Featured Do you recognise the differences between reformed/calvinist/Hyper?

I don't see in this scripture where the writer exhorted his readers to receive Jesus thru faith.
I see life being manifested in their believing.
totally in concert with what Paul wrote to Timothy, about grace being given to the believing elect (those who heard and obeyed the gospel) in Christ BEFORE the world began and their possessing life and immortality before hearing the gospel which life and immortality was revealed (brought to life) through the gospel. 1 Timothy 1:9-10 - Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began , 10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

 

But this multitude that knoweth not the law are accursed. Jn 7:49

That about sums up the gist of the 'hyper hardline restrictivism' that you espouse.

Egad man, who do you think the life giving Spirit of Jn 3:8 is?

 

"Many, maybe even most, Reformed folks hold to regeneration before profession but none hold to regeneration without profession, that is the real distinction to be made between PB and Reformed soteriology."
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1971484#post1971484

 

I must confess that I must be dense this morning. Just exactly what is your view, and how does it differ from mine?

 

Well, meditate on it for a while Tom, maybe you'll be able to 'flesh it out' and articulate it for yourself. We're both referring to each other's positions as 'hyper'. Why is that?

[add] By hyper I mean 'extreme'.

 

What a hyper untruth. A gospel relationship with the Saviour is the most precious possession His little lambs could ever have in this time world, but, a gospel relationship with the Saviour is not a requirement to become one of God's little lambs. It's the grandest of all privileges bar none, but not a requirement.

 

28 They said therefore unto him, What must we do, that we may work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. Jn 6

Whether you want to call it a work or a fruit of the Spirit, faith in Christ is something that we do. We are commanded to exercise it.

 

Hmm, maybe we're closer together than we think.

I hold that we are saved through repentance and faith.

I also hold that repentance and faith are gifts of God, and that He enables us to exercise them.

John 6:29 clearly says that God works saving faith in those who believe. Saving faith is a work of God, not man.

I Timothy 2:25 says: " The Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but must correct with gentleness those in opposition, if perhaps God might grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth."

I don't think that's an extreme position.

How does it differ from your view?

 

We differ on the correct meaning of 'sozo' (saved, i.e., delivered) here. You always apply 'eternal consequences' to it, i.e., synonymous with regeneration and the acquisition of eternal life. That cannot be supported from scripture.

Ditto.

You're gomming up that word 'sozo' again in that what you really mean by 'saving faith' is 'regenerating faith'; such a thing doesn't exist.

Not at all extreme, but the context is concerning erring professing saints, not the unregenerate.

Well, I'm one of those 'hyper hardshellers' you referred to in an earlier post. You tell me.

 

JF, I've told you earlier today, I agree with these statements from the good Dr. Graham, and you seemed to be defending him also:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1984178#post1984178

Billy Graham was one that I always admired, growing up Mom ALWAYS tuned him in on the TV when he was preaching.

Tom Butler is an 'orthodox evangelical' and would not agree with Dr. Graham. Tom says any who have not heard the gospel are bound for hell. What an awful belief.

 

RM,please address the above.

And will you now acknowledge that Phil Johnson believes in specific redemption,otherwise known as defite atonement (i.e. limited atonement)?

 

Which is a typical 'Gospel Means' Reformed position.

I agree with the Bible:

..It behoveth you to be born from above; the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.` Jn 3:7,8

The evangelist has zilch to do with that. No different than Gentiles outside of the old covenant who neither had the law nor had heard the law yet had the law written in their hearts [Ro 2:13-15]. No flesh had anything to do with that.

 

This is the scenario i have use to determine what i think the truth is about different religions or different denominational beliefs. If i came upon a car wreck and a lost person is pinned under the car and there is no way to get them out and there is little time left for them on this earth, because they are badly hurt but concience, or the car will catch on fire and burn them up. If i believe in coc doctrine this will be of no help because they cannot be baptized for the remission of sin's pinned down under the car. If i believe in pb doctrine what will i tell them if i don't think it necessary that they call upon the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation? IMO a person has to believe a doctrine that is useful in every situation.

 

Because, "A gospel relationship with the Saviour is the most precious possession His little lambs could ever have in this time world."

And our dialog is over.