This is a debate no doubt as old as Christianity itself. That man was created a volitional creature is without question, but what guides his choices? This hotly contested issue can be traced back at least as far as the days of the Pelagian controversy, when Pelagius took exception to a prayer by Augustine of Hippo, in which he asked, "Lord command what you will, but give what you command." The debate has continued down through the centuries between the likes of Luther vs. Erasmus, Calvin vs. Arminius, Whitefield vs. Wesley, Nettleton vs. Finney, and more recently, RC Sproul vs. Norman Geisler.
I think it's fair to say that what one believes about this issue is determined by his understanding of what happened in the garden of Eden. As many have stated, there can only be three possibilities concerning the condition of Adam's progeny after the fall: 1) The fall affected only Adam; 2) The human race was affected by the fall, but not completely; 3) That Adam died spiritually, and thus the whole human race was plunged into a state of spiritual death.
In his book, "The Doctrines that Divide", Erwin Lutzer addresses this issue as "Free Will" vs "Predestination".....I tend to think of it more as a matter of "free will vs. bondage of the will. " Do the scriptures address this issue decisively? I will withhold my own view on this subject for the time being, but I challenge each who may comment on this important matter, to make a scriptural argument for whatever position you hold.
note: Nettleton vs Finney wasn't so much a debate between the two men, rather two men who preached during the 2nd Great Awakening from two opposing viewpoints.
Friday, January 05, 2007
"Free Will".....is man's will truly free?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
96 comments:
I beleive the bible teaches that until the Holy Spirit gives man a new nature(regeneration)then his will is in bondage to his old nature...Romans 5:12..Eph 2:1 dead in sins..I liken mans unregenerate nature to that of a lion..set 2 bowls of food one of meat and the other vegatables he has a choice to eat of either but will always choose the meat since that is his nature...We are the same way until the Holy Spirit quickens a dead heart of a Child of God. The believer is then equipped w/ a dual nature (Romans 7:21) to truly choose...good or evil...John 6:44 says God draws man to himself... This means to me that inwardly God changes the heart and outwardly man follows...
Im going to go with #3. Because of Adam, we are all born totally sinful with no way to save ourselves. To me, the emphasis in Eph. 2:1-22 is on the word "dead". In my mind, I picture someone drowning in the ocean, being pulled under by the current with no hope of survival. Spiritually, as Eph. 2:5 says, we were dead in our transgressions like that person drowning with no hope. God does the saving...HE reaches in to the water and pulls us out, gives us CPR, and takes us to His home to heal and grow and learn. Because of verses like these, its hard for me to hear so many pastors telling the unsaved in the congregation to "repeat this prayer after me". Repeating a prayer may be a sign of salvation but since we CANT make the decision to save ourselves, repeating a prayer doesnt mean we are saved. I think I may be getting a little off topic here...stepping off my soapbox...sorry AOG! :)
I don't really understand #2. Could you elaborate?
In any event, I believe scripture, (Romans 3) points us to #3. No one seeks God, No one understands....
lindon,
to simplify the 3 possibilities...1) man is well, 2) man is sick, 3) man is dead...number 2 implies that although the fall greatly affected man, there's enough goodness left in him that he can "choose" Christ in his own power.
Sometimes truth is difficult to digest and for me the truth is that God's sovereignty reigns supreme over man's free will due to the total depravity of man. My fear is that I will be labeled a cold calvinist. The one passage that speaks to me is the condition of the rich man in hell. He lifted up his eyes in torment. He never accused God of being unjust. Not even a hint of blame toward God but rather a cry for the smallest degree of mercy short of no mercy at all. He cries for an intensity of warnings to his surviving family. God cannot be charged with callous indifference to unbelievers. All who die seem to understand the extension of mercy and free grace on God's part.
aog, thanks for bringing that down to a level I can grasp! Definitly, 3.
wh, It helps not to refer to election as 'Calvinism'. Why does he get all the credit? A mere man?
quote: God cannot be charged with callous indifference to unbelievers. All who die seem to understand the extension of mercy and free grace on God's part."
How do you deal with this in Romans 9:
10Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger."[d] 13Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."[e]
14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."[f] 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."[g] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "[h] 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?
lindon
God is not unjust, not at all. He cannot be charged with callous indifference to unbelievers. He is just and fair.
John Calvin dosen't get all the credit but he deserves a little for laying the foundation toward our belief in election. I hope you won't mind if I continue to call myself a Calvinist.
lindon, watching,
Calvinism is just shorthand...a means of identifying onesself with the belief in the doctrines of grace..aka the 5 pts..frankly I think Calvin would be embarrassed and might even rebuke us for linking his name with those doctrines, since as you say, he did not invent them, nor did he systemetize them into 5 pts...that was the Synod of Dort's doing in response to the 5 heads of reformed doctrine that the Remonstrants protested.
I agree completely. It is just that some tend to forget the 'Just' part.
Well, I might cry a bit your calling yourslf a Calvinist, but I will get over it! I believe in election but refuse to call myself a Calvinist!(Great Book...must read for all reformers: Step-Children of the Reformation by Leonard Venduin written in 1962. Don't worry, he believes in election, too.)
There was an interesting question asked and answered in this post on election: http://centuri0n.blogspot.com/
aog, we were commenting at the same time....
I understand the reason why we use the term Calvin but it really bothers me. (I know, I know..get over it...)
Calvin was part of the 'state church' that persecuted Anabaptists because they would not join the state church or have their babies baptized. I lump him in with John Knox who was part of a conspiracy to murder Mary, Queen of Scotts and even preached a sermon excusing the murder of her 3rd husband of which he was a plotter. There is a very unsavory past with reformers and the state church in Europe.
I most certainly believe in election as did most 'baptists' until about 100 years ago. But, I am not impressed with reformed history...even with the writings of Martin Luther who lamented that he would love to have a 'believers only' church in addition to the state church filled with those compelled to come or get a visit from the magistrate.
Forgive me for this rabbit trail....
lindon,
I think most people "kick against the goads" when it comes to Romans 8 & 9. Most would just prefer to skip over them or try and just explain it away. As a former pastor of mine once said..."Try and explain it all, you lose your mind...try to explain it away, you lose your soul."
lindon,
The only way you'll ever understand reformation history, is in it's historical context..as in every era of church history. The 16th century in Europe was quite a different place, and it's governments were quite different as well...Luther, Calvin, Knox...were all men of their times..but prove that God can still hit a pretty straight lick even with crooked sticks...btw..a little history on Knox..bloody Mary once said of him..."I fear the prayers of John Knox more than all the armies of Europe."
Sad to say but I would like to be called a 'Bible believer' but it is an overworked phrase that has no meaning today. If I say I am a 'Bible Believer' everyone says, "well aren't we all?" But when I tell people that I am a Calvinist then they know exactly where I am comming from and what I belive. They don't have to guess as to what I believe and I don't have anything to hide.
Very good points, aog. You seem like a very measured man. I have yet to read anything from you that is in any way vitriolic, sarcastic or condescending. God Bless you!
What I would love to learn more about is the remnant church. Was there a remnant church that refused to join Constantine's state church? Has there always been a remnant church? The information out there is vague and sketchy.
Any thoughts on Antinomianism? I kept running across it in my research on election a few years back.
lindon,
I created this blog as a discussion forum...no one has to be a scholar here, or agree with anyone else's views, including mine, to come here and discuss these things. My heartbeat in this is just to get us as Baptists to search the scriptures and whatever belief we hold, to let it be informed by the scriptures, and not just what we're told, or by tradition...I'm a reformed/calvinistic believer..not because the reformers taught it..but because I believe it's substantially what the scriptures teach. But I also understand that others come to different conclusions, and I have many brothers and sisters whom I hold in high regard who would disagree with me on some points. I don't even agree with everything my brothers and sisters in the reformed ranks think...but I love the slogan I have on this blog from the reformation...eccelesia reformata, semper reformanda...the reformed church, always reforming...always becoming more and more conformed to scripture...I think that's a good slogan.
If people have free will as the anti-calvinist say then when God ask in the garden, "where art thou?" the implication is that God did not know until Adam and Eve came out of hiding. God who was originally sovereign in creation is now not omnipresent nor omniscient. When he ask Eve, "what is this that thou hast done?" He did not know until Eve informed him? Is man's will truly free?
watching,
God knew exactly where Adam was, and exactly what Eve had done. He was calling to Adam to look where he was, and to Eve to acknowledge what she had done. In my view, Adam and Eve were the only people to ever have a truly free will, uncorrupted by sin, until Eve was deceived, and Adam partook of the fruit with her.
poorinspirit, seekingtruth, lindon, watching...just want to say thanks for your input..it's very encouraging to me and edifying as well...you all make very good points.
all of grace( I like that tag)
I am an armchair theologian. It's my day off and I have the house to myself to labor over the text. I'm not sure I can agree with you and I can't put my finger on exactly why. I understand you to say that Adam and Eve's fall is somewhat different than our fall. "All have sinned..." comes to my mind.
Sometimes I want to throw up my hands in desperation and agree with Augustine that God created in man a necessarty defect that explains the problem of evil! That would make me a cold calvinist. While man was created holy he was created from the dust of the ground. Evil is not an abstraction but is a person, Satan. So the problem of evil resides in the person of Satan. Adam and Eve were drawn away by the external things while Satan had evil internally.
Thanks to Ken Hamm I am a literal 6 day creation guy and I do not hold to any gap theories of Lucifer's fall as taking place between Gen 1:1,2 but his fall took place before Gen 3. It does seem to me that the garden temptation was not just about Adam and Eve but also the serpent. Probation would entail God's questioning dialogue with Adam and Eve but to Satan he just abruptly pronounces a curse upon him detailing his destruction. Then proceeds to pronounce his wrath upon the rest and the promise of deliverance.
Sin originated in the garden of Eden.
In worship of all mighty God I throw up my hands and declare that a sovereign God decreed the present universe, willfully permitting the entrance of evil into it to fulfill those purposes which were elected in his holy and eternal counsels.
Ok, let me give this a try:
My free will is limited to whether or not I pick up the Bible and study or the new book on Ariel Sharon I just received. (Strange: There are times I hunger for the Word just like food and then there are times I do it out of obedience..what is that?)
I used to think the fruits of the Spirit were free will. No longer. Now I know that those fruits can only come from the Holy Spirit working them in me. I am too depraved to practice them on my own.
Can my free will stand in the way of the Holy Spirit working them in me?
I am trying to find the Spurgeon sermon on just this topic...of free will. There are things we do have free will over.
Any thoughts from my 'arm chair theologian' friends?
watching: "Evil is not an abstraction but is a person, Satan. So the problem of evil resides in the person of Satan. Adam and Eve were drawn away by the external things while Satan had evil internally."
God allowed evil to exist. I have heard it preached that by doing this, He can bring Glory to himself. (That must sound awful to people. But we have this teddy bear image of God that is incorrect) We exist to Glorify God. Period.
But the only problem I have with your statement is that scriptures talk about our 'flesh'..our sin nature. After the fall, our flesh became worldly...we took on the attributes of sin because of Adam and Eve. We deal with our sin nature until we are restored. Ergo, the evil is not just 'outside' of us. Adam and Eve took on the sin nature. Right?
lindon
The temptations, the bait, are outside us and our desires, lusts are aroused, enticed, sin is conceived when we yield. Yes, free will always stands in the way of the Spirit's operation, that is why we are admonished to submit ourselves to God and resist the devil and you have the guarantee that he will flee. That is why they are called 'fruit' of the Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit at work in us, supernaturally.
Yes, there are things we have free will over but they are things that we do not do from a pure heart but as sinners and doubleminded people. We afflict ourselves, mourn and weep. While others laugh and are joyous we are in heaviness. We sinners humble ourselves and the Lord lifts us up. (James 4:5-10; I John 2:15-17)
AOG,
I check in on your forum from time to time, just to see what's being said. (S'pose that makes me 'lurking'.) I've enjoyed this interaction.
It's interesting that the more one reads the Bible, the more that the "free will" scheme breaks down. One of my favorites that's not mentioned much is the account of Abimelech in Genesis 20. The short of it is that God kept Abimelech from sinning with Sarai, not for Abraham's sake, but for the sake of the Seed yet to come.
Anyway, keep up the great discussions. I am blessed by them.
watching,
What I meant was...Adam and Eve were created upright...no sin..they walked in perfect unbroken communion with God..but God put a tree in the midst of the garden as a symbol of his right to be God and His rule over them. When Adam chose to disobey, he plunged the whole human race into sin...Adam was our federal head and covenant representative in the covenant of works God made with him. As we are all children of Adam..because we were in Adam when he sinned, all died. That was my point...because of Adam's sin, our wills are now in bondage to sin..we can choose, but our choices are in bondage to our sinful, depraved natures, until by grace, God unshackles our will. But we still have the flesh to contend with as long as we walk on this earth. Paul, in Rom. 7 describes this struggle. Hope that clarifies it somewhat.
consumedwithoutgrace,
Thanks for dropping in on us..please feel free to join the discussions..as watching says..we're "armchair" theologians. But whether you join in or not, I hope you find something here that edifies and encourages you, or provides some good resources for you. Blessings.
AOG
still working on Free Will...
Adam was created from the dust of the earth and Eve was taken from his side. They are creatures as are angels. Only man was formed from the dust and I assume angels were just spoken into existence. I've read that man was formed from the dust and thus we should not have too high an opinion of him. The JW's seem to have a high opinion of Adam and the garden of Eden. Rom. 8:20 states, "the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope."
So Adam was not created perfect, but pure and sinless. God is perfect. If Adam had been perfect he would not have sinned.
God cannot be charged with respon sibility in the sin of Adam neither can he be absent when he did sin. Christ was there with Peter when he foretold his sin and though he himself was being prepared for crucifixion he brooded over Peter's denial knowing that his faith would not fail; he would be converted and when he was converted he would comfort the brethern in their sinfull condition.
James says: "the scripture is not vain when it saith, The Spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy." "The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth." Given the facts of the Bible, the exercise of free will led to the sin of Adam and Eve and it was predictable, maybe enevitable. (I speak as an armchair theologian here) Such a slight disobedience was attached to such a great penalty. Through it all God is neither a meddling dictator nor an absentee landlord but he was there and his purposes, decreed from eternity were working in resisting the proud and giving grace to the humble. James 4:6
Spurgeon, in his "In Defenese of Calvinism" states:
"That God predestines, and yet that man is responsible, are two facts that few can see clearly. They are believed to be inconsistent and contradictory to each other. If, then, I find taught in one part of the Bible that everything is fore-ordained, that is true; and if I find, in another Scripture, that man is responsible for all his actions, that is true; and it is only my folly that leads me to imagine that these two truths can ever contradict each other. I do not believe they can ever be welded into one upon any earthly anvil, but they certainly shall be one in eternity. They are two lines that are so nearly parallel, that the human mind which pursues them farthest will never discover that they converge, but they do converge, and they will meet somewhere in eternity, close to the throne of God, whence all truth doth spring."
Ever since I read this quote by Spurgeon, I have found these debates over "free will" and "election" to be not much more than theological hair-splitting. Why we obsess at times with trying to explain the Unexplainable so that our little finite minds can understand it puzzles me.
Does man have free will? Yes
Is God sovereign? Yes
Are these two ideas seemingly contradictory? Yes
Can man understand it? No
Does it mean they both aren't true? No
What purpose does it do to debate it ad-naseum?
Just my 2 cents.
ed_t,
The whole point and purpose of this blog is to spur people to search the scriptures..whether anyone agrees with my own personal views on these things is not. I raise questions in a manner that I hope will accomplish that purpose..to base whatever position one holds on the revelation given in the Bible...the level of discourse on this blog has been very respectful of one another's views and understanding of these things. I really don't sense hair-splitting in anyone's comments or positions...I do enjoy the discourse..because I get to hear others share what they're studying and what they've discovered from their studies...it's good fellowship as far as I'm concerned...and some have emailed me as well as posted on the blog that they appreciate and enjoy the opportunity to discuss and fellowship around that. I concede, it's not for everybody...but it's here for whoever is interested. Thanks for stopping by and commenting. Blessings.
ed_t,
John Piper on the So-Called Antinomy Between the Sovereignty of God and Human Responsibility.
lindon, what makes you think Baptists don't believe in election?
My Southern Baptist pastor for 30+ years would explain it this way (my paraphrase) - Salvation is a like a doorway. While on this earth, the sign at the top of the doorway reads "Whosoever will may come. In eternity, we look at the sign on the other side of the doorway and it says, "Chosen before the foundations of the earth."
And my former pastor was as Baptist as you could get. :)
Like my former pastor and Spurgeon, I don't find the two issues mutually exclusive.
The question about this debate that I always have is: WHY is it even an issue? What is the big, fat, hairy deal that this is worth so much fuss? (other than the obvious implications on evangelism)
What practical implication does any of this have on day-to-day Christian life?
ed_t: Wow, there is a lot in your post. Let me try to explain even though it will be a pitiful attempt. But I warn you, I can only explain in context of my testimony. I pray it does not bore you! :o)
"lindon, what makes you think Baptists don't believe in election?"
Sheer numbers. Hatred toward Calvinism. (C-word!) Reading the Baptist Press. Etc., Of course, historical Baptists belived in election. This free will thing is relatively new...maybe a 100 years or so.
Now, since I live in the same city as the SBTS, I get to see things in somewhat of a different light. When Mohler became president, you would have thought Hitler came back from the dead to take over. And that was just the reaction of the Baptist churches! The newspapers, who did not understand, just demonized him as some sort of Hitler Christian that hated other Christians. All because he was the big 'C'. This went on for several years! (BTW: Mohler teaches an SS class in a free will church. He has done quite a bit to bridge the gap…with love.)
However, with that said, I am completely amazed at what is happening. There is some sort of 'awakening' going on. I cannot explain it. But 5 years ago, you would have been hard pressed to find someone who believes in election on a secular campus. Now, we are seeing reformed students showing up on campus at Christian events with their Reformed books, small reformed churches popping up with 20 something’s. I admit the movement is not large but even at this rate, it is quite amazing. Just a few years ago, no one in an Arminian church would have admitted to being a C. Now, quite a few do and worship with the free willers! Like me.
" Salvation is a like a doorway. While on this earth, the sign at the top of the doorway reads "Whosoever will may come. In eternity, we look at the sign on the other side of the doorway and it says, "Chosen before the foundations of the earth."
My only problem with this is that I would never come to the door on my own. Only God could drag me to the door.
It took me a long time to see this. I thought I was 'seeking God' but I wasn't. But, I think God honored my ignorance by sending me into a horrible situation where my only chance of escape was to depend on Him. I could no longer depend on those I thought were Christians. This is the only way that would have worked with me. I went home and for 6 months did only one thing: Read scripture in context looking for answers as to how people can call themselves Christians and yet, do the things they do without any remorse. You know what he showed me? MY SIN. For the second time in my life, I became overwhelmed by my own sin. BTW: We should worry when there is no chastisement. It may mean that God has left us to our own devices.
But, it was through this process that something in the Word kept popping out at me. ELECTION. There was my answer as to how 'professing Christians' could do the things they do with NO remorse. They aren’t saved. (Hear me out…)
Please do not misunderstand this point...I do not believe you have to believe in election to be saved...not at all! It is just that they are many professing Christians out there who I believe are not saved. People who are saved act saved more than they don’t act saved. It is that simple. But people do not want to believe it is that simple. If they are saved they still sin but they are desperately trying to walk in the Light. You can tell.
I was confused about election because this went against what I believed being the little 'god' that I was. I kept studying and God kept revealing. Then, I e-mailed a cousin of mine who, lived far away, that I knew was a 'C' and asked her to send me every verse she could think of that had anything to do with election. She sent me about 4 pages of verses to study. Same verses that I had recorded during my own 6 mo study.
This novella, leads me to answer your question:
"The question about this debate that I always have is: WHY is it even an issue? What is the big, fat, hairy deal that this is worth so much fuss? (other than the obvious implications on evangelism) What practical implication does any of this have on day-to-day Christian life? "
Boy this is a big one. It has EVERYTHING to do with how we approach the gospel message. I started seeing real problems at my former mega and in the mega community in the light of this. People think, really think, they have something to do with someone's salvation. So, they plan, design, strategize on how to get people to "accept" Christ. They spend millions and millions on this! It has become a business...a very profitable one I may add. We are marketing Christ! As I heard at so many GCM conferences: You have to ‘brand’ everything you do at your church.
It literally becomes works oriented. It becomes a formula or a creed and turns into a exactly what the Catholic Church is guilty of except ours looks so much more fun: We lure them in, tell them, God loves you, Jesus died on the Cross to save us from our sins and don't you want to go to heaven? Yes! Who wouldn’t? Ok, say this prayer, be baptized and presto, you are one of us. YOU BELONG. Where is the brokenness? Where is the regenerated heart! Where is the new creation?
We have turned it into a cross between a social club and a business. The pastor is the CEO of this social club. The CEO has his board of directors who are the elders and are chosen carefully to represent the success of the world. (I saw this formula in so many churches!)
What is wrong with this picture? No where in scripture do we see people asking Jesus into their heart. No where in scripture do we see: Jesus loves you and wants to forgive you. That is not the FULL gospel message. The first sermon Christ preached in Matthew is REPENT, for the Kingdom of God is at hand. The gospel message pierces the heart...breaks us...turns us into brand new creations that are not the same. We are not recognizable from what we were before.
The scripture tells us that FEW who profess to be Christians will make it through the narrow gate! We are seeing it before our very eyes. (Matthew 7)
The question is not are we saved? The question is: Do we HATE the sin that we loved before. Do we keep repenting every day? Growing in holiness?
As one theologian said, I think it was Paris Reidhead: I would put a moratorium on the teaching of salvation for 2 years and only preach sin. Because no one understands sin anymore. (bad paraphrase)
Anyway, we plan these events, programs, entertainment hoping they will come and eventually 'accept Christ' when all we need to do is preach the full gospel. Paul plants, Apollos waters, Christ gives the increase. We are mere vessels but we are decorating the ‘vessel’ making it the focus. The Church has literally become the idol. We put it before Christ. (This is happening at BBC and it happened at my former church)
We dumb down the Word, making it more palatable for these seekers so it cannot pierce their hearts. We teach heresy such as self forgiveness, purpose driven life, the love languages of God, dominionism, results, unity of relationships, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
And even more dangerous, what we win them with is what we win them to. They are being won to entertainment, feel good platitudes, fake forgiveness, works, fun, zany kids programs, cool Jesus stuff, horizontal relationships. Everything, except Christ alone.
I heard one repentant former GCM preacher say he grew a church of baptized pagans. I also heard another reformed pastor say these big fancy mega churches have been built on the dead bones of unconverted church members. How true!
I am going to say something really harsh now. Or, I should say, 'harsher' :o) I believe we have many 'churches' that are filled with unsaved people who think they are saved. (Gasp) I believe with all my heart we are guilty of sending people to hell with a false gospel that scriptures warn us against.
I also discovered some tests in scripture to tell us if we are really saved. One is Matthew 7 which is usually quoted out of context and not taught fully as it was meant. This passage is about people who call themselves BELIEVERS but it is usually taught as meaning those other people out there...unbelievers, atheists, etc.
Another good one is in 1 John (which is hardly ever taught anymore)
When is the last time we have heard a pastor claim from the pulpit these passages saying you may not really be saved unless...
No, we are taught that we cannot judge that. That is a lie from the pit of hell. Matthew 7 (and others) say different. We may not know who is elect in the end, but we can see fruitfulness. I pray that if someone loves me, they will rebuke me. Don't we love one another enough to want to keep each other from hell? Please, tell me when I am sinning!
There is so much false teaching out there it freaks me out. I mean, I am amazed but I know I fell for it, too. I will say this...for the last 10 years, I have been uneasy in my heart. But, I could not put my finger on it. God had to chastise me to total brokenness before I saw what I was doing: Believing and then promoting a false gospel. I believe the prayers of my dear mother were answered. She knew the situation but did not live long enough to see me really saved.
What are the day to day implications? Number one, God starts separating us from whatever we need to be separated from. Has anyone noticed this, too?
Number two: I can do nothing but defend His Word, proclaim His Word, Walk in His Way..walk in the Light. And, I stumble often. My evangelism is preaching His full gospel message…very badly, I might add. He gives the increase. I am a nothing and a nobody. I am not worthy of a second thought. (This is a very big deal for me to admit. I was extremely successful in a worldly way, sought after by many companies for my expertise, made lots of money, etc. Now, I am a poor broken down fool for Christ that some in my family thinks is a nut case...even a loser.)
And I have a burden for those sitting in these towers of Babel who are as lost as I was. I also have an anger (which I am praying about) toward false teaching.
How was that for the short edition? :o) Aren’t you glad you asked?
Well, I don't know how much energy and time I want to devote to this debate - I ended up in a 20+ page thread on a message board debating whether or not baptism was required for salvation. But I'll make some comments...
I'm not aware of any "hatred" of Calvinism in my Baptist circle of associates. They may not agree with Calvinism (at least as it is defined today), but they don't hate it. Really thought it was interesting to read about Mohler and Paige Patterson debating Calvinism in the SBC last summer.
I agree that there are many "Christians" out there who are not saved, but I don't think it's got anything to do with election theology. It's got more to do with living in a capitalist society and how that affects church thinking. Below is an excerpt from a good article in Christianity Today entitled: "All We Like Sheep"
According to Finke and Stark, the American church adopted a consumer-driven model because the First Amendment prohibited state-sanctioned religion. Therefore, faith, like the buying of material goods, became a matter of personal choice. And "where religious affiliation is a matter of choice, religious organizations must compete for members and … the 'invisible hand' of the marketplace is as unforgiving of ineffective religious firms as it is of their commercial counterparts."
This explains why marketing strategies and secular business values are pervasive in today's ministry—we're in competition with other providers of identity and meaning for survival. We must convince a sustainable segment of the religious marketplace that our church is "relevant," "comfortable," or "exciting." (One billboard in my area proclaims, "Kids love our church. It's FUN!") And we must differentiate our church by providing more of the elements people want. After all, in a consumer culture, the customer is king.
I doubt I could be convinced that churches espousing election would be immune to these trends of consumerism nor do I think the consumer mentality of churches is related to only churches who are "non-Calvinist". I think it's just a sign of the times in which we live. The consumer mentality leads us to measure our "success" by growth figures just like in a corporate board room.
I still think Spurgeon's "In Defense of Calvinism" sums up the Baptist view on all this. Spurgeon does a good job of fitting the free will of man into the sovereignty of God.
For now, I'll leave it at that.
Ez: How do you get people to understand just how close you came to eternal destruction and show them how they are on the same path without looking and sounding like a blooming idiot..."
Well, I probably gave more information than anyone cared to know. But, I think there are many out there like me. But you know, we really have no control over the result and if we speak total Biblical truth, we are going to sound like fools...for Christ. And the truth is, being saved ain't easy.
It is harder still to walk in the Light each day, because you can get sucked in...just like at the BBC blog. Do you have any idea how much of that mirrors what I saw in churches all over this country..simply because I was in a position to see it and God opened my eyes. I feel like I have this secret information I must tell people about. They are being fed lies.
You know, when you get right down to this 'sin' thing...it is NOT our sin...stay with me...It is our ATTITUDE toward our sin and sin in general. We MUST hate it. When you see people kind of blow sin off as a mistake, or give easy cheap forgiveness and do not see a godly sorrow of shame, there is a problem if this is continuous. Dare I say it? You gotta question fruit at that point.
Here is one thing that really scares me that I am seeing on that blog and all over Christendom ...this idea of 'annointed men' that we cannot touch. I cannot think of any 'annointed men' but maybe..an old ragged country preacher on his knees 20 hours a day who would be furious if you called him 'annointed'... know what I mean?
maybe aog, should do a post about this heresy. This annointed thing is popping up all over the place, in reformed circles, too. There are problems in both camps with 'authority' teaching even though their methods are very different.
Ez, Ironically, one passage, among others, that God has used to open my eyes, is Ez 36. (I think it is 36...about the separation, new heart of flesh, cleansing, etc.) Notice He says...I WILL do this and do that. They did not have a choice!
The present light view of sin has a flip side...that flip side is an all too high view of man..which means there's a low view of God and His holiness...when we become desensitized to His holiness..we take a light view of sin..another thing..we've lost the doctrine of depravity..man's utterly corrupted nature...there's no understanding of it anymore, and people have begun to believe we're really not that bad...which degrades the cross..and the magnitude and need for God's grace..and by grace I mean the gift of God working in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure...we cannot regenerate ourselves, or bring it about...it's a sovereign gift, sovereignly given..that fact debases man and puts him in his place...and in this age where the gospel that's preached tells men they have it within themselves to "get saved"...promotes this light view of sin. imho
Here is something interesting to ponder on: I heard a sermon recently where the pastor said that we have degenerated salvation into a popish creed. Just like the Catholics baptize babies, we have someone say a prayer, invite Jesus into their heart, Baptize them and pronounce them saved. He asked, how is this 'supersticious' prayer any different than Baptizing babies? (please ignore my spellling!) How can that pastor pronounce anyone saved? It could take months, years to see the fruit of regeneration and sanctification.
He was making the point that we do not teach the doctrines of perserverence of the saints nor the doctrine of security correctly. There are many outlines in scripture for us to go by to check if we are really saved or not but we do not preach them anymore.
Ez: "Having read the WORD one time and running across John 1, it seeems the abiding occurs by a lot of time in the Bible.... Why don't we preach this from the pulpit any more? "
Yes, EZ, Yes! Whatever we do, do it to the Glory of God. I was thinking just today as I went to the grocery, did I pray about it first? Am I abiding in Him to the point where I cannot even go to the grocery unless He is a part of it?
AoG,
Told you I would drop by when I got a chance. I really am not going to post on the nbbcf blog (or whatever the acronym is) any more. I checked back in to make sure 'ace' got my apology. I saw where the 'crowd' was giving their teary eye farewell to you. It may pull too hard on your heartstrings to resist going back, but that is another story. The questions that I presented ace were sincere, and really did hope that it would reveal that there was something to him deeper than a puddle, but you saw the result. Sadly, that may be indicitive of the depth of many(not all) who are waging battle on either side, but I digress.
There are some really great posts already on this thread. The quotes from the 'Divines', the links, the numerous scriptural passages pointed to have laid out much for the soul to dwell on. If you dont mind, I'd like to take it in a different direction.
When a bull goes charging through a china shop, he breaks a lot more than he intends is what I believe one blogger told me in a semi-rebuke. He was right. Another blogger directed an angry and saddened response to my comments to ace and spoke of being an arminian (aog-notice the spelling) and having a teenage daughter that was mentally retarded. She then asked the question, "Well, I guess according to your 5 point theology the only hope she has is if GOD has chosen her"....I didn't respond, but I wanted to say....YES!!!! WHAT OTHER HOPE COULD WE HAVE FOR ANY IN THAT CONDITION? The point being this...you can discuss the doctrines of grace separately but they are always systematically and harmoniously joined together. You may be asking at this point, what in the world are you talking about?
depravity...election...atonement...grace
This thread is about free will. The arminian believes that salvation is according to free will. The man who believes the true gospel believes salvation is according to free grace. What better example than in the case of one who is mentally retarded, or in the case of an infant. I personally do not believe they are the subjects of reprobation, I know that Spurgeon didn't either. If that is the case, then by what merits are they declared righteous before GOD?
This whole 'well they didn't reach an age of accountability thing' cant fly because we are talking about sinners, maybe not by choice, but by nature...either way...GOD has to judge it or it has to be atoned for. In the case of the lady's mentally retarded daughter or an infant, it cant be said that salvation is according to an act of their free will. It can ONLY be said that it is an act of GOD's free electing grace.
They are depraved as any other, but they are elected in GOD, secured by the meritorious work of Christ for His people, according to the love and grace of GOD and of those given unto Christ by the Father, He shall lose none.
Sorry, no wiggle room for free willism there
I dont know that lady, the arminian lady with handicapped daughter: but the very doctrines of the gospel, the ones that Jesus preached, the ones that the apostles preached and then were murdered for preaching, the ones that Jesus said of, when the Holy Spirit is come, he will bring these things to your remembrence the things I have said unto you; these doctrines she despises, and they ought to be the ones that give her comfort. These doctrines that she mocks is the gospel.
I will close my post in true China shop bull fashion, for I dont think our blog master will delete my post...this is just my opinion, take it or leave it, but think on it. Daily, it grows harder and harder for my mind to reconcile this thing...how can one who says they have been saved by grace alone continually despise the idea of GOD being sovereign in grace?
That was not to pick a fight, so spare me the comments about it makes no difference in our day to day life, because it does.
Old preacher told a story: young man asked him, 'how come you and your wife get along so well, I dont believe I've ever heard a harsh word between the two of you'. he replied, 'Well, after we got married, we were riding back to the house in our horse and buggy, and the horse kinda of rared up. In a stern voice I told the horse, "that's one". The horse rared up again. I pulled out my pistol and shot him dead. My wife got upset and slapped me real hard on the arm. I told her in a real stern voice, "That's one".
Point: Right from the beginning, you need to know who the boss is. Most folks dont know who the boss is.
CSB
china,
Couldn't agree more about the age of accountability thing, concerning infants and the mentally incapacitated. Sin, both original and actual have to be atoned for...no middle ground.
That particular issue has been a difficult one for me, in coming to a solid stance one way or the other...at least in an exegetical sense. There are basically 3 passages which have spoken to me in some sense on this issue.
1) When the child conceived in adultery by David and Bathsheba was stricken, David had been fasting and weeping, then when his servants informed him that the child had died, David arose, cleaned up and took food. His servants were surprised at his behavior and asked why. David's response in 2 Samuel 12:23 speaks: "But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me."
For many I'm sure this is conclusive enough, but for me one question mark is raised...what is David saying in this phrase? Is he speaking of joining the child in death, or joining him in paradise? In the OT scriptures the word sheoul is used much, and unless I'm mistaken on this, refers to the grave..also the phrase...and so and so "was gathered to his fathers", which I believe means to join them in death. Perhaps a Hebrew scholar could straighten me out on this and clear it up. Anyhow this speaks to the issue I think, but not conclusively for me.
2) Then there's the story of Nineveh, where God sends Jonah (the long way :)) to prophesy against her and call her to repentance or face destruction. When Nineveh repents and God spares them, Jonah has himself a spiritual hissy fit (Nineveh hadn't been too kind to Israel). Then the LORD comes to Jonah to correct his thinking, by springing up a plant to shade him from the sun, then withering it, angering Jonah. The LORD confronts Jonah: Jonah 4:9-11 Then God said to Jonah, "Do you have good reason to be angry about the plant?" And he said, "I have good reason to be angry even to death." Then the LORD said, "You had compassion on the plant for which you did not work, and which you did not cause to grow, which came up overnight and perished overnight. And should I not have compassion on Nineveh, the great city in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know the difference between their right and left hand, as well as many animals?"
I think it can be easily inferred from the LORD's reference to the 120,000 that these would include infants, children still not old enough to know "right from left", and probably those mentally incapacitated as well. The question for me in this passage is this: The LORD's concern for these 120,000 is beyond doubt..but what is the basis of His concern..if these would be included in the election of grace? Was the concern over their physical life, or spiritual? Again..speaks to the issue, but not exactly conclusively in my mind...again a plea to any Hebrew scholars out there who could straighten me out here.
3)This last one is not really one passage, but a few, and an appeal to the overall tenor of scripture.
Matt. 19:13-15 Then some children were brought to Him so that He might lay His hands on them and pray; and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, "Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." And after laying His hands on them, He departed from there.
Mk 10:13-16 And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; and the disciples rebuked them. But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, "Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it at all." And He took them into His arms and began blessing them, laying His hands upon them.
Luke 18:15-17 And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He might touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them. But Jesus called for them saying, "Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter at all."
First, it's important to note that this event is recounted in 3 of the 4 gospels..the children being brought to the LORD range from infants to small children..possibly some a little older. I believe the LORD in part, is teaching by analogy, the necessity of being "born again", becoming like a child. But the reference to infants I think is very significant in Luke's account. That, and His words, "for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." Both the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are referenced among the 3 gospels. While some may believe that the 2 references are interchangeable, and I guess in some sense they are, I still find it significant that they are translated in different terms. Now to my final appeal: Whenever I find that the scriptures don't address an issue directly or definitively, I first appeal to the scriptures for some precept or principle which could give direction on the matter...if I still can't find an answer, I appeal to the overall tenor of scriptural revelation. It's clear from both the OT and NT scriptures that children are a blessing, and are very important to our God. As one who adheres to covenant theology, albeit from a Baptist viewpoint, I must let the New Covenant be the final arbiter and interpreter of all previous administrations (covenants)of the covenant of grace. That said, because of our LORD's words in the gospels, the overall tenor of the scriptures concerning children, and the mere fact that all are born in sin, and that in that sense, are all as helpless as infants, dependent solely on the mercy and sovereign grace of God to set us free from our shackles; and finally, my own appeal to the wisdom and scholarship of those giants of the faith who have gone before me and on whose shoulders I stand, I have to take the stand of Spurgeon, Mohler, "china", and others, in agreeing that God has mercifully and graciously included those infants and the mentally incapacitated in the covenant of grace, and provided for them in the atonement. Good grief what a mouthful!
btw china,
Nobody gets censored here unless they get particularly nasty, or come here for the sole purpose of beating up on someone..all views are always welcome. Even if you break some china, just be sure to come back and clean up the mess ;), which I know you would. The LORD has blessed this little endeavor by bringing folks here who have kept a high level of discourse..may HE continue to bless us in that regard, and guide us in our thoughts and words.
allofgrace: "That said, because of our LORD's words in the gospels, the overall tenor of the scriptures concerning children, and the mere fact that all are born in sin, and that in that sense, are all as helpless as infants, dependent solely on the mercy and sovereign grace of God to set us free from our shackles; and finally, my own appeal to the wisdom and scholarship of those giants of the faith who have gone before me and on whose shoulders I stand, I have to take the stand of Spurgeon, Mohler, "china", and others, in agreeing that God has mercifully and graciously included those infants and the mentally incapacitated in the covenant of grace, and provided for them in the atonement."
This is exactly what I have come to think, too. It was interesting to see your take on the passages from Jonah and on David.
I have often wondered about the infants in Sodom and during the flood.
Lindon
AoG,
I had supposed that we would be in agreement on the premise of infants and such being found in the election of grace.
Another few verses I like is found in the 72nd Psalm. This is a Psalm for Solomon, and is speaking about the righteous exploits of his reign. Of course, I have always looked at these as the Psalms of Christ, and you cant help but see all the types and figures and prophecy intertwined in them. But is that at the expense of practical applications? Of course not. I know, some would say this would be exegesis(right spelling?) gone astray. But consider the depth and passion of these words.
Psalm 72:12 For he shall deliver the needy when he crieth; the poor also, and him that hath no helper.
13 He shall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls of the needy.
14 He shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and precious shall their blood be in his sight.
It seems there can be drawn from that a definite spiritual sense, but you cant overlook the implication of the saving of the innocent and helpless...maybe it's just me.
That was not the original major subject I hoped to touch, but I am glad that it is an area of agreement, and probably for many others for the reasons that you and I laid out.
My main point was to highlight the pacivity of the 'free will' in this. And I believe like the scriptures, and also drawing from the wisdom of men who came before, that our will in passive in regeneration, and because of our condition of total depravity it must be so.
Though you didn't reference that part of my post, (free will) might I safely think that you agree with that part also? And did you like the preacher's story?
And AoG, know that this Bull has no intention of breaking no glass on this forum. I think this forum is wonderful! But, while this is a 'free' discussion, you never know when a 'party pooper' may descend upon such hearty discussion. In such a case, I would, with only the 'man's permission, set things aright, and that in an orderly manner. But, I doubt that would happen and if it did, I have confidence that there is a lil Bull lurking in AoG if need be:)
A sinner is no more likely to will himself to spiritual life than Lazarus was to will himself from the tomb. The sinner is dead and bound as he was, and like Lazarus must be called forth unto life. As far as Irresistable Grace goes, I've never heard one argument saying that Lazarus could have chosen not to come forth. No, those whom the Lord quickens unto to life, they always come forth, and praise be to God, they have been MADE willing to do so...that is in stark contrast to have willed themselves to have done it.
btw, great comments on this thread!
china,
Absolute agreement with the pacivity issue...actually I intended to include that in my post, but got so caught up in making my case, I lost it..lol..and it's a good point...I sort of hit on it with my remarks concerning the fact that adults, just like infants or mentally incapacitated, are dependent on the work of God, not ourselves.
Amos,
Welcome to the forum...nice post...and good points...I've used the example of Lazarus before to show how God quickens sinners, dead in trespasses and sin.
china,
Yes the preacher's story is right on...first lesson..."In the beginning, God...."
all of grace,
no comment to add to thread; just a word to you; I've been posting on nbbcf; no thoughts; just scripture...you have to love it! I saw you there, wasn't being rude, but I want to keep silent, and let the word speak. Even then, some have criticized...amazing!
amos,
oh no problem...I've appreciated your posting the scriptures..indeed..the Word speaks...loudly.
The example of Lazarus is great!, Thanks.
"The present light view of sin has a flip side...that flip side is an all too high view of man..which means there's a low view of God and His holiness...when we become desensitized to His holiness..we take a light view of sin.."
I read something about this in Phillip Marsden's biography of Jonathan Edwards. He was talking about the Great Awakening and how the Enlightenment thinking of Europe was just starting to make it's way to the US. The author was inferring in this book that the Enlightenment thinking was elevating man to such a level that conviction of sin was becoming harder.
Isn't that exactly what the Enlightenment did...elevate man to a 'god-like' status?
Have you guys seen this:
http://www.founders.org/blog/2005/10/steve-gaines-on-calvinism.html
I am sure you have but it was interesting for me to read.
Sorry about the non link. Cut and paste URL. I cannot get links to work in comments in blogger. Must be some magic code I do not know besides html.
lindon,
concerning the link you posted and the accompanying sermon comments by SG: I had actually found this some time ago and had debated whether or not to bring it up.
I found his comments amazing, but not in the least surprising. I am not SBC, though I was at one time. The utter disregard of the doctrines of grace by so many so called 'well learned' 'men of GOD' made my decision to leave the 'convention' an easy one.
I sat under the preaching of several types of sbc preachers and found a few types:
-those completely blind to sovereign grace; they believed that everything for the salvation of a man's soul was already hard wired in a man and all he had to do was make a decision for Jesus-basically GOD was a bystander just holding his breath and hoping they would make the right choice
-then there was the hybrids- they believed that GOD was actively doing his part to save man, but man's free will was going to have to at some point give in; GOD was going to keep on trying, but after a while, He might get tired of 'striving', thus they would 'sin away their day of grace'
-then there are those who say it is all of grace, it is the free gift of GOD, that GOD the Spirit must draw a man unto Christ, BUT that's all He can do...offer...He cant cross the line of man's free will...thus, they ultimately make man's free will sovereign, not GOD
Gaines' theology is so shallow and so 'all over the place', it's hard to exactly nail down just where he fits it, but I would say its a little of all of these, probably more of the 3rd category.
Whatever the case, reading the transcript of the sermon notes from the link, these observations can be made:
-he either ignorantly or purposely misrepresents the doctrines of grace (I-irresistible grace-that if God wants to save somebody they don't have a choice of it, he'll just save them if he wants to, they can't resist it)---I have never heard a true grace man say this
-he constantly uses 'fleshly reasoning' ex. ( 'how many of you know that GOD wont make you do anything...nothing)
-he makes somes truly outlandish, fleshly and foolish statements ex.1("I was talking to a Calvinist one time and he said, "Well, you are a universalist." I said, "No I'm not. I believe Jesus even died for the people who go to hell)
ex. 2 (I am not knocking people who are, but they know themselves that they got the idea of limited atonement from their own logical thinking, they didn't get it out of the Bible)--he may have been referring to his own theology
-he self servingly takes a quote from Pink out of context ("'Many have affirmed that a merely conditional provision of salvation has been made by his death)--any who have ever read Pink know that this is out of context
-though he has a PHD, he reveals his profound ignorance of the scriptures:
examples
-No where in Scripture, you will not find one verse in the Bible that says Jesus died exclusively for the elect
-I don't believe you can find in the Bible limited atonement.
-I don't believe you can find in the Bible irresistible grace
*********************************
Listen guys, I believe most of you are grace men, so I am not going to post all the accompanying proofs to refute the preacher's ignorant and false comments. And if is doesn't offend the readers and the moderator, I must say this: much of what he said in that sermon was just outright lies. Regardless of all his 'other' blunders, big and small, he stands in the pulpit and utters that which is not true. So let me end this post with these scriptures:
Galatians 1:6 ¶ I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood
(to preach what, THE GOSPEL OF GRACE!)
the same gospel found in
1st Thessalonians 1:4 Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.
5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.
the same gospel in
2nd Thessalonians 2:13 ¶ But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
That gospel is being perverted, not according to opinion of Amos, but according to 'what saith the scripture'
Amos
ps AoG...I'm am not trying to come across as being overly harsh or critical, but the truth is what it is...grace to you
amos,
Right on brother...I remember that sermon...I was sitting there when he preached it...I wanted to stand up and shout...that's a lie!! He's not ignorant of the scriptures...but it's become the favorite pasttime of SBC pastor's to denounce the doctrines of grace...or as they refer to it..."the problem of Calvinism". I am a 5 pointer myself, and subscribe to covenant theology, with an amillinial eschatology. Which means I'm a total outcast in the SBC ;)But I'd rather be an outcast for the truth than to surrender to untruth and half truth for the sake of comfort. Thanks for your post...right on the money.
I was pretty shocked when I went to the link. He is way off base.
Was Rogers this intense about it, too?
Quite frankly, when I went to the sermon outlines posted on the blog and read through the scriptures provided my first thought was: Throw a bunch of scriptures in there out of context to fit a premise. Lots of scriptures look good.
BTW: I am pretty shocked at what many pastors will use as an excuse to say election is not biblical. One time I was listening to Swindoll in the car and he quoted a verse: 2 Peter 3:9 to say that it proved election was not true. I ran home, looked it up, read it in context, and a few verses above it, it read: Beloved, .....
The verse was being written to 'Beloveds'...Christians! I was stunned that he would do that? Is it intentional, is it ignorance? What on earth is it? It is as if they read it but cannot see it.
Then later I came across this video clip which I promptly posted on my blog! Excellent teaching on this:
http://coffeetradernews.blogspot.com/2006/11/calvinism-and-2-peter-39-this-video.html
Lindon,
I know the ramifications of saying anything against Adrian Rogers. But referring to the 'doctrines of grace' as the 'doctrines of devils' (as he once did) may answer your question as to how he felt about the matter, and I will leave it at that.
For you other brothers who remain in SB churches, I would like to share something with you. A young pastor came to the truth while he was pastoring a SB church. He began to slowly teach the sovereignty of GOD to the congregation over the course of a year, much to their delight. After all, this stuff was new to them, for they had never heard GOD presented in such a manner. He thought that GOD was opening their eyes. He slowly began to relate GOD's sovereignty to grace in salvation. They quickly began to moan and kick. It took less than 2 months for the deacons to hold a private meeting in which they decided amongst themselves to get the support of their families and other close member 'friends' to vote the pastor out. Even though GOD had opened several of the members eyes to truth and had saved others by the preaching of this truth, they were able to garner a simple majority and vote him out.
He did not try to 'politic' or get votes for himself, and did not even attend the service in which they voted him out, a 'service' in which they attacked everything about him...from the way he dressed, to his wife, to the length and content of his sermons.
They had a 'neutral' party hand deliver him a letter giving him 30 days, for him, his wife and two small children to vacate the parsonage. They gave him no severance pay either. And all of this because...he attempted to fulfill the scriptures and command of Christ by 'feeding His sheep'. All this pastor did was love them enough to bury their dead, marry their children, visit them when infirmed, take them to Doctor's appts.,do whatever else a pastor is asked of, and preach the truth to them concerning the sovereign, saving, grace of GOD.
Two weeks after they voted him out, the Baptist Convention had an officer come and conduct a service to come and clear up this pastor's 'false' teachings.
This pastor called and wrote letters convention offices telling them what had been done, hoping they might assist. They never replied or contacted him.
You see, the blindness and the ignorance is not just a 'local church' thing. It goes from the top to the bottom. My, how Rome would be proud.
But GOD takes care of His own and provided for this young preacher and his family during this time of 'rough' providence, and he now sees it as his deliverance.
I know that this type of ignorance and hatefulness does not represent every SB church, but you if you would put a man who preaches the true gospel of grace in every SB pulpit, this story would very likely not be an 'exception'.
BTW, my family are doing fine now, and I am pastoring a Sovereign Grace Baptist Church, and fellowship with one there in Memphis, which is sorta how I got interested in this.
BTW, on a previous post, I said:
'The utter disregard of the doctrines of grace by so many so called 'well learned' 'men of GOD' made my decision to leave the 'convention' an easy one'.
I never said that was the only reason I left.
Grace to you
AoG: I hope you dont mind me sharing that; I sorta want to get a feel for 'you' and the posters on this blog before disclosing too much 'personal' stuff
Anyway, I know that people can say anything on these blogs, but I have some sermons online at the Memphis Church's site...let me know if you're interested in listening to them, and I'll give you the info
typo:
"BTW, my family are doing fine now"
correction:
"BTW, my family and I are doing fine now"
amos,
God bless you for your stand brother. Please send me a link to your sermons...I'd love to hear them..I listen to Henry Mahan and Don Fortner quite a bit on sermonaudio.com..two more sovereign grace Baptists. You're at home here brother...speak your mind as the LORD leads.
Amos, God Bless you for sharing that. God Bless you for preaching truths! not counting the cost!
Ironically, This just happened to my cousin's husband, too, in a small SBC church. For the same reason. And he approached it the exact same way as you. This happened just in the past few months. They had been there a few years. Moved 400 miles away to pastor this church, etc. So, I can sort of understand it.
I have a few questions. One that concerns me is how believing correct doctrine on election affects the way we worship, teach, build churches, etc.
The other is that I have witnessed in the past year, those having correct doctrine who seem to make it an idol. They have the right teaching but it is hard to discern the presence of God in their teaching. They almost seem puffed up in knowledge. Many have also fallen for the celebrity, money focused business model in ministry, too. Some are authoritarian to a degree that is unbiblical.
It is almost as if the pendulum swings too far both ways.
It's almost as if one side has cheap grace and the other believes in Grace Alone but possess little of it themselves. Am I making sense?
(For this reason I have been very blessed with Paul Washer's sermons.)
BTW: Nothing like having to totally depend on God during those times, huh? Such growth occurs during these times that you want to Praise Him for the crisis!
AOG
I was also there and heard SG message. My reaction was the same as yours.
Ed_T....Wow...this paragraph really spoke to me:
Please do not misunderstand this point...I do not believe you have to believe in election to be saved...not at all! It is just that they are many professing Christians out there who I believe are not saved. People who are saved act saved more than they don’t act saved. It is that simple. But people do not want to believe it is that simple. If they are saved they still sin but they are desperately trying to walk in the Light. You can tell.
Wow.
The doctrine of election is something I had studied on in God's Word for many years before Stephen and I married last April. I was living alone with only The LORD and The Holy Ghost took time to teach me so many, many, many things. Oh, how I love Jesus.
The doctrine of election is found throughout God's inerrant and infallible Word. One can trace it as far back as Genesis and it continues thoughout the entire Bible. Do I understand it when I start trying to understand it with my flesh mind? No. I do not. My flesh mind's understanding of it, however, is not required. I simply accept it and hold on to it because God has said it in His Word. God realized that there were going to be times that our flesh minds would question some things which, ultimately, if taken full circle would cause us either to doubt God's Word or falsely accuse Him of being unjust and unfair. He therefore left His Words plain in His Word for all of us to read..."My thought are NOT your thoughts....My ways are NOT your ways." (Oh, how our flesh minds take issue with His statement for we want to think our flesh minds can know it all!) Oftentimes, our flesh minds can be prisons indeed as we take hold of faith for our flesh minds want to think that we are capable of understanding even those things which God has plainly referred to when He has said "The secret things belong to The LORD". It takes on the scenario of an ant trying to understand a human being. (This is an inadequate example but it is the one I always use in discussing things that pertain to this topic, etc.)
Our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ PLAINLY said that "Those that The Father has given Me will come to Me." Since WE don't know who the elect are while here on earth, we are commissioned to teach Jesus' Word all over this world to every creature. If we will but do what we have been told to do by The LORD, we will be doing good. He will take care of the results. JESUS is LORD and we are not!
Years back, I had several prayers before The LORD Jesus and was not pleased with the way He was answering them. The Holy Spirit spoke something so plainly and straight-forward and STERN to my heart one day that I still remember it to this very day...."When you can put a cloud in the sky, THEN you can critique My work." What we don't understand, He DOES understand and that is enough. When He gets us Home, we will know as we are known and we will understand it all.
If one never grasps the doctrine of election in God's Word, they never fully realize how very grateful they should be for their salvation.....for what if He had NOT chosen us??? What if we had NOT been one of His elect? What if He had NOT given us to Jesus and called us to Him? When one realizes that GOD gets ALL of the glory for bringing us into Jesus' fold, the prideful looks and haughty "I've got it and you don't" feelings of spiritual pride dissipate. POOF!!!
Thank You, LORD Jesus, for "POOF"!
Realizing the truth of election and the truth of God's Sovereignty are truths that ONLY The Holy Ghost can reveal to a person and He deals with us while in His Word. We MUST read and study The Bible with Him. He will teach us and be ever so glad we asked Him to teach us about election. He will take us to His Word, however, to do it.
It is worth mentioning that Jesus has a ministry that produces series for teaching purposes called "Word Pictures". One hour segments of "Word Pictures" can be viewed at different times on Sky Angel Satellite. There is an in-depth look at this topic in a series that Word Pictures offers called "The Sovereignty Of God". It can be ordered at Word Pictures' website. Once again, The Holy Ghost will take you BACK to His Word to validate the teachings in the series. How God LOVES His Word and He wants us to love it, too, FOR IT IS OUR LIFE.
Praise You, Dear Father!!!
Sincerely in The LORD and ONLY Savior Jesus Christ,
Bonita Ann Richie
Living Hope In Jesus
www.livinghopeinjesus.com
aog, I found this very interesting comment on the founders blog and was wondering if you had some of the same reservations"
"You can be covenantal and still be baptistic. I've tried 3-4 times to become a Presbyterian, but my exegesis would not allow me. If I'm not mistaken, Bro. Tom did his Ph.D thesis on the conenant theology of Witsius. Dr. Fred Malone recounts his struggles and journey from Presbyterian to Baptist in the booklet "A String of Pearls Unstrung." Also, his book "The Baptism of Disciple Alone" by by Founders Press is a solid read. I think it has not be sucessfully answered by any paedobaptist. Furthermore, if you contact Reformed Baptist Publications at (562) 944-3366, they will send you a booklet entitled "Covenant Theology: A Reformed Baptist Overview." I completely understanding your struggles. Let me encourage you not to "throw out the baby with the bathwater."
lindon,
Not quite sure what you mean by reservations...about what? I've read the comment on Founders that you cut and paste in your comment. I agree with what he said. You can be covenantal theologically without being a paedobaptist. I'm in substantial agreement with my Presbyterian brethren doctrinally. I believe they use a bad hermeneutic in their interpretation of the Abrahamic covenant. Since the New Covenant is the fullest and final revelation of the Covenant of Grace, it has to interpret all the previous covenants, or administrations of the Covenant of Grace and how they're fulfilled in the New Covenant. The shadows contained in the OT are the outward types of the inward realities of the New Covenant. From my viewpoint, the circumcision of the Abrahamic covenant is fulfilled in the New Covenant as "a circumcision not performed by human hands", but by the Spirit...a circumcised heart, not baptism. Hope that answers your question..if not let me know.
aog wrote: "From my viewpoint, the circumcision of the Abrahamic covenant is fulfilled in the New Covenant as "a circumcision not performed by human hands", but by the Spirit...a circumcised heart, not baptism. Hope that answers your question..if not let me know"
You understood where I was coming from. The above is what I was wondering about. But, I hope ignorant questions are tolerated because the above brings into question: What about females under the old convenant? This is where I get confused.
lindon,
Ignorant questions are fine..none of us has it all...when I taught SS I used to tell my class that the only stupid question is the one you want an answer to but don't ask. As to females under the old covenant...I'm just assuming here, but my guess would be that since the male is head over the female, that when a Hebrew male married...which God required them to only marry Hebrew women, the covenant sign would be applied to them through the husband...just guessing though.
Which always makes me wonder about Naomi and Esther who do not fit the criteria. Why this bothers me, I do not know but it does. It is one reason I have challenges with reformed teachings. (Not the Election part...the circumcision part)
So if Baptism is the new circumcision, then one must be Baptized? Or is 'Baptism' also the Holy Spirit?
Someone once told me, blythly, that if there is a Q&A room in heaven, I will be in there all the time.
:o|
lindon,
When I say I'm reformed...I'm referring to my soteriology..and I do subscribe to covenant theology..but not from a presby view...maybe a presby could explain that for you. Like I said, I think they use a bad hermeneutic in interpreting the Abrahamic covenant, and how it's fulfilled in the New Covenant.
Thanks. Sorry for the question, I should have realized that.
aog:
this is the link to the church I was telling you of
http://www.raleighspringsbaptistchurch.org/
once on the opening page, there is a box, right in the middle with scrolling arrows up and down; scroll down until you come to:
Click here to listen to sermons presented by Brother....of Free Grace Baptist Church; that'll be me
aog,
also I copied this from the other forum; it's taking forever for anything to post, so I'll just post it here for you to read; it was concerning the question I asked about the locality of your friend:
aog,
the reason I asked is twofold
-the last name is of course cajun, but is a local name found primarily in eastern and southern La, for I knew several people by that name growing up
-you mentioned that he was a primitive baptist; you would be hardpressed to find many organized primitive baptist churches, though there may be a few, except in central and southern La.(most of these are hardshell, I doubt your friend was); also, I know several primitive baptist church groups that meet in homes and are not incorporated in our surrounding area, and usually they are made up of a family or two, so that part of your post is really endearing
-I do have one friend who attends an organized PBC further south; I will inquire of him the name; again...grace to you
amos,
I'll copy my response here as well:
allofgrace said...
amos,
When he shared with me that he was primitive baptist, he made a point to clarify not hardshell..he was a grace man to be sure...homespun in the way he wrote sometimes in his native dialect, but in his writings...like a seminarian..as he told me once.."my wife say I talk like a hayseed, but write like a divine." She had it right. I'm going to miss hearing from him....he actually used to be the pastor of this particular little congregation.
9:05 PM, Feb
amos,
Also thanks for the link...I look forward to hearing your sermons.
aog,
no need to respond,
I saw where you did in the other forum; the quote you gave and his last name make perfect sense to me. You may have to be from La. to know what that means (or maybe not). But Daigrepont is a particularly cajun name. When we hear a cajun dialect that is very pronounced, we usually say they are definitely sub I-10,...south of Interstate 10 in La. I live far enough north to where I am considered a yankee.
BTW, I didn't think he was a hardsheller, and please forgive me if I implied that. I could tell by the way that you spoke of him that he was a dear 'brother'. We have lost so many friends and family (not to death, but they have branded us heretics) since coming to truth, that I hate to hear of any losing a friend. Grace to you.
amos,
No I didn't take any implications from what you said..I was just reiterating what you stated..I may post a couple of his writings he sent me..it would be a shame for others not to hear the heart of this young man for the LORD.
aog,
that would be great; I love to read, especially if what I read is worth reading; looking forward to it
amos,
When he first showed up on the BBC blog, he posted in his dialect...I asked him after he'd posted a couple of times, if he by chance was from La...he replied he was, and wanted to know how I knew...I laughed and said something to the effect that I was a southern boy who had heard most of the southern dialects, so i recognized that La speech. He was in Memphis at the time, but moved back to La before I got the chance to meet him. It's amazing to me how even with the limitations of getting to know a person online, he really made an impact on my life in a short time. As much as it hurts, I'm grateful that Providence made our paths to cross.
aog,
The church that I am linked on commissioned us to begin a sovereign grace church after I left the SBC. The pastor is from La. and has known me since birth. (I am not on there because I am some big name or something special, so please don't think that I gave you the link for that reason.) He is the closest thing I have to a Dad and I consider him my pastor. I preached there 3 times last year, and usually preach at their fall bible conference in October yearly. I saw in one of your previous posts
"I am a 5 pointer myself, and subscribe to covenant theology, with an amillinial eschatology. Which means I'm a total outcast in the SBC"
Wanna guess what eschatology camp I am in? The same as my pastor. Let me put like this, at his or my church, you would be a total incast.
amos,
I would have guessed he was from La from his last name. That's great brother, that you had someone like him to encourage you in your ministry, after such a disappointing time in the SBC.
Also, I've been on a long journey coming to my position..and still have much to learn on the details...at one time I didn't know what to call my eschatological position, but when I would describe how I saw things my reformed friends would tell me..well you're amill. I just knew I wasn't waiting on a Kingdom..I was a citizen of one..the only thing I was waiting on was the consummation of it ;)
aog,
if you get a chance, listen to the sermons; I do like constructive criticism; those sermons were the first that I ever recorded for radio, and were done in a studio, by myself; it really is hard to preach to no one; I also had to edit them myself my computer, so you might notice some glitches there also; but as for as the content, let me know what you think of them; and remember, and I had to fit and hours worth of theology into 15 minutes
amos,
I've already listened to the first 2 parts of the Sovereignty of God..about to load up the 3rd?..anyhow I'm listening as I speak..I like what I've heard so far...can't find a thing to criticize.
Bro. Jackie has a grasp on amil like very few preacher I know. I was basically no-mil 5 years ago. What I mean is, I just had very little knowledge of it. But I have studied it intensely, and have looked at the other views, and the amil view seems to be most scriptural and GOD honoring. I like that phrase...I am already a citizen of the kingdom!
also, understand, when I recorded those, I did so with the knowledge that there was and is not a grace preacher/church within 50 miles of the area that it is broadcast...so I tried to be basic, but forthright...you know, building blocks
amos,
I think God will continue to use the evil of this world to shake His church till he draws history to a close, to reveal what's real, and crumble what isn't, so that His bride is spotless. Make any sense?...or am I off-base on that?
right on base
I've read some on the amill position...the already/not yet tension..and that both evil and the Kingdom will continue to grow exponentially till the end.
aog,
I also believe that 99% of what you see in religion today is false; consider the 100's of millions chasing after the garbage that you see on religious broadcasting; I truly believe that the LORD is using the false religion of this day to accomplish his purposes and glorify himself; I believe that what we see is the strong delusion; the lie; that which is preventing them from seeing the truth; even this reprobate religion will bow down and be his servant; it will be a narrow way or no way at all
amos,
I agree..the level of blindness and deception and delusion is mind-boggling.
yes aog, you are right concerning the amil position; the lord has allowed the kingdom of darkness to be raised up at the same time as his kingdom has been established; the message in revelations, told 3 times, each time growing more intense, is that the kingdom of darkness will grow more and more violent against the children of GOD, until at last He returns to judge his enemies and receive his own to himself and there we shall forevermore be with the LORD
amos,
Amen and amen!!...I attended South Woods Baptist this morning..a Founders church...the message was from Rev. 11...on this very subject..the persecution of the church..intensifying.
aog,
good talking to you, but that alarm clock is going go off early...man how I love mondays!
Grace to you
We'll have to talk more on the amil stuff...trust me...I'm a novice by far...but just so you know, there's a grace preaching, amil church right there in Memphis...just food for thought
amos,
Grace and Peace to you brother..sleep the sleep of the righteous.
Amos
I know your post was directed to AOG so I hope its ok that I took the link and am listening to your preaching. I listened to the Sovereignty of God and am now listening to Total Depravity. What a blessing it has been to hear true, unapologetic teaching of God's Word! I have recently realized how hungry I am for "meat sermons". God bless you as you continue to lead your congregation to understand the doctrines of grace through Scripture! How the SBC needs more shepards like you! You and your family are in my prayers! I look forward to hearing the other sermons provided.
AOG...my prayers are with Chad's church family and all that loved him. I pray you all take comfort in knowing he is in the presence of his Heavenly Father right now. What a promise!
Heather
Dear Brother Amos,
I have accessed the Raleigh Springs Baptist Church website but I simply cannot find where to click to hear YOUR sermons. I see the pastor's sermon and sermon archives but I am looking for your sermons. PLEASE give me the information we need to listen to YOUR sermons that The LORD Jesus has given to you. Thank you, Brother Amos.
May Jesus ever bless you in Himself.
Sincerely in The LORD and ONLY Savior Jesus Christ,
Stephen and Bonita Ann Richie
Living Hope In Jesus
www.livinghopeinjesus.com
aog,
wanted to see if you had a chance to listen to all the sermons. Hope to have them changed out soon with 5 different ones, continuing with basic teachings in the doctrines of grace. remember what I told you previously about the area that I preach in and where this is broadcast...truth upon truth upon truth.
I've pretty much quit posting on the other forum. Dial up and moderation makes it take forever and plus its just getting kind of weird with all the ace stuff. I'll check back soon to see if you get a new thread started.
grace to you
amos
ps one other link to check out of one who has much wisdom to offer:
http://www2.arkansas.net/~odheath/
amos,
I've listened to the ones on God's Sovereignty, and the ones on depravity...were there more?...the links are yellow on my screen and hard to see. I think NASS is going to a new format where comment moderation won't be necessary. Don't know when though..I've only commented there a couple of times lately myself. Thanks for the new link.
Btw..your messages are good...straightforward..anyone should be able to understand them.
amos,
Also a new thread will be posted soon.
aog,
I had noticed that also...about the light yellow letters...they are very hard to read...I know that the last sermon on the list is supposed to be Election in the Old Testament. The new sermons that I hope to have posted soon include Election in the New Testament, Particular Redemption, and Drawing Grace. You said the sermons were straitforward and should be easy to understand...I take that as a compliment, because that is what I was shooting for. Look forward to seeing your new thread. BTW, if you noticed, on a couple of sermons, there was a radio announcer doing an introduction...that is my brother...he is the station manager. The LORD brought him back into this area a couple of years ago (hadn't seen him in years). He had never heard me preach in person, so he obliged me by coming to church a couple of times. And then a couple of more times. After a few months of hearing the preaching of the gospel of grace, the LORD melted the stony heart of this drug addict and gave him a heart of flesh and gloriously saved him! I baptized him last year, and we now have a close relationship. He is a member of our church, and I can truly say that my brother is a brother. God bless.
Amos
amos,
Wonderful testimony about your brother..you'll like the new thread I think in light of that..btw, it was a compliment :)
Post a Comment