Someone made a comment about Reformed and the sad thing is that part of the statement is true which is that Reformed cannot agree with anyone whom is not Reformed. I see plenty of examples of this on this board and on FB. I was in a debate recently on FB with some whom were basically saying that no one but Reformed preachers and authors are worth reading or listening too. I disagree with that statement as non Reformed have good things to say and can teach and have taught me well. However once I started defending them I get labeled an Arminian.
Not all Arminian believe you can lose your salvation so that stereotype is a false one that some Reformed have.
I also saw examples of this type of thinking at the Strange Fire Conference were comments were made that only Reformed are the guardians of the truth, and such.. So what say you? I believe Reformed and non Reformed can agree on the essentials of the faith.
Posh!
I agree with many non-Reformed folks on some essential areas of the faith.
The Trinity, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, justification by faith, Christ's imminent return, et. al.
So you claim, but my experience is just the opposite. Having just come from the cesspool of Onlinebaptist, it's been my experience, both there and here, that the Finneyists are the most vicious, disgusting people toward those who hold to Reformed theology.
And for the most part, I agree. But that doesn't mean that I have to disagree with them on everything or see them as any less my brothers in Christ.
Citation, please.
So do I. But, evidently, you don't, as the premise of your thread is that Reformed believers cannot agree with any non-Reformed believers.
And please tell me, what are the essentials of Faith? Those who attack the Reformed faith have some serious issues with the reformed that just bothers them to the quick. They cant just shut up and practice their own faith, they have got to spend time finding fault & those are the worse kind of miscreants in my book (& we have seen it displayed on this board on a continuum) Examples: Attack the Roman Catholics, shift & attack the Calvinists, shift & attack the OSAS crowd, shift & attack the SDA, shift and attack.....this is the basic MO & there must be a rather divisive issue lodged somewhere in the gene pool just spoiling for an argument. Rather than doing that, try contemplating Christ Sermon on the Mount for a while & tell me what Christ meant by......Blessed are the meek, the merciful, the peacemakers. And what did Christ mean by Love your Enemies. Is a Christian the person taken out of the present evil world & placed in a higher level or isn't he?
Personally I like the "Herald" personna & what it means:
1. A person who carries or proclaims important news; a messenger.
We had an Archangel here too...... the Dr Whatever his face, implied that my handle 'Earth, Wind & Fire' was demon worship because of the band & certain implications to occult..... then again I consider him a nut. E,W,F are natural elements of this planet with God given energy sources.....nothing more.....so is water.:thumbs:
I enjoy books from all kinds. I get more out of the reformed mind though. I recently read a book by Tozer, then he went into this lauding Lady Julian of Norwich and her mysticism. I lost interest from that point on. He did say some good things, but that isn't the whole picture of him.
We can see on BB that anti-reformed tend to give those in dissident theologies lot's of wiggle room and defense while they attack the reformed, so I can agree with the above to an extent, not to mention some of the theology on here being spouted by several of them.
Now you're taking your previous statement back? You are puzzling.
I think mainline Arminians and the Reformed community --(big tent --ordinary Calvinists are included) can agree on the essentials and more.
Back on 4/14/08 I started a thread that dealt with the theme of harmony between the two perspectives:N-C's Really Agree With Much Of Calvinism. I used the Westminster Confession of Faith to demonstrate that there is much both sides have in common.
And on 8/10/06 I had a thread called :Arminians That I Admire.
In no particular order I'll list a number here for the benefit of our viewers! :)
F.B. Meyer (1847-1929)
A.W.Tozer (1897-1963)
Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910)
Alan Redpath (1907-1989)
G.Campbell Morgan (1863-1945)
William McDonald (1917-2007) I met him at a PB conference and read much of his material.
William Wiersbie (1929-
Gordon Fee (1934-
H.A. Ironside (1876-1951)
C.S.Lewis (1898-1963)
George Elton Ladd (1911-1982)
I. Howard Marshall (1934-
D.Edmond Hiebert (1928-1995)
Elizabeth Elliot (1926-
Ravi Zacharias (1946-
Yea well I ahm gag, gag, puke ah love the NUT! LOL!!!
Subnote from Wiki.....
Matthew 5:44 is the 44th verse of the fifth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament and is part of the Sermon on the Mount. This is the second verse of the final antithesis, that on the commandment to Love thy neighbour as thyself. Jesus has just stated that some had taught that one should "hate your enemies" and in this verse he rejects this view.
In the King James Version of the Bible the text reads:
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
The World English Bible translates the passage as:
But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you,
Id say its some kind of unresolved New Jersey Behavior surfacing. Next he will be using the well know "F" word in every sentence. Hows that for Crack Pot Psyco Babel?!? LOL