Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | WHO is Hebrews 6:4-11 refering to? | Heb 6:4 | DocTrinsograce | 144295 | ||
Dear Brother Ed, You're right. I was zeroing in on a specific part of what Brother Hank was saying. Perhaps you also missed my point. I wasn't talking *about* Calvinism, Arminianism, or Lutheranism. I only mentioned them as examples of labels. Calvinism is more than simply what John Calvin argued. Arminianism is more than simply what Jacob Harmensen argued. Lutheranism is more than just what Martin Luther argued. Each of these theologies has matured, changed, refined, etc. over time. Let me see if I can find another way of saying this. Recently I spoke to a young Southern Baptist minister. I asked him what his thoughts were about Calvinism. He said, "Well, I'm not really into following men. I just follow Jesus." This revealed that he didn't have a clue what Calvinism was about. (Shame to the seminary in which he was educated!) The "isms" I mentioned above have nothing to do with following men! Oh, how the men whose names these theologies bear would have hated for anyone to think this way! Purely as an example of the kind of understanding that I'm talking about, please let me quote one of the more famous Baptists, Charles Hadon Spurgeon. (Note that I do not use this quote to persuade anyone to Calvinism or away from anything else.) He wrote, "There is no soul living who holds more firmly to the doctrines of grace than I do, and if any man asks me whether I am ashamed to be called a Calvinist, I answer -- I wish to be called nothing but a Christian; but if you ask me, do I hold the doctrinal views which were held by John Calvin, I reply, I do in the main hold them, and rejoice to avow it. But far be it from me even to imagine that Zion contains none but Calvinistic Christians within her walls, or that there are none saved who do not hold our views. Most atrocious things have been spoken about the character and spiritual condition of John Wesley, the modern prince of Arminians. I can only say concerning him that, while I detest many of the doctrines which he preached, yet for the man himself I have a reverence second to no Wesleyan; and if there were wanted two apostles to be added to the number of the twelve, I do not believe that there could be found two men more fit to be so added than George Whitefield and John Wesley." This is not a matter of arrogance, this is a matter of persuasion. Indeed, "the debate has raged for 500 years." May it rage until the Lord comes again! Let us have done with "second hand faith," and be more like the noble Bereans, regardless of where we fall on the questions. In Him, Doc PS This post is not an effort to sway anyone to anything except to the following Scripture: And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. (2 Peter 1:5-9) |
||||||
2 | WHO is Hebrews 6:4-11 refering to? | Heb 6:4 | Hank | 144353 | ||
Doc: :: In re: the young Baptist minister who averted your question about his thoughts on Calvinism, which you took to be a revelation that he didn't have a clue of what Calvinism is about. You may be right. Perhaps he didn't. You follow with, "Shame to the seminary in which he was educated!" Doc, I'm not sure I can go with you on this one. I mean this: why should we measure the value of a seminary by what the seminary student learns about Calvinism or any of the other host of isms floating around? What good is it to poke the seminary students' heads full of ism doctrines if seminary doesn't try to spur them with a passion for lost souls so that when they leave the halls of academe they will be chomping at the bit to go into the highways and hedges and preach the gospel of Jesus Christ; so that they, like Paul, will be willing to press on and keep pressing on in spite of beatings, shipwrecks, jailings or whatever thorn they may have in their flesh? I doubt that the old preacher who pastored the church where I was saved more than 50 years ago knew beans about Calvinism or Arminianism: he probably didn't know enough about them to tell one from the other, but he knew what I had to do to be saved! The faith that saved my soul came by hearing this dear old saint preach the gospel of Jesus Christ from the word of God. I believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, and I was saved, just as the Philippian jailer did in Acts 16. ...... So I wouldn't shame the seminary for not teaching this young Baptist preacher the five points of TULIP Calvinism, but I would shame them from here to eternity if they did not teach this young preacher and solemnly charge him in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus to "preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with great patience and instruction" (Cf. 2 Timothy 4:1,2). ..... I am in no wise promoting ignorance or waving an anti-education flag. Seminary students invest a great deal of time and money to learn, and seminary professors have a duty to teach them. But I am quite unconvinced that a seminary whose professors do well by their duty to prepare and equip a young preacher candidate for the high calling of proclaiming the gospel of Christ should bow their collective heads in shame if they neglect to make him a master of TULIP theology. There are things higher in the pecking order than this. --Hank | ||||||
3 | WHO is Hebrews 6:4-11 refering to? | Heb 6:4 | DocTrinsograce | 144357 | ||
Dear brother Hank, The sentiments you express I understand and even share. A minister, it is true, ought to know how to be an evangelist. However, that is because he ought to be teaching his flock to be evangelists. After all, we know from the Scriptures that he will have to give an accounting to the Lord for how he has tended the flock. In the context of the young man I was speaking to, you should know that further discussion took place. I verified his ignorance of almost anything based in sound doctrine. Instead, he seems to have been educated in self-help, psychology (though not in depth), and a very tepid overview of scripture. I very humbly point out, however, brother Hank, that you present a false dichotomy. You assume that the minister's mind has only sufficient capacity to learn two things: being an evangelist or "ism doctrines." Firstly, ministers are usually considered men of learning in our society. Who hasn't seen the study of a minister where the walls of his office are covered with books? The apostles admonish the flock to be continually learning, and they modeled doing just that themselves. Many pastors are some of our most astute thinkers, both in the past and in the present day. I would happily put fourth such men as John MacArthur, John Piper, and Adrian Rogers as such examples. My pastor showed me letters from his great, great grandfather who was an itinerate Baptist pastor right here in Missouri and Illinois. These letters were to various of his churches where he was admonishing them on the doctrine of particular redemption. He even declared it to be a Baptist distinctive. Secondly, there are many reasons to study various theological approaches. Such things include the ability to do critical thinking, apologetics, skillful hermeneutics, and solid teaching. Look how often in the pastoral epistles Paul emphasizes learning and sound doctrine. Plus, as the seminarian is reading through the expositional and systematic theologies of the men of old, he learns to judge everything in the light of Scripture. I would be disappointed in a seminary that only taught one theological perspective, although I would expect that every seminary would have a position on them. (That's what makes our varying denominations distinctive in the first place.) After all, we needn't fear them... the theological perspectives stand or fall on their own merits. Additionally, the pastor will encounter people of many different backgrounds. He must have at least an inkling of the ideas that form the basis of the most common of these backgrounds. How else can he understand the needs of the people with whom he speaks? How else can he correct error, promote sound doctrine, and cogently present the Gospel? Now, brother Hank, I also was not denigrating education as a whole. There are some very good seminaries out there. The best of them turn out young men who have a high view of Scripture, a heart for the flock, and desire to see the lost saved. They can also speak with some intelligence on just about any ism that you'd care to talk about, showing you how those things line up with Scripture. There is a certain degree of romance to the simple pastor you mentioned in your post. I am confident that God used Him to His glory. But I'd rather learn under a pastor with that same heart, and yet with a solid educational foundation... and a man modeling the Christian principle of never ceasing to be a student. In Him, Doc |
||||||