My questions as I study Reformed Theology

It's strange how "non-reformed" always say that about chapters 9-11 and then want it to be universal in 10:9-10.

It is NOT JUST talking about the election of Israel over other nations.

It is clearly talking about God's right to elect whomsoever he chooses just AS he elected Israel and not other nations throughout the Old Testament.

 

If you are going to look at this link given below...In regards to soteriology,

www.faithalone.org


You should look at these links as well..where GES and the late founder Zane Hodges and the still living (as far as I know) Bob Wilkin are considered cults by many.

At this site..
http://s1.zetaboards.com/eternallysecure/topic/1602743/1/

You will find these quotes by founder Hodges saying a person needs not repent..

A member of the Baptist Board, Lou Martuneac, wrote a book on this called the Crossless Gospel. Lou Martuneac is NOT a Calvinist...

His blog is here...
http://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-crossless-label-right-label.html

a long post by him here..
http://www.baptistboard.com/archive/index.php/t-52142.html

Here is a very small clip from that site..

There was a large number of Grace Evangelical Society followers that was kicked off this website, for advancing another doctrine. The doctrine of "Millennial Exclusion" also from Zane Hodges.

Here is the link to the Baptist boards actions...
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=42624


I for one, as well as many others feel like Zane Hodges was a heretic. Yet there remain followers even on this board.

More links..
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/freegrace.html
http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/03/response_to_the_free_grace_mov.php

 

Uh, naw.

In Exodus 33, when God told Moses He will have mercy on whom He will, and show compasion to whom He will, as Romans 9 directly uses as example to believers today and to believers this applies. To say God only meant that to Israel, and limited it to only them is completely wrong.

He also showed this same Sovereignty on Pharoah.

He does the same today.

He uses this as a warning to us also, as he quotes Osee in verse 26 and applies all of this truth to us.

 

Jarthur,

That is pretty troubling stuff you just dug up. Thanks for the window in which to view this Heresy.

 

Of course JArthur will pull snippets to try to dismiss the whole of the site. Would you like to put those quotes into context for us? I believe that might have had to do with the front loaded works based salvation...Lordship Salvation.

I posted that link as a response to TULIP where I believe they touch on those 5 point in accurate fashion.

It's ironic you vehemently dismiss Lou's work in regards to MacArthur's LS...but pretty much praise his work on the fictitious "crossless gospel". Talk about inconsistent.

 

To you and Luke, I'm in pretty good company in regards to my understanding of these chapters. Cal's and non alike agree these chapters are in regards to Israel.

 

Pure bolgogna. The other quote, alluding to absence of "repentance" in Johannine writings is no proof. That's called cherry picking, and is a failure to look and hold onto the whole counsel of God.

Acts 11:18 says "...then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life..."

Also note Romans 2:4 "...the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance..." He wouldn't lead us to something that is unnecessary.

There are thousands upon thousands of people that lay claim to faith in faith, a la "I believed" and feel they are entitled to eternal life, and never darken the door at church, are not changed, and are exactly as they were the day they said they believed.

What a horrendous misinterpretation and study and conclusion on what must happen to one to be born again into the Kingdom.

Thanks for the post JArthur.

 

You and they are both incorrect then.

 

Like I said above, I believe he understands repentance in the same way MacArthur does, and that's turning from sin in exchange for salvation. They are both wrong in their understanding of the term.

 

Of course we are.

 

I said NOT JUST to Israel. please TRY to represent me accurately- at least on occasion.

EVERYONE agrees with me on that except rabid Arminians.

 

...and if you would actually TRY to read my comment...I never said "what you said".

Rabid arminians...from the one always crying "ad hominem"? No way

 

In school, when studying Romans, and in a school that did not embrace Calvinism, not one author of all the books studied held your view that this only applies to Israel. Not one professor dismissed this as only applicable to Israel in God's Sovereign will to choose and show mercy on whom He so desires.

The context and allusion to Osee and other nations in it links this Sovereign will to all of mankind.

Which of us are not lumps of clay? All of us belong to the potter.

 

You are the KING of ad hominem Webdog- and everybody knows it. I might be the KING of abrasiveness on here- but EVERYBODY knows you are the KING of personal attackes against those who debate you in a heated fashion.

I will gladly pull up the post where I proved this a few weeks back and show about thirty personal insults you spewed in just a few weeks time.

 

*sigh* Luke, you are becoming a thorn in my flesh. If I do not reply to you anymore, don't take it personally.

Merry Christmas to you and your family.

 

There are plenty of wonderful Arminians in this world and in history.

John Wesley was a great man of God.

But Arminian scholars tend to be hereitcs (not all by any means) because the deeper you get into Arminianism the more it debases God and exalts man.

The more ignorant an Arminian is of his doctrine and its implications the better off he is, it seems to me.

The more brilliant he becomes the more like Pinnock he becomes.

Dake is another.

 

Making some progress.

 

I agree... :thumbs:

 

I guess we both have the same right to be stubborn.

A better work to consult in this environment is Roger Olson-- Arninian Theology: Myths and Realities. This book is only about 240 pages and doesn't have all the references to the ECF's and the 19th/20th century liberals.

 

In regards to Pinnock- One of my professors (actually the dean of Christian studies) was friends with him & I was talking to this professor 1 day & asked him-- what in the world happened to Pinnock--& he said—“I confronted him (Pinnock) once about his open theism & he told me that he really did not know if he actually supported it or not-- but simply wanted to make people think!” My professor responded—“make them think? you made them think all right—you made them think the truth was false & think a heretical idea was acceptable!” With this Pinnock responded—“well you have your opinion & have mine—as long as they are thinking I accomplished what I set out to do.” Take that 4 that 4 what its worth—but I always thought that was an interesting story.