Replies

You're starting to sound like people within my denomination (Plymouth Brethren) when they try to use types, which are inherently subjective, to prove doctrine. Types carry ABSOLUTELY no weight in my mind because I can name types alleged to demonstrate the pretrib rapture, etc. One of the first rules I learned when I was taught hermaneutics was that types were to be completely subject to doctrine, never used to prove them.

You're "Plymouth Brethren"?

Well, I can see that it will be a hero's labor to divorce you from Dispensational Premillenialism, then. (That's all well and good, I was a dyed-in-the-wool Dispy Pre-Millenial myself at one time).

BUT.... perhaps you should start calling yourself OrthodoxPlymouthBrethren, given your adoption of Absolute Predestinarian soteriology (JN Darby and his associates were, of course, strict 5-Point Calvinists). It's only the latter-day "Plymouth Brethren" such as Dave Hunt who have led that denomination astray into the wilds of Humanistic Arminianism.

Although, if you really want to be an "Orthodox Plymouth Brethren", then you of course cannot call yourself a "Calvinist". While the Baptist Spurgeon was entirely comfortable with the label "Calvinist" (as, indeed, am I), the Brethren JN Darby thought that it was silly to define the Biblical Doctrine of Absolute Predestination in what he considered to be "sectarian" terminologies.

JN Darby had a much different terminology for the Biblical Doctrine of God's Sovereignty: he preferred simply to refer to Absolute Predestination as "plain, simple, Bible doctrine".

the natural man's pretension not to be entirely lost, for that is really what it amounts to.

All men who have never been deeply convinced of sin, all persons with whom this conviction is based upon gross and outward sins, believe more or less in free-will. You know that it is the dogma of the Wesleyans, of all reasoners, of all philosophers. But this idea completely changes all the idea of Christianity and entirely perverts it." ~~ John Nelson Darby

JN Darby BUMP!!

Y'all take note and mark your calendars, this may be the first and only time I "bump" a Plymouth Brethren quote (grin).

Best, OP

You're "Plymouth Brethren"? If the shoe fits, I guess. I do go to a Plymouth Brethren assembly both at home and here at school. Grew up in them, agree with about 75-85% of what they teach and what they do.

I actually recently came to the decison that I was Christian first, Calvinist second, and Plymouth Brethren third. A distant third. I'm concerned by what I see in within the assemblies: there seems to be an almost arrogant supposition that we're better than the "denominations," because we follow "NT church principles," a buzzword which essentially translates that we have elders instead of clergy, our women wear head coverings (don't get me started on that. From an obscure passage an entire doctrine -- not just a practice -- was built.), and so forth. Little piddley stuff.

And of course, theres dispensational pre-millenialism. I'm not completely convinced by it. I certainly do not consider the dispensations to be anything other than a convenient man-made framework to note major shifts in God's program. But I lean more towards the covenant understanding of things -- but still make the dispensationalist distinction between the church and Israel.

I'm dismayed by the antipathy towards Calvinism to be found in the assemblies. I came within inches of leaving them altogether this past weekend. One of the outreaches the assemblies have is youth conferences that draw young people from all over the region. This past weekend, there was one about 25 or 30 miles from here. I wnated to hear the speaker, since I had heard good things about him. So I drove over on Friday, met up with friends I hadnt seen in a while, and so on. Now, generally the typical youth conference audience contains non-believers, carnal believers, weak believers, young believers, and a few strong ones. A lot of impressionable young people within those walls.

Well the speaker was discussing his testimony, and how "sin makes us stupid," etc. But he, for whatever reason, thought it a good idea to disparage Calvinism (specifically, limited atonement) in his message. Only took two minutes to do so -- using bad exegesis of I Tim. 4:10 (Christ is the savior of all men, especially of believers). I think he saw the glares from a few of us in the audience -- I was close to the front, debating in my mind whether to get up and walk out -- and quickly changed the subject.

I raged the whole drive back to my dorm. This man, before impressionable young minds, took a complicated doctrine, that of the definate atonement, and oversimplified it and disproved the oversimplified version. That was how I became an Arminian. What business did he have discussing definate atonement in an environment that is largely evangelistic?

Fast forward to Sunday. I am at the house of one of the elders from my assembly here at school. I told him about what happened -- he hit the roof. We saw eye-to-eye about this (he's a 5-pointer too). He agreed about the gravity of this, too. So there are like-minded people within the assemblies. Just not the one that sponsored the youth conference. I'll not go back there again.