REFORMED?

[SovereignGrace]

You have no problem contradicting Scripture in order to continue believing your false doctrines. God left no one to themselves, and had He done so, He would be contradicting His own Word.

So why don't you simply sit down where you can meditate on Scripture, and meditate on these passages? But beyond that, BELIEVE what God has said.

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:18-20)

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16:15,16)


45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

48 And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:45-48)

FYI, I am a MISSIONARY Baptist, and its my Reformed beliefs that cause me to want to fund missions.

Yes, we are to go to all nations, but not everybody in these all nations are numbered amongst the elect.

 

[joaniemarie]

Nehemiah,

I completely agreed with your post until tour last line. How is everything that disagrees with a perversion of Scripture?

We both agree that it is an error; but our fellow believers are equally persuaded we are in error.

Perversion carries a strong connotation of intent to do wrong. In most Calvinists I've met I don't find that to be the case.

Calvinists tend to passionately defend dispensationalism. I believe that divine election does NOT involve their definition of predestination; but I regard my belief as THIS MAN's OPINION; and I do NOT consider everyone who disagrees with me perverted.

"Would" that each believer who posts here on CC have your good and kindheartedness Marc!

 

[SovereignGrace]

You have no problem contradicting Scripture in order to continue believing your false doctrines. God left no one to themselves, and had He done so, He would be contradicting His own Word.

So why don't you simply sit down where you can meditate on Scripture, and meditate on these passages? But beyond that, BELIEVE what God has said.

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:18-20)

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16:15,16)


45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

48 And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:45-48)

You said God left no one to themselves? Oy vey!!

Which of these nations:

--Edomites
--Hivites
--Hittites
--Jebusites
--Philistines
--Egyptians
--Assyrians

Had their names on the ephod's that were on Aaron's High Priest robe? This is found in Exodus 28.

And furthermore, which of these nations did Aaron confess their sins upon the scapegoat in Leviticus 16?

To say that God has not left ppl to themselves, is an egregious error.

 

[joaniemarie]

My view on the sin issue....Jesus paid the entire sin debt of humanity upon the cross, sin is no longer the issue.....faith into Jesus is the issue.....the sacrifice of Christ which covers all sin is preemptive and applied unto ALL who exercise genuine saving faith....if one dies without said faith and salvation they are judged by the law and condemned because the sacrifice of Christ has not been applied by the blood.......

When I see the blood I will pass over you.

No blood applied, they will not be passed over in judgment and condemnation.......

A big Amen to that! It's always about Jesus.

 

[joaniemarie]

I hear what your saying as well migo....I just cannot step over the statement-->the sins of the whole world and is why I used the words preemptive.....the debt has been paid already, but is only applied if one exercises faith into said sacrifice....

I know this is a gross example but is weakly compared to a life insurance policy......the policy is paid for and in force, but only applied at death......

The blood of Christ is in force, the debt has been paid, but is only applied at faith......

Right or wrong that is how I balance it in my mind when it comes to this particular discussion......

In a way the Passover kind of proves this.....the order was given, the promise to pass over in force, but was only applied if the blood was struck.....any and all who struck the blood would be passed over.....those who did not strike the blood were affected by the death of the firstborn.......

Very much like that example!

 

[SovereignGrace]

You have no problem contradicting Scripture in order to continue believing your false doctrines.

Hypocrite much? It was you acting like a crybaby that P4T made an personal attack against you and you did that very thing to me.

#Passive-Agressive

 

[SovereignGrace]

There is no need to continue promoting this fallacy. Every sinner who hears the Gospel MUST repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. So only those who "obey the Gospel" are saved. Since all will not obey the Gospel all will not be saved. By the same token if all would obey the Gospel, all would be saved. And the Lord Jesus Christ actually taught this in the context of John 3:16, but the Calvinists simply brushed it aside. So please note carefully.

ALL COULD BE SAVED
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (John 3:17)

BUT ALL WILL NOT BE SAVED
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. (John 3:18,19)

Another chunk of wood for my burn pile...

 

[preacher4truth]

Still awaiting for you, nehemiah6, to prove what you said about Spurgeon. Here is my request, again, which also explains your position, showing it to be not biblical:

Now as to nehemiah6 I am still awaiting proof of your claim that Spurgeon preached or taught that other than the elect are saved, or however you put it. You need to be backing up your claim. I know for certain it's false, but am expecting;

1) You to take something out of context he stated (kind of how you do with Scripture) or;

2) Just avoid it altogether and make pretense that what you said is true when you know it isn't true.

3) Just more arguing, and offerings of unsubstantiated claims which the naïve will accept as being true when it is false.

Oh, and for the record, Paul expected none other to be saved, because none other than His chosen will be saved.

But this first: The duplicity of folks who are against biblical election is remarkable. You teach a person becomes elect when they choose God, which is false, mind you, then you teach that people other than the elect get saved which is also incorrect and false doctrine.

Hopefully you can see the sheer error and double standards you employ here: If the latter aren't elect, but believe in the same way, how does that, in your economy make them not elect since by choosing they then become elect? It doesn't, it is senseless and both teachings are fictitious.

Then you hold to yet another glaring error in that you teach "God looked down through time and chose those who He knew would choose Him."

See the error there as well? How are any "non-elect" in that group? There cannot be even any non-elect being saved in that teaching either, even though your entire premise is false.

Your hermeneutics and teachings are completely inconsistent, and have to be so in order to support your free will idol and doctrines against election and predestination, a teaching you are fearful of that is completely biblical. The fact remains that you are more secure in what you did, thinking you made the decision to elect yourself and choose God, than in the fact that God chose based upon nothing in us, and for nothing we would or would not do, but solely according to His purpose; note 1 Corinthians 1:26-31; Romans 9:11; Romans 8:28 &c.

Anyhow, back to Paul, who expected none other than the elect to be saved:

Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.- 2 Timothy 2:7-10.

The fact remains, only those whom God has chosen will come to salvation, even though they are condemned and under His wrath prior to experiencing conversion; John 3:17ff, Ephesians 2:3&c. This is why we preach the Gospel because God has His sheep out there whom He elected prior to the foundation of the world, Acts 18:10; John 11:51-52; Ephesians 1; 2 Thessalonians 2:13.

You offered some quotes from Spurgeon that absolutely do NOT support what you stated in this post.

You also claim my above to be a personal attack when it is not, so report away! Any honest person can see that this charge is simply not true, but we are accustomed to false charges from you and others.

I've called you on your teaching, you have no recourse but to falsely claim I've attacked you personally, then you offer from Spurgeon absolutely nothing to prove your case as seen here. Not to mention your continual slander of the Reformed and Calvinists in other posts. I don't bother to go around reporting you.

Anyhow, your only argument is "why didn't he say the elect" or something similar at the end, as if this proves anything. It does not, and you are bearing false witness against Spurgeon. He never made the claim you've leveled on him, but here is your failure to prove he said it:

Since this is a personal attack, I will have no choice other than to report it to the moderators. However, for those who might be curious, I will also post an excerpt from Spurgeon that shows that while on one hand he said he was a Calvinist, on the other hand His sermons could not avoid preaching that the offer of salvation was to all who would repent and believe. So kindly read carefully what he says:

QUOTED FROM “PLENTEOUS REDEMPTION” (Sermon #351, December 16, 1860).

Christ has redeemed the souls of all His people who shall ultimately be saved. To state it after the
Calvinistic form, Christ has redeemed His elect. But since you do not know His elect until they are revealed, we will alter that and say, Christ has redeemed all penitent souls; Christ has redeemed all believing souls; and Christ has redeemed the souls of all those who die in infancy—seeing it is to be received that all those who die in infancy are written in the Lamb’s book of life, and are graciously privileged by God to go at once to heaven—instead of toiling through this weary world. The souls of all those who were written before all worlds in the Lamb’s book of life, who in process of time are humbled before God, who in due course are led to lay hold of Christ Jesus as the only refuge of their souls, who hold on their way and ultimately attain to heaven—these, I believe were redeemed—and I most firmly and solemnly believe the souls of no other men were in that sense subjects of Christ’s redemption....

And, now, a word or two concerning the last thought—“PLENTEOUS REDEMPTION.”... It is “plenteous” when we consider the millions who have been redeemed. Think, if you can, how
great that host who have already washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. And then think how many now with weary feet are plodding their way to paradise—all of them redeemed— they all shall sit down at the marriage supper of the Lamb! Is it not “plenteous redemption” when you reflect that it is a “multitude that no man can number,” that will be gathered in? Let us close that by saying, “And why not you?” If so many are redeemed, why should not you be? Why should you not seek for mercy on the strength of that, knowing that all who seek will most assuredly receive, for they would not have sought unless it had been prepared for them?

Since there would have been a multitude of sinners in his audience, he says to anyone and everyone "And why not you?" Although in good conscience he should have added "But only if you are one of the elect".

As anyone can see, he said nothing of the sort, in the end above you attempt to make it appear that way with your own words, not his.

You've failed.

I want direct quotes of Spurgeon saying other than the elect get saved. And spare me of the false charge of "personal attack" as many here know that is your fortè, to attack the Reformed/Calvinists. Believe me, we can handle it, we're used to dealing with this and with those who cannot prove their premise.

 

[notuptome]

Another chunk of wood for my burn pile...

Still awaiting for you, nehemiah6, to prove what you said about Spurgeon. Here is my request, again, which also explains your position, showing it to be not biblical:



You offered some quotes from Spurgeon that absolutely do NOT support what you stated in this post.

You also claim my above to be a personal attack when it is not, so report away! Any honest person can see that this charge is simply not true, but we are accustomed to false charges from you and others.

I've called you on your teaching, you have no recourse but to falsely claim I've attacked you personally, then you offer from Spurgeon absolutely nothing to prove your case as seen here. Not to mention your continual slander of the Reformed and Calvinists in other posts. I don't bother to go around reporting you.

Anyhow, your only argument is "why didn't he say the elect" or something similar at the end, as if this proves anything. It does not, and you are bearing false witness against Spurgeon. He never made the claim you've leveled on him, but here is your failure to prove he said it:



As anyone can see, he said nothing of the sort, in the end above you attempt to make it appear that way with your own words, not his.

You've failed.

I want direct quotes of Spurgeon saying other than the elect get saved. And spare me of the false charge of "personal attack" as many here know that is your fortè, to attack the Reformed/Calvinists. Believe me, we can handle it, we're used to dealing with this and with those who cannot prove their premise.

Spurgeon is not here to inquire of him directly so we cannot know if he believed as you infer he believed. I would contend that he preached the gospel to all men and allowed God to save those who responded to the preaching of His word.

At the end of the day there is no one who is going to help you to see anything you do not want to see.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Muzungu256]

no question about it spurgeon was a reformed preacher thru and thru!!!!!!!

 

[notuptome]

no question about it spurgeon was a reformed preacher thru and thru!!!!!!!

Well I don't know if he really fits the modern definition of reformed. It is likely that he took a position in opposition to Romanism which is a classic works based religion. He favored Calvin over Arminius.

Unfortunately many today impute more value to what these men of God taught than to what the bible teaches. You must view what they taught through the bible to really understand what they intended to teach not what those who came after them say they taught.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[garee]

There is a difference between a revival in regard to a particular sect and reformed. Reformed has to do with "time period" .The first century reformation did just that restored the government of God to when there was no outward representative and men walked by faith under the authority of our King not seen. The time of the Judges.

It is the pattern used as a parable of any reformation (sola scriptura) all things written in the law and the prophets,

It would seem affirming there was a reformation loses its value .Men desire to walk by sight comparing the Jewish flesh to a Gentile flesh as if there was a difference .

Which was a figure (parable) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. Heb 9:9

 

[7seasrekeyed]

No Willie my intention was to say politely please don't pigeonhole folks .
Blessings
Bill

that does sound reasonable

yet I just posted in a thread where the op seems to believe ALL charismatics have a loose screw

I'm not charismatic but I am also not a cessationist. there is pleeee-enty that both pentecostals and charismatics practice that I do not find in scripture and the results of many of these circuses is not good and many people are still cleaning up the mess years later even thought the 'experience' felt good at the time

it's pretty funny that some people liking your post are exactly the ones that DO label and crush everyone together

aren't you glad that God does not do that?

 

[Bogadile]

I'm not charismatic but I am also not a cessationist. there is pleeee-enty that both pentecostals and charismatics practice that I do not find in scripture and the results of many of these circuses is not good and many people are still cleaning up the mess years later even thought the 'experience' felt good at the time

You just described quite well how I feel about it. I believe in the continuation of the gifts until Jesus returns, it is very clear from the Scriptures this is the case. However I am not going to roll on the floor barking at a Benny Hinn service.

What the cessationists have done is, they have identified false signs and wonders and fakers, and have gone overboard to the point of stamping all of them as false.

 

[Nehemiah6]

You said God left no one to themselves? Oy vey!!

So now you have to revert to God's judgments in the OT to prove your point? Amazing! However, we are dealing with the offer of salvation to all after Christ came to this earth and offered His one great sacrifice for sins forever and became the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. And to prove how mistaken you are, all we have to do is read Acts 17:30:

And the times of this ignorance God winked at [overlooked]; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

So now let's take a closer look at this verse:

The times of this ignorance = all the ages before the coming of Christ

But now = today, at present, during the Church Age

Commands = obedience is not optional

ALL MEN = all human beings without exception

Everywhere = in every corner of the globe without exception

To repent = to turn from their sins, evil ways, and idols and turn to the Lord Jesus Christ

Now if God commands all men everywhere to repent, it means that He offers salvation to all men everywhere without exception. And that is the nail in the coffin of Calvinism.

 

[MarcR]

You just described quite well how I feel about it. I believe in the continuation of the gifts until Jesus returns, it is very clear from the Scriptures this is the case. However I am not going to roll on the floor barking at a Benny Hinn service.

What the cessationists have done is, they have identified false signs and wonders and fakers, and have gone overboard to the point of stamping all of them as false.

I agree completely.

However I would like to relate an incident:

Many years ago my wife and I went to an event at a Pentecostal church with a friend.

everything seemed to be done in Scriptural order ... One would speak in a tongue another would interpret.

Something about it didn't sound right so I recited Psalm 96 in Hebrew. The interpretation had no resemblance to Psalm 96.

 

[Depleted]

I can see how calvinism might give some people the idea they can never be saved

if a person has guilt or shame or is clinically depressed, they will not 'feel' saved and can assume they are therefore not saved

salvation is not about feelings, but a person who is told they have no choice etc, can very easily begin to think that Gods lot for them in life is for them to be miserable

I've known people like that and it can be difficult enough for them, without someone telling them God has put them on the dump because they are not 'chosen'

the more I learn about calvinism, the more I reject it. it is NOT God's plan for salvation

further, it is my understanding, that because I reject a method or interpretation of SOMEONE ELSES' faith, I cannot be saved

God help everyone if that were true

Amen sister that is exactly my thoughts on it...I think it is as dangerous as a cocked cannon...

er, not to argue, but to assure you, i number among the Reformed, and attend a Reformed church, but have never known anyone who does this.

we are fully aware most of us weren't familiar with Reformed doctrine when God saved us.

Ok...not wanting to argue either and I am happy to hear your thoughts on this matter.

My thoughts are that sometimes we, me included, can unintentionally cast fear and doubt on others...If we say Jesus didn't die for all and that some have no opportunity at forgiveness... then you can see how the enemy could use that to cast fear and doubt...He knows that we have to believe in order to receive the promises of God...In my opinion this gives him wiggle room to get in and try to cast doubts at others. He knows what scripture says...Whosoever shall believe, as well as any, so his job is to try to dissuade others from believing....and he does this in many ways...

That's my thoughts about it anyhow

We don't think that either.

How many other things will you tell us that we can't think that we already don't think? Because, so far, every time you tell us what the problem is with being Reformed, you haven't taken the time to find out what we DO think. Thus it always looks like "This is what's wrong with them," when it wasn't ever what we thought in the first place.

If you noticed I said this is my thoughts, and then she explained her thoughts and I thanked her for that because she is really one of the very few that even took the time to even explain anything to me about it. Most others I have talked too wouldn't explain anything to me about their beliefs... other than quoting Calvin, some other dude, or giving me one or just half verses.

So yes, I really do appreciate her post to me...

Right, you never said the word "Calvinism," because 7 said it for you. But you kept running down the list of what you think of it before being told what it really is.

And, right, I don't bother telling you what it is anymore, because the last time I did that you went right back to saying the same things about it that you said here. The same charges repeated.

If you don't know what Calvinists believe, (and I think you do), then that's because you are determined not to know, despite being told -- several times.

You're being appreciative to Notmyown now, but give it a little time, and you'll be repeating the same things again. You were appreciative with me at first too.

 

[Depleted]

If a person says they are "Reformed", do they not claim to follow the dictates Calvin stated? And if that is so, is it not very easy to look up what Calvin said..... and thereby know what those people claim to believe?

If a person is Wesleyan does that mean they believe everything Wesley said? (Or even know what Wesley said?) If they are Arminian, does it mean they believe everything Arminius believed? (Or even who he was?)

No. Really, the one thing all these men have in common is they got some stuff wrong. Truthfully, TULIP didn't even come from Calvin. It came from some guys -- much later -- who disputed what Pelagius said. Calvin would have rolled in his grave had he ever found out people were calling themselves Calvinist.

And when you refute TULIP do you ever quote Pelagius?

We're not all that different than you with our belief system. We take a bit from Column A, some from Column B, and a smattering from Column C. Sometimes we don't even know who put those things on the menu in the first place. The difference seems to be we're vaguely taught who said what and when, so sometimes remember the history that brought the doctrines we now believe.

And, we're big on understanding why the doctrines are doctrines. A how do we know what we know thing. We're taught the fight over "trinity," the fight over "was Jesus a man or God," and the fight over whose rightousness saves us.

We're taught it. But I know I was also taught algebra, and forgot most of what I've been taught.

 

[Depleted]

Exactly! All "REFORMED" seems to really mean is that it is part of the name on the sign out in front of the building.

Different churches, entirely different meanings of that word.

Nope. Reformed means we believe God chooses, God is sovereign, and Man is not free will. Does your church believe any of that?

 

[Depleted]

((senses math being discussed))



who says it's supposed to be + ?

1*1*1 = 1 is obvious in the algebra we are all familiar with, and to our normal cartesian way of thinking.

but "+" needs to be defined for any space, and so does "="
we are used to using them in a certain way, in a certain numerical context ((i.e. space, to an algebraist)) but it's only one of infinitely many.
still, 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 is valid in contexts that many people are familiar with, for example vectors

<1, 0, 0> + <0, 1, 0> + <0, 0, 1> = <1, 1, 1>

and <1, 1, 1> has measure ||<1, 1, 1>|| = 1 using the L[SUP]∞[/SUP]- norm,

or volume = 1 if you want to think of it in that way.

we use 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 when we're talking about how many jelly beans we have, if we start with 1 and add a few. but when we're discussing the nature of God and how He has revealed Himself to man, hey y'all, we ain't hardly talking about jelly beans, are we??!!

(I'm back to feeling dumb again. lol)