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!
True only to a point. The Calvinistic view or Born-Again/reneration IS NOT the same as others.As for my references dealing with being born again -- I think even non-Calvinists are in agreement with me on this . Those references are dealing with regeneration . It is not only in the domain of the Calvinists
We see this is to those who have already attained this faith we all share through God who is without blame and Christ. It simply and only is a statement that their savlation (faith - thus it uses the title of Savior for Jesus) is from God (not of themselves). God is the only one who can allow anyone to attain this faith/salvation (and He has opened the door that any who will may choose Christ which He offers freely) but it does not state their faith was something given to them.Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
That is to bad, for the Calvin view is what is found in the Bible.The Calvinistic view or Born-Again/reneration IS NOT the same as others.
**Being born-again in the Calvinistic view point is not about salvation, BUT simply to be made spiritually alive though still not saved or believing, and must still one day be saved and believe.
hummm..maybe you overlooked these passages**Being born-again in the non-calvinist view point is, yes regeneration BUT it is specifically referring to it in the salvic sense. One is regenerated once one has beleived and thus is saved.
No, Truth is found in the scriptures, and your take of that truth is of a Calvinistic bent, just as I share the same truths but have a non-Calvinistic bent. For if they are not the same immutable truths then we can not truely both be beleivers in Christ but one is a fraud. But since we both believe the immutable truths and ARE brothers it is the logical conclusion what we hold are views of these truths.That is to bad, for the Calvin view is what is found in the Bible.
You know I welcome discussion. The analogy however is not synomous with your veiw of regeneration and salvation as a Calvinist.Being that I am a Calvinist, and you claim not to be, may I share my view as to what some Calvinist believe? It is much like human life. Life comes before the birth. right?
Actually, you just proved my point. This verse speaks of salvation AND shows that from the regeneration to the new spirit that wants to serve God (salvation) is ALL done at one time, thus the term 'AND' throughout it. And = in addition to.hummm..maybe you overlooked these passages
Ezek 36:26-27
A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances
I agree hear as well, as we see always it is the Lord who initiates the call, revealing, enlightening, and or lighting (scripture has different terms for the same thing), But PLEASE NOTE one important thing you have overlooked.Acts 16:14
14One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message
You seem to have neglected and or left out the fact that Paul acknowledges whatever this was, it must be GOD for he calls him Lord (supreme ruler in the Greek) before he knows who it is speaking. How do we know he didn't know, because he asks who it is speaking with him. Look up what I said earlier concerning Paul and his salvation - in our conversation recently under "Robots in Heaven - Post #103."Acts 26...
I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,' the Lord replied. 16'Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you. 17I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.
You have some of this right.No, Truth is found in the scriptures, and your take of that truth is of a Calvinistic bent, just as I share the same truths but have a non-Calvinistic bent.
I type the above before I read this. I type so slow i'm not deleteing it.For if they are not the same immutable truths then we can not truely both be beleivers in Christ but one is a fraud. But since we both believe the immutable truths and ARE brothers it is the logical conclusion what we hold are views of these truths.
I have a good line...but I'll pass and be nice tonight.Because at conception (or life beginning) I will maintain and continue to be as I was (as one consistant and continuous thing, ie, person). Regeration does not save in the Calvinist mindset (it leads to that change) and therefor being alive to God is not the same as being saved. So you are not continuing as you are from were you were as one constistant and continuous thing.
Allan...just trust me...your wrong.Thus the analogy is not adaquate for your point. I may be wrong and if so please continue.
Proved your point? Sorry to hear that. but Actually I disagree.Actually, you just proved my point. This verse speaks of salvation AND shows that from the regeneration to the new spirit that wants to serve God (salvation) is ALL done at one time, thus the term 'AND' throughout it. And = in addition to.
Also NOTE that He will give you a NEW spirit AT this time which is a direct reference to salvation.
INDEED...I agree hear as well, as we see always it is the Lord who initiates the call, revealing, enlightening, and or lighting (scripture has different terms for the same thing), But PLEASE NOTE one important thing you have overlooked.
The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message. It was up to her to respond once the truth was revealed. I maintain this same view.
Ok, but what are you saying here: That we do believe two different things and you have the truth (which necessitates I do not) or That you were incorrect in your first statement and just did not want to take the time to delete it.Your Statement:
You have some of this right. Let me just add...I do not hold to the doctrines of grace, only because I have nothing else to do. I happen to believe they are truth. As a friend you like to quote has said..."Calvinism is the gospel for it is only a nickname for the truth". I'm sure you heard this before. Now no need to say you have the truth on your side...for I know better. Just kidding..
My Quote:
For if they are not the same immutable truths then we can not truely both be beleivers in Christ but one is a fraud. But since we both believe the immutable truths and ARE brothers it is the logical conclusion what we hold are views of these truths.
Your Statement:
I type the above before I read this. I type so slow i'm not deleteing it.
I will always call it what the bible calls it even if you don't agree. And I agree with EVERY single "tis" and God in that without question. That is why scripture states man is to believe. Beleive what - That God has, and is able to do and maintain everything He has established concering our salvation. It is all about God and if we will beleive He is able. It is always about the Gods glory for man has no part to play in getting (works) or keeping his salvation, but must needs beleive that GOD has, is and does all for that salvation.Call it what you want to make yourself happy. It will always come down to this. Salvation is by GOD. Tis God that saves. Tis God that elects. Tis God that keeps. Tis God that draws. Tis God that sent His Son. Tis Gods own Son that redeems us from the slave market. Tis God that must be paid ransom. Tis the blood of Gods Son that pleases God. Tis God that then Justifies the sinner. Salvation is all about GOD saving man.
Now maybe you do not like how I word things, but do not deny God the glory of salvation. To much of salvation is centered on MAN
Sorry, but as I stated before my motto - Let God be true but every man a liar.Allan...just trust me...your wrong
This is a good place to understand Hebrew and luckily I do somewhat. There is also no vowels in the originalHebrew either and therefore what you wrote is not correct except in enunciation. Here is a concise Hebrew to english translation from http://www.mechon-mamre.org (from the masoretic texts)Proved your point? Sorry to hear that. but Actually I disagree.
chadash leb nathan chadash ruwach nathan....
no "and"
I do not know where you recieved the "chadash leb nathan chadash ruwach nathan" which looks like it came from a concordance style break down of word (blueletterbible.com has something like this that I know of - and like to use) but if so they leave out any english word three letters or shorter (a, the, and, was, ect...) because it would basically be rewritting the bible a hundred times for one book and therefore focus on the main words there. :BangHead:כו וְנָתַתִּי לָכֶם לֵב חָדָשׁ, וְרוּחַ חֲדָשָׁה אֶתֵּן בְּקִרְבְּכֶם; וַהֲסִרֹתִי אֶת-לֵב הָאֶבֶן, מִבְּשַׂרְכֶם, וְנָתַתִּי לָכֶם, לֵב בָּשָׂר.
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.
כז וְאֶת-רוּחִי, אֶתֵּן בְּקִרְבְּכֶם; וְעָשִׂיתִי, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-בְּחֻקַּי תֵּלֵכוּ, וּמִשְׁפָּטַי תִּשְׁמְרוּ, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם.
27 And I will put My spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep Mine ordinances, and do them.
Indeed...INDEED...
1st the heart must have been CLOSED and not able to respend....for this was the meaning of the opening of the heart. so...
1)...Lord opens heart
2)...she can now respond
3)...she believes and has faith and is saved
I have read it, preached on it, and gone through it in bible study verse by verse and have never come to the conclusions you espouse.I'll address John 1 latter. Mean time...why not reread the 1st 6 chapters of John and see if the world takes hold of the good news. Your verses say men CAN...and also tell what will happen if they DO. Now...how many do...other then does that Jesus hand picks?
Which low and behold there were many Jews afterward who came to a knowledge of Jesus being the Christ.Jhn 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
I do not remember quoting Spurgeon on any of this web board. I went looking back through some of it but I couldn't find anything. When did I quote Spurgeon on here.As a friend you like to quote has said..."Calvinism is the gospel for it is only a nickname for the truth".
We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were reformers before Luther and Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel under ground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor, I believe, any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with Government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men.
—Charles H. Spurgeon
Christian history, in the First Century, was strictly and properly Baptist history, although the word "Baptist," as a distinctive appellation was not then known. How could it be? How was it possible to call any Christians Baptist Christians, when all were Baptists?" William Cathcart, The Baptist Encyclopedia, 1881, p. 286
Allan said:But just so you know, Spurgeon is also one who is quoted as saying:
Allan said:Jarthur:
I do not remember quoting Spurgeon on any of this web board. I went looking back through some of it but I couldn't find anything. When did I quote Spurgeon on here.
And if I have not, how would you know that I like to quote him at times?
But just so you know, Spurgeon is also one who is quoted as saying:
Allan said:Jarthur:
I do not remember quoting Spurgeon on any of this web board. I went looking back through some of it but I couldn't find anything. When did I quote Spurgeon on here.
And if I have not, how would you know that I like to quote him at times?
But just so you know, Spurgeon is also one who is quoted as saying:
Hello Andrew...Nice to meet ya.Andrew Walling said:Could you please provide the reference for the Spurgeon quote?
Jarthur001 said:I have read the quote by Spurgeon before. I'm not sure where I read it. It may have been a Baptist history web site. I know it was not from a history book that I read it...this i'm sure of. I hope this is not your proof for Baptist successionism.
To those that are staring to wonder if Baptisuccessionism is true...stick around.![]()
Lets see the proof Allan has 1st. This idea started on another thread, for those that did not know. But maybe we should keep this to one thread. I would like to finish a few things here 1st.
********
As to how I knew you quoted Spurgeon...lets just say I was ordained to know.
The post before this..I will address tonight...Lord willing
In Christ...James