Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Reformed Theology Is Replacement Theology


Recommended Posts

  • Members

The opening post is nonesense. I know some reformed Baptists who are dispensationalists, quite a number actually.

I have known people who call themselves Baptist who are Calvinist and that Calvinism has led them into replacement theology, so by your own reasoning, your post is nonsense.......

Just because you "know some" doesn't make the OP nonsense.

And to Jeff - yes Calvin is far more that tulip - he has all sorts of false doctrines in his commentary series, not just tulip.

And his false teaching has led many to hell.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

 

And to Jeff - yes Calvin is far more that tulip - he has all sorts of false doctrines in his commentary series, not just tulip.

And his false teaching has led many to hell.

And what are those teachings? please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I answered this before once. See: .

I'm glad to share my opinion, but let's try to avoid any promotion or defense of Calvinism, eh?

 

 

I have known people who call themselves Baptist who are Calvinist and that Calvinism has led them into replacement theology, so by your own reasoning, your post is nonsense.......

Just because you "know some" doesn't make the OP nonsense.

And to Jeff - yes Calvin is far more that tulip - he has all sorts of false doctrines in his commentary series, not just tulip.

And his false teaching has led many to hell.

 

 

And what are those teachings? please.

 

Trying again to promote Calvin's teachings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And what are those teachings? please.

See heading of thread........

But you already know - that's why you are here after all - to promote the doctrines you follow in spite of this being a forum that is not in agreement with those doctrines.

You are not really that stupid, but you seem to think we are......

The overwhelming majority of reformed theologians I have met or known are disingenuous about their motives.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No invicta, my OP is not nonsense.  It is an accurate description of what Calvinism believes and teaches---Covenant/Reformed Theology, which is actually Replacement Theology.  Laurence Vance wrote an excellent book on Calvinism, "The Other Side of Calvinism" and I have found a portion of that 800 page book online.  That portion is called "Calvinism and the Baptists".

I will now contribute to this thread.

 

The best way to learn about Reformed Baptists is to study the 1689 Baptist confession. 

 

I did submit a question for Herman Hanko to answer. I got a "politicians answer". Thanks for your question. It gives me an opportunity to make MY point..... 

 

The prOBlem on both sides is developing logic from a position - A is true, therefore B is true, Etc.

 

No! Our logic MUST be constrained by Scripture. I am happy to be happily inconsistent as a "Reformed Baptist" taking Scripture as my sole authority. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Pastor Adrian Rogers, a staunch anti-Calvinist, yet called Calvin's Institutes one of the greatest Christian books.

 

While I don't know what all Reformed Baptist churches hold to, the few I'm familiar with don't hold to Replacement Theology. Thus far, none of the Reformed Baptists I've ever known or spoken with hold to Replacement Theology.

 

Not that all confessions or creeds are sound, but the intent of them were to put forth biblical truths in a manner easy to read, study and learn from. They are similar to what many Statements of Faith are today. As with all things put forth by man, each confession, creed or statement of faith must be considered in light of Scripture.

 

The most famous, most quoted and most studied Baptist pastor, Charles Spurgeon, was a Calvinist but he didn't teach Replacement Theology. He did at times cite the 1689 Baptist confession. In all things, he began with Scripture and finished with Scripture.

 

Attempting to say there are only two or three boxes in existence and that everyone must fit neatly into only one box ignores the complexity of reality and at times calls honest men liars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

At the same time, many like to paint liars as honest men.

If that was in reference to the post above yours (the only one in the vicinity where someone named other men and what they taught or believed) -- then consider this a cease and desist order on the personal slander. It's not what he did.

 

If it's just a generic statement (the lack of clarity is why I used "if" in the above sentence), then it OBviously doesn't apply -- carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love that people always use Spurgeon as an example of a Baptist calvinist.

I have every message that he ever preached that was recorded (by written records for the picky ones) and he preached a couple of messages on the five tulip points - in support of them!
BUT - and it is a very big but - he believed and taught more messages upholding the free will of man in salvation.
He acknowledged that it was inconsistent, but said it was one of the unresolveable things about God - That God was sovereign AND man was free to choose.

Anyone who claims Spurgeon as a proper calvinist does not know what Spurgeon taught.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have every message that he ever preached that was recorded (by written records for the picky ones) and he preached a couple of messages on the five tulip points - in support of them! BUT - and it is a very big but - he believed and taught more messages upholding the free will of man in salvation. He acknowledged that it was inconsistent, but said it was one of the unresolveable things about God - That God was sovereign AND man was free to choose. Anyone who claims Spurgeon as a proper calvinist does not know what Spurgeon taught.

 

I read Loraine Boettner's book Reformed Doctrine of Predestination and he said exactly the same thing--God's sovereignty co-existing with man's free will is a paradox. As far as I can tell, Boettner identified as Calvinist/Reformed. I've also spoken to many lay Christians who identify as reformed and/or go to churches that identify as reformed and they affirm what you say Spurgeon said too, Dave.

 

I don't find that surprising since there are few Christians I know who would claim to have a complete, watertight, systematic theology for everything they believe the Bible says. Some acknowledge there are paradoxes but others, like myself, simply acknowledge they don't have the brights!

 

So what makes Spurgeon or Boettner not a Calvinist, then? Is it because their views don't align 100% with all the stuff Calvin said? Or is it because there's an inconsistency in their views and that therefore those views don't count as 'consistent' Calvinism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Calvin would reject their teaching on free will.
Calvin would have had them banished or killed for their teaching on free will.

Their teaching of free will is anti calvinist.
Reformed doctrine holds to the teachings of Calvin - regardless of what some of them say. That is where it is based.
And Calvin's 5 tulip points are corruptions of Bible teaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...