Thanks brother, very humble of you.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

But see, we're not even talking about headcoverings and the like here - we're talking about the deeper meanings of scripture and the not-so-fluffy parts of the Bible. We are in this sort of community. One insignificant example (that just drives me nuts): I hear people quote James 1:27 all the time but they NEVER finish the verse. I can handle simplification to a degree but too often what comes of it is a quick run through the Sinner's Prayer and a high-five-welcome-to-the-club. What about discipleship? Not when there are more waiting to pray the Sinner's Prayer, sorry. Of course we hope that they will grow but so often the emphasis is on milk that even as much as we know they need meat, we just never get around to it, there are more babies coming through the door all the time, and the sermons never get beyond what those new believers 'need'. There's the danger. Parallel teaching with confessions help solidify what those verses mean/how they are applied right up front.

__________________
Kevin
Far East
Deacon, Int'l Church

KVANLAAN:

Okay, I'll give an example of what those dreaded Arminians are doing.

New tribes Mission contains many arminians. Their approach, however, is often the same. They go to a tribal group that has little or no knowledge of the Gospel. Then they intensively tell them the story of salvation from Genesis right through the OT, going through the patrirachs, the promises, etc. This is called the Firm Foundations series and is used by many other groups as well because it really aquaints tribals with the ONE story of Scripture.

By the time they get to the NT, the existence of universal sinfulness and the need for a sacrifice are well established. When they hear of Jesus, then even these tribals often "get it"! Jesus is that ONE! Strong and lasting effects have resulted.

This is done by folks that belong to an org that has a publication which calls Calvinism a "grave error" (saw it in their library). Yet, for the arminian stance of this group as a whole, they do a lot of good evangelizing.


This is far from the "give me five you're in the club" or whatever you wrote above. This is a lengthy and in depth storying of the whole Bible story. Hours per day of teaching also follow...much more intense than an hour or two on Sundays like many Reformed churches. They too would be horrified at merely teaching the sinner's prayer.



Other groups that are not five point calvinists do similar things.


Perhaps because of our intellectual arrogance as calvinisits we often equate Arminianism with lack of intellect or lack of doctrinal depth. I have a friend that puts out a calvinistic newsleter entitled, "For the thinking Christian"- as if Arminians are not also struggling with deep issues.


Do we as calvinists dare admit that we are often arrogant?

Again, I desire to give honor to whom honor is due. Praise God for those faithful preachers, even if Arminian, who are, in fact, preaching the Gospel. [okay, now I brace myself for the replies that say, "But arminianism is a false gospel"]

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

Sure, and stubborn also. Do Arminians admit the same? And after they do, what have we accomplished? We've only proven that convictions are being maintained by people who still have to struggle with sin in their lives.

I grieve for people who are being reached by those who call Calvinism "a grave error." How can a Calvinist not weep at the deception which is being taught in the name of Jesus? Yes, it is often the case that false religion is more zealous than true religion; that is due to the fact that man made religion relies on man made endeavour to be successful. A Pharisee will compass sea and land to make a proselyte; that doesn't negate the sad reality that the Pharisee has made his proselyte twofold more the child of hell than himself. Has the Pharisee taught men something about God? Undoubtedly. But what he has taught has not been saving, but damning; he has shut up the kingdom of heaven against men because he has not taught the gospel of sovereign grace.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

__________________
Chris
Member at Grace Community Baptist Church, Mandeville, LA

Beware of a religion without holdfasts. But if I get a grip upon a doctrine they call me a bigot. Let them do so. Bigotry is a hateful thing, and yet that which is now abused as bigotry is a great virtue, and greatly needed in these frivolous times. I have been inclined lately to start a new denomination, and call it "the Church of the Bigoted." Spurgeon

Spurgeon said,
and

__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon
________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk

What is the difference between this and the politician (or anyone else) who says "I am personally pro life but I would oppose a movement to ban abortion"?

The best (most effective) lies always have some truth in them.

Armourbearer:

So you grieve over people coming to know their Savior for the first time, even if through a witness done by those with whom you don't agree? Why are there not then Calvinists over here witnessing?

You sin, brother, by bringing slander against these dear missionary workers! They are not preaching a "false Gospel"


Are all arminians unsaved? Do all arminians give out a "false gospel?" No, many give out a good Gospel message. How else then would many of our brethren on the PB be saved underneath arminian ministries?


Many calvinists call anything that is less than full 5 point calvinism to be arminianism. There are many good many out there who do not like that L but are doing wonderful jobs?



How can a Calvinist not weep that the arminians often outpace them in missions and the calvinists just sit back and take potshots at those trying to reach the lost?


Knowledge puffs up and many here are quite swollen!

You might grieve at people being reached by arminians, but I grieve over those people NOT being reached by calvinisits.


Again,

Many arminians do give the Gospel to people. All are not heretics. There are shades to arminianism and many stay very closely to the Bible and do not mention the mechanics of salvation, but teach from the Biblical examples of salvation. One need not explain the ordo salutis to people.

New Tribes for instance, teaches from the Firm Foundations series which gives a chronological story of the Scriptures. I have seen the materials and can endorse it. But some here would rather see this teaching never take place rather than see those that disagree with Calvinism to do it.

Again,

Calvinists are wrong and arrogant when they demonize all stripes of arminians and say that it is better that some people have no Gospel witness rather than the witness of a preacher with arminian leanings.

Again,

There is a core Gospel. And it is simpler than the five points. One can hear the Gospel and be saved through the witness of Arminians instead of Calvinisits. And it may be that more are! Why is that?

Again,

We should give honor to whom honor is due. There are many saints who balk at limited atonement and do not quite know how the ordo fits together, and yet they evangelize faithfully, they disciple people, they resist sin. There are many missionaries who ae not five pointers but do wonderful jobs. We should praise God for all preachers of the Gospel, and many of these would be labeled as "non-calvinists" by us.

Again you impute the most sinister of motives to those who disagree with you. Again you take the most extreme positions you can find and ascribe that to all Calvinists.

God can certainly strike straight blows with crooked sticks. I think we all rejoice when sinners come to faith, even if it is under Arminian ministry. I came to faith under Arminian ministry although very soon thereafter I accepted the doctrines of grace (but not the full fledged Reformed faith as it took me longer to embrace infant baptism).

There is not one ecclesiology for Christendom another for the heathen. The statement of faith you posted asserts that only "believers baptism" is valid. But even if it were less sectarian than that and said simply that the two ordinances of the church are baptism and the Lord's Supper it would be worthless because you cannot escape the issues of who is going to partake in the Lord's Supper and the proper mode and objects of baptism. You had mentioned church planting. Some kind of church is going to be planted, or that is the goal. It may be Arminian, Calvinist, paedobapist, credobaptist, credocommunion, paedocommunion, charismatic, cessationist, etc. God be praised for those who are truly converted under any of the above banners. But to ask Presbyterians to support non Presbyterian missions is just as preposterous as asking Baptists to support Anglican missions that practice paedocommunion.

This statement calls for "believers baptism". Obviously Presbyterian and Reformed believers cannot assent to it. As I noted in the previous post, even simply said baptism and the Lord's Supper, you cannot escape the question of the proper objects and mode of baptism. The statement is silent with regard to mode, but surely you as a Baptist do not advocate pouring or sprinkling.

I "sin?" Am I still on a reformed discussion board which acknowledges the Canons of Dort as exhibiting Scriptural truth?

You need to make up your mind, Pergamum. Either they teach men are dead in trespasses and sin, and cannot do anything to make themselves alive, but need the sovereign grace of God to work in them to draw them to Jesus Christ; or they teach God has given all men the grace to accept or reject the Saviour. The first is the true gospel; the second is false gospel. One might very well tell people about the wonder of Jesus Christ; but if the hearer is left with a false impression as to how an individual is to be made partaker of salvation by Christ, then it is a false gospel. "Asking Jesus into your heart" is not the gospel.

You wrote:

"Again you impute the most sinister of motives to those who disagree with you and take the most extreme positions you can find and ascribe that to all Calvinists."


That is what I hear people here doing to all that do not believe in calvinism. They are all painted with one brush as preaching a "false gospel" quite a charge!

Charging someone with preaching a false gospel is not the same as imputing sinister motives.

The first is the failure to preach the truth; the second is a failure to live the truth.

__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA
Church Blog

"there is no creature, either in heaven or on earth, who loves us more than Jesus Christ"
Belgic Confession, Article 26

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

What does teaching in or out of the church have to do the propriety of "pictures of Jesus" one way or another?

Why the need for so called "pictures of Jesus"?

You sin if you attribute evil to the Lord's servants.

Most arminians pray like calvinists and know that God has saved them soley by grace. Most are inconsistent with themselves. They simply do not know the mechanics of salvation.

It is not as easy as saying calvinism=true gospel, all shades of sub-calvinism=arminianism=false gospel.



Asking Jesus into your heart is wrong phraseology, but it IS needful to ask Jesus into your heart is it not?



Charles Spurgeon often met with Hudson Taylor and Geroge Mueller to pay, folks who were not five pointers. Is Spurgeon then a compromiser for collaborating with the enemy?

"Lord Jesus save me!" Is that or is that not askign Jesus into your heart,into your life, or however you want to phrase it! The arminianis use poor terminology to get across that we must each personally be converted.

First, if you are going to start charging brethren with sin, at least be man enough to do it openly without hiding behind a screen name.

Secondly, this is a reformed board. The canons of Dort with their condemnation of error are considered to be biblical. The canons charge Arminianism with serious error. You have no basis to charge me with "slander" for doing nothing more than upholding the confessional standards of this board. The "sinner" here is the one who says he maintains a Calvinist confession and then degrades Calvinism as if it is nothing.

Thirdly, if a person doesn't know the mechanics of salvation then they have no basis upon which to be assured they are saved. If A, B, and C, are true of a saved person, and person X doesn't know A, B, and C, then person X has no way of knowing if he is saved. If your "servant of God" leaves people with no way of knowing if they are in fact saved, then I put it to you they are not preaching the gospel of salvation, whatever else they might be pretending to do.

Fourthly, no it is not needful to ask Jesus into your heart. It is needful for the Holy Spirit to renew a man so as to give him faith whereby Christ dwells in his heart really and sincerely, Eph. 3:17.

Okay, give me the ordo salutis in detail with Scripture proofs! What, you cannot do it from heart?

Asking Jesus into your heart is the loose terminology that many use in trying to express one's personal con