The Five Solas

[MB]

I'm pickin' aren't I? I was simply meaning that theology is the "study of God," sure. But he's studying men's ideas from what I can tell. Just loves the older ones too. Did you read my critique in its entirety? Older theologians have problems just inherent in their studies.

skypair

Please tread lightly on this old man.
MB

 

[skypair]

This one is for you skypair with all the love in my heart:

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." Jer 6:16

Yes, indeed -- BIBLICAL paths.

I'm sorry. I'm about "burned out" with trying to convince my Catholic friend that tradition in that church is NONSENSE! I see lesser problems with Reform theology but, like I said, similar allegorization -- similar lack of dispensationalism between church and Israel (except for Pink who I am reading now) -- similar nuancing of scripture to suit the "system."

"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."—C. H. Spurgeon

I don't see a direct connection between Calvin and Augustine -- and Paul.

I hope your verbal disrespect for some of these men, who spilt their blood so you could have a Bible in English, extends only to where you disagree with them on points of doctrine.

Like Paul says -- I don't even judge myself. What the Spirit has told me is what I preach.

Again -- Dr. Rogers called some vocabularies "God's word according to Satan's dictionary." How do you swallow Calvinism's vocabulary whole like you do? Why not use God's "dictionary" -- the BIBLE -- and find out what He really means?

skypair

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Yes, indeed -- BIBLICAL paths.

I'm sorry. I'm about "burned out" with trying to convince my Catholic friend that tradition in that church is NONSENSE! I see lesser problems with Reform theology but, like I said, similar allegorization -- similar lack of dispensationalism between church and Israel (except for Pink who I am reading now) -- similar nuancing of scripture to suit the "system."

I don't see a direct connection between Calvin and Augustine -- and Paul.

Like Paul says -- I don't even judge myself. What the Spirit has told me is what I preach.

Again -- Dr. Rogers called some vocabularies "God's word according to Satan's dictionary." How do you swallow Calvinism's vocabulary whole like you do? Why not use God's "dictionary" and find out what He really means?

skypair

Shakes the dust off computer. :type:

 

[skypair]

Not with out the reformed logical conclusion. None of the doctrines of Grace are even hinted at, in scripture. Man is not totally depraved, or disabled from believing the first time they hear the scriptures preached. unconditional election is real but this isn't what the reformers teach. They teach a particular election which makes it very conditional. the atonement is not limited to just a few particular individuals. Irresistible grace isn't in scripture at all no where does it even hint that God only wants to save some and those have no choice. There is no perseverance of the saints. Salvation is never ending and complete from the beginning if the man's surrender is genuine. Simply God doesn't need those who aren't willing. There are plenty that are and they alone have the ability to Love God willingly. If man were made to then there love would not be genuine and original. The love would not be from man.

Be careful, MB. RB might not speak to you anymore. He might be "offended" and need an apology. raying:

Those are EXCELLENT points! :applause:

skypair

 

[skypair]

Shakes the dust off computer. :type:

Very good. So now you go on to the next messageboard, eh? :laugh:

sky

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Be careful, MB. RB might not speak to you anymore. He might be "offended" and need an apology. raying:

Those are EXCELLENT points! :applause:

skypair

Because I will not respond in the kind of spirit you do, you mock me. I am starting to think of Jude...

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Very good. So now you go on to the next messageboard, eh? :laugh:

sky

Are you trying to create strife? Is there anything else you want to mock, belittle, your brother about?

 

[skypair]

You say that the Five Points are not "graceful", but they are.

TO THE ELECT, if there is such a thing as the Calvinist definition thereof, they are. To 94% of humanity -- no, they are NOT grace at all!

To say, "I am saved because I chose to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ," or to say, "There was nothing good in me to make me worth saving"?

The greater demonstration of grace is that ALL are forgiven of sin! Greater grace is that men aren't physically punished for their sin but are ONLY separated eternally and spiritually from God.

skypair

 

[ReformedBaptist]

TO THE ELECT, if there is such a thing as the Calvinist definition thereof, they are. To 94% of humanity -- no, they are NOT grace at all!

The greater demonstration of grace is that ALL are forgiven of sin! Greater grace is that men aren't physically punished for their sin but are ONLY separated eternally and spiritually from God.

skypair

WOW!!!! I did not know you abandoned the orthodox teaching on hell too. All I can say it wow. That downgrade is a slipperly slope indeed!

 

[skypair]

Someone said that the allegorical method wasn't abandoned until the 1900's ! Actually John Calvin ( 1509-1564 ) pioneered the exegetical method of biblical interpretation.

And by no means used it to the extent he should have!

skypair

 

[skypair]

Please tread lightly on this old man.
MB

Hey -- me too! 60 and can't fly Captain anymore! Talk about "the pits!!"

skypair

 

[skypair]

WOW!!!! I did not know you abandoned the orthodox teaching on hell too. All I can say it wow. That downgrade is a slipperly slope indeed!

Aw, c'mon, RB. Tell us what you really think. :laugh:

RB -- what is the "2nd death" but a resurrected body slain again so that the spirit spends eternity in the "lake of fire" spiritually?

Hey, where would I be without you as my "straight guy?" :laugh:

Look, do you admit you have bought Calvinism "hook, line, and sinker?"

skypair

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Aw, c'mon, RB. Tell us what you really think. :laugh:

RB -- what is the "2nd death" but a resurrected body slain again so that the spirit spends eternity in the "lake of fire" spiritually?

Hey, where would I be without you as my "straight guy?" :laugh:

Look, do you admit you have bought Calvinism "hook, line, and sinker?"

skypair

You surpised me skypair. But I am not going to wrangle with you, no matter how much you want to quarrel with me.

 

[TCGreek]

Hi TC,
I had a very good friend called TC once. His name was Terry Cody

The burden of proof is on anyone who makes the claim whether or not it's Calvinism.
MB

1. And that has been the case for centuries. Sometimes I wonder why we engage in Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism debates.

2. But I guess that once we keep it civil, we can learn from each other, while extending and maintain that righthand of fellowship.

3. Once I truly discovered and understood the doctrine of unconditional election, life has never been the same.

 

[skypair]

1. And that has been the case for centuries. Sometimes I wonder why we engage in Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism debates.


Those are some interesting comments, TC.

1. It would appear that you don't think sotierology matters because you also believe there is nothing we personally can do about it. But the debate rages because that is NOT what scripture tells us.

Imagine, if you will, Pharisees setting up "hoops" for people to "jump through" in order to get to heaven and those "hoops" putting the focus of faith on THEIR doctrines and not on God's (though they claimed to be every bit as scriptural as real Jews).

I'm going to pose a hypothetical for you, TC. Let's just say...

... one of the "hoops" was the need to baptize infants into the God's kingdom just like the Jews circumcised their infants into the same kingdom (that we allegorized from scripture). Next let's suppose we can actually force people into that kingdom, say in Geneva, say with "two swords" -- gov't and religion. We'd have like the "City of God" Augustine was talking about, wouldn't we? But see, just like the RCC, they only have to act like what they already are -- "elect" -- by confession of, say, the "Apostle's Creed." This assures everyone, ourselves included, of our original fellowship of baptism! And see ... we didn't DO anything of ourselves in order to enter, did we? It was "all of God" -- and of those who told us so.

2. But I guess that once we keep it civil, we can learn from each other, while extending and maintain that righthand of fellowship.

2. Fellowship in the truth has been the hallmark of MY postings. I show disfunction with my left typing hand, I turn around and offer my right hand of fellowship to those emerging from the "fire," re: 2Cor 7, Jude 1:23.

3. Once I truly discovered and understood the doctrine of unconditional election, life has never been the same.

3. Wow! The only time I had such an experience was when I received Christ! So are you saying that the "doctrines of grace" are on a par with or same as "the gospel of grace?" Let's see -- believing the "doctrines" you are informed that you are "elect." Believing the "gospel," you are commanded to repent and receive Christ for salvation. Hmmm.

skypair

 

[David Lamb]

1. And that has been the case for centuries. Sometimes I wonder why we engage in Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism debates.


Those are some interesting comments, TC.

1. It would appear that you don't think sotierology matters because you also believe there is nothing we personally can do about it. But the debate rages because that is NOT what scripture tells us.

........

3. Wow! The only time I had such an experience was when I received Christ! So are you saying that the "doctrines of grace" are on a par with or same as "the gospel of grace?" Let's see -- believing the "doctrines" you are informed that you are "elect." Believing the "gospel," you are commanded to repent and receive Christ for salvation. Hmmm.

skypair

I personally think you are reading far too much into what TC wrote.

First, you seem to believe that his words, "Sometimes I wonder why we engage in Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism debates" mean that he doesn't think soteriology, the theology of salvation, matters.

Later you make an unwarranted assumption about his words: "Once I truly discovered and understood the doctrine of unconditional election, life has never been the same," suggesting (at least to my mind) that you understand him to mean that coming to the doctrine of unconditional election was for him more important than being saved by Christ in the first place. But he didn't say that. He just said that it changed his life. He did not say that his conversion didn't change his life, or that his conversion was not far more life-changing.

Surely if we are going to have meaningful discussions, we must deal with what others actually write, not what we imagine them to mean. And if we are not sure what someone means by a particular word, phrase or sentence, it's simple enough to ask, "Did you mean ........". Certainly, you did ask a question:

"So are you saying that the "doctrines of grace" are on a par with or same as "the gospel of grace?"​

But without waiting for an answer, you then went on to make comments that assumed that the answer "Yes" had been given. Now I would agree that if anyone had actually said that they viewed their conversion as somehow less life-changing, less important, than learning about any particular doctrine, you would have been right in your remarks. But that was just not the case here.

 

[MB]

Hi TC,

1. And that has been the case for centuries. Sometimes I wonder why we engage in Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism debates.

There have been many things I've learned from the Bible it self by discussing other views. Many things I wound up learning about myself that I wasn't aware of. Most of all I've learned no one is absolutely correct about any of it.

2. But I guess that once we keep it civil, we can learn from each other, while extending and maintain that righthand of fellowship.

You're right. Our whole reason for being in discussion is to learn from each other and from God's word.

3. Once I truly discovered and understood the doctrine of unconditional election, life has never been the same.

Life for me is still changing ever since I was saved. Growing is like that. I hope I never stop growing in this life or the next.
MB

 

[David Lamb]

TO THE ELECT, if there is such a thing as the Calvinist definition thereof, they are. To 94% of humanity -- no, they are NOT grace at all!

skypair

You know more than the scriptures, then, brother, if you know that 6% of humanity is elect, and 94% is not.

 

[skypair]

I personally think you are reading far too much into what TC wrote.

First, you seem to believe that his words, "Sometimes I wonder why we engage in Calvinism vs. non-Calvinism debates" mean that he doesn't think soteriology, the theology of salvation, matters.

Isn't that what you got? Isn't that the prime and supreme issue and reason for any debate. It's one thing to disagree how we should be "sanctified" in Christ. It's another to disagree what starts us on the road to the sanctification of the Spirit -- namely, "justification" in Christ.

Later you make an unwarranted assumption about his words: "Once I truly discovered and understood the doctrine of unconditional election, life has never been the same," suggesting (at least to my mind) that you understand him to mean that coming to the doctrine of unconditional election was for him more important than being saved by Christ in the first place.

I do assume one thing -- that my life has been the same "in Christ" as it began. I did assume that he heard the "doctrines of grace" before being saved/"elect" whereupon he would have been saved and THAT, not "the doctrines of grace," would be the reason for life never being the same.

The anwer to my question should clear up the mystery though, right?

skypair

 

[skypair]

You know more than the scriptures, then, brother, if you know that 6% of humanity is elect, and 94% is not.

I "put a pencil to is last night!" :laugh: You know what I mean.

skypair