The Pelagian Captivity of the Church

Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals ^ | R. C. Sproul

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Are you going to become a independent pastor or missionary?

BigMack

[ksen]

I don't know yet.

When I started school it was with idea of becoming a missionary to the Jewish people. As far as I'm concerned that is still where God wants me.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

There is no way you can become an independent missionary now and be honest to the church, you know that don't you?

BigMack

[ksen]

Why? Since when has Calvinism been opposed to Independent Baptist churches and missionary work?

Calvinism is the historic Baptist faith, which I provided a link for you above.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

real possibility...of hell

The wheat and the tares look alike until the harvest, Marlowe.

God knows His elect. If God knows who will sit with Him in heaven, those names are cast in stone. His flock cannot be lost.

All men are born fallen and equally dead in sin. When God chooses, He regenerates the sinner's heart; the Holy Spirit opens the sinner's ears to God's gift of faith and the sinner is transformed into a believer. That is when we know we are saved.

God has always known it. Otherwise, He wouldn't be God.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You have proved nothing.

Think man! In the real world independent fundamental baptist do NOT accept Calvinism and call it what it is, false teaching.

You have no idea what kind of trouble that you will cause if you try and inter an independent church as a pastor or missionary, when it is found out you are a Calvinist all hell will break lose, you will split a church and ruin many a faith if you choose to do so.

You will have to enter under the same not so honest way that you tried to sell what you believe to me for the last 6 mos or so, is that what you really want?

I didn't buy what you were selling and someone else in the independent church were you will have come into dishonestly will see thru what you say also, even the most liberal indepent church will not put with Calvinism.

Do the right thing and don't cause trouble in the independent churches, align you self where you can be honest and accepted. Or better yet, stop being deceived.


BigMack

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Ping to a great Baptist Calvinist, GWB.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Wow. God's sovereignty elicits quite a tirade.

Such are the times we live in.

[jimtorr]

You are only playing with words. Stop it, and be real, because others can play with words too.

I thought we were talking about what scripture means.

Do you want to convince me that I am given no choice but to beleive, or do you merely want to convince me of your own arrogance?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

You should print and save some of these replies.

"Don't make waves; go along and keep your mouth shut; why cause trouble..."

They need to stop and examine their own hearts. For the faith of the Reformation to cause so much consternation among Protestants is sad indeed.

[George W. Bush]

Ping to a great Baptist Calvinist, GWB.

Yes, he most certainly is. Possibly the only writer among all the modern 'celebrity Christians' who is actually devout and orthodox to the great Reformation. And this is a superb article.

However, I've come to the conclusion that there is little reason to continue to provide a dissident Protestant facade, scarcely more than a fig leaf, to a religion forum which has become little more than a thinly disguised Romo-Mormon propaganda stronghold.

I think many others who once posted here have come to the same conclusion. The resulting influence are increasingly obvious on the main political forum as well. You know my opinion that it is actually religion which is the underpinning of politics.

I think it's playing out fully here at FR, exactly as I have previously suggested its influence when discussing the principle as applied to the influence of religion on American political development.

It seems to me that certain conclusions are inescapable.

[harbingr]

From...www.Catholic-Defense.com...'This web site was developed mainly for non-Catholic Christians, but is also for Catholics who want to explain their faith to Protestants and non-Christians. Most often, this "defense" is against "Bible" Christians and Fundamentalist Christians.'

"On Justification" - by Tom Jensen

Excerpt:..
'...The Protestant position on justification is somewhat more difficult to define. With all due respect to my Protestant friends and without any belligerence or malice, I respectfully submit that the Protestant position contradicts itself. While the Calvinist and Lutheran positions differ in detail, they both suffer from the same defect -- Calvinists and Lutherans both affirm that justification is a "forensic," "legal" imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the sinner who is not thereby interiorly transformed. But simultaneously both camps affirm regeneration prior to justification that does inwardly change the sinner. Protestants deny the Catholic position that works done in grace are meritorious but themselves say that works of sanctification are a result of regeneration...'

'...An extensive examination of the teaching of Scripture on the subject is not possible here, and there are many excellent works on the subject from more competent writers than I. However, a few points must be briefly made. St. Paul writes "Man is justified by faith apart from observing the law." (Romans 3:28). The context is circumcision and the Jewish ceremonial law (Romans 4:9-12). When James says "a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone" (James 2:24), the context is works of charity: clothing the naked and feeding the hungry (verses 15 and 16), showing mercy (verse 13). Of course, this is the work of Christ in us ("it is not I who live but Christ lives in me." Galatians 2:20). When God crowns our righteousness, He is crowning His own work within us; a Father loving His children not a judge pardoning guilty criminals. If the Bible never says we’re justified by "faith alone" and the only time the words "faith" and "alone" appear together is when it is rejected as a description of justification (James 2:24), why do Protestants use a description for justification that the Bible doesn’t use?...'

Also...

"Justification: Is The Debate Justifiable?" by Tom Jensen

[Wrigley]

I thought the same thing as I read that post.

Wow is an understatement.

[Vernon]

An attack against the encyclopedia does not disprove the truth of what was said in the encyclopedia.

I notice you use a statement about God not "paying" slaves in your tag. Are you familiar with the Greek term doulos? A very careful understanding and use of that term might change your theology!

[Corin Stormhands]

To get to Orlando from my house you need to first go north on I-95. Well guess what road also takes you to Jacksonville? Yep, I-95.

At some point the Elect leave I-95 and head west on SR-528. It is at that point that they have left the road to Jacksonville and are exclusively headed towards Orlando.

Having done just that recently, I can assure you the turn towards Orlando was a choice freely made.

Welcome back ksen. ;-)

(prayers for your interview today, let us know)

[harbingr]

'I notice you use a statement about God not "paying" slaves in your tag. Are you familiar with the Greek term doulos? A very careful understanding and use of that term might change your theology!'

No, I'm not - The wording comes from "On Justification" by Tom Jensen, see above Link #112...
...'In other words, Packer and the Council of Trent are saying: When God crowns our merits, He’s crowning His own work within us. God is not paying slaves; He’s granting an inheritance to sons and daughters.
Packer begins this chapter by saying: He ends the chapter thus: "It is a strange fact that the truth of adoption has been little regarded in Christian history." (I would correct Packer by saying Protestant history) ". . . there is no evangelical writing on it, nor has there been at any time since the Reformation, any more than there was before Luther’s grasp of adoption which was as strong and clear as his grasp of justification, but his disciples held to the latter and made nothing of the former." (Packer, Knowing God, page 228)
Packer is dismayed by the lack of Protestant writing on the subject of sonship. I would suggest that that is because it is the Catholic definition of justification...

[Vernon]

The world doulos in Greek means, whether literally or figuratively, volunatry or involunatrily, a slave, a bond man or servant.

The use of this term in a few places in the New Testament are: Romans 6:18,19,22; Ephesians 6:6; Philippians 1:1; 1 Peter 2:16; Revelation 1:1;2:20; 7:3; 10;7; 11:18; 19:2; 19:5; 22:3; 22:6

I am assuming (very dangerous thing to do) you are using the term in the sense of one who is captive without a choice or against their will. It is well to keep in mind there were those "slaves" who served their masters out of love and devotion, and were free to leave at anytime.

Just thinking.

[connectthedots]

Thank you ksen. You just shot down the entire doctrine of Calvinistic predestination.

As I have suspected, ksen only thinks he's a Calvinist.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Ping to a great Baptist Calvinist, GWB.

I meant you, GWB. I should have said, "Ping to GWB, a great Baptist Calvinist."

In recent posts on this thread, Ksen was taking heat for being a Baptist Calvinist. As a Presbyterian, I think you're better qualified to defend the term.

[George W. Bush]

I would say that both Jerry_M and the_doc are far stronger advocates for the historical prinicples of Calvinism in the Baptist faith and in present day Baptist churches. The two of them illustrate nicely a difference in promoting the doctrines of grace, as Calvinism is sometimes known within Baptist circles.

I would observe that the_doc attended an independent Baptist church for years and I doubt anyone escaped without absorbing a few morsels of sound Calvinist bible knowledge. At least, I can hardly imagine it.

Jerry_M, as a Southern Baptist clergyman, has certainly done more than I in working with others in the SBC to raise the level of biblical knowledge and Calvinist doctrine, far more than I have ever done. That he does not wear a Calvinist lapel pin does not undercut his steadfast effort.

Me, I'm just a camp follower.

I would say that ksen will find no great obstacle to teaching Calvinism, i.e. the full teaching of the gospel. No more than did Spurgeon himself, surely the greatest of Baptist preachers.

In my view, Jerry_M would have an approach to the subject similar to Spurgeon and the_doc would have an approach more similar to John Gill, another great exponent of Calvinism in Baptist circles in the early Baptist era.

So, pursuing a 'soft' Calvinist line or a 'hard' Calvinist line can both be observed to be well within Baptist tradition. ksen, whichever his choice of Calvinist style, is entirely orthodox in this, not an isolated extremist as his ignorant opponents would like to paint him.

I'm sure that their efforts have provided ksen with no small amusement.