you will probably never see it.
Ka-Boom......:laugh:
preacher4truth
Active Member
You brought up the term "monster" as you typically do because you can't stand to see the truth of Sovereignty and must attempt to erase it with a derogatory term? Doing thse things shows you've already lost the battle.
Yes I know Bob, the non-cals can call us liars with no repercussions. They can also state that we aren't Bible believers with no problems for doing so. Congrats! :thumbsup:
Your view of Scriptures and of God is an unbiblical stance as Spurgeon and others have cearly show, and that you won't address. Spurgeon and Bible clearly line out the ones who have robbed God of His greatness, and it's not the Calvinists. Go read it again and do some deep contemplating upon the exaltation of man seen within the theologies which he addresses.
You've failed to answer what Spurgeon has said and have instead resorted to personal attacks. With that the debate is over and you've lost. My indictment on you stands, you've offered nothing Biblical or theological, only pejoratives, which further proves my case that years in church can mean nothing.
:wavey:
Last edited by a moderator:
psalms109:31
Active Member
IT IS DIFFICULT to make men understand that the salvation of the gospel is not by works but entirely by grace, that it is not presented to men as the reward of their own endeavors, but is given to them freely upon their accepting it by an act of simple faith or trust in Jesus Christ. However plainly we may preach this truth, there will always be some who will misunderstand us, and as many more who will raise objections against it, as if it were their part to give an opinion, and not to do as they are bidden by the Lord. But when men are brought under the teaching of the word, to see that the pardon of their sins, and the acceptance of their souls does not lie with any merit of their own, or any doings of their own, another difficulty generally presents itself: they say, "What is this faith of which you speak?" and when we assure them that it is a simple trust or confidence in the finished work of Christ, then straightway they say, "How can we get this faith? How can we obtain this confidence?" To us, who have faith, this question is very easy to answer, for when we heard the gladsome news of a finished salvation for lost sinners, complete forgiveness for the guilty, and acceptance for the ungodly, simply upon believing in Jesus we came to Jesus, and we trusted in him, and we continue still to trust, and we have joy and peace through believing...But, it is not needful for the feeding, of the hungry that we should on every occasion go into all those details, although we hold very sound views upon them. And when you are dealing with an anxious person, it will suffice to say to him, "Faith cometh by hearing;" further information can be supplied under happier circumstances.
What is most important to Spurgeon in the sermon posted last?
When is a much happier circumstances for some one to be forced down some food that they don't see eye to eye with you on?
What is most important to Spurgeon in the sermon posted last?
When is a much happier circumstances for some one to be forced down some food that they don't see eye to eye with you on?
Last edited by a moderator:
Right there, you never said a truer word :thumbs:
Regarding Total Depravity and Irresistible Grace: "CHS"
When you say, "Can God make me become a Christian?" I tell you yes, for herein rests the power of the gospel. It does not ask your consent; but it gets it. It does not say, "Will you have it?" but it makes you willing in the day of God's power....The gospel wants not your consent, it gets it. It knocks the enmity out of your heart. You say, I do not want to be saved; Christ says you shall be. He makes our will turn round, and then you cry,"'Lord save, or I perish!"
Last edited by a moderator:
psalms109:31
Active Member
" IT IS DIFFICULT to make men understand that the salvation of the gospel is not by works but entirely by grace, that it is not presented to men as the reward of their own endeavors, but is given to them freely upon their accepting it by an act of simple faith or trust in Jesus Christ. However plainly we may preach this truth, there will always be some who will misunderstand us, and as many more who will raise objections against it, as if it were their part to give an opinion, and not to do as they are bidden by the Lord. But when men are brought under the teaching of the word, to see that the pardon of their sins, and the acceptance of their souls does not lie with any merit of their own, or any doings of their own, another difficulty generally presents itself: they say, "What is this faith of which you speak?" and when we assure them that it is a simple trust or confidence in the finished work of Christ"
It doesn't get rid of man's responsibility nor it being trust in the finished work of Christ not what we did.
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting.. I've never met an Arminian who ever considered Spurgeon to be anything BUT a Calvinist.. I'm sure there might be some out there but the above is the same childish statements based in ignorance as have typically been tossed around in here.
However, I have many times met and spoke with Calvinists who knew that Martin Luther was Reformed but not a 5 pointer. They DO find it shocking, and then it gets more interesting when you bring up the fact that quite a few Reformed fathers were not 5 pointers (not holding to the "L" of the T.U.L.I.P.)
Last edited by a moderator:
By todays standards, they would not be considered totally Reformed...certainly not Calvinists. I believe that could even bar them from holding positions like Elder & Deacon in the church.
Kinda hard to do when you have little to no biblical support to make such a statement. We KNOW this because there is a complete divide on the issue as to the soterological views we claim to see. We see the same passages in different light. We have people (great and small) from both sides leaving and crossing over to the other. Thus it is not one-sided as you imagine.
I haven't and have never met a pastor or SS teacher yet who did either. Granted I have never (nor have you) been in every SS teachers class as they teach what scripture states these speak to/of. I know a great many non-cal, and even Arminian pastors who have NO issue with teaching these.. It is the fanciful imaginings of people like who try to proclaim such silly musing. It 'might' be that you have been in a place or two where it was passed over but that fact could very well be that it was not the topic of discussion currently or they didn't feel it was necessary to address. Neither instances mean they were afraid to address it. Though I do allow for that to be such a case as well as some do not understand it very well.. my point is that it could easily one of many issues.
Actually there is no disdain whatsoever for 'biblical' aspects thereof.. there is some contention against how many reformed see these aspects in what is understood as a lopsided view of the above.
Point of fact.. even Calvinists/Reformed our wills are free
preacher4truth
Active Member
Interesting here too, as I've never met a non-cal or Arminian that was aware that Spurgeon was a Calvinist.
preacher4truth
Active Member
Not hard whatesoever when all of Scripture supports this. So your "no biblical support" is an extreme misomer and is unfounded.
Then you haven't met many SS teachers. There is no fanciful imaginings except in your own world an mind. I've been in way more that a "place or two", having held many revivals and attending may SS settings, but I've enjoyed your know everything about me assumptions that remain false and unfounded. Wow, if only your assumptions and allegations with no support whatsoever were true, (other than fantasies of your own mind) it might sound like what you are saying is true. :thumbsup:
Actually there is no disdain whatsoever for 'biblical' aspects thereof.. there is some contention against how many reformed see these aspects in what is understood as a lopsided view of the above.
Point of fact.. even Calvinists/Reformed our wills are free
There actually is disdain for these truths. It is seen on here and in the real world. You should get out of your county and experience this some day. Point of fact, Calvinists don't all agree on freedom of the will including this one. :thumbsup:
Robert Snow,
:laugh::laugh:
Glad to see you get a bit excited enough to attempt a response more than two sentences:thumbs: I guess it took a few posts by P4T to get under your skin to bring out your response.
Now if you understood the position clearer you would not make such false caricatures of it...but might actually engage in scriptural discussion.
You feel you have truth.....but many of us are not convinced you have enough understanding of what we see as the biblical position.
No one here that I have read "makes God into a monster"..or the old faithful straw man....the puppet master.
Robert .....take a deep breath and give a biblical response that would demonstrate any part of .....lets say....the 1689 conf. of faith incorrect on how it describes, election, decree, salvation, the fall.....you pick anyone you want...and show us why you believe it is in error. I would like to see how you come to your "ideas".:thumbsup:
Nope.. we KNOW this because it has NEVER been received or shown to be true. It is only true to the group who wishes to believe it. It is the same for the Arminians.Not hard whatesoever when all of Scripture supports this. So your "no biblical support" is an extreme misomer and is unfounded.
I'm sure you are well aware that revivals YOU hold in no way correspond to what the SS teaches. If YOU were afraid to touch the issue when you were preaching revivals.. that is a different issue. The fact you have attended many SS, is good but it in NO way allows you the position or to authoritatively state by any means your sweeping all inclusive blanket statement of " I love how they skip over certain texts and don't dive into them. Try stopping one in SS to explain the word elect, or chosen, or predestined, and they'll balk, and want to get to the man choosing part immediately.".. of which you preface from the line prior regarding 'Non-Cals' as whole. You haven't been in all (as I stated you nor I have) SS, you haven't even been in 5% of them. Your statement is purely opinion and since it isn't based on facts but assumption based on your limited interactions.
Thus my point is accurate, firmly founded and true regarding you and your assumption or imaginings regarding Non-Cals as well as what non-cal SS teacher will teach, skip over, or address or not.
You truly need to get better at debating. I attacked your statements which were made as a blanket statement (first mistake) regarding Non-Cals and based upon your personal encounters of a FEW churches, in relation to all Non-Cal churches, and attempted to paint them all in like manner (2nd mistake. And in attacking your misguided statements should your statements to be 'silly musings' and 'fanciful imaginings'.
You however don't deal with the substance of what I stated but attack the person..a typical response of evasion when the truth can't be avoided.
In relations to believers - Your statement regarded disdain not for the words themselves but the Reformed view of what those words entailed. I stated, that it was not at the words themselves whereby disdain comes, but disdain comes in relation to the Reformed view of what those words entail.
It is in this, where you can find the disdain you mention both here in the BB and abroad.
[personal attack/language snipped]
This has nothing to do with the subject.. though it is true.
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting.
My family and I attended an IFB church a few years back. The pastor (an older gentleman) was fond of quote Surgeon. I recall him saying from the pulpit that whether or not one held to the doctrine of predestination was not a test of fellowship. There was room in his Church for both points of view and that predestination was not foriegn to Baptist doctrine and history. (my paraphrase)
Perseverance of the Saints was not debatable in that Church yet ironically many of his members were saved and rebaptised two or three times in their lives because "you have to know that you know."
I am pretty sure he had Calvinistic leanings but being a good IFB pastor he worked those alter calls as good as any old time revivalist I ever saw. That is not a criticism, just an observation.
preacher4truth
Active Member
Simmer down, OK? And perhaps stop making my statement into an all sweeping blanket statement? That's all on you and nothing about my statement implied it as all-encompassing and exhaustive research. No need to throw in the strawman. My authority is based upon what I've seen and also what many pastors I know have also discussed with me. I find it humorous you make pretense as some authority on me as if you know me and what I do. You don't on either count.
BTW, I have sat in SS during revivals and have said to SS teachers what I've stated, on several occasions. They balk, stutter, skip, and get to the man choosing part immediately, like I've stated. So actually YOUR statement is the one based upon assumption, I'm merely sharing my true experiences. So, one more time, you're wrong, the revivals I've held actually did correspond to what the SS taught, as I've sat in many.
Not quite, you're merely opinionated and thus your point is inaccurate and based upon your own false assumptions (above) and continues to unravel as we continue here, pay attention. :wavey:
I've not even come close to attacking you. I attacked your unfounded and opinionated fallacy that you know how many churches I've been in. No need to call that a personal attack. OK?
Anyhow, everything above in your latter response is utterly false. :laugh:
You make false assumptions about my experience, that you knew nothing concerning, telling me how many SS settings I've been in, then I address it and you call it attacking the person? Please.
Everything you've stated is base upon your assumptions, and it all crumbles after that, thus you resort to name-calling. But hey, I appreciate the name-calling and it rather leaves you as the one wearing those shoes you claim I wear, and shows you as the one losing a debate.
Next time know who and what you are talking about and leave out the know everything attitude as if you know all about others, namely me? No? Yes?
Last edited by a moderator:
I didn't make it into that.. it was your statement that is worded as such.
You 'might' not have meant your statement to be all encompassing but that is just what you wrote. You addressed the group (non-cals) in general/the whole.. that was all you.. no strawman at all. You didn't specify a group, or some, or those I know. It is simply a matter of owning up to what you said.
Second, I know your 'authority' for making a statement is based only what you have seen, and I made the same such statement.. thus your blanket statement is false, a musing, and imaginary in extent NOT your experience. My statements regarding you are exact even though I don't know you. Additionally I don't make any pretense toward you.. I made the statement from YOUR OWN pretense.
You messed up in your statement, simply fess up and move on.
Exactly what part of my statements of "You haven't been in all (as I stated you nor I have) SS, you haven't even been in 5% of them. Your statement is purely opinion and since it isn't based on facts but assumption based on your limited interactions" did you not grasp. Your statement was not about a certain group or some, but a sweeping or blanket statement which includes even those you haven't met. Thus the extent of your comment is outside the bounds of your experience and thus imaginary and fanciful. THAT is my point.
Apparently facts are being lost on you. So it might behoove YOU to pay attention admit your mistake and move on. Here.. let me help you.. Here is your post again:
Yep.. pretty clear.
Hmmm.. shall we do it again? Yes.. why not! :wavey: From your post #33 in this thread:
Thus far I have proven you to be untruthful in your statement. Just admit you are wrong and move on.
Please share with us where I made any such assumption. My statement about you being in 1 or 2 is in relation to the whole of Non-cal churches/SS and I even qualify this. I did not speak against nor belittle your experience but acknowledged and maintained my statement (as shown above) that your post referenced not those in your experience but as a blanket statement of the whole group. Do you see the difference?
,
Again, please show where I stated how many SS classes you have been in. My exact statement was "Granted I have never (nor have you) been in every SS teachers class...", and you feel this boxed you into a certain number, why exactly?
See, you're not reading very well.. Try again. You didn't address 'it' but in fact DID give out 6 personal attacks and lots of rhetoric.
As shown above, everything I stated was based upon fact, and thus I stated that you using such blanket statements was silly musing and fanciful imaginings. The evidence shows it to be so.
Next time read what the arguments are, and go back and reread your post and you wont look so silly - Yes? No?
NOW - since this thread has been completely derailed, my apologies. I will not continue to proceed with this. May the thread have new life and enjoyable posts
