1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Introduction to Calvinism

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by IfbReformer, Jun 12, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 2
  1. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1

    That may be so, but the truth of the matter is that scripture does give us other reasons and those reasons seem to contradict your premise. Maybe that is why Calvinists attempt to eliminate all other reasons as being viable because they don't fit into their soteriological system? Interesting.
     
    #21 Skandelon, Jul 7, 2004
  2. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    2
    So Skandelon, You're opposed to Calvinists Evangelizing?
     
    #22 Hardsheller, Jul 7, 2004
  3. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Nope. Just opposed to Calvinism and its teaching that the only reason to evagelize is because "God said so." That is enough of a reason, no doubt, but its not the only reason.
     
    #23 Skandelon, Jul 7, 2004
  4. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    2
    So tell us please what would the other reasons be?
     
    #24 Hardsheller, Jul 7, 2004
  5. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well, for one thing, if you build up a good following, you can get your own TV show. ;)

    (Someone once said that if Jesus were born into our era, that would have been one of satan's temptations -- to give Jesus his own television show.)
     
    #25 npetreley, Jul 7, 2004
  6. IfbReformer

    IfbReformer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please explain to us the difference between a guarantee and an earnest? An earnest is something you give as a promise, or deposit on something you are coming back to get? Does God take back his deposit? I look forward to you distinction here.

    IFBReformer     </font>[/QUOTE]Ephesians 1:14 is a verse where using the correct translation does make a difference. The NIV makes the Holy Spirit a guarantor rather than an earnest. In the KJV, we are given "the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession" but, according to the NIV, we are given "a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession."

    Webster's says that "earnest gives assurance, or establishes a strong probability, of something more to come, usually of the same kind; a pledge (the stronger term) affords security, frequently for something which is quite different." This meaning is completely different from the "deposit guaranteeing our inheritance" rendered in the NIV.     </font>[/QUOTE]
    Well according to this dictionary definition, an earnest is "A token of something to come; a promise or an assurance".

    But instead of us arguing about the definition of english words, lets look at the Greek(and really Hebrew in this case):


    The 'Arrhabon' is what is translated as 'earnest' by the KJV, 'pledge' by the NASB, and 'deposit guaranteeing' by the NIV.

    According to Theological Dictionary of the New Testament(based on Thayer's and Smith's Bible Dictionary) this word which has its roots in Hebrew means "money which in purchases is given as a pledge or downpayment that the full amount will subsequently be paid" - sounds like a deposit to me!

    And according to one definition I pulled up it is
    "A token of something to come; a promise or an assurance" - oh boy, theres are those dangerous word "promise or assurance".

    The root Hebrew word that this word is derived from('`arabown') has for its definition "pledge, security"(Theological Word Book of the Old Testament).

    This word is all about security, thats why it is used speaking of the Holy Spirit in us three times in the New Testament. He is our security, our deposit, or pledge of our inheritance to come.

    So I don't think the NIV's rendering, "deposit guaranteeing" is off one bit.

    The definition you gave from Websters, somehow trying to draw a difference between a earnest and pledge seems to be in the minority. Besides, that is the definition of a english word used to translate a Greek and Hebrew Word, we should always look back to the original in these cases.

    I don't think you have knocked down that the greek and hebrew here do in fact give us a sense of security, and promise from God of better things to come because we have the Holy Spirit of God in us.

    IFBReformer
     
    #26 IfbReformer, Jul 7, 2004
  7. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    I like the TV show idea [​IMG]

    How precious are the feet of those who bring good news....

    How will they hear and believe unless someone tell them?

    Statements such as these strongly suggest that if people don't hear they won't believe unless someone tells them. That is a motivator to heed the call of God to go when we are sent.

    Secondly, I don't claim to understand this concept completely but it does seem to me that scripture indicates that the messenger could be held accountable for the "blood" of those he is sent to tell if he refuses to do so. Here is one example:

    Ez. 3:16 At the end of the seven days, the LORD gave me a message. He said, 17 "Son of man, I have appointed you as a watchman for Israel. Whenever you receive a message from me, pass it on to the people immediately. 18 If I warn the wicked, saying, 'You are under the penalty of death,' but you fail to deliver the warning, they will die in their sins. And I will hold you responsible, demanding your blood for theirs. 19 If you warn them and they keep on sinning and refuse to repent, they will die in their sins. But you will have saved your life because you did what you were told to do. 20 If good people turn bad and don't listen to my warning, they will die. If you did not warn them of the consequences, then they will die in their sins. Their previous good deeds won't help them, and I will hold you responsible, demanding your blood for theirs. 21 But if you warn them and they repent, they will live, and you will have saved your own life, too."

    That is a pretty good motivator! Paul says something similiar in Acts 18:

    6 But when the Jews opposed him and insulted him, Paul shook the dust from his robe and said, "Your blood be upon your own heads – I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles."

    It seems like there are other verses, but those are the only two I remember right now.

    So, the motivator that some may go without hearing and believing if I don't tell and the motivator that I could be held accoutable for not telling do factor into the equation. Those motivators undermine the Calvinistic premise that a selected few will certainly be saved regarless of your obedience.
     
    #27 Skandelon, Jul 7, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 2
Loading...