Whom would you allow to preach...

[Allan]

Whatever they desired, hopefully including the gospel. But I would expect that they would know me and our church's doctrinal statement (New Hampshire Confession) well enough to know what to stay away from.

Agreed! We who come into another fellowship bringing a message are under the authority of that sheparding pastor called of God to oversee His (Gods) flock. Though we have a message from the Lord, it is the Lord who knows what that fellowship needs to hear in a way that is edifying to His Name. This does take much discernment on the part of the Pastor, however.

I hear a week or so ago a message by Paul David Washer at an SBC youth conference with regard toward salvation. I agree with his message and believe that the holiness of God is something we don't see much in the preaching of salvation anymore. But what gave me pause, is that at the beginning of his message he stated "he was going to preach a message that the majority wont agree with... and that he most likely will never be asked to preach there again..." And he was right, they never did.

Though the message was correct (just asking your opinion here) IMO but do you thing he was right to preach something he knew would break fellowship with those believers who asked him to preach there??


There is a sermon by Henry Blackaby that is an excellent follow up to Pauls sermon. You would almost think they planned a two parter together! It is How to tell if God has visited your church...Wow, it was truly a work of God.

 

[Allan]

Well, its just not going to happen so I guess that about says it all, and yes, it does continue to other areas that we may meet. We are but mere humans who feel that we are preaching the "truth" and if we allow others to preach a different doctrine then we have become someone who endorses that doctrine.

Yes.

I agree to a point. But do we disagree because ones doctrine is a false doctrine or that the mechanics of that doctrine differ from what we hold. If the later then we both affirm the same doctrine but if the former then I agree they should not preach.

I say again however it should be a rarity to have one of a differing theological bent to preach in your fellowship. But should they/we not join together more often in the world for the sake of the Gospel and reaching those lost and in their sins?

Remember Brother Bob, I'm not here to change or argue opinions but interested in hearing your thoughts on these issues.

 

[Brother Bob]

Remember Brother Bob, I'm not here to change or argue opinions but interested in hearing your thoughts on these issues.__________________

I hope you don't get the impression I am arguing, if so I will discontinue.

I ask you a question, you greatly disagree with the Calvinist veiw, would you allow that doctrine to be preached in your church?

 

[reformedbeliever]

Wow! I agree with Bro. Bob.

It all boils down to election. Do you believe that men are born again by the sovereign act of God to cause a man to be born again? Is this God's sovereign choice? Is it by the will of man?

If it is not all of God then its another gospel.

I would not allow anyone to preach another gospel to my congregation.

 

[Allan]

I hope you don't get the impression I am arguing, if so I will discontinue.

I ask you a question, you greatly disagree with the Calvinist veiw, would you allow that doctrine to be preached in your church?

I was actually saying that for your benifit brother :smilewinkgrin:
You hopefully know by now that it takes a great deal to ruffle my hair, so please don't discontinue...

I would not permit those thing where by I disagree with to be preached. But, depending on who they are and if I trusted them enough to know they would not over step and in some cases preach specifically on certain theological points then I would allow such a one, yes. Let us use salvation for example in the context of understanding your sin verses a Holy and righteous God, repenting and belief in the perfect atoning sacrifie who took ALL the wrath of Almighty God on our behalf - Yep they can preach that doctrinally without stepping into areas we disagree on.

But as I said there must be trust and understanding.

I know, shocking. But I do not say everyone must do as I do and respect those who don't as well.

 

[Allan]

Wow! I agree with Bro. Bob.

It all boils down to election. Do you believe that men are born again by the sovereign act of God to cause a man to be born again? Is this God's sovereign choice? Is it by the will of man?

If it is not all of God then its another gospel.

I would not allow anyone to preach another gospel to my congregation.

Which was one of the reasons I brought up Spurgeon and Moody and asked what you though of Spurgeon allowing Moody to not only preach in his pulpit but also to give his support toward Moody's preaching Crusades/Revivals concerning salvation.

 

[Jkdbuck76]

Ok.

I'm not a pastor. I am the Chairman of Deacons.

Before anyone takes over the pulpit, we make sure we know who he is
and what he believes.

We once had a Calvanist preacher give a sermon, but did not give an invitation at the conclusion of the service. My pastor, who is not Calvanist, then offered an invitation.

But here's my question, of all the verses in the Bible, how many deal with election, foreknowledge, predestination? 1%? 1/2%?

I mean, whether a guy is Calvanist, Hyper Calvanist, Arminian, 1-point Calvanist (I've heard that one before), does it really matter so long as he preaches a salvation message, calling sinners to repentance? Aren't there more things to talk about than predestination, and election?

Don't beat on me, I'm just asking.

So why did Spurgeon allow Moody to speak? I'm sure that the two following had something to do with it:

1) Moody probably didn't talk election from Spurgeon's pulpit,
2) By all acounts, God used Dwight L. Moody in a mighty way and Spurgeon saw it.

 

[pinoybaptist]

........ does it really matter so long as he preaches a salvation message, calling sinners to repentance? Aren't there more things to talk about than predestination, and election?

I don't know about Calvinist churches, but in Primitive Baptist churches we sure have a lot of other things to talk about from the pulpit. It's called preaching the whole counsel of God.
However, at the end of the day, it all boils down to why do you have hope that you are on your way to heaven ?
Is it because you decided for Christ ? Is it because you responded to an eloquently given invitation ? Is it because you felt you had been such a sinner all your life, and now it's time to give God a break, and open the door of your heart to him ?
Or do you realize that, when everything has been said and done, you have no right to claim heaven at all, and must trust in God's mercy and justice, and Christ's finished work, and accept the fact that if perchance you stand before Christ one day only to hear, "I never knew you", then He is just and sovereign and He is the One who truly decides but nevertheless you will live your life for Him on this earth, shun sin, and trust in His goodness and mercy and lovingkindness ?
I preach election and predestination because it glorifies God, magnifies His mercy, puts Christ on the pedestal, focuses on His justness, mercy, love of the Father and obedience to the Father, and teaches my heart to tremble before the King and cling to Him with a lively hope, and I pray that the preaching of His sovereign electing grace has the same effect on the hearers.
I preach election and predestination because it puts the sinner completely at the mercy and disposal of God, and robs him of any thread of self-glory.

So why did Spurgeon allow Moody to speak? I'm sure that the two following had something to do with it:

1) Moody probably didn't talk election from Spurgeon's pulpit,
2) By all acounts, God used Dwight L. Moody in a mighty way and Spurgeon saw it.

No one on this board, not even the adherents of Calvinism, knows why Spurgeon allowed Moody to speak. They lived in another time, with perhaps different situations.
Spurgeon is not around anymore to give any defense for criticisms, neither is Moody here to defend his friend, or vice-versa.
Anything we say will purely be speculative, unless some document is lying around somewhere discussing those very questions.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Which was one of the reasons I brought up Spurgeon and Moody and asked what you though of Spurgeon allowing Moody to not only preach in his pulpit but also to give his support toward Moody's preaching Crusades/Revivals concerning salvation.

I would say that maybe Spurgeon knew of circumstances that I'm unaware of. Who knows? Maybe he didn't view non - calvinist as "another gospel".

The only thing that I veiw as something I would not allow in our pulpit, is the teaching of the non - calvinist that one has to believe before regeneration. You and I disagree on John 1:12-13. I think it is essential.

 

[npetreley]

So why did Spurgeon allow Moody to speak? I'm sure that the two following had something to do with it:

1) Moody probably didn't talk election from Spurgeon's pulpit,
2) By all acounts, God used Dwight L. Moody in a mighty way and Spurgeon saw it.

1) Do we have any idea what Moody preached about (I mean specifically the Spurgeon situation, not in general)?

2) This rings true.

 

[Jkdbuck76]

1) Do we have any idea what Moody preached about (I mean specifically the Spurgeon situation, not in general)?

2) This rings true.

Yeah. I mean, wouldn't you let Moody preach at your church?

Adrian Rogers?

 

[Brother Bob]

I was actually saying that for your benifit brother :smilewinkgrin:

You will have to bear with me for it may take me some time to figure out how it benifits me.

 

[Allan]

You will have to bear with me for it may take me some time to figure out how it benifits me.

Bob, you still make me laugh. I put it in there to let you know that "I" was not trying to argue (start an argument) with you, brother.

 

[Brother Bob]

Well, I thank you for that but in no way did I think you were. That is why I didn't understand.

 

[Allan]

1) Do we have any idea what Moody preached about (I mean specifically the Spurgeon situation, not in general)?

2) This rings true.

I'll have to dig a little further on the exactly 'what' scrptures he preached from, but I know it was a repent, get saved, for the Lord God is coming --message. It was almost always about salvation (or salvation messages) when he was not at his church. As I stated earlier though Moody only preached there twice but in preaching all around Europe much more than that, and Spurgeon was one Moody's supporters with regard to his Revival servers.

 

[Allan]

I would say that maybe Spurgeon knew of circumstances that I'm unaware of. Who knows? Maybe he didn't view non - calvinist as "another gospel".

The only thing that I veiw as something I would not allow in our pulpit, is the teaching of the non - calvinist that one has to believe before regeneration. You and I disagree on John 1:12-13. I think it is essential.

When preaching a message for and to the Lost, does one have to say - "Before you can be saved however you must first be regenerate..."

Could I not (in your church) Preach a message of Gods holiness vs our sinfulness, the need to repent, and recieve from the grace of God - His blessed salvation through faith in Jesus - and that ONLY through the conviction of God is there any true repentence. All this culminating and due to the Lamb who took the full wrath of God upon himself that we who have believed are now reconciled to God due to His matchless grace that bestowed on us so great a salvation.

Is this not the same message a Calvinist Preaches to lost 'elect' in his church??
Is that not the gospel unto salvation? The rest are really the mechanics and that should be something explained and taught via the pastor NOT the evangelist or guest speaker.

And yes, I know you would never extend the honor to me to preach such a message in your church. Though I do understand you position.
However, If I preach (as you say - another gospel) does that not neseccitate that I am not saved being that I bring that same gospel to bear werewith I came unto the Lord??

 

[Brother Bob]

does that not neseccitate that I am not saved being that I bring that same gospel to bear werewith I came unto the Lord??

I know you didn't ask me but that is where we go beyond our realm, when we try to judge who is saved and who is not. I would never say anyone is not saved, who declare that they are, for that belongs to God and Him alone. I thank God, it is not my job to try and judge his servants.

Romans, chapter 14


"4": Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

 

[reformedbeliever]

When preaching a message for and to the Lost, does one have to say - "Before you can be saved however you must first be regenerate..."

Could I not (in your church) Preach a message of Gods holiness vs our sinfulness, the need to repent, and recieve from the grace of God - His blessed salvation through faith in Jesus - and that ONLY through the conviction of God is there any true repentence. All this culminating and due to the Lamb who took the full wrath of God upon himself that we who have believed are now reconciled to God due to His matchless grace that bestowed on us so great a salvation.

Is this not the same message a Calvinist Preaches to lost 'elect' in his church??
Is that not the gospel unto salvation? The rest are really the mechanics and that should be something explained and taught via the pastor NOT the evangelist or guest speaker.

And yes, I know you would never extend the honor to me to preach such a message in your church. Though I do understand you position.
However, If I preach (as you say - another gospel) does that not neseccitate that I am not saved being that I bring that same gospel to bear werewith I came unto the Lord??

I do believe it is another gospel. I do not question your salvation.

I believe God uses all kinds of means to accomplish His purposes. I am in no way saying you are lost Allan. I very highly respect, and like you. I think you are the best appologist for your position on this board.

I believe the mechanics of salvation are so very important. Here is why.

I lived my life (40 plus years) as a person who was taught and believed in free-willism. I didn't know of any other doctrine. I was never taught there was another view of salvation. For years I believed that my salvation depended upon my belief for me to become regenerated. I knew my heart, and knew that I could not be saved. There was always doubt, about myself, about God. I knew that if it depended on me in the least, I could never be saved.

I was taught in a class on Ephesians about God's choosing me before the foundation of the world. I was taught about God's sovereign grace. The realization that I could be saved, not because of anything in me, but by the sovereign grace of God, caused my heart to break for Jesus. I realized that He loved me while I was His enemy. The thought of what He did for me, while I was so full of self, just overcame me and it is that point that I was born again of God.

Things have never been the same Allan. I went back to school to learn more. God called me into ministry and that I would have never dreamed. No one who knew me before would have ever dreamed it either. Everyone who knows me can see the vast, great, unimaginable difference in my life.

That is why the doctrines of sovereign grace are so important to me. I hate the teaching that I used to be taught (free-willism). Why was I not taught the sovereign grace of God sooner? I don't know... but God does, and has a plan. A part of that plan is for me to preach and teach the sovereignty of God in all things, including salvation.

 

[Brother Bob]

Guess it couldn't be any more plain than that. I think I understand the meaning of it anyway.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Allan:

Why don't you post, in a different thread, a "message of salvation" exactly as you would deliver it and let those of the Doctrine of Grace point out why they could not agree with your message ?

Just a thought.