fed up with the constant irrational slander from the humanists.

The natural bent of our unredeemed flesh is absolutely wedded to an irrational a priori commitment to the philosophical humanist presupposition of final self determining universal libertarian autonomy which renders GOD a helpless failure who is incapable of accomplishing His purposes in the affairs of men apart from coaxing them to give Him permission.

It is purely philosophical and decidedly humanist and is in perfect harmony with the default view of God that every vain humanist and works-righteous religionist automatically defaults to in this fallen world. In the end, it is a selfish refusal to submit ones pride to the revelation of God and humbling authority of His Word.

This is why the Scriptural revelation read by virtually everyone who actually had opportunity through history to study and had a love for Scripture (including and especially the reformers who revived exegesis and sola scriptura but not limited to them since these truths were exegeted many centuries prior) brought them to the conclusions that humble exegesis of Scripture by any Christian willing to submit to the Truth must come to.

Calvin just happened to exegetically preach the Bible verse by verse in context directly from Greek and Hebrew texts, translating as he preached and had much opportunity to do it publicly so the Truths that were always there in the first place, and that any honest exegete would come to, happened to be associated with his name (and he probably would have recoiled at the thought and preferred the name, doctrines of grace).

The reason I recoiled when initially introduced to these obvious Truths in Scripture is because I was ignorant of the Scriptures (I never learned about context and exegesis) and had been indoctrinated with the humanism of most evangelical thought in this anti-intellectual and selfish age of compromise in the Church. When I was exposed to honest and real Bible exegesis, instead of the topical humanism and religious emotionalism so prevalent today, I was shocked to find the Scriptures actually mean what they say in context. I also found the doctrines of grace harmonize all of the so called "paradoxes" that superficial, man-centered, pop-Christian cliche culture would always say, "we cant know until we get to heaven" about.

I honestly think people who oppose these Truths are dishonest with the text and approach it with a hermeneutic of "if I don't like it or don't understand it, it can't be true" and then they slander those who are willing to submit to the Truth in order to avoid the inevitable, namely, being faced with the fact that Scripture contradicts their humanistic presuppositions.

God is not subject to your fallen notions of fairness. He is not subject to man (or woman) in ANYTHING. He is God and we are not. That's the bottom line. The Scriptures are clear.

You and everyone else I have ever talked to are incapable of answering the problem of God knowing the future circumstances and inclinations of every person who ever lived in regards to exposure to the Gospel as well as the fact that no redemption was provided for angels yet you all keep beating the same dead horse and slandering GOD's right to His own free will. If you claim God is unjust in unconditionally electing undeserving people for salvation and actually accomplishing His will at the cross then you are the ones who are slandering God and that's why we get upset with your accusations against our zeal for His glory. It's like accusing Jesus of casting out demons by the power of beelzebub. That is how we see your slander against God: you clearly see the Scriptures and then attribute the Truths they present regarding God's free will as being evil and instead give the glory to man's "almighty" sovereign autonomous power, but its not an unpardonable sin since you are not actually attributing that sovereignty to satan.... just to man.

I'm sorry, but I can't accept a philosophy that makes Jesus out to be a weak and helpless beggar who doesn't get His prayers answered by the Father and can't seem to accomplish anything by the power of His Spirit apart from being under the total subjugation of the "almighty" will of man. Sorry, I can't fall for that. The Bible teaches the opposite.

I'm tired of slanderers creating division with all their lies about GOD and the doctrines of grace so I might as well take a polemical approach now, I mean, defending the truth of Scripture seems to just make the haters more vicious in their slanders. Since they can't tear down the Truth, they just spew more falsities instead.

the world dont need more exegesis but more examples ~ santosh poonen

the problem is the truth of scripture is not reserved for calvins doctrines of grace. You can not say [i]your[/i] view is the absolute truth what scripture teaches, in deed much may be truthful and found in scripture but much of the arminian views are equally true. both sides have truths that may seem to be opposed to one another, they are not, just as two sides of a river may seem to be wide apart but the thing that unites them are the river itself, so the spirit and the word unites both sides.

To say this side is the only true is to make God a liar because there are hundreds of verses that tech clearly different, when reading them in their context and believing straight forward what they say.

Revelation 22:19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Rev 22:19 NKJ)

many do this, i have done myself, twisting and bending and making much scripture meen something else then what is clearly stated. But let us not be frustrated but preach all Gods word, if we do we are neither calvinist nor arminians but faithful servants that preach in simplicity and in truthfulness all gods word, all free will verses all election verses, for warnings and for comfort.

God help us not take away or add to his book, in doing so we are in risk of hell and leading others there also. And whatever truth we hold we need first be examples, what good is it for me to say Calvin had a faulty doctrine when my walk and example are not more holy and more loving then he?

what hypocrisy is to say Wesley had wrong ides on free will when our life is but a shadow of his?

it should make us shame ourselfs in dust and ashes to even utter such words if our life and example do not of a higher quality then thoise we criticize. God did not come to give us a correct doctrine even if its important to have the fundamental ones right, but he came to give us life in abundance.

I am more and more sure God have his children in a vast spectrum of denominations and different churches, take mother theresa, clearly we would agree she had a faulty heretical doctrine in some aspects, but her life testifies she knew Jesus Christ the risen son of God personally.

i believe this could be so for many, but many do have right doctrines and will go to the deepest pit of hell anyway, the pharisees had the perfect doctrine in the days of our lord, yet most of them went to hell.

let us be passionate students and search for truth, myself have had to repent due to i when searching scriptures i did not study for learn the truth, but to reinforce my already established doctrines and find fault with what i already kneww to be wrong.

God showed me my wickedness and now i can study to find truth, many times i dont understand it many times it will crumble a doctrine i though was rock solid.

just my thoughts broter.

Gods peace and grace

more food for thought

a quote from one of A.W. Tozer’s biographies. It’s regarding a young man getting ready for Bible college and getting Tozer’s advice on this issue. Here’s the excerpt…
***************************

[i]I was preparing to go to Nyack College. Before I left there was one burning question I had in mind, and I went to Dr. Tozer and said, “Could you give me some advice concerning the problem of Calvinism versus Arminianism?”

And I’ll never forget the advice he gave me. At the time I thought it was rather inconclusive and not too helpful. But I listened carefully. He said, “My son, when you get to college you’re going to find that all of the boys will be gathered in a room discussing and arguing over Arminianism and Calvinism night after night after night. I’ll tell you what to do, Cliff. Go to your room and meet God. At the end of four years you’ll be way down the line and they’ll still be where they started, because greater minds than yours have wrestled with this problem and have not come up with satisfactory conclusions. Instead, learn to know God.”[/i]

some more from J.C Ryle

Oh, do not be satisfied with a religion built on man! Do not be content with saying, "I have hope, because my own minister has told me such and such things." Seek to be able to say, "I have hope, because I find it thus and thus written in the
Word of God." If your peace is to be solid, you must go yourself to the fountain of all truth. If your comforts are to be lasting, you must visit the well of life yourself, and draw fresh water for your own soul. Ministers may depart from the faith. The visible Church may be broken up. But he who has the Word of God written in his heart, has a foundation beneath his feet which will never fail him. Honor your minister as a faithful ambassador of Christ. Esteem him very highly in love for his work's sake. But never forget that infallibility is not to be found in godly ministers, but in the Bible.

some more

The Vanity of Life by Keith Daniel

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=1854

Beginning at 7:34 min. (Please listen the audio while reading).

"...I lay up treasures in heaven and I can't wait to get there to see how much did get to heaven of what I believe God wasdoing. I'll actually be stunned if anyone is missing."

Now, some theologians won't like that statement.
'Am I Calvinist?', 'Am I Arminianist?', 'Wesleyan Arminianist?', well I said that in some meetings before that sent shock waves through your country already and I better not shock you tonight.

What I am, best you don't know. And it's good that you don't know. That means I am a good - when you say good, I mean you teach correctly, if nobody knows, whether you are a Calvinist or Arminianist.

Something wrong with you if they know that you are Calvinist, brother, and Arminianist, and half of the Bible you can't preach. You lose your liberty once you brand yourself to some group you know, I refused to do it, you can kick me out of the pulpit, I think that some of you have already in America, so long as you don't take away my right to have every liberty to preach on every single thing in this Book, without messing myself into some group. And with such conviction that just one thing, that a soul is all that matters, not doctrines, I am not here to defend a doctrine. God forbid! Some people stand up and all they have compassion for is the doctrine they are defending, there's nothing to care for the soul!

Brother, if you don't have one longing, throbbing, thrust from your soul and heart when you are in the pulpit, just for souls. And people are conscious of that only. And The Calvinist sit and wonder 'well, is he a Calvinist?' And the Arminianist, '

Is he Arminianist?'

That's all that matters. And you reach them all. No one gets truly offended you see. If they are not too sure, they all come.

You don't know what I am talking about some of you children, but you will know. Oh, what the doctrines have split and torn a church apart, that they can't even allow you in their pulpit, if you say one word wrong concerning their doctrine. Oh, God forbid.

Anyway I bless dear Lord for all those Calvinists who are good Arminianists, and all those Arminianists who embrace a lot of what Calvin taught. Anyway, if I don't stop now you will be really confused….

I love to see the reactions of Doctors of Theology, you know, they allowed me to speak once in a University, our largest, ooh, I better not tell you where it was. Anyway, they were mostly Professors of Theology, and Doctors of Theology, and well , by the time when I finished that sermon, you should seen that meeting, you wouldn't believe it what I had to face at the door. But I thank the dear Lord, with all my heart, the dean of the whole faculty, came, and he put his arms around me and sobbed, and he said,

"When I was young, I preached like you, and all this has robbed me of everything, and I only found out tonight when I heard you."

The whole dean, professor, I won't tell you his name. I thank the dear Lord, you don't tremble with whom you preached brother, you just preach what you are, wherever you preach, there in University or anywhere.

Souls have one need, compassion, and if you give to them, no matter who they are, they break. God's compassion, not yours. That's what you got to prepare for.

fed up with the constant irrational slander from the humanists.

I'm tired of slanderers creating division with all their lies about GOD and the doctrines of grace so I might as well take a polemical approach now, I mean, defending the truth of Scripture seems to just make the haters more vicious in their slanders. Since they can't tear down the Truth, they just spew more falsities instead.

I pray that God brings peace to your life over this issue. I remember when I fought against the doctrines of grace with all I had. I also remember how, after having the truth contained in them revealed to me by God, I argued in their defense. It was all perfectly clear to me. I could not understand how anyone could not see the writing on the wall. Then I remembered how I was before I was awakened to the truths that some call reformed theology or Calvinism. I believe the doctrines of grace to be the very truth of God's Word and the Gospel itself. I know what you are feeling. It is sad how distorted and convoluted this topic has become. But this is nothing new.

Check out what C.H. Spurgeon said about his beliefs and the situation involved with defending it. He was very much a "Calvinist", as the first quote shows, but as the last quote reveals, he also accepted what seems to be the inevitable.

__________________________________________
1st quote.

Spurgeon also said “Calvinism is the gospel and nothing else” Read the context of this quote below:

If anyone should ask me what I mean by a Calvinist, I should reply, “He is one who says, Salvation is of the Lord.” I cannot find in Scripture any other doctrine than this. It is the essence of the Bible. “He only is my rock and my salvation.”
Tell me anything contrary to this truth, and it will be a heresy; tell me a heresy, and I shall find its essence here, that it has departed from this great, this fundamental, this rock-truth, “God is my rock and my salvation.” What is the heresy of Rome, but the addition of something to the perfect merits of Jesus Christ—the bringing in of the works of the flesh, to assist in our justification? And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here.
I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.
I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor. – C.H. Spurgeon
_________________________________________
2nd quote.

“DO NOT IMAGINE for an instant that I pretend to be able thoroughly to elucidate the great mysteries of predestination. There are some men who claim to know all about the matter. They twist it round their fingers as easily as if it were an everyday thing; but depend upon it, he who thinks he knows all about this mystery, knows but very little. It is but the shallowness of his mind that permits him to see the bottom of his knowledge; he who dives deep, finds that there is in the lowest depth to which he can attain a deeper depth still. The fact is, that the great questions about man’s responsibility, free-will, and predestination, have been fought over, and over, and over again, and have been answered in ten thousand different ways; and the result has been, that we know just as much about the matter as when we first began. The combatants have thrown dust into each other’s eyes, and have hindered each other from seeing; and then they have concluded, that because they put other people’s eyes out, they could therefore see.” - C.H. Spurgeon

_______________________________________________

So, I say all that to say this...

Choose your fights well. Many great men of God have held to the truth of God's Word that has been labeled Calvinism, but as you can see, they have also accepted the very real fact about arguing it.

spurgons first quote i dont agree with :-) but i understand why he said it and respect him, i do like his second one and its a very good word to remember no matter what belief we think is true.

What saddens me a bit, and i am guilty of it myself is that it when discussing these things it often divides and creates chaos and tension, may it be that we are to prideful and to much of self, i strive to be able to discuss any topic and doctrine and yet be able to feel nothing but love towards those who disagree with me and no matter what i say it is carefully weighed and considered before speaking.

Its easy to just "jump in" and say this is so and this is so! and love and compassion and reason goes out the window.

we ought to be able to speak as arm vs cal as we where speaking to the Lord himself and it should shame us when the debate goes out of control, but i can sypathise with the original post since i feel the same way just for other reasons and from an other point of view.

i just feel it is very bad wording to say "they" are wrong when scripture does support much claims from both sides when read just as they are. I think we can agree on that at least , and i long for the day when the debate will be once and for all settled in heaven when we will se how it really was ( of course i know already ;-) )

anyway, God bless your passion to se truth in reality, let us remember truth is not always what we are certain it is.

The natural bent of our unredeemed flesh is absolutely wedded to an irrational a priori commitment to the philosophical humanist presupposition of final self determining universal libertarian autonomy which renders GOD a helpless failure who is incapable of accomplishing His purposes in the affairs of men apart from coaxing them to give Him permission.

This paragraph does not encourage further reading...{{sigh}} :-( And what does "priori" mean? Can't find it in my dictionary...

Here in the south we say, "say that again."

ginnyrose

"[i]a priori[/i]" knowledge is knowledge that is independent from experience. I think in this sense he is saying that we "naturally" gravitate towards this humanist presupposition - it is part of being lost.

That is a very true paragraph, by the way.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

the problem is the truth of scripture is not reserved for calvins doctrines of grace. You can not say your view is the absolute truth what scripture teaches, in deed much may be truthful and found in scripture but much of the arminian views are equally true. both sides have truths that may seem to be opposed to one another, they are not, just as two sides of a river may seem to be wide apart but the thing that unites them are the river itself, so the spirit and the word unites both sides.

There is perhaps more common ground than people realize, but one must not overlook the fact that the two doctrines are diametrically opposed to one another for the most part.

You either believe in total depravity…or you do not.

You either believe in unconditional election…or you do not.

You either believe in limited atonement…or you do not.

You either believe in irresistible grace… or you do not.

You either believe in perseverance of the saints… or you do not.

You either believe the Bible supports the doctrines of grace…or you do not.

What bothers me is the post-modern wishy-washy grey area where everything is or may possibly be true. (not an accusation, brother)

I do not attempt to label a preacher one way or the other when I listen to him. But having knowledge of the Bible and an understanding of basic doctrines allows me to ascertain his theological convictions rather easily and without conscious effort. A lot of folks today have retreated to some hypothetical haven of middle ground and dodge any scripture that could possible lead to him being identified with either camp. I believe many do this under the guise of “peace keeper” when often times the reasoning is to simply not offend potential followers or lose any they already have.

The problem seems to be one of balance and extremes. A.W. Tozer held arminian beliefs, but is often referred to by Calvinists because he also held a high view of God’s sovereignty. C.H. Spurgeon held to Calvinistic beliefs, but he never abandoned the teaching of the responsibility of the believer as found in scripture.

While A.W. Tozer and C.H. Spurgeon held to many totally different beliefs, they did seem to find some common ground in not going to extremes. In simply terms I would say Spurgeon was not “hyper” in his doctrine and Tozer not “rank” in his.

Although I appreciate what hmmhmm is doing in trying to get int3grity to see that there is truth on both sides I will only write just one post to say that I pray for you int3grity to really experience God without any bitterness, to get in your bible to minister His Word without the trappings of men’s limited understandings. Most of these types of threads are fruitless and grieving to the Holy Spirit and as I said before this will be my last post because I will not grieve the Holy Spirit of my God.

Titus 3:8-11 This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

Blessings to all!

The problem seems to be one of balance and extremes. A.W. Tozer held arminian beliefs, but is often referred to by Calvinists because he also held a high view of God’s sovereignty. C.H. Spurgeon held to Calvinistic beliefs, but he never abandoned the teaching of the responsibility of the believer as found in scripture.

While A.W. Tozer and C.H. Spurgeon held to many totally different beliefs, they did seem to find some common ground in not going to extremes. In simply terms I would say Spurgeon was not “hyper” in his doctrine and Tozer not “rank” in his.

its a good word brother, brother rbanks post is also very full of wisdom.

myself dont think calvinsim honestly deals with mans ability to respond to the gospel and also in the area of once saved always saved, i guess those two mix its contradiction of all five points in calvinism. And I have read much calvinistic authors and none so far has been able for me to reconcile the very large sum of verses that says otherwise. Not spurgeon or edwards or withfield or washer. All fail in reconciling much scripture to the five points.

in my opinion :-) I do think wheter one holds to this side or that do best in preaching Gods word in its fullness, even the verses that may contradict some areas of our doctrines. then we will have no regret in the final day

Brothers and sisters, I apologize. Lateley I have been so misrepresented and bombarded with slander starting with my Pastor from the pulpit (while I was away) last Sunday so misrepresenting the doctrines of grace that one of my dearest friends turned against me and then I have been trying to reason with a woman who has a radical feminist apologetics ministry who is making a dvd project to attack these doctrines but she twists every reasonable point I make into something I never said and misrepresents the position with emotional, anger inducing slanders. It all piled up and I snapped. My point in the polemical statements was to try and point out what is constantly done to people who believe the doctrines of grace. I think it really grates on us and makes it hard to not be upset and want to be blunt. I am generally very gracious about these things. Forgive me for snapping like that.

myself dont think calvinsim honestly deals with mans ability to respond to the gospel and also in the area of once saved always saved, i guess those two mix its contradiction of all five points in calvinism. And I have read much calvinistic authors and none so far has been able for me to reconcile the very large sum of verses that says otherwise. Not spurgeon or edwards or withfield or washer. All fail in reconciling much scripture to the five points. in my opinion I do think wheter one holds to this side or that do best in preaching Gods word in its fullness, even the verses that may contradict some areas of our doctrines. then we will have no regret in the final day

I believe the Bible itself reconciles them just fine. I need not man to convince me what God teaches. I think there may be verses that seem to be contradictory, but are truly not when properly interpreted. The problem is then with who holds the key to proper interpretation. I believe the Bible holds the key…scripture interprets scripture. I believe this is truly done through the doctrines of grace.

I think the point of the original poster’s post was the heart of this very matter. Dropping our humanistic understandings and presuppositions and just accepting what the Bible teaches…even when it gets bumpy and hard to accept.

All of the men you mentioned admit to not understanding all the mysteries surrounding these doctrines.

The key is not in being persuaded by these men but in simply accepting God’s truth as it is. This is where men often stumble…by attempting to wedge God into their limited ability to comprehend Him and His ways.

We are all entitled to our opinions but I do not want an opinion…I want THE truth.

As far as I am concerned the Bible is clear on these issues. I may not fully grasp the hows and whys, but I know He does. That is fine with me.

God bless you my brother from Norway! :-)

int3grity wrote:
Brothers and sisters, I apologize. Lateley I have been so misrepresented and bombarded with slander starting with my Pastor from the pulpit (while I was away) last Sunday so misrepresenting the doctrines of grace that one of my dearest friends turned against me and then I have been trying to reason with a woman who has a radical feminist apologetics ministry who is making a dvd project to attack these doctrines but she twists every reasonable point I make into something I never said and misrepresents the position with emotional, anger inducing slanders. It all piled up and I snapped. My point in the polemical statements was to try and point out what is constantly done to people who believe the doctrines of grace. I think it really grates on us and makes it hard to not be upset and want to be blunt. I am generally very gracious about these things. Forgive me for snapping like that.

I will pray for you. It is par for the course for those who hold reformed views.

God bless you all! :-)

priceless brother ryan, priceless

The natural bent of our unredeemed flesh is absolutely wedded to an irrational a priori commitment to the philosophical humanist presupposition of final self determining universal libertarian autonomy which renders GOD a helpless failure who is incapable of accomplishing His purposes in the affairs of men apart from coaxing them to give Him permission.

Too bad your English teacher did not make you diagram this sentence before posting it here on SI. {{SIGH}}

ginnyrose

Too bad your English teacher did not make you diagram this sentence before posting it here on SI. {{SIGH}}

ginnyrose

lol. I am SO guilty of this in my everyday life. I cannot tell you how many times I have wrote something out, posted it, then looked back and said, "what a buffoon I am!" lol. I'll probably do it after this post as well! 8-)

We serve a good God. That I am sure. But do we fear Him?

Miccah,

You did not post the original on this thread...

But anyhow, this opening paragraph is so long, it wearies one trying to understand what is even meant. One has to go to the rest of the post to get a fair idea. In fact the longer you read, the simplier the structure.

This complicated paragraph reminded me what the scripture says about "great swelling words." It is always used in connection with deception. Jude 1:16 and 2 Peter 2:18.

Jesus, who is God, the creator of all seen and unseen, who knows the hearts of people, understands all languages, all vocabulary, spoke simply so all could understand. He made sure his listeners [i]knew[/i] what he meant, that no doubts lingered. If there were questions and they asked him about it, he explained it. (He did say he spoke in parables to keep the blind blind. But his overall mission was to minister to all.) Seems to me Christians who are interested in communicating God's truth would take lessons.

I'll probably do it after this post as well!

One can read your post quickly and know exactly was is meant! Loved it! :-) (BTW, ever notice Enid's posts? she is brief, to the point, wastes no words.(I love it!) Who knows? maybe someday I will advance to that level in communications! :-)

ginnyrose

I do not attempt to label a preacher one way or the other when I listen to him. But having knowledge of the Bible and an understanding of basic doctrines allows me to ascertain his theological convictions rather easily and without conscious effort. A lot of folks today have retreated to some hypothetical haven of middle ground and dodge any scripture that could possible lead to him being identified with either camp. I believe many do this under the guise of “peace keeper” when often times the reasoning is to simply not offend potential followers or lose any they already have.

Tricky business there ... Understanding this to be so -

Mat 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

I would probably add that it doesn't infer [i]blessed are the compromisers[/i]. Your point is well taken TJ and being of the sort of mind of a middle-ground by 'nature', as by duty (here) it boils out into conduct and disposition. The whole trouble as I see it has to do with the 'camps' themselves and moreover the [i]hard-line[/i] stances that as the Spurgeon quote so well stated - Has each other throwing dust into the eyes never recognizing the disposition that compels the hand to scoop it up in the first place ...

Really the only reason to jump into this was to slightly disagree with a mention here;

Although I appreciate what hmmhmm is doing in trying to get int3grity to see that there is truth on both sides I will only write just one post to say that I pray for you int3grity to really experience God without any bitterness, to get in your bible to minister His Word without the trappings of men’s limited understandings. [b]Most of these types of threads are fruitless and grieving to the Holy Spirit[/b] and as I said before this will be my last post because I will not grieve the Holy Spirit of my God.

"Most" - Certainly. This one however may be the best collection of ... "how to go about it" that has ever graced these pages (no pun intended).

I think there is a world of difference between reconcile and compromise, between having convictions and [i]forcing[/i] them, between restraint, refrain and those words that seem to be very much underneath or inside the disposition which was pointed out above -

[i]without any bitterness[/i]

I am pretty well convinced that the scriptures were presented in such a way (to borrow from Wesley) that the [i]expression[/i] of them would be just as they are - Different! And the test as it were would be just how well we deal with each other over the extrapolations of those same articulations.

As TJ pointed out, there are differences, absolutely, unequivocally and I think a certain, generic generality of "Would the Lord approve?" of so much squabbling and strife might be too vanilla, maybe the better question would be - "Would you be so obstinate and vicious in your opinion in His presence, if He were within arms reach - If he were typing along side us?"

That is not happening here thankfully, but appealing to the same known general overdose that is predominant when this subject is broached.

A recent mention -

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=29031&forum=36&start=10&viewmode=flat&order=0]Reformed from what?[/url]

[i][b]John Newton and the English Evangelical Tradition: Between the Conversions of Wesley and Wilberforce[/b][/i] -

D. Bruce Hindmarsh

I could not recommend more highly, redundantly, due to the treatment of this long running debate - Because it is not direct but more indirect it gives you a snapshot, at least of that era of where these men differed yet still managed to not only get along but to dispel much of what has become, in my mind mere folklore and misrepresentation of the two 'warring factions'.

It is a bit ironic and seemingly contradictory to say so ... Because there was certainly a great deal of rhetoric and ill-will, strife and contention between the 'Established church' and that of Wesley and the Morivians for instance, But along comes an Edwards of a very reformed upbringing and background [i]wiling[/i] and able to bridge the gap in many ways and never lose his bearings or his real convictions. Go figure!

The whole point and long running suspicion is that there is much more than mets the eye with many of these men - Charles Simeon comes to mind, Tozer (As pointed out, who [i]everyone[/i] appeals to - again - Go figure!) even in our day a Paul Washer who, taken apart on one sermon could easily be humbled by yet another - Keith Daniel ... Zac Poonen ...

What I do think happens even subconsciously is a sort of embedded-ness that can have one looking over their shoulder and tends to color everything they absorb by the settings of certain constructs when they are presented in such an ironclad, 'hard-line' fashion. If you are going to be stuck on 5 points and feed everything through that funnel you are generally going to get the results you anticipate. The opposite being just as true.

Applying it to those participating here over the years - TJ and Hmmmmm as just two great examples - Often misunderstood - Just as often 'labeled' by their convictions and sometimes sorely chastised by that old English word, [i]meanness[/i] which now means something else entirely. My point? They both 'get it' as did so many before them, those and many others mentioned above.

lol. I am SO guilty of this in my everyday life. I cannot tell you how many times I have wrote something out, posted it, then looked back and said, "what a buffoon I am!" lol. I'll probably do it after this post as well!

You stole my thunder brother - Hence the recent silence. Guess I had a ramble all bottled up for awhile now ... it's been an interesting and difficult year so far.

I applaud you all for your handling of this often hostile subject matter.

Mat 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. I would probably add that it doesn't infer blessed are the compromisers.

Once again you have summed up quite nicely (with your entire post and not just the above quote) what I think many of us feel and believe about this issue. I see the point of contention arising from the fact that both sides view the other as compromising to some degree.

So, I believe many folks are attempting to make peace with people they believe to be compromisers. Tricky, for many believe that the opposing views must be refuted or they will be guilty of compromise themselves.

Though they may long for peace, but compromising, by remaining silent about what they believe to be an attack on the very Gospel itself, is not an option. Many simply fall back on the old, “agree to disagree” motto. It usually works just fine, especially when you know you are right and they are wrong. :-)

I think there is a world of difference between reconcile and compromise, between having convictions and forcing them, between restraint, refrain...

Very true. I pray for His grace in all these areas.

...there are differences, absolutely, unequivocally and I think a certain, generic generality of "Would the Lord approve?" of so much squabbling and strife might be too vanilla, maybe the better question would be - "Would you be so obstinate and vicious in your opinion in His presence, if He were within arms reach - If he were typing along side us?"

I am glad you brought this up. I pray to always be aware of being in HIS presence when typing my replies. But I must admit that I have not always been successful in this endeavor.( Did I really need to even include that sentence? :-) ) I wish it were not true but the sad reality must be faced...I simply fall short. I ask you all for your prayers in dying to self to an even greater degree...complete death.

I, personally, think the Apostle Paul would have taken a stand on the issue. That may very well be because I believe he already did and his side is clear to me. :-)

I disagree with parts of brother Christian’s (hmmhmm) theology, but I consider him a brother and would never not click on his posts. I have learned much from him and am sure I will continue to do so. He is an example of what it is to be gracious...an example I am learning from.

well , :-) the part of me being gracious maybe true, but you really should ask my wife about that, but seriously i to see many of my reformed five point brethren as precious, even tho i know they are wrong ( :-P ) i still recognize i can learn much from them in doctrine and life. And i am persuaded that Finney could have found things that he thought to be true and holy in Spurgeons preaching and vice versa. I find faults in both mens preaching but can still be blessed and driven to my knees by both, and often as i have thought about this and prayed to the Lord i have more then once had a sense that God may have designed this by purpose, not for the "battle" of the "whos right" , but to show us, our ungraciousness, our "we know it best" sides, the subtleness of religious pride ect, it is fully possible to be right in all the correct doctrine and be proud of that i am not one of those deceived ones. and somehow in this seeming twoside discussion, a lot such things have been revealed to me for myself, and that is precious, if i do something about it, if it where not for this issue i never would have noticed some of the corruptions inside, i could never have cleansed these out. I am far from clean in this yett, but i have seen it and working on it by gods grace and his power i hope to one day , whether calvinist or arminian or a wishy washy middle man

;-) , that I in truth can say i have no such pride or bitter thoughts and motives towards anyone, and to be clean like this inside i think is one keystone of humility, blessed are the meek....

learn from me.... (jesus)

but also i recognize the thin line between compromise, and its hard, often times this is loaded with feelings and passions, for most of us have a passion for truth and for the word and for correct doctrine, this is very important to us even if we see them differently, so in a sense, many times i been just broken over what this debate has caused and what it has cost christianity over the ages, we will never know, but on tthe other hand i am thankful for it, since it has allowed me to spot something inside me that is a seed towards pride and religion, and pride is the gate to hell.

God is good in reviling these things, cant remember where i heard it, but it was one methodist preacher one generation after wesley if i am not mistaken, when he died even his "worst" enemies of doctrinal sort, spoke at his funeral and could say no evil about this man because his life was so filled with God, he was the most holy man that he had ever seen, i will try remember where i found that story and post it, but we have wesley and withfield i think it was, at the funeral, their grace and love even tho they had some heated letter correspondence and preaching that seem obvius what they preach against and for.

But in the end, they where brothers, may God work such an heart in us also. I am sure even if TJ have some small things against my theology and i against his, i am truly truly convinced if we where ever to meet we could have the sweetest kind of fellowship this side of the Glory.

isent it wonderful?

Gods grace and peace to all my five pointer brethren, from your one point brother

PS: you know you need come to sweden and teach five points? i suspect the lack of calvinist here in sweden is to the fact we have no modern word that is used for the word grace :-) so i suspect that is one reason calvinism hasent seen its days here since Spurgeons days, anyway....

I appreciate this thread and you all brethren... TJ, Mike.... Gods peace overflow your hearts brethren