Top Ten Reasons not to join a Reformed Baptist Church

[gb93433]

Specifically, what are you referring to as a "Common argument among Calvinists?" & are saying that I (ME PERSONALLY) have never read Calvin or are you imposing that commentary on someone else? For your edification , I have read Institutes & his golden books as well as other sermons & commentaries....but I dont know if you are referencing me in your own above commentary? So I ask the question for clarification.

I am not referencing anyone in particular. The more I study the more I see a Jewish background in scripture and not how so many Americans think they know who have a complete disregard for how a Jew would have understood what was written. How we think and how they thought are often very different. Scripture has seemingly contradictory statements but they are not contradictory when interpreted as a Jew would have.

From Walking In The Dust of Rabbi Jesus by Tverberg on page 132, "Marvin Wilson notes that often the biblical text uses "block logic" rather than the "linear logic" that we are more used to. Linear logic uses statements that build on each other in a tightly argued fashion: if a = b, and b = c, then a = c. Block logic groups together ideas that may come from opposite perspectives - such as from a human perspective and then a divine perspective. For instance, Jesus said, "Whoever comes to me I will never drive away," yet no one can come "unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:37, 44)."

 

[annsni]

LOL. Take a look at the 'superior' language skills of James White's tiny 'Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church' on display at their homesite on the interwebs:

http://www.prbc.org/about/deacons.htm



Bizarre.

Looks like someone forgot to work on a page. That's what would come up if you had the "fake content fill" of web page creators.

 

[gb93433]

Calvin didn't write in English. The acrostic, TULIP, did not come from Calvin. In fact it is doubtful that he believed in the points represented by that acrostic. Calvin's commentaries can easily be found on-line. Look up his commentary on John 3:16. Calvin does not believe in a limited atonement according to his comments of that verse. What is being spouted as Calvinism today under the guise of Reformed Theology is far from what Calvin actually believed.

Good points. The commentaries can be downloaded at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/commentaries.i.html

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

There certainly is no reason to question his salvation. He doesn't believe in TULIP, as many don't. Dave Hunt, in his book, "What Love is This," also dismantles all five points of TULIP. There are many who have done it. There is no need to question their salvation. I also agree with this position. It is Biblical. I believe you have a wrong interpretation of 2Pet.3:9 and 1John 2:2 and are unwilling to face the truth of these verses because it so devastates your position.

BTW, none of us deny the working of the Holy Spirit. His work is clearly defined in John 16. He came to convict the world of sin and of judgment and of righteousness, which he clearly does. I prefer to believe the Bible on these matters, not some made-up doctrine that says that regeneration precedes salvation, is totally mysterious as to how it takes place, but at that time God gives faith to believe at the time of salvation. This position is totally unbiblical and has never been shown to be true in Scripture. It has only been inferred.

So because it is not explained to you to your individual satisfaction you dismiss it...... can you show me exactly how the Trinity comes together scripturally? No mystery there right.

"there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" WS

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Looks like someone forgot to work on a page. That's what would come up if you had the "fake content fill" of web page creators.

Oh really.....funny....like speaking in tongues...:laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

I told you that you would have a response. :laugh:

What a disappointment...at least he did not deny the trinity:thumbs:

he denied about everything else, did not address the actual teaching,probably went home and told the wife he did a great job....:laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

There certainly is no reason to question his salvation. He doesn't believe in TULIP, as many don't. Dave Hunt, in his book, "What Love is This," also dismantles all five points of TULIP. There are many who have done it. There is no need to question their salvation. I also agree with this position. It is Biblical. I believe you have a wrong interpretation of 2Pet.3:9 and 1John 2:2 and are unwilling to face the truth of these verses because it so devastates your position.

BTW, none of us deny the working of the Holy Spirit. His work is clearly defined in John 16. He came to convict the world of sin and of judgment and of righteousness, which he clearly does. I prefer to believe the Bible on these matters, not some made-up doctrine that says that regeneration precedes salvation, is totally mysterious as to how it takes place, but at that time God gives faith to believe at the time of salvation. This position is totally unbiblical and has never been shown to be true in Scripture. It has only been inferred.

DHK,

let me say this....seriously....I cannot read a persons heart, we know only God can....This man did not deny the trinity:thumbs:
However...he denied about everything else....
As he preached this message, between the 12-15 minute mark..listen to what he said.....he could just talk to a sinner and get the sinner to believe is what he said....no mention of God giving the sinner a new heart, enabling the sinner...he goes to eph 2....and says that they evil calvinists say the Spirit must quicken the dead sinner......Hello....This is exactly what the text says....he claims it is not necessary.

I do not believe the Spirit of truth is having this man deny the scriptures...it is all of His flesh.

Unless he repents of opposing truth he will stand at the white throne saying...
I cannot believe in a God who chooses one and does not choose another, as he says a few times in this message. My god does not do that! Indeed...but his god will not save him when he hears depart from me ,you who work sin, I never knew you.

Salvation is not a multiple choice.....have it your way propositon....it is God given....in your attempts to fight against what you believe is error...you do a better job of trying to engage the scriptures than this person.

There was much error here....:type:

 

[Iconoclast]

I am not referencing anyone in particular. The more I study the more I see a Jewish background in scripture and not how so many Americans think they know who have a complete disregard for how a Jew would have understood what was written. How we think and how they thought are often very different. Scripture has seemingly contradictory statements but they are not contradictory when interpreted as a Jew would have.

From Walking In The Dust of Rabbi Jesus by Tverberg on page 132, "Marvin Wilson notes that often the biblical text uses "block logic" rather than the "linear logic" that we are more used to. Linear logic uses statements that build on each other in a tightly argued fashion: if a = b, and b = c, then a = c. Block logic groups together ideas that may come from opposite perspectives - such as from a human perspective and then a divine perspective. For instance, Jesus said, "Whoever comes to me I will never drive away," yet no one can come "unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:37, 44)."

What unsaved Jews thought,and all this second temple judaisim ideas have nothing to do with the scriptures being revealed by God.....all there thinking led them to crucify Jesus. What matters is God's revealation of His truth...not what natural men ,thought or did not think.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What unsaved Jews thought,and all this second temple judaisim ideas have nothing to do with the scriptures being revealed by God.....all there thinking led them to crucify Jesus. What matters is God's revealation of His truth...not what natural men ,thought or did not think.

Amen Amen Amen

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What a disappointment...at least he did not deny the trinity:thumbs:

he denied about everything else, did not address the actual teaching,probably went home and told the wife he did a great job....:laugh:

Honey...I beat those [edit] DoG belivin Calvinists into submission ROFL

 

[DHK]

DHK,

let me say this....seriously....I cannot read a persons heart, we know only God can....This man did not deny the trinity.

No he didn't, and no reason to doubt his salvation.

However...he denied about everything else....

Only as a dyed-in-the-wool Calvinist would see it. We have been through most of these points before on various threads in the theology forum.

As he preached this message, between the 12-15 minute mark..listen to what he said.....he could just talk to a sinner and get the sinner to believe is what he said

This is the problem with you (i.e. the Calvinist). It is my way or the Highway. You don't consider what the Bible says other than your pet verses. When the jailer came to Paul and Silas and asked him how to be saved, what did Paul say:

Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.
--Paul did not talk about the new heart, the inner working of the Spirit, etc., either. His message was to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, just like you heard in that message. What is so different?

....no mention of God giving the sinner a new heart, enabling the sinner...

Jesus didn't explain that to Nicodemus when teaching about the New Birth.
Paul didn't explain that to the Philippian jailer.
Paul didn't explain those things in Romans 10 where salvation is clearly explained, and neither in 1Cor.15:1-4 where the gospel is defined.
Like I said: You want it "Your way or the highway."

he goes to eph 2....and says that they evil calvinists say the Spirit must quicken the dead sinner......Hello....This is exactly what the text says....he claims it is not necessary.

That is because the Calvinists have a warped definition of "dead." "Death" in the Bible simply means "separation." It does not mean "corpse," or "lifelessness," as so many like to define it. It simply means "separated" as in separated from God. The unsaved is reconciled to God by the Holy Spirit and thus given life. He already had a spirit. Now his spirit is joined with the Holy Spirit in some unexplicable way, and he is reconciled to God. That is being made alive. There was nothing that was actually "dead," in the sense that we usually think of the word. We were simply separated from God.

I do not believe the Spirit of truth is having this man deny the scriptures...it is all of His flesh.

He doesn't deny the Scripture. He uses biblical definitions instead of Reformed Theology's made-up definitions.

Unless he repents of opposing truth he will stand at the white throne saying...

Are you God??

I cannot believe in a God who chooses one and does not choose another, as he says a few times in this message. My god does not do that!

Indeed...but his god will not save him when he hears depart from me ,you who work sin, I never knew you.

Again, a needless judgment not based on Scripture. You will give account to God as much as he will.

Salvation is not a multiple choice.....have it your way propositon....it is God given....in your attempts to fight against what you believe is error...you do a better job of trying to engage the scriptures than this person.

There was much error here....:type:

Your error is not believing what he is trying to teach--that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

That whosoever shall believe on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

That whosoever believes on him shall be saved.

You don't want to believe in the "whosoever's of the Bible.

 

[Iconoclast]

No he didn't, and no reason to doubt his salvation.

Only as a dyed-in-the-wool Calvinist would see it. We have been through most of these points before on various threads in the theology forum.

This is the problem with you (i.e. the Calvinist). It is my way or the Highway. You don't consider what the Bible says other than your pet verses. When the jailer came to Paul and Silas and asked him how to be saved, what did Paul say:

Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.
--Paul did not talk about the new heart, the inner working of the Spirit, etc., either. His message was to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, just like you heard in that message. What is so different?

Jesus didn't explain that to Nicodemus when teaching about the New Birth.
Paul didn't explain that to the Philippian jailer.
Paul didn't explain those things in Romans 10 where salvation is clearly explained, and neither in 1Cor.15:1-4 where the gospel is defined.
Like I said: You want it "Your way or the highway."

That is because the Calvinists have a warped definition of "dead." "Death" in the Bible simply means "separation." It does not mean "corpse," or "lifelessness," as so many like to define it. It simply means "separated" as in separated from God. The unsaved is reconciled to God by the Holy Spirit and thus given life. He already had a spirit. Now his spirit is joined with the Holy Spirit in some unexplicable way, and he is reconciled to God. That is being made alive. There was nothing that was actually "dead," in the sense that we usually think of the word. We were simply separated from God.

He doesn't deny the Scripture. He uses biblical definitions instead of Reformed Theology's made-up definitions.





Your error is not believing what he is trying to teach--that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

That whosoever shall believe on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

That whosoever believes on him shall be saved.

You don't want to believe in the "whosoever's of the Bible.

You as well as him are in denial.
calvinists believe all the whosoever will verses...even the ones that are not there like jn 3:16
Spiritual death...the word is necrous...corpse.

The unsaved is reconciled to God by the Holy Spirit and thus given life. He already had a spirit

The unsaved have the Holy Spirit....really????what are you talking about?

You friend did not mention the Holy Spirit.

This is the problem with you (i.e. the Calvinist). It is my way or the Highway. You don't consider what the Bible says other than your pet verses

Calvinists consider all the verses...you cannot face this...so you make your false claim.

He doesn't deny the Scripture. He uses biblical definitions instead of Reformed Theology's made-up definitions.

His denial of biblical election is classic. You agree with His error so of course you are not going to admit it.

Keep in mind DHK....I listened to your link, unlike several you said you would not listen to...you did not have time.:laugh:

The excuse that the covenant teaching is "man made" is very shallow and unbiblical in itself.
It is God's way, or the highway...and i am very doubtful of any who reject God's grace as historically taught and believed by the professing church.

 

[Iconoclast]

Honey...I beat those [edit] DoG belivin Calvinists into submission ROFL

The man had no substance to His fruitless argument.Like you said before...this man trying to debate/discuss with someone like Sinclair Ferguson would be like a tsunami of truth washing away his groundless claims.
Ferguson is very gracious...but I doubt he would put up with much of this Spirit denying heresy. He says he can just convince sinners to believe....never mentions the need of the Spirit to do anything to the sinner.
Goes to Eph 2...but then denies that God needs to quicken the sinner,despite paul writing that in eph2???? unbelievable:laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

There certainly is no reason to question his salvation. He doesn't believe in TULIP, as many don't. Dave Hunt, in his book, "What Love is This," also dismantles all five points of TULIP. There are many who have done it. There is no need to question their salvation. I also agree with this position. It is Biblical. I believe you have a wrong interpretation of 2Pet.3:9 and 1John 2:2 and are unwilling to face the truth of these verses because it so devastates your position.

BTW, none of us deny the working of the Holy Spirit. His work is clearly defined in John 16. He came to convict the world of sin and of judgment and of righteousness, which he clearly does. I prefer to believe the Bible on these matters, not some made-up doctrine that says that regeneration precedes salvation, is totally mysterious as to how it takes place, but at that time God gives faith to believe at the time of salvation. This position is totally unbiblical and has never been shown to be true in Scripture. It has only been inferred.

My position on these verses is completely biblical.You take 2 pet3:9 out of the book and try to make it stand on its own,completely missing the whole point of the verse.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You as well as him are in denial.
calvinists believe all the whosoever will verses...even the ones that are not there like jn 3:16
Spiritual death...the word is necrous...corpse.


The unsaved have the Holy Spirit....really????what are you talking about?

You friend did not mention the Holy Spirit.



Calvinists consider all the verses...you cannot face this...so you make your false claim.


His denial of biblical election is classic. You agree with His error so of course you are not going to admit it.

Keep in mind DHK....I listened to your link, unlike several you said you would not listen to...you did not have time.:laugh:

The excuse that the covenant teaching is "man made" is very shallow and unbiblical in itself.
It is God's way, or the highway...and i am very doubtful of any who reject God's grace as historically taught and believed by the professing church.

:laugh: There you go again ICONO, trying to do the right thing by hearing the guy out & then pointing out his error....shame on you actually for doing that & then criticizing DHK! My word, only a (I will quote DHK here) " Died in the wool CALVINIST" would do such a horrendous thing ......
and all I gotta say in closing is THANK YOU for cutting through all the nonsense & telling the truth :thumbs:

 

[gb93433]

His denial of biblical election is classic. You agree with His error so of course you are not going to admit it.

It is tough to handle opinions with any sense of integrity. So give us your understanding of the biblical definition of election starting with the OT and then the NT and how it was used in the secular world.

 

[Iconoclast]

It is tough to handle opinions with any sense of integrity. So give us your understanding of the biblical definition of election starting with the OT and then the NT and how it was used in the secular world.

The biblical view of Election starts with the Covenant Of Redemption among the members of The Godhead. This takes place before the Ot...in fact before the world was. Creation could not take place unless God had Jesus as mediator was already in place to be the surety of the covenant..Heb7;22...
The fallen sinners that God elected were flesh and blood, so Jesus took part of the same....hebrews 2:9-16.
after creation and the fall,God introduced his covenant to mankind...we read about this in Moses writings.
In Deut 7...God elects out from the nation of Israel His remnant.....In Isa 40-54...The Servant of Jehovah is declared to be God's elect servant...
In the Nt we learn that we are elect in Him.

ALL WHO WILL FINALLY BE SAVED, WERE CHOSEN TO SALVATION BY GOD THE FATHER, BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD, AND GIVEN TO JESUS CHRIST IN THE COVENANT OF GRACE.[16

jl dagg...


http://www.founders.org/library/dagg_vol1/bk7c4.html#sec1

._____ Those of mankind that are predestinated to life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.
( Ephesians 1:4, 9, 11; Romans 8:30; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:9; Romans 9:13, 16; Ephesians 2:5, 12 )

6._____ As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
( 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 5:9, 10; Romans 8:30; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:5; John 10:26; John 17:9; John 6:64 )

This is the biblical teaching....That is all I am concerned with:thumbsup: here are some more links;

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/ch29.html

http://www.kenscustom.com/bible/election.htm

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Election/index.htm

 

[seekingthetruth]

The biblical view of Election starts with the Covenant Of Redemption among the members of The Godhead. This takes place before the Ot...in fact before the world was. Creation could not take place unless God had Jesus as mediator was already in place to be the surety of the covenant..Heb7;22...
The fallen sinners that God elected were flesh and blood, so Jesus took part of the same....hebrews 2:9-16.
after creation and the fall,God introduced his covenant to mankind...we read about this in Moses writings.
In Deut 7...God elects out from the nation of Israel His remnant.....In Isa 40-54...The Servant of Jehovah is declared to be God's elect servant...
In the Nt we learn that we are elect in Him.

jl dagg...


http://www.founders.org/library/dagg_vol1/bk7c4.html#sec1




This is the biblical teaching....That is all I am concerned with:thumbsup: here are some more links;

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/ch29.html

http://www.kenscustom.com/bible/election.htm

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Election/index.htm

Which book of the Bible did JL Dagg write?

John

 

[gb93433]

The biblical view of Election starts with the Covenant Of Redemption among the members of The Godhead. This takes place before the Ot...in fact before the world was. Creation could not take place unless God had Jesus as mediator was already in place to be the surety of the covenant..Heb7;22...
The fallen sinners that God elected were flesh and blood, so Jesus took part of the same....hebrews 2:9-16.
after creation and the fall,God introduced his covenant to mankind...we read about this in Moses writings.
In Deut 7...God elects out from the nation of Israel His remnant.....In Isa 40-54...The Servant of Jehovah is declared to be God's elect servant...
In the Nt we learn that we are elect in Him.

jl dagg...


http://www.founders.org/library/dagg_vol1/bk7c4.html#sec1




This is the biblical teaching....That is all I am concerned with:thumbsup: here are some more links;

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/ch29.html

http://www.kenscustom.com/bible/election.htm

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Election/index.htm

The same word used for election was also used in society. So election extends far more than just religious "theories" as noted in one link.

 

[Iconoclast]

Which book of the Bible did JL Dagg write?

John

As a pastor and teacher he was not called upon by God to write scripture....God had others do that.he was called upon to labor in the word and doctrine,to help others who want to learn....I think I read something about that.....let me see:

11And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

Some like JlDagg:thumbsup::thumbsup:


12For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

John...you can resist all you want...but God has put pastors and teachers in His church. many of these servants spent their lifetimes in the scripture to help us. Trusted guides and teachers are to read with caution, but not despised. Did you read the link??? Go back and read it....you will learn something if you are teachable. You can offer correction and disagree with him if you want....but to be quite honest...this will be wilful iqnorance.

Can you teach any of what these men teach? can you offer an alternative?


Take election for example.....write your own explanation for the biblical teaching, and improve upon what dagg offers....do it right here in this thread.

Then take the topics discussed in the 1689 confession of faith....write your own understanding of it in your own words ...I will print them out and compare....let's see who knows what the bible teaches.

Do you just despise the teaching so much ,that you can not learn from these men....or are you just too lazy to read through and work on improving your knowledge of Divine truth.
you say you believe the bible....good, so did Dagg. lets see who knows what the bible teaches...dagg wrote down his understanding...now this is the time where you are being asked so to speak.......to put up, or shut up.....I think that is how the expression goes!