Commentary on the book of John

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by evangelist6589, Jul 3, 2014.

  1. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,369
    Likes Received:
    105
    Hey a heads up if anyone is interested RC Sproul is offering his commentary on John for a donation of any amount. He's a theologian not a NT Scholar so his commentary is in one volume and may not be as detailed as the one by DA Carson and other NT scholars, but hey I made a donation.

    https://www.ligonier.org/rym/offer/
     
    #1 evangelist6589, Jul 3, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 3, 2014
  2. kyredneck

    kyredneck
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    10,569
    Likes Received:
    276
  3. RLBosley

    RLBosley
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bookmarked!

    PBMinistries has some great stuff. I remember spending a lot of time there when I was wading through the pre-trib v post-trib debate a couple years ago. Very helpful.
    Though, looking through it now, particularly the theology section, they have a whole lot of articles from VERY different sources. This seems to be a website that promotes the writing of reformers and Puritans... yet they have an article by David Cloud on Music?? Just goes to show you need to be careful on any site you go to.
     
    #3 RLBosley, Jul 3, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 3, 2014
  4. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,369
    Likes Received:
    105
  5. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    If one wants to study shoddy theology, i.e. Calvinist misinterpretation, then this book might be in your wheelhouse.

    However, if one wants to consider what John actually wrote, this is not helpful, except possibly as an example of what John did not write.

    A. W. Pink has those that "received Him" already born of God. When a person is born of God, they are born into God's family, thus at birth, they are sons or children of God. So John writes that those who believe are given the right to become, in the future, children or sons of God. But Pink reverses the order and says they became children of God by being born anew before they believed.

    Just read it folks, John 1:11-13, and the truth will set you free from the shoddy scholarship of Calvinism.
     
  6. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,369
    Likes Received:
    105

    Excuse me??? Have you even read this new RC Sproul book????
     
  7. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    If you could not figure out I was addressing the Exposition of the Gospel of John by A. W. Pink, excuse me indeed.
     
  8. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    As far as the RC Sproul book, again he rewrites the text of John 1:11-13, by claiming as many as [were made by the Holy Spirit] received Him. Thus, according to RC, they did not really receive Him, no they were made to receive Him by the Holy Spirit administering irresistible grace. Not how the text reads.
     
  9. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    ^^I think Van is catching on. :thumbs: GOD is sovereign and HE is Lord. We aren't.

    Hearts of stone will never admit it. Van is a child of God (albeit confused) but has that new heart. Perhaps he will soon see Mac, Pink, Sproul, and <gasp> even Calvin were, of course, correct.

    We love Him only because of His first love to us, regenerating us and replacing that hard heart of stone (that was incapable of seeking and loving Him), in turn giving us a living heart of faith. Only then can revel in the salvation He alone gave us.
     
  10. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    John presents the inspired truth, that as many as receive Him are then given the right to become children of God, born from above.

    We love Him because He first loved us, as demonstrated by Christ dying for us on the cross. Without beholding Him, high and lifted up, we would not be drawn by His lovingkindness toward us. No one can come to Him unless first drawn by the Father, through the call of the gospel.
     
  11. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Other than getting faith and regeneration backwards, and claiming Mac, Pink, Sproul and Calvin are "correct," you've got "great points" here. :laugh:

    Yes, God is sovereign. But man is also responsible, and that doesn't just mean that he's responsible even though he's incapable. If far more complex than that. Your gentlemen listed there never caught on to that, preferring black and white theology to a whole picture.
     
  12. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    God is sovereign is Calvinist code for Exhaustive Determinism, God predestines whatsoever comes to pass. But the doctrine is cloaked in double speak, so that at the same time mainline Calvinism can say God is not the author of sin.

    Those on the other side of the street simply define God's sovereignty as God either causing or allowing whatsoever comes to pass. Thus God is not the author of sin.

    According to the book of John only after believing in His name are we then given the right to become children of God born from above. This would be God allowing us to choose life or death, and crediting our faith as righteousness if we wholeheartedly chose life.
     
  13. JamesL

    JamesL
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2013
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    76
    Any Calvinists have ears to hear?
     
  14. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    II Tim 2:16 is our view of the "If it's going to be, it's up to me" man-is-god crowd.

    Didn't work in Eden. Still won't. Either salvation is 100% of God or it is no longer grace.
     
  15. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Jesus taught that our yes should mean yes, and our no should mean no, and therefore we should not engage in profane chatter, as false teachers do, going off the path of righteousness.

    If salvation is 100% of God, why not take God's word, which says He gives the right to become children of God after we believe in the name of Christ. Why rob God of the grace of crediting our worthless filthy rag faith as righteousness?
     
  16. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,134
    Likes Received:
    52
    That is the traditional calvinistic view on his soveregn ways though van!
    That God either determined through direct causes, or theough others to have His plans and purposes, his will to get done!
     

Share This Page

Loading...