Posted on 01/23/2002 6:38:27 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Yup. BTW, while this Reformed pastor's harsh words for the "methodist and baptist revivals" might be taken as a stab at the Baptist communion, I choose to charitably regard it as a reference to the kind of "revival" that was going on... a rejection of the Historic doctrines of each communion (Methodists departing from Old Anglican Calvinism and "New School Baptists" departing from Reformed Baptist Calvinism).
I choose to read the author the same way. Today's Reformed Baptists would prefer, say, Asahel Nettleton's revival work over Charles Finney's any day.
If I split my winnings with you, we both will have to repent of the sin of gambling and taking ill-gotten gain derived therefrom.
In any event, it's better than having an an angel Moroni burned on my front lawn at 2 a.m.....
{8-)
Radical, eh?
But for now, we dwell among a people of unclean lips, many of whom falsely believe that they are Saved, and oft-times we are not warning them as we ought.
...are the Halls of the Professing "church".
I didn't get the impression that this guy's article was about the "once saved, always saved" issue. I'm not saying that you think it is, but it is a different issue. Furthermore, defining the problem that way doesn't change my basic question. If the explanations of the gospel that people are receiving are doctrinally correct, why do they make a one-time "sinner's prayer" without substance instead of a true repentance and confession? The thrust of his article still seems to be: "We're telling them all the right things. Why don't the people of the church do what they are supposed to?" My question remains: If they aren't doing what they are supposed to do, how can you be so sure that you are teaching the right things?
WFTR
Bill
Amd the main reason for this dangerous omission is the fact that most churches are Arminian. This creates the misunderstandings which OP was referrimg to.
In order for you to have "won", you must prove that praying for someone is considered bashing.
2 Corinthians 4:3-6 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them. For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus' sake. For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.Now, when our church goes by and annoints the beams of that temple with oil and prays that God would break the delusion, we are not bashing or being hateful, we are praying that God will command the light to shine in your darkened hearts. Now, you are free to maintain that it is hateful if you like, but I would declare that such a position on your part is just plain bigoted. It is no different than when "black" people behave in a bigoted way around "white" people for no other reason than they are "white" and they must be bigots. So, I would submit that 1 post doesn't qualify as anything, especially given what was said.
"You're going straight to hell if you aren't baptised today!" -- What oddity. This dogma -- the Roman doctrine of baptismal regeneration -- is one which Calvinists have ever staunchly opposed.
The guy, a Calvinist who seemed to revere Calvin more than God, didn't like being told that what God has to say carries more weight.
It is certain that this fellow was no Calvinist, if he affirmed the dogma which you have attributed to him. He did not "revere" Calvin; he frankly opposed Calvin, and preached a dogma (baptismal regeneration) which Calvin called "fatal and pestilential".
If this was his dogma, he had not even read Calvin -- even as many who object to Calvin, have never read his writings either.
May the Lord grant eternal peace to whoever it was that recently died and left you in charge of my salvation....
If he endorsed Baptismal Regeneration, then Calvinist Predestination most certainly did not have "a real hold on the guy". Calvinist Predestination admits zero incorporation of human works (even including the divinely-ordained sacraments of Baptism and Communion) in the ordination of the Divine Election of Predestination. To advocate a theory of Baptismal Regeneration placed this fellow in frank opposition to the Calvinist doctrine of Predestination.
So neither he, nor you, would be in the "good company" of Foxe's Book of Martyrs. Most of those hallowed saints died in defense of the Calvinist doctrine of Predestination. Realize that the fundamental reason why the Reformers broke communion with Rome was over the doctrine of Absolute Predestination. That was the fundamental doctrine which Foxe's Martyrs were dying for!!
The Reformation was fought, first and foremost, because mighty Men of God realized that if one honestly inquired what the Bible taught on the subject of Predestination... the only doctrine which one could admit as Biblical was the Calvinist doctrine thereof.
If not for Calvinist Predestination, we'd all be Romanists. At a fundamental level, that was what the Reformation was about. It was the only Doctrine which justified breaking communion with Rome. Why? Because it concerned the nature of Grace itself... the very heart of the Gospel. IF and only IF Rome had gotten THAT wrong -- and had strayed from preaching the Biblical doctrine of Absolute Predestination -- was the Reformation justified. Every other "offense" of Rome was an ecclesial offense (offenses concerning the proper government of the Church) which could be handled within the Church without breaking communion. Only the doctrine of Predestination presented an insurmountable disagreement between Rome and the Reformers... and justified the necessity of a Break in Communion.
Those who disagree with the Calvinist doctrine of Predestination have no ecclesiologically valid reason to be out of communion with Rome.
If you do not know this, you've got a lot to learn (I say in complete and charitable honesty).
Sounds like he was a louse.
Not to worry; from the Wentworth Letter:
Persecution has not stopped the progress of truth, but has only added fuel to the flame, it has spread with increasing rapidity. Proud of the cause which they have espoused, and conscious of our innocence, and of the truth of their system, amidst calumny and reproach, have the Elders of this Church gone forth, and planted the Gospel in almost every state in the Union; it has penetrated our cities, it has spread over our villages, and has caused thousands of our intelligent, noble, and patriotic citizens to obey its divine mandates, and be governed by its sacred truths. It has also spread into England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, where, in the year 1840, a few of our missionaries were sent, and over five thousand joined the Standard of Truth; there are numbers now joining in every land.Our missionaries are going forth to different nations, and in Germany, Palestine, New Holland, Australia, the East Indies, and other places, the Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done.
But, of course, you already know this. ;-)
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.