It's quite amazing how quickly the conversation moves without me! (And that's okay - just the nature of these public forums.)
Welcome to CC - I followed your progression on the "Not By Works" thread a little and had to laugh a bit to see how you stepped into the middle of "lively discussion"!
I myself mostly stay out of that thread: it has a good point and I agree with its thrust that salvation is not by works. But when it gets pushed to the extreme it becomes a "let's talk about faith only; and don't bring works up at all". So I mostly stay away because I do not want to undermine the thread topic and emphasis.
I am not a Calvinist (far from it) and if you stick around here I will probably wind up getting into deep (not "heated" ) debacles with you, so I am not sure why I give you any encouragement to stay - actually I suppose it is because I sense you have a good spirit about you!
I welcome the deep discussions, and I look forward to them. I believe when done in a spirit of love and understanding (not that we have to agree in the end), they can be mutually edifying. I appreciate the encouragement to stay, and I hope my spirit of congeniality always comes through in what I write.
To start with you may as well not try to pin me down with some sort of man-made doctrinal statement. I just go by what the Word says: no less and no more (and there are about a half-dozen on here whose hackles will go up if they read that: they will say I don't! LOL!). I believe that we need to read each and every Scripture and interpret each one in its context: none of this having a doctrinal statement by which I interpret the individual verses.
I couldn’t agree more with you – we need to read each and every part of scripture and interpret each part in light of its context. I’ll mention two things here to push back one what you’re saying here – in a friendly way. (Pushback is a term I’ll probably use often, it only means to challenge or question – not fight or argue.)
First, when you say, “I just go by what the Word says: no less and no more…”, this in itself is a doctrinal statement – well, more of a creed if you will. Is it man-made? Sure – not in a bad way, though – it’s a statement made by you, and you are part of mankind. Doctrinal statements and creeds (I recognize that I’m bringing up the subject of creeds here, and that creeds may not have been mention previous to this post in this thread), are an organized presentation of what men and women before us have put together as they studied the scriptures themselves. As you study the scriptures, you’ll come up with your own doctrinal statements. For example, “Salvation through faith alone” is a doctrinal statement.
Second, and I hope this doesn’t open a whole can of worms, so I’ll not say what I believe regarding the rapture, but do you hold to the teaching that Christ will rapture the church from the earth prior to a time of great tribulation? Did you know that the word “rapture” never occurs in the Bible, nor is it ever explicitly taught in the Bible to occur? It’s assumed – whether right or wrong – because of the perceived absence of the church after a certain point in Revelation.
My point isn’t to say whether or not this doctrine is right or wrong, but rather to present a possible doctrine that you may agree with that may find its place in the category that you place the 5 Solas in.
Also, what are our pastors doing on Sunday mornings except sharing with us what they’ve come away from the Scriptures with? It’s doctrine, Lord willing, sound doctrine, but doctrine none-the-less.
So you come in here touting the 5 solas - you may do that - but you won't find those five listed anywhere as the five cornerstones of the Bible.
You mention that we won’t find the 5 Solas mentioned anywhere in Scripture. Do you mean that we won’t find them as an explicit list in the Scriptures, or that they have no support in the Scriptures? I want to make sure I’m answering your response adequately, and not making a false assumption on what is meant.
Take just this one "faith alone" - Those words are never found in Scripture except in James 2:24 where it says "not by faith alone." And furthermore salvation is not by "faith alone". Whose faith? well, your faith? so you save yourself? And if it is "faith alone" then grace, God's love, Jesus, the cross, and the resurrection have nothing to do with salvation because it is by "faith alone." Now of course you are allowed to use "faith alone" as a doctrinal statement and I am sure you can explain eloquently and probably very soundly what it means: and I might have little issue with your explanation. But you won't find "faith alone" in the Bible. I won't say what the founders meant by "faith alone' is wrong, but I will say that the wrong overflow and use of that cry of "faith alone" has caused much lukewarmness and passivity in the American church.
Any cry of a creed or doctrinal statement without fully understanding what is meant by it, and without living out what is taught by it certainly can and does lead to lukewarmness and passivity. I agree with you on this point.
At the same time, we shouldn’t toss the baby out with the bathwater. There are many who know what is meant by “Faith Alone”, and hold to that truth without hypocrisy. Should they be discouraged from holding that as one of their doctrinal statements? Should we leave off with using “Faith Alone” because some got it wrong – and discourage the proper use of it by others who hold to its truth?
There you have it: Now I will sit back and see what you are made of . . . ????
The question has been asked a few times, why not leave off with the title “Calvinist”. Truthfully, I’d prefer not to have to say that I’m Calvinist, but when the term Calvin is, from my perspective, misrepresented and disparaged, I feel it necessary to speak up as one who identifies with that system of theology.
I’ve included the quotes from your post, not to pick what you said apart, but to show where various parts of my response is addressing what you said. I’m not sure if that’s standard practice on CC, but I know it can be perceived as nit-picky. My intent is sincere.
Also, I appreciate your thoughtful interaction here! Thank you. I hope we can continue to dialogue together on these matters. If I’ve omitted anything in my response that you wanted me to address, please let me know. I’ll be glad to revisit and respond to anything I might have missed.
God’s blessings on you, friend.