Hyper Calvinism

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by pinoybaptist, Jun 20, 2006.

  1. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hyper Calvinism (Again ?)

    First, let me state that I will NOT answer any post that delivers a negative and/or sarcastic slant about Primitive Baptists to whom I belong, or to any who posts anecdotes or hearsays about PB ministers who are no longer around and therefore unable to speak out.
    This happened in one of the threads about the G C and I stopped posting.
    Second, let me state that I disagree with the statement highlighted, italicized and underlined above. I do not believe there is a "Great Commission", nor that this, if it did exist at all, was handed down to the church. I believe that there was a commission, handed down and continuing, a directive, an order, and this order was given only to the Apostles, and from them, to any who will later on be called by the Savior to the ministry, and that the commission was NOT to spread the gospel in order that men may be saved, but to preach the gospel that those ordained to eternal life may hear the fulfillment of their salvation, and make them learners and disciples of Christ, called out to be a body glorifying God in their midst amid a crooked and perverse world.
    That being said I do not believe that all who are elect and foreordained unto eternal life will hear the gospel in their lifetime nor become disciples and members of a gospel church, but such non-hearing does not damn them because they were elect from eternity past and Christ alone secured their salvation.
    Also, as a Primitive Baptist, I believe that the charge to preach the gospel to all who will hear still exists, and the child of God whom He separates unto the ministry, is obligated to GO IMMEDIATELY AND preach the good news, money or no money, board or no board, supporters or no supporters. : That Christ came to save sinners. But that primarily the duty of the preacher or pastor is to the church, once organized, if such a church were not in existence before he came to where the Lord sent him.
    All these being laid down, let me now focus on the words highlighted in blue (in fairness to the original poster in the original thread, these were not his position).
    I agree with all but number 4, and that only because I have never heard of such a thing as common grace, and if someone will explain that to me, then I can decide whether or not I agree or disagree.
    Will the venerable learneds of this board pray tell this orangutan turned crosseyed cat how :

    1. the gospel call applies to all sinners (by this I take it that all sinners mean all mankind). If you insist, where are the Scriptures, and then expose on that Scripture;
    2. If faith is the duty of every sinner, is this sinner a redeemed, or unredeemed sinner ? If what it means to you is a 'redeemed sinner' then we are in agreement, but if it is an 'unredeemed sinner', then we part ways, unless you have irrefutable proof texts.
    3. Where are the Scriptures that there is an "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect ? For that matter, where is the "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mecy to the elect ?
    4. -
    5. Where is the Scripture that God has any love at all for the non-elect ? Those not His people ?

    Thank you, and if we can avoid sarcasm and gall, I think we will have a lively chat. :smilewinkgrin:

    Oh, yes, ps: If there are challenge posts at all, it may take a while for me to respond, but unless you posted a sarcastic post about PB's living and dead, there will be a response. It may be I have gone out to work, find work, or take my wife out to dinner, or my wife took me out to dinner, or face whatever it is that this fallen world throws at us....
     
    #1 pinoybaptist, Jun 20, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 20, 2006
  2. Pipedude

    Pipedude
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    I may be coming into this discussion late, but I'll leave early to make up for it.

    I don't like Johnson's definitions. He seems to be following a particularly common malpractice, that is, he just defines a term willy-nilly. "I'm a Calvinist, those who disagree with me are wrong, so I'll list off the things I disagree with and call them hypercalvinism." I see no regard for historical precedent.

    That's all that God has ordained that I write about it. G'day!
     
  3. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe this is to simple, but I simply state that hyper-Calvinism are doctrines built on Calvinism and not the Bible.
     
  4. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    pipedude said:

    I see no regard for historical precedent.

    In that case, why don't you post a historical definition of hyper-Calvinism? It's easy to complain.

    (And cite your sources.)
     
  5. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly how do they "confess and believe" (Rom. 10:9-11) onto salvation if they never hear the gospel?

    peace to you:praise:
     
  6. Pipedude

    Pipedude
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    You answered your own question. I'm lazy and it's easier to shoot from the hip.

    'Course, I'm also right, but who really cares?

    Besides, God hasn't ordained that I write any more about this tonight.
     
  7. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Pinoybaptist, I don't know what kind of run-ins you've had on this board with other folks, but I think you're over-protesting on this thread. I wrote the post you quoted in the OP and I want you to know that I have great respect for many of the PB doctrines. In fact, I've come to accept the doctrine of regeneration without means myself - and I'm not convinced that the attitude of God toward the non-elect can properly be called "love". Your veiw of the great commission is your right to have, and let me think about it, maybe I shouldn't have related that view to hypercalvinism. That was the real point of my post anyway - that definitions of hypercalvinism leave a lot to be desired. As Pipedude said above, both arminians and we "orthodox" calvinists like to define hyperism as anything to the "right" of us that we happen to disagree with.

    My concern with PB's is that some of them I know personally discourage and even forbid witnessing. I don't understand that, and it seems to be indefensible to me, no matter what one's particular view of the GC and church may be. If this represents an overly narrow view of PB's then correct me.
     
  8. PreachTREE

    PreachTREE
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2005
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    0
    hOy Pare, kamusta!? I got a simple question. Wouldn't you rather proclaim the Gospel to the world and be wrong doing so, rather than NOT witnessing to the world and be wrong not doing so?
     
  9. pituophis

    pituophis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would like to see someone address (with scriptures) the questions that Pinoybaptist asks in the OP.
     
  10. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, if there are hyper-Calvinists on this board, let us leave this to them to refute or confirm.
     
  11. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    ARe you referring to this part of my "opening remarks"
    With all due respects, but if you continue on reading all the way to Romans 11, you will see that in effect Paul was talking about his desire to take the gospel to the elect children of God among the nation Israel who at that point in time was still in bondage to Judaism. He calls them 'remnant' (Romans 11:5)
    Note verse 1 of Romans 9.
    His heart's desire and prayer to God is that they (Israel, or those in Israel for whom the gospel means anything) might be saved.

    But saved from what ?
    Saved from the penalty of sin ?
    Does the gospel do that ? If the gospel saves from the penalty of sin, then what of the cross ? If the preaching, hearing, confessing, and believing of the gospel takes away the sins of the sinner, and justifies him before God, then what of the blood of Christ ?
    The fact is that there is one ordained Savior, and that is God Himself in the Person of His Son Jesus Christ.
    Now, as to salvation, there may be one salvation with two aspects, or two salvations in the Bible.
    We Primitive Baptists call it Time Salvation, that is, salvation from the effects and influence of sin in this plane we call time. Evidence this in the many calls to righteous living that God made to His people Israel, the many references to being saved used by Paul. One example:
    1 Corinthians 7:16 where Paul writes - "
    For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? "
    Was Paul talking of eternal salvation ? Does another sinner eternally save another sinner ? Are we able to do that ?

    Confession and belief in Christ is not evidence of eternal salvation, it is the mark of righteous and gracious living.
    Confession and belief in Christ does not result or augment eternal salvation. Christ alone secured eternal salvation for His people, and nothing we add to it can augment or strengthen it.
    Confession and belief in Christ precedes a righteous and gracious life.

    You non Primitive Baptists teach it as Separated Living.

    And then again, if confessing and believing upon hearing the gospel results or is a prerequisite (are there any prerequisites) to or of eternal salvation, then I will have to go back to the question that most of those who oppose the Doctrine of Grace seem to half-answer or either totally ignore:

    What are we going to do about fetuses who are murdered or aborted before birth ? What are we going to do about babies who die in infancy ? What are we going to do about those born idiots or morons ?

    Obviously, these are unable to hear the gospel, or to comprehend it, much less confess and believe in Christ.

    Thank you.
     
    #11 pinoybaptist, Jun 21, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2006
  12. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Friend:

    I have had some caustic exchanges with some members of the board here in response to a few disparaging remarks they have made about PB's in the past.
    I was originally Bible Baptist and Arminian.
    Now, there are many loving and sincere Bible Baptists, but let me say that for the most part those I've met in my years with them are judgmental, border on fanaticism, irrational with their doctrines (particularly the KJVO types, as opposed to the KJV Preferred), and condemning in their attitudes towards those of other faiths and persuasions.
    But the Primitive Baptists ?
    At least in my eight years with them, I have found them to be loving, sincere, caring, simple people who may be a little weak in some areas of doctrine but are convinced that God's elect are scattered among all nations, all ages, all types of people, and all theologies and creeds, and therefore are careful in condemning a person simply because of his theology, creed, race, or tongue.
    Now there are hypers, I grant you, but the hypers are far outnumbered by the others.
    Nevertheless, hyper or not, I love the Primitive Baptists, not just respect them. I love them.
    The truth is that there are those in this board who cannot resist taking potshots at PB's especially in the area of our belief that the elect does not need gospel preaching for their eternal salvation, and that God uses no means or person to reach His elect.
    Another poster here in another long ago thread have called on me to continue discussing with him, and have practically accused me of trolling, because I stopped posting.
    I love discussing the Doctrine of Grace if only to strengthen my understanding of it, but potshots at my people make me lose interest, thus the statements I made.
    I was in no way alluding to you, though.
    The reason I started a thread on your post is because I also would like to discuss and understand what it is that certain people here sometimes obtusely or sarcastically refer to as hyper Calvinism.
     
  13. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Pare, if you think that every Christian is supposed to go out into the world to proclaim the gospel, whether or not God called him for that ministry, show me the Scriptures and expose on it.
    I believe that the gospel ought to be preached to all who would listen, but I also believe that the gospel (1) does not cause or result in eternal salvation of the elect, it brings life and immortality to light (2 Timothy 1:9 and 10). In other words, it exposes to the elect child of God something he already was given in Christ, therefore it is good news to him.
    (2) That the gospel's purpose is to teach and disciple those who are already saints of God by virtue of the eternal decree and purpose of God.
    (3)And then, show me by Scripture that if I do anything wrong in the eyes of God, He will still bless me, as long as my motive was right.
    God bless, pare.
     
  14. Corry Cox

    Corry Cox
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    0
    What do you do with Romans 1:16?

    For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

    It is the power of God UNTO salvation, says to me it leads to or results in salvation.

    <><
    cbc
     
  15. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    You said some. Well, you know, right now, we have had this issue of missionism dividing us.
    There are those who agree that God still calls someone to the ministry of preaching the gospel to other lands, but that the purpose of the preaching is to make disciples and depend on God for (1) the increase of his people into the church, and (2) that he who is called should go IMMEDIATELY, and depend on no man, board, quasi-board, or pledges of support from churches other than his own.

    And then there are those who are opposed to it because they are simply opposed to it, in other words, they oppose for the sake of opposing and have no idea why they are opposed to it. It just seems like the proper thing to do.:laugh:

    Well, you know, our relationship to the Master is unique and peculiar to each one.

    You can still love them.
     
  16. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Again, you have to ask yourself. Who wrote this epistle ? Paul. And what has been the stand of Paul with regards to eternal salvation all throughout all his epistles ? That salvation is only thru the finished work of Christ. This is the same Paul who wrote in the same letter to the same addressees that:

    And a little further down, he says:
    Knowing then the writer and what his soteriology is, in accordance with what he wrote, we next turn to the addressees. Who are they ? How does Paul view them ?

    A careful reading of Romans 1:1-8 shows us that these are saints of God, that Paul says their faith is spoke of throughout the whole world (and I think the historical context of the letter will give us a hint of why).

    So, these are brethren. (I am not disrespecting you by yelling with the bold words. They are bolded only for emphasis).

    If brethren, and Paul says that God is their Father as well (verse 7d, chapter 1)then, then they are redeemed children of God.

    So, if they are redeemed children of God, why does Paul want to bring them the gospel whom he says is the power of God unto salvation.

    What salvation ? Salvation from the wrath of God ? Salvation from the penalty of sin ? But the cross has done away with that, according to Paul.

    If we study the letter more closely we see that Paul is speaking of deliverance from idolatrous, morally and spiritually corrupt practices, which he enumerates all the way to the end of the chapter.

    The gospel is indeed the power of God unto salvation.
    But not eternal salvation.

    Or do you deny that one who professes to name the Name of Christ ought to be taught gospel obedience, and abstaining from all appearance of evil.

    The gospel has no more power to save anyone from the penalty of sin that the repetitious prayers of some sects and religions.
     
  17. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    pionybaptist

    1 Cor. 1:21 "For since in the widsom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe."

    This verse indicates the gospel is not only necessary for salvation, but that the idea of salvation coming from preaching such a message is the "wisdom of God". God has ordained preaching the gospel as the means by which mankind appropriates the salvation secured for them by Christ.

    You are not intentionally putting yourself in direct opposition to God's wisdom and plan, are you? You seem to be, when you reject the necessity of the gospel.

    peace to you:praise:
     
  18. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pinoybaptist

    I Cor 15:1-4 "Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, (v.2) by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. (v.3) For I delievered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures...."

    This verse is clear that salvation came to them through the preaching of the gospel. Paul then repeats the elements of the gospel that He considers to be of "first importance".

    Preaching the gospel seems to be pretty important to Paul. How can it not be important to you?

    peace to you:praise:
     
  19. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    You have to understand that not every salvation spoken of in the Bible is pertaining to the salvation of the soul. For the salvation of His people, that is, for them to be saved from the penalty of sin, Christ took that penalty unto Himself.
    He stood in their place, and took the wrath of God that was meant for them.
    Having done that, Hebrews tells us that He then entered into the Holy of Holies, bearing His own blood, for the eternal redemption of us all.
    There is no gospel, no good news, without Christ.
    Good news do not happen because you believe it. You believe it because it happened. Your belief did not cause the good news.
    To put the preaching, hearing and receiving of the gospel as the cause of eternal salvation is false teaching at worst, or error, at best.
    However, there is a salvation which is connected to the hearing of the gospel, and that is a salvation, a deliverance if you will, from false doctrines, false teachings, idolatry, sexual concupiscence, idleness, adultery, murder, lies, and works based religion, all of which are the ways of the world, if you will remember, put into heart and practice, the preaching and the teaching you receive thru the preaching of the gospel which is exactly the tenor of Paul's letter to the Corinthians, a carnal, worldly church.
    Remember that the Corinthian church is made up of professing believers, and that to Paul, they are brethren, which means, in our parlance today, saved brethren.
    Why should he go and preach the gospel to those he already considers saints of God, if his purpose is to 'get them saved' in the eternal sense ?
    I suggest you do a careful, contextual reading of Paul's letter, and not just lift one verse to prove your theology.
    I have never, here, or anywhere on this board, rejected the necessity of the gospel for instructions to righteousness.
    I do reject it when the gospel is used to substitute for the finished work of Christ.
     
  20. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, if you believe that the saint has no eternal security in Christ, then you might use this verse to prove that the gospel is an instrument to salvation.
    But, if you believe that (1)salvation is OF the Lord (2) Christ is the author and finisher of our faith (3) no man is able to snatch us from the Father's hand, (4) that the finished work of Christ needs no addition, nor certainly can it not be deducted from, then consider the phrase "if you hold fast the word which I preached to you".
    Take a close look.
    And then I will ask you.
    Since you intimate in your questions that I am bordering on heresy, let me ask you in return.
    How do you think you were saved ?
    By Christ's work and that alone, or by Christ's work plus your ability to continously be faithful to the teaching and preaching you have heard.
    But let me answer your question.
    The importance of the gospel to me ends where the preaching of Christ, and him alone as the cause of my salvation, begins.
     

Share This Page

Loading...