Posted on 10/03/2010 3:36:39 AM PDT by grassboots.org
In an ongoing debate about what it means to be a Christian, Chris Redford, a former Assembly of God youth-turned-atheist, is trying to make the case that the view of salvation held by Pentecostals today is more akin to his own view than the one held by the entire Protestant church since the Reformation. He in particular cites my Calvinism and suggested “‘saved’ means “something different (to me) than what it means to Pentecostals”.
I will summarize his position, which is found in a comment on the other post.
Calvinist (Protestant Reformation View): Metaphysical Salvation, Salvation and the Gospel Message with Metaphysical Implications, Focused on Who is Saved and Who is Not, and an Emphasis on Being Saved From God’s Wrath After Death.
Pentecostals: Commitment to Christ, Experiencing God, Salvation Experience, and a Connection with God Here on Earth.
Where Redford is Definitely Wrong
First, he misunderstands Calvinism, especially as viewed by Calvin himself, the Reformers, the Puritans, and many who still call themselves Reformed, Presbyterian or Calvinist today. Experimental religion, testing one’s experience against the Word of God both in Salvation and Sanctification, has been the Hallmark of the Reformation.
Even in my little Assembly of God church in Byesville, Ohio, the preachers were always asking us to test ourselves to see if we were in the faith: “Are you really saved?” they would ask. Indeed, every aspect of Christianity listed on the right side has been a major part of Christianity from the beginning. The doctrine of the Incarnation means God is with us. “Being saved” means not only being given Peace with God, but having the Peace of God. The Christian who knows God’s wrath was upon him also knows the joy of...
(Excerpt) Read more at wp.me ...
I think you will find there are NO Christians who accepts a "man-centered religion". Those who do are tares of the church. A true Christian can see the miracles of God not in some outward manifestation as feeding 5,000 with a few fish. This certainly didn't help the populace of our Lord's time. Rather a true Christian can see the miracles of God in their own lives, how He has and is transforming them.
If a person wants to test themselves to see if they are in the faith, then they should look inwardly to see the manifestations of God. Chris couldn't do this. He couldn't objectively see and acknowledge how God was working in His life to change him. Consequently he left. God did not open his eyes to the truth.
2. Why does that term need a modifying prefix?
Wonderful post, HarleyD.
I agree that no Christian accepts a man-made salvation, that is why I used the word “professing”.
The Scripture you shared was especially apropos.
Wonderful post, HarleyD.
I agree that no Christian accepts a man-made salvation, that is why I used the word “professing”.
The Scripture you shared was especially apropos.
I was hoping for a Muslim joke here.
An Atheist, a Pentecostal, a Heretic, and a Calvinist Walked Into a Blog. They found a Muslim waiting inside.
Allahoo Akbharoo!
BOOM!
CS Lewis compared the definition of Christian to the word Gentleman. In his day, the term had become a generic term for every man (”Ladies and Gentlemen”) so it was perfectly fine to describe someone as a true gentelman or fine gentleman. Sadly, the same is true of Christian, hence the occasional use of modifying pre-fixes.
Moreover, the term itself can be applied to both professors and in an effort to describe those truly born again, etc.
Can a blog fall down, go boom?
When a man (or woman) genuinely seeks the Lord, all the fluff involved with the name above the door to the church falls aside.
You will know them by their fruit.
Amen.
A tree with no source does not produce fruit. A dead tree does not produce fruit. All trees don’t produce fruit at the same rate, but they are still connected to the source of life, and living to reflect the Son that shines in(on) them.
The adjectives are hulls that will fall away someday to reveal what is truly inside.
Maybe we could say a Christian is a child of God, but many have truly run away from home and haven’t changed their name.
I was just re-reading that essay yesterday. Lewis was writing about the devaluation of words over time through poor usage.
“[Chris] couldn’t objectively see and acknowledge how God was working in His life to change him.”
That’s really not true if you read what he writes in the blog comments and what he says in the videos. He claims to have known God was working in his life. You may dispute that but you have no grounds to because you aren’t in his head.
Let’s stay fair here, folks. There’s no need for straw men. People can fall away from a real experience of God due to their own free will.
The term evangelical has come to embrace all manner of error ... I sometimes listen to the likes of Olsen and wonder about his eternity, as he certainly does not seem concerned with the eternity of his "flock" .Finney was a true heretic, and he has drawn many Arminian churches into his web..
I think of the parables of mat 13 with its warning and prophecy that a "little leaven leaven the entire loaf" Today there are as many churches leavened as there are unleavened ..But as Christ promised the elect will not be deceived
The doctrine of the Incarnation means God is with us. “Being saved” means not only being given Peace with God, but having the Peace of God. The Christian who knows God’s wrath was upon him also knows the joy of Salvation.
Amen! Christianity is the basis for true mental and physical well-being, as well as spiritual well-being.
RnMomof7: The term evangelical has come to embrace all manner of error
I usually don't use the term. "Protestant" was good enough for 500 years. Who benefits by Protestants further deconstructing into multiple names and nomenclature?
“Finney was a true heretic, and he has drawn many Arminian churches into his web”
He certainly doesn’t sound like a heretic from what I read about him. It seems to me like Calvinists are sore about him because he so strongly rejected their doctrine.
If their doctrine can’t be deduced directly, word for word, from the Bible, I don’t see how Calvinists are so free in throwing around the word “heretic” at someone who doesn’t believe in it. Calvinist doctrines have always seemed to be pretty much extra-Biblical interpretations to me.
I guess it depends how you define heretic
He denied original sin, a doctrine held by Protestants and Catholics.He followed Pelagius, the fifth-century heretic, who was condemned by more church councils than any other person in church history, in denying this doctrine.
Finney says, is that Christ could not have died for anyone else’s sins than his own. His obedience to the law and his perfect righteousness were sufficient to save him, but could not legally be accepted on behalf of others
Finney believed the reason for the cross was to return God’s moral government and to lead us to eternal life by example, as Adam’s example excited us to sin. Why did Christ die? God knew that "The atonement would present to creatures the highest possible motives to virtue.
Finney was all about men earning their way to heaven ...
"assumes that the atonement was a literal payment of a debt, which we have seen does not consist with the nature of the atonement ... It is true, that the atonement, of itself, does not secure the salvation of any one" (p.217).
There is more.. but this makes the point..
There is no strawman. Let's stay with what the scriptures teaches. People can shipwreck their faith. We can be unstable in our faith. But people can NEVER leave the faith. But in one way you are correct. Chris may one day return to the fold. I cannot see that end. But as John points out, "...they went out from us because they were not of us". I'm only quoting John. So it seems that John is making the same observation that I'm making.
"Free will" is just a myth, concocted in the depths of hell. Any bad fruit we have is of our own doings. Any good fruit we have is of Christ working through us. We are NOT free to decide whether we are going to produce bad fruit or good fruit. We will ALWAYS produce bad fruit unless God helps us. He is the vine and we are the branches and without Him we can do nothing. To think that we have a free will to choose to do good is absolute silliness and besmirches the grace of God.
“You may dispute that but you have no grounds to because you aren’t in his head.”
So, you are claiming he experienced God, but now he claims he did not really (actually he is confusing on that point, but I will accept your premise).
Aside from the implications of the Armenian view of salvation, which I do not take the time to oppose here, it seems strange to me that you would accept his claim that he was a real Christian (while he tells you God does not exist).
I plead I am totally flummoxed.
Finney was not a heretic because he rejected Calvinism. He was a heretic because he denied substitionary atonement. He therefore denies that salvation is on the merits of Christ. He taught that our own righteousness saved us, in the long run. Grace plus works.
He was wrong about every major point as it pertains to salvation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.