'Encroachment of Calvinism' concerns Baptist editor
Southern Baptists must decide whether they are satisfied with a "presumable encroachment of Calvinism" in their leadership and their seminary graduates, Baptist paper editor Gerald Harris wrote Feb. 9, drawing responses from several SBC entities.
In a column titled "The Calvinists are here," Harris, editor of The Christian Index, newsjournal of the Georgia Baptist Convention, set forth statements about Calvinism and quoted Southern Baptists on both sides of the issue.
"... It appears that some of our institutions and agencies are giving, at the least, tacit approval to Reformed theology or are, at the most, actively on a path to honor, if not implement Reformed theology and methodology in their institutions," Harris wrote at ChristianIndex.org....
Look up in your Yellow Pages® under Churches and you'll likely validate a statistic more akin to this:
98 out of 100 Evangelical preachers recommend works with your justification for a balanced salvation.
The RCC has no corner on this market. Evangelical preachers are utterly sold out for works salvation. They'd prefer following the old paths rather than the "genuine theological novum," Sola Fide, coined in the 16th Century.
If salvation were to be truly watertight of works --- even the works of neurons firing in the brain --- who could know it?
Plus, nobody really desired the hassle of memorizing this wonky new salvation formula and its four associated dogmas anyway.
Mike wrote: The wise won't be taken in by "9 out of 10" TV ad-like words.
Lurker wrote: Poor John, If only you had born an elite Reformed Presby and baptised the eighth day, all would be well.
Och aye the noo Lurker.
Although I can't see me in a tartan skirt with a wailing bagpipey for scotty worship and going home to a dinner of haggis and chips, followed by a wee dram to keep the cold at bay.
Old Paths Beat Theo Novums wrote: 9 out of 10 Evangelical preachers recommend works with your justification for a balanced salvation. A word to the wise should be sufficient.
The wise won't be taken in by "9 out of 10" TV ad-like words.
O for onesty wrote: Good grief what a terrible accusation to make of John. Don't you know that he is a professional hyper-Wesleyan of long standing? He has been teaching the Roman Catholic style works based religion for ages. His methodology is to take a verse and reconstruct it to demote the operation of the Spirit and promote the ability of the sinner. For example the indwelling of the Spirit is not allowed in John's theory until the sinner has acted in accordance with acceptable parameters. Thus under his own volition the sinner without the Spirit, overcomes enmity with God and a lack of spiritual discernment, even dead in sins, and works a faculty of private faith and repentance. Jacob Arminius is obviously a good buddy of John.
Poor John,
If only you had born an elite Reformed Presby and baptised the eighth day, all would be well.
John UK wrote: Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. John 5:25 How can "the dead" hear the voice of the Son of God? By that quickening spirit which opens eyes and unstops deaf ears.
Yup! Of course there are many who never hear the voice of the Son of God, and therefore, if they become religious, they will be, and act, just like that - religious. They may even hold firm to the calvy flag, but they will still only be religious, no matter how many times they recite the wcf.
Christianity is about the Lord Jesus Christ calling men to himself. It is about hearing his voice, his actual voice, internally, in the heart. No man can produce such a calling, neither can he merit or demand or encourage such a calling. It is by the will of God only, and as such, it is a very humbling thing to be so called. The few humble Christians that I know, would say with myself, "Why such grace to such an ungodly specimen as me? Why did he save me? Why shower this scarlet reptile of a sinner with his great love and mercy? Why choose me of all people unto salvation and eternal joy?"
Good grief what a terrible accusation to make of John.
Don't you know that he is a professional hyper-Wesleyan of long standing?
He has been teaching the Roman Catholic style works based religion for ages.
His methodology is to take a verse and reconstruct it to demote the operation of the Spirit and promote the ability of the sinner.
For example the indwelling of the Spirit is not allowed in John's theory until the sinner has acted in accordance with acceptable parameters. Thus under his own volition the sinner without the Spirit, overcomes enmity with God and a lack of spiritual discernment, even dead in sins, and works a faculty of private faith and repentance.
"Some truths which it is hard to explain in words are simple enough in actual experience. There is no discrepancy between the truth that the sinner believes, and that his faith is wrought in him by the Holy Spirit. Only folly can lead men to puzzle themselves about plain matters while their souls are in danger. No man would refuse to enter a lifeboat because he did not know the specific gravity of bodies; neither would a starving man decline to eat till he understood the whole process of nutrition. If you, my reader, will not believe till you can understand all mysteries, you will never be saved at all; and if you allow self-invented difficulties to keep you from accepting pardon through your Lord and Saviour, you will perish in a condemnation which will be richly deserved. Do not commit spiritual suicide through a passion for discussing metaphysical subtleties."
John UK wrote: I guess the scriptural argument is just too great, Lurker.
Makes one wonder from whence some of these posters get their doctrines and how they are satisfied they are biblical. It seems to me that if Christians really feared God who alone holds the power of life and death; they would search the scriptures as if their very lives depended on it so they were sure they weren't being carried about by every wind of doctrine.
Oh well! Not to worry. It's only our eternal destiny we're talking about.
Duh wrote: BTW, calvs cannot say "will not". You can only say "cannot" because according to you the unregenerate are literally "dead".
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. (Ezek 18:4)
Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
2Cr 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
1Cr 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
No problem? A stony, hardened, blinded heart isn't really that hard and blind after all, just a little anemic? It can turn to a new heart of flesh to love the Lord God if it just lifts itself up by the bootstrap? The blinded Jews could have done the same if they would have just used their God given freewill and that spark of prevenient grace innate to all mankind?
1Cr 4:7 For who maketh thee to differ [from another]? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive [it], why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received [it]?
WillNot CanNot wrote: Sinners 'will not' because they are servants or slaves of sin therefore they 'cannot'!
Actually, that's enlightening. Perhaps what you said is the reason some Calvinists often will not answer a question, but hightail it to the WCF or some supportive commentary. They will not because they cannot. Thanks for the insight.
Duh wrote: You must feel very special to be so elite
Ha! I guess you feel very special, seeing as you think you know something the calvinists don't.
However, enough bandying words. When I prayed for you last night, it was because I believe God can make a difference in your life, unlike the arminist who imagines man is in the driving seat and must make all the running and willing.
When you understand grace, you will become like the apostle Paul in his attitude, thus:
For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 1 Corinthians 15:9-10
Here we have Paul the "abundant worker" for Jesus Christ. Yet he doesn't claim anything for himself; it was ALL the grace of God.
If you can get shot of your "prevenient grace" error for a moment, and think about Paul's mindset, you may yet become a biblical Christian, which is neither a calvinist nor an arminist.
Duh wrote: Was Christ speaking lies when he said v34b ..but these things I say that ye might be saved? And what was then the point of his remark at v40.. and ye will not come to me, that ye might have life? Surely he could have explained the bondage of their will and how to overcome it. It was an ideal opportunity to demonstrate his calvinism. BUT, what do we find? A simple statement that shows cause and effect viz. they will forfeit the life he held out to them because they would not come! Simple.
If you want to make a case against the doctrines of grace (calvinism), why are you arguing from first covenant texts?
The doctrines of grace are new covenant specific. You know, the gospel of the grace of God Paul preached after He confined the Jews in unbelief and turned His favor and sure mercies to the Gentiles.
So we all know where you stand, perhaps you could tell us exactly when the new covenant came into full force and effect.
John UK wrote: Now you have really gone down in my estimation, even further than it was already. Now I gave you the answer to your question, but you do not have ears to hear, nor eyes to see. These things are far too deep for you. The whole of your thinking is on a shallow level. You are like those in the NT to whom Jesus spoke in parables, so that they wouldn't understand a word he was saying. I'm sorry, but that's the way of it. However, if you come to see that there are two views of looking at events, you may get somewhere. The first view is the simple view, and if arminists would stick to that, all would be well. But no, they want to look at events from God's view as well, and so they are all budding theologians, thinking they know greek etc. I trust that the Lord will remove his grace from you for a season; then you might realise that grace is not merited.
Don't care at all for your opinion of me.
Grace is never merited and no one says it is. So quit your lying.
You must feel very special to be so elite
Must be really something to know the secret code to understanding the bible. Plain people cannot understand it. We need a calv to explain it
Duh wrote: Nice little dance. But you have not addressed the question! Obviously the Lord needed a good calvinist to explain to him the "bondage of the will" and then he would not have made such unguarded statements. BTW, calvs do not say "will not". You all say "cannot" because the unregenerate are dead!
Are you calling me a Calvinist?
Now you have really gone down in my estimation, even further than it was already.
Now I gave you the answer to your question, but you do not have ears to hear, nor eyes to see. These things are far too deep for you. The whole of your thinking is on a shallow level. You are like those in the NT to whom Jesus spoke in parables, so that they wouldn't understand a word he was saying.
I'm sorry, but that's the way of it.
However, if you come to see that there are two views of looking at events, you may get somewhere. The first view is the simple view, and if arminists would stick to that, all would be well. But no, they want to look at events from God's view as well, and so they are all budding theologians, thinking they know greek etc.
I trust that the Lord will remove his grace from you for a season; then you might realise that grace is not merited.
John UK wrote: But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. John 5:34 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. John 5:40 Of course, the Messiah was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, who were claiming belief in "Moses", that is, the law. But they did not believe Jesus was the Son of God nor the Messiah. That is why they had him killed under the Mosaic law. I say 'they', but some of them believed. Those who believe the doctrines of grace also preach that men should believe and be saved. They also say, "Ye will not come to Christ and be saved?"...
Nice little dance. But you have not addressed the question!
The point is the Lord was willing (no limited atonement here), but they were not. It was not the Lord who made them unwilling.
According to calvinism if the Lord was willing but it did not happen, then he failed!
Obviously the Lord needed a good calvinist to explain to him the "bondage of the will" and then he would not have made such unguarded statements.
BTW, calvs cannot say "will not". You can only say "cannot" because according to you the unregenerate are literally "dead".
Duh wrote: Was Christ speaking lies when he said v34b ..but these things I say that ye might be saved? And what was then the point of his remark at v40.. and ye will not come to me, that ye might have life? Surely he could have explained the bondage of their will and how to overcome it. It was an ideal opportunity to demonstrate his calvinism. BUT, what do we find? A simple statement that shows cause and effect viz. they will forfeit the life he held out to them because they would not come! Simple.
But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. John 5:34
And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. John 5:40
Of course, the Messiah was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, who were claiming belief in "Moses", that is, the law. But they did not believe Jesus was the Son of God nor the Messiah. That is why they had him killed under the Mosaic law. I say 'they', but some of them believed.
Those who believe the doctrines of grace also preach that men should believe and be saved. They also say, "Ye will not come to Christ and be saved?"
All that come to Christ, believing, will be saved, that is for sure. We are looking now at the view from the human side.
COMMENTS 
locked 
Plain people cannot understand it. We need a calv to explain it 
