The scriptural and contextual reading of Lydia's heart

[Van]

Is that what you call scripture truth ?

I am not a fan of empty posts. If you have nothing to say, do not say it.

 

[Van]

To be honest God does hide or withhold truth from some, and gives it to others Mk 4:10-12

10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.

11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

Matt 13:11

He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

I am reminded of the Publican and Pharisee. Gnostic notions are just that, i.e. nonsense to support nonsense.

 

[Brightfame52]

I am reminded of the Publican and Pharisee. Gnostic notions are just that, i.e. nonsense to support nonsense.

So God witholds vital christian knowledge from some, and reveals it to others, as He sees fit.

 

[Silverhair]

I'm always learning about Calvinism, as well as the other schools of thought as well. All I know is that there is one end of Calvinism that is so deterministic that I find it odious too. And at the other end, when I read Bonar, Spurgeon, Ryle or Martyn Lloyd-Jones I find I agree, as far as I know with everything I have ever read by them.

When you say "trust what the Bible says" I agree but what I have found is my problem is that I wonder sometimes if I'm getting it right as to what the Bible says or specifically, what does that passage mean. So, you have pastors, and teachers and your own commentaries and I make use of them. And I have found the Calvinistic confessions, and the writers mentioned above most helpful. But yeah, they could be wrong sometimes and so could I. Actually I'm sure that's the case, just look at some of the contradictory explanations given for certain passages among them.

Martyn Lloyd-Jones said that Calvinism without a dose of Methodism doesn't work well. He also thought highly of Richard Baxter, who had a different view of the atonement at one point and of justification and yet is viewed by many Calvinists from the Puritan era to today as one of the greatest pastoral teachers of all time. Don't get lost in a "party" spirit.

The main thing I would recommend is that you look as much at the preaching of the great Calvinists as the philosophical arguments. When Jonathan Edwards told people in a sermon that Christ has died and everything is prepared and is waiting for you to come to Christ - do you really think he forgot everything else he ever wrote? That he isn't allowed to say that if he's a Calvinist?

Dave what I am saying is that I think labels are a bad idea. That is why I just say I trust the bible. I can agree with what some of the Calvinst writers have said and still not agree with their overall theology. I have even agreed with Austin on occasion as strange as that sounds.

What I have found with those Calvinist writers I have read is that when they stick to the bible they are good. But when they drift of into the Calvinist philosophy they are very bad. For me it seems that many that hold to the Calvinist view are just confused as it seems they want to walk on both sides of the street at the same time. For example DoG/TULIP and free will do not comport and yet I am told all the time they do because I just do not understand Calvinism. The problem is that Calvinist's do not understand Calvinism or they just ignore what it says. The way some Calvinists come across you would think they were the only people that could read.

Dave I am not questioning the intelligence or integrity of many of your Calvinist writers, what I am saying is that they let the Calvinist philosophy overrule the text of scripture at times.

Perhaps you should look at some non Calvinist writers to get a different perspective. Daniel Whedon, Adam Clarke, John Wesley are some of the commentaries I have.

 

[DaveXR650]

Perhaps you should look at some non Calvinist writers to get a different perspective. Daniel Whedon, Adam Clarke, John Wesley are some of the commentaries I have.

I do. I have read a lot of Baxter and Wesley and have read Thomas Grantham. I am reading Leroy Forlines right now. I am Calvinist because I stumbled upon the Puritan's and Jerry Bridges who had basically paraphrased Owen and they were of great help to me. If you have been helped by non-Calvinists more and that is your background, and you haven't been convinced of the validity of Calvinism I see no reason for you to embrace Calvinism. One thing I do not do is doubt the salvation of the non-Calvinists. Some do, and it goes in both directions. I'm not being opened minded, I just really don't think these issues are of first tier importance.

Regarding this thread, I just listened to Martyn Lloyd-Jones sermon #5738 How the Gospel Came to Europe, which is about the events leading up to Paul meeting Lydia. It is worth listening to.

 

[Silverhair]

I do. I have read a lot of Baxter and Wesley and have read Thomas Grantham. I am reading Leroy Forlines right now. I am Calvinist because I stumbled upon the Puritan's and Jerry Bridges who had basically paraphrased Owen and they were of great help to me. If you have been helped by non-Calvinists more and that is your background, and you haven't been convinced of the validity of Calvinism I see no reason for you to embrace Calvinism. One thing I do not do is doubt the salvation of the non-Calvinists. Some do, and it goes in both directions. I'm not being opened minded, I just really don't think these issues are of first tier importance.

Regarding this thread, I just listened to Martyn Lloyd-Jones sermon #5738 How the Gospel Came to Europe, which is about the events leading up to Paul meeting Lydia. It is worth listening to.

I think it is foolish for some man to think he can judge the salvation of another, that is way above our pay grade. Do you have a link to that sermon, Martyn Lloyd-Jones sermon #5738.

I have Frolines Classical Arminianism and John Lennox 's book Determined to Believe that I plan to read when I get a chance.

Since I had not even heard of the A vs C fight until about 10 years ago I can only say my theology came from reading the bible. What I have found over the last few years is that Calvinism just seems to have to many contradictions in it. But I should imagine that we will find that we all had some points wrong when we get to heaven.

 

[DaveXR650]

Do you have a link to that sermon, Martyn Lloyd-Jones sermon #5738.

How the Gospel Came to Europe - a sermon from Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones

What I was saying about applying the theology is illustrated by the story of Lydia. The guys on here that devote most of their time to the study of the doctrines of grace and how to argue them tended to view Lydia, like the Calvinistic theology would suggest: As a God hating, spiritually blind, totally bent on evil individual just like everyone else until she would be regenerated, which would occur like the flipping on of an electrical switch. And they assumed that "the Lord opened her heart" then just had to mean regeneration or nothing.

The free will people tended to try to play down or even eliminate the fact that the phrase "opened her heart" is there and must mean something more than being exposed to new information. They refused to allow for any type of a supernatural intervention. The beauty of Martyn Lloyd-Jones's sermon is that he honors and rejoices in God's sovereignty in arranging the whole event of Lydia's conversion and at the end he takes the Calvinistic position about God opening her heart, without going to the excesses that some on here do. He correctly applies his Calvinistic understanding of the scripture passage. And that's why I say you can't really understand Calvinism until you have observed how the great preachers and teachers handled it rather than relying on those who primarily are wanting to debate.

 

[Silverhair]

How the Gospel Came to Europe - a sermon from Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones

What I was saying about applying the theology is illustrated by the story of Lydia. The guys on here that devote most of their time to the study of the doctrines of grace and how to argue them tended to view Lydia, like the Calvinistic theology would suggest: As a God hating, spiritually blind, totally bent on evil individual just like everyone else until she would be regenerated, which would occur like the flipping on of an electrical switch. And they assumed that "the Lord opened her heart" then just had to mean regeneration or nothing.

The free will people tended to try to play down or even eliminate the fact that the phrase "opened her heart" is there and must mean something more than being exposed to new information. They refused to allow for any type of a supernatural intervention. The beauty of Martyn Lloyd-Jones's sermon is that he honors and rejoices in God's sovereignty in arranging the whole event of Lydia's conversion and at the end he takes the Calvinistic position about God opening her heart, without going to the excesses that some on here do. He correctly applies his Calvinistic understanding of the scripture passage. And that's why I say you can't really understand Calvinism until you have observed how the great preachers and teachers handled it rather than relying on those who primarily are wanting to debate.

Dave what you call opening her heart I would call the conviction of the Holy Spirit. God is working to draw all people to Himself but man has to make the choice to accept or reject the invitation. When I hear or read the Calvinist version it always comes down to God having to make the choice for the person which does not fit with the text of the bible.

I have said this before but it bears repeating, God is actively working in and through His creation, our conscience, His bride, His Holy Spirit filled followers, and His Word to aid humanity in their conversion. Man can not save himself and God will not force someone to be saved.

God is sovereign and it seems some people really do not want to allow Him to be so, they want to impose their version of salvation rather than what the bible says.

Augustine defended mans free will until he had to defend against Pelagius. If Augustine had just stood his ground he would have defeated Pelagius but instead he ran back to his pagan roots and in that he brought pagan philosophy into the church and we are dealing with the result to this day.

Thank you for the link I will listen to what MLJ has to say.

 

[Silverhair]

Dave I listened to MLJ, interesting talk. It did make me think though and here is what came to mind.

In Calvinism’s TULIP, the T stands for total depravity/inability which says that men are so fallen, so wicked, so depraved that they cannot do, think, or want anything good, nor can they want or seek God, until and unless they were elected and God regenerates them first. But this unregenerated unbeliever, Lydia, was worshiping God all on her own, before God “opened her heart.” We also see this with Cornelius. Acts of the Apostles 10:1-2 How was this possible?

How could they seek and worship God as the bible says they did if, according to Calvinism, they were unable to do. Were they worshiping a false God? Not according to scripture. On the other side if they were worshiping the God of the bible then they did not need to be regenerated so they could believe as Calvinism teaches.

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than:
11 am GMT 7 am EDT 4 am PDT

 

[AVL1984]

Thats already understood. And sometimes ones interpretation is according to revealed truth from the scripture.Prov 1:5-7

5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:

6 To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.

7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Please, don't try to flatter yourself...it's not becoming of you.

 

[DaveXR650]

How could they seek and worship God as the bible says they did if, according to Calvinism, they were unable to do. Were they worshiping a false God? Not according to scripture. On the other side if they were worshiping the God of the bible then they did not need to be regenerated so they could believe as Calvinism teaches.

To be completely honest with you, I don't know. Like I said earlier, I was drawn to Calvinism by the benefits I got from Puritan preaching and teaching. I started going to a moderately Calvinist church because they taught a more rigorous living of the Christian life than the "go forward and then do whatever" churches I was used to. Personally, as a theological system I think it has some weak points and that is one of them. I don't think God is up there passively waiting to see who "decides" for Christ, but I don't think there are millions walking around who have no possibility of being saved because Christ did not die for them. Since I know so many Calvinist preachers like Lloyd-Jones, who not only preached in a fair and balanced way, but genuinely respected Wesley and Baxter and in the case of Lloyd-Jones, his own predecessor, G. Campbell Morgan, who was an Arminian, I stay with them.

 

[Brightfame52]

Please, don't try to flatter yourself...it's not becoming of you.

Its not me, I plead Gen 40:8

And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you.

God has made Christ to be unto His People Wisdom 1 Cor 1:30

30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

He also gave Christ to be these things to Lydia as well

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than:
11 am GMT 7 am EDT 4 am PDT

This thread is closed