SITE NOTICE | MORE..iPhone+iPad App Update v3.8! Lots of fixes and enhancements including iTunes file sharing for importing or backing up sermons, smarter downloaded media fail-safe, and MAPS tab search for nearby churches! .. click for more info!
Great Sermon! Jeff Lyle says he goes out on a sturdy limb by assuming not everyone knows who Balaam is. Well, the limb is sturdier than you think. You mentioned repeatedly that Balaam was an Israelite prophet. However, Deuteronomy 23:4 clearly teaches that Balaam was of Pethor in Mesopotamia.
Darren wrote: 2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." Could somebody please explain to me what this verse really means? If God's will is never revoked why do some people go to hell?
Who this passage refers to isn't too hard to understand if you keep a few things clear in your head.
1) Who is the statement directed to? "...but is longsuffering to us-ward." Who is "us" and referred to in verse 1, "This is the second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you...". And, if you look at who 1 Peter is addressing, "...to the strangers scattered throughout...Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father..." So, this statement is directed to the elect.
2) The "any" is referring to the "us"
3) The "all" here is refers to the "any" and can't refer to everyone because the Epistle refers to those who will be destroyed.
Imagine adding "of us" immediately after the "any" and "all".
So now you should be able to see where God's will is being applied: the elect.
John for Jesus wrote: I'm not a big fan of this confession because it seems poorly written to say Jesus suffered the wrath of God for all mankind and then here that God will judge the sins of all mankind, which would seem to me to cause all to go to the Lake of Fire. I also have a red flag up about temporally being punished. Could mean purgatory.
The writers of that catechism tended to delay fully answering each and every point to later questions and answers.
Q12: Since, according to God's righteous judgment we deserve temporal and eternal punishment, how can we escape this punishment and be again received into favour?
A: God demands that His justice be satisfied.  Therefore full payment must be made either by ourselves or by another. 
 Ex 20:5, 23:7; Rom 2:1-11  Is 53:11; Rom 8:3,4
So, yes, God does punish all sin. Either directly to the unconverted or vicariously through Christ.
John for Jesus wrote: I disagree that Jesus paid a price of eternal Hell on the cross because He is obviously in Heaven and eternity isn't over. Jesus erased the debt of sin that believers owed, so there is no need to pay for it anymore. If the debt was obliterated, then there is nothing for Him to pay for.
I'm not sure I understand what John is communicating with the wording of that particular statement. Jesus Christ took the full force of God's wrath that was due to believers for their sin. He paid the full price of their redemption at the cross. And their sins were fully atoned for.
John UK wrote: Who is the "righteous servant"? Jesus. How many shall he justify (declare righteous)? Many. How does he justify "many"? He bears their iniquities. Does he bear the iniquities of those he does not justify? No. So they have to bear their own iniquities? Yes. Simple theology, but hidden to them that believe not. This is why Jesus spoke oft in parables, so that folks would not understand what he said. You want a chapter and verse on that? No, of course you don't.
Yes indeed John! A friend and I compared our own notes concerning this truth over the weekend. Conclusions of penal substitutionary atonement and particular redemption are inescapable when you study the OT and NT carefully and honestly and ask similar questions as you laid out here. You cannot help but see them unless you are still blind and refuse let go of tradition.
Faks wrote: Calvinists are scary. And before this one you had a post about hating Paul, that he's a bigot, and that you don't believe in Hell. And you and John are blood brothers or something? Don't they have any nice people posting here, any nice Southern Baptists?
I suppose some can be when they deviate from sound doctrine. More scary are the cultists who deny the glorious Gospel of Christ by diminishing the vicarious, substitutionary atonement for sin and put heavy yokes of legalism on people's necks just as the Pharisee's and the Judaizers did.
I only know one Southern Baptist these days (I once was one myself) but there are some who will continue lovingly expose your error and try to reach you.
John for Jesus wrote: Bizarre that we were predestined to God's wrath as unbelievers or that Jesus assended to the Father and we can't ome to Him on our own? God saves people from the Lake of Fire, where unbelievers are predestined to go. All saved people were once unbelievers. If you can go to Heaven apart from God show me.
I'm starting to get a little understanding of your bizarre notion of what it means to be predestined. You essentially have taken a predetermined destination and made it a variable destination. Your confused view can't really make sense of Acts 4:27, "For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Potius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel ***determined before*** to be done."
The crucifixion of Jesus was predestined/decreed to occur before Earth was even created.
I don't have time to write more; for now this will have to suffice.
John for Jesus wrote: 2. Meaning one must be faithful in order to be of the group of people who were predestined. Prior to their faith they were predestined for God's wrath. 3. Read the whole text. It is in relation to Jesus going to His Father. He says where I go you cannot come? Where did Jesus go? Heaven. We can't just show up in Heaven unless God draws us the
That is as bizarre as how Catholics read that passage.
Mike wrote: My old church being southern baptist reformed, is huge in " new Calvinism" they want to be relevant with the world. Instead of seperate.They want to be hip with the world. These men talk of Calvin and puritans, but Live there live much different.
And so full of arrogance and pride too. Coming to grips with the doctrines of God's free grace should have a profound impact on your life and your demeanor. Have you read "The Practical Implications of Calvinism" by Al Martin? http://www.the-highway.com/practical_Martin.html
John for Jesus wrote: 1. True, but it doesn't say we can't believe. 2. I ask you, who is the "us"? Verse one says it is the faithful. The faithful were predestined to be adopted. 3. We come to Jesus in Heaven after we die by God drawing us there.
re: 1: Coming (v44, 65) is impossible apart from belief. So yes, it does in effect say that.
re: 2: Yes, it is the faithful who were predestined v1 of Eph 1. The same ones who were "dead in sin" Eph 2:1 that were by nature children of wrath (v3) who were made alive with Christ (v5), saved by grace (v5, v8) through faith ***and not of themselves lest any should boast***. It was God's free gift.
re: 3: eh, what? Have you joined the The Faks Societety? I frankly have no idea how you came to that conclusion apart from your mind still darkened. Did you ever read John 6? v65 tells you what Jesus was referring to, "...that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my father." He refers in brief to the prior verse regarding who they were that did not believe and who would betray Him. v65 states so clearly that even children can understand that "no man can come" to Christ except through the Father's will to give Him. Are you still so blind that you can't see?
John UK wrote: ...but keep these thoughts in mind while you are doing your daily readings, and you will see how it all fits together. And when you see it, you will never again argue against the Biblical Doctrines of Free and Sovereign Grace, which some unwittingly call Calvinism.
I am regularly amazed during my daily reading since God graciously opened my eyes around 8 years ago.
John for Jesus wrote: At least in a lottery you have a chance to win. Calvinism is much more fatalistic then that, in that philosophy there are people who don't know there is a lottery and couldn't afford tickets if they did. They are doomed from birth without a chance.
Misrepresentations abound! Biblical Calvinism teaches that Jesus bids us to come and that those who do come and believe in Him shall be saved. This call is open to every one without exception and even commanded.
The tragic fallen nature of man is that "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, **there is none that seeketh after God.**" (Rom 3:10-11)
However, Eph 1:4-6: "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: *Having predestinated* us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, ***according to the good pleasure of his will***, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved."
John 6:44: "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day"
Praise God that He does remove our stony hearts; else none would come.
Wow, you are blind and lost. "Life is a test" Really? You accuse us of reading in to Scripture. You have absolutely no grounds for such an assertion.
You do love your strawmen arguments as Luker stated. You keep wanting to assert that God must be like the one of your own design because "life is a test, not a lottery" to you. What blasphemy! You deny the power of God to save someone and keep them and then raise them up in the last day. You will never hear a Calvinist claim that life is a lottery. Unless God saves us, **none** would be saved. Rom 3:10-18, specifically (or tersely if you will), v11 "...there is none that seeketh after God..."
John 10 is not speaking of conditional security at all. Jesus said, "ye believe not" and He gives the *reason*, "because ye are not of my sheep"! Extrapolating out what that meant to the ones He addressed would be **if they had been sheep, then they would believe**. It is plain and even a child can understand it.
1 John 1:7, "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowhipo one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from [how many sins???] all sin."
Thank God for the power to save sinners to the uttermost!
Presby wrote: Ah but don't forget Thomas Presbyterians use the Whole counsel of God including the OT. And don't forget Thomas your method was only introduced in 1521. Here is a sermon on SA to help you... Confessions of a FORMER Baptist
I was just jabbing for fun but thank you just the same. I have studied this out for several years now, which was prompted by my attending a Reformed church for a little while. I haven't come to my conclusions lightly.
However, I would like to mention one thing regarding the notion that because something was alleged to have been introduced as recent as 1521 that it must be wrong. Martin Luther and John Calvin would both take issue with that I think. Should they have gone back to Rome because Rome rejected Sola Fide? The question is whether or not it is biblical.
By the way, baptism by immersion was also practiced early in the first century AD to as I recall. (sorry, just another quick jab; no offense intended - I love the Presbyterian and Reformed; some of my friends are P&R. I also love listening too Alan Cairns - Let the Bible Speak - of the Free Presbyterians)
Faks wrote: Actually Jesus' prayer in John 17:12 disproves your doctrinal statement: "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. There's also "Many are called and few are chosen."
What doctrinal statement? Jesus's? I told you that that verse (John 6:39) was doubtless confounding to you and that proved true. I quoted Jesus alone. Exactly how then does Jesus Christ lose **none** that the Father gives Him and actually **raises them up on the last day**? That verse speaks directly about the chosen and not the (generally) called.
More confounding Scripture to you and your doctrine: Jesus said in John 10:26, "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." This, I fear may be you.
John 10:27-29, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."
John UK wrote: It is His Word, God's precious Word, It stands for ever true: "When I the Lord shall see the blood, I will pass over you." By Christ, the sinless Lamb of God, The precious blood was shed, When He fulfilled God's holy Word, And suffered in our stead.