Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

MacArthur


DaveW
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
3 minutes ago, Alimantado said:

Bob, it's the long-stated view of DaveW, Heartstrings and probably several others on this forum that if a person comes to believe the Calvinist/reformed interpretation of scripture before they are saved, then they cannot be saved while continuing to believe it, since it is a false Gospel. Or in other words a Calvinist is not a Christian unless it so happens that the Calvinist got saved before believing in Calvinism, or they think they believe reformed doctrine but don't really. If you look back over the forum's history you will see mammoth threads discussing this.

And among those here who don't think reformed beliefs are incompatible with salvation, a large number still think that reformed beliefs are incompatible with the label 'IFB'.

This forum used to have a page called 'Doctrinal Statement of this board' with a statement of faith on it, but I can't find it anymore. That statement specifically rejected some of the reformed distinctives, including limited atonement. Even so, back when this forum was busy it used to tolerate a much more 'eclectic' mix of people who called themselves IFB. Not so among the dozen or so who still post here, or so it seems.

Those are just some of my own observations from having been on here a long time...

I thank you for the attempt, but your representation of my position is in error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Well here's the last time I remember you summing it up, Dave:

On 06/07/2014 at 11:25 PM, DaveW said:

If I may explain my position - I believe that anyone who holds to Calvinism as Calvin intended is not trusting in the shed blood of Christ for salvation - their salvation is based on the choice of God. This is unbiblical, for the Bible never says that we are saved by God's choice, but it constantly says we are saved by the precious blood of the Lamb of God.

However, I believe many people who "align with Calvin" do not really understand what Calvin believed and taught. These people might be saved because they believe the surface words without understanding the depth of Calvinism.

I think that there are people in various false churches who are saved in spite of what their church teaches, not because of it.

I have known people who defend Calvin who I would think are saved (I can not know another man's heart for certain), in spite of their defence of the system which teaches salvation not by faith, but by God's choice.
I have also known people who defend Calvin who, by their actions and attitudes, I would think are definitely not saved (again, I can not know another man's heart but the indicators??????? ).

But I have met many people who claim the name of Christ who appear by their life and actions to not know the Saviour.
That is not the exclusive domain of Calvin.

I don't see where my representation of that is wrong. Heartstrings has written very similar in the past but I can't remember where.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
22 minutes ago, DaveW said:

If you had it ready to fire, why did you not just post it up?

Because I was also talking about other things in that post, not just you, and I wanted to be concise for Bob's sake. And since I wasn't trying to misrepresent you, I didn't think you'd disagree with what I said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
8 minutes ago, Alimantado said:

Still, now that you have disagreed, I've gone and posted up your own words, so no harm no foul eh? I'll just have to accept that I don't have a clue what you're saying--since you've told me I'm wrong. Hopefully Bob will understand better.

No need to be like that.....

I stand by what I wrote, and I disagree with your explanation of what I wrote.

I doubt Bob will understand it, but I am sure he will attack it and smile while he does.

I was not really interested in becoming the subject of discussion, especially since this was supposed be an explanation if my warning against MacArthur.

Bob has chosen to ignore my initial post and go on the attack, making this about Calvinism and ignoring any discussion about MacArthur while accusing me of treating MacArthur unfairly.

I am just not interested in all this muck.

And people asked me why I stopped posting recently.........

EXACTLY how much false doctrine is enough to warrant a warning such as the one I posted in the original discussion, or even the listed points in my op here?

And why has this become about me?

MacArthur promotes the five listed points in the op which are ALL UNBIBLICAL.

That is my warning, and if you don't think they are unbiblical, or you wish to follow his teachings, then I have warned and my job is done. Chew carefully, and don't whine to me when you start to feel the effects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, DaveW said:

No need to be like that.....

I stand by what I wrote, and I disagree with your explanation of what I wrote.

I doubt Bob will understand it, but I am sure he will attack it and smile while he does.

I was not really interested in becoming the subject of discussion, especially since this was supposed be an explanation if my warning against MacArthur.

Bob has chosen to ignore my initial post and go on the attack, making this about Calvinism and ignoring any discussion about MacArthur while accusing me of treating MacArthur unfairly.

I am just not interested in all this muck.

And people asked me why I stopped posting recently.........

EXACTLY how much false doctrine is enough to warrant a warning such as the one I posted in the original discussion, or even the listed points in my op here?

And why has this become about me?

MacArthur promotes the five listed points in the op which are ALL UNBIBLICAL.

That is my warning, and if you don't think they are unbiblical, or you wish to follow his teachings, then I have warned and my job is done. Chew carefully, and don't whine to me when you start to feel the effects. 

You and Bob started talking about whether Calvinism was a secondary issue or not--your choice.

At that point I saw the convo and felt like chiming in with my experience of how it is not a secondary issue to many on here, so I did. In doing so I happened to mention you (though not just you).

You then disagreed with how I represented you, so I posted up your own words, hoping that would settle that.

You then questioned my motive ("If you had it ready to fire, why did you not just post it up?"), so I responded to that too.

Drama over, hopefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Bob, the Bible says to mark those who bring teaching contrary to the faith (my paraphrase). That is what Dave & Jim are doing. Instead of focusing on your perception of their words as abusive (which, btw, they're not), why don't you examine the allegations against Scripture and see whether they don't have something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
16 minutes ago, Salyan said:

Bob, the Bible says to mark those who bring teaching contrary to the faith (my paraphrase). That is what Dave & Jim are doing. Instead of focusing on your perception of their words as abusive (which, btw, they're not), why don't you examine the allegations against Scripture and see whether they don't have something?

You have missed the point.  If people wish to disagree with Calvinism that's fine, I did for many years.  However, saying that people are teaching poison because they are Calvinists is ridiculous.  Do people who make this allegation really believe that C H Spurgeon taught poison?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, Salyan said:

No, actually, it's not (ridiculous, that is). Calvinism is a damnable heresy, and as such, it is a poison.

I'm going to ask that you move on from this point.

No, I'm not moving on until we have established this question - did Spurgeon teach a damnable heresy?  If you answer "yes" you condemn one of the finest preachers that graced the western world.  If you answer "no" you concede my point that Calvinism IS a secondary issue.  Which is it to be? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Men or Christ is always the real issue in these debates.

Remember the words God gave us through Paul: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" Don't ever be of a man for any accomplishment or publication. And yes, if a person follows their writings, purchases their writings and defends their writings - they are of that man.

TULIP cannot be found in the Word of God, it can only be learned through men's writings.

Regardless of which man teaches calvinism, our only goal in this life is to be like Christ. That is the Scriptural result of the new birth and is a huge part of the Gospel.

Now if our goal is to be like macarthur, spurgeon or anyone else than keep studying their writings by all means. But and this is the point I pray is understood: If our goal is to be like Christ; stick with the Bible only, focus on the NT Gospels first to grasp all things whatsoever He taught His disciples, dump the confusing merchandise of men, start over again and let's saturate ourselves only in the Word. 

Whatever our "goal" in this life is - will settle the matter of our salvation. If we have any other goals "great or small, religious or otherwise" we must revisit the matter of our souls.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
7 hours ago, Salyan said:

No, actually, it's not (ridiculous, that is). Calvinism is a damnable heresy, and as such, it is a poison.

I'm going to ask that you move on from this point.

 

5 hours ago, Bob Hutton said:

No, I'm not moving on until we have established this question - did Spurgeon teach a damnable heresy?  If you answer "yes" you condemn one of the finest preachers that graced the western world.  If you answer "no" you concede my point that Calvinism IS a secondary issue.  Which is it to be? 

Whoa, wait right there, hold up, rein in, halt ------    Did you just say that a moderator can take a hike, you'll do as you jolly well please and move on when YOU are ready to?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

According to Spurgeon's own words, he tried to believe BOTH views, but evidently did not understand the scriptures completely. He figured that the two "truths" would be reconciled somehow in eternity. But God is not the author of confusion.  When I got saved, I didn't even know the name "Spurgeon"; didn't need to. . I believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. I trusted in His word. I believe the answers to these questions are in "the volume of the Book" and I have studied this for myself. I trust what the Bible says. Furthermore, being indwelled with the Spirit, I know the Voice of the Shepherd: I know not the voice of "Calvinism".  This verse just came to mind last night as I was driving home...

Proverbs 18:1Through desire a man, having separated himself, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom.

I don't know everything that verse means but, I believe it applies to growing in knowledge as a Christian AND I believe it applies to salvation. You have to "desire" it. If you want to be saved, God ALREADY "desires" you FIRST and He's willing and waiting to save you. But YOU have to desire Him and when you do, you will "separate yourself", in your heart, from sin and self and come to Jesus. God will not make you do it. I can only "speak what I know" to be true in my own life.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarnock/2010/12/giving-spurgeon-the-last-word-on-arminianism-and-calvinism/

Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, OLD fashioned preacher said:

 

Whoa, wait right there, hold up, reign in, halt ------    Did you just say that a moderator can take a hike, you'll do as you jolly well please and move on when YOU are ready to?????

Calm down, old chap.  I'm just showing how fallacious it is to make sweeping statements.  I don't care if people believe in Calvinism or not, it's a secondary issue and not worth calling people heretics over.

If it upsets shallow thinkers that much I'm happy to let it drop.

Kind regards

Bob

Oh, and by the way, I think you meant to say "rein in" not  "reign in", grammar and spelling are most important.

 

Edited by Bob Hutton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
2 hours ago, Bob Hutton said:

No, I'm not moving on until we have established this question - did Spurgeon teach a damnable heresy?  If you answer "yes" you condemn one of the finest preachers that graced the western world.  If you answer "no" you concede my point that Calvinism IS a secondary issue.  Which is it to be? 

Bob,  taking into consideration that you are new to this board, I would like to take a moment to provide you with some helpful information that you should have read in the board guidelines before posting.

First of all there is a feature on these forums whereby members can determine the status of other members. An important feature is found in the left column, where you see a picture of the member.

The member you replied to is a moderator, as evidenced by the title under her name. Moderators are here to moderate, keep order and make sure that these boards operate according to the wishes of the owner of the boards.

We here at OB are not like other message boards where anything goes. The response you gave to Salyan, a moderator is totally unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Our board moderators are not only here most of the time, but they are active on the board, unlike many other message boards. They are mature Christians that moderate with a light hand even though they have a difficult job to do.

You sir, have openly defied two moderators with your reply that I quoted above. If a moderator tells you to "move it on", this is not a request or a suggestion that you can ignore at will.

Since you are new here I am not going to give you an official warning point against your status, but I do want this to serve as a warning that such behavior will not be tolerated. Salyan has instructed you to "move on" and if you do not comply, you will be moved on without further notice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
12 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Bob,  taking into consideration that you are new to this board, I would like to take a moment to provide you with some helpful information that you should have read in the board guidelines before posting.

First of all there is a feature on these forums whereby members can determine the status of other members. An important feature is found in the left column, where you see a picture of the member.

The member you replied to is a moderator, as evidenced by the title under her name. Moderators are here to moderate, keep order and make sure that these boards operate according to the wishes of the owner of the boards.

We here at OB are not like other message boards where anything goes. The response you gave to Salyan, a moderator is totally unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Our board moderators are not only here most of the time, but they are active on the board, unlike many other message boards. They are mature Christians that moderate with a light hand even though they have a difficult job to do.

You sir, have openly defied two moderators with your reply that I quoted above. If a moderator tells you to "move it on", this is not a request or a suggestion that you can ignore at will.

Since you are new here I am not going to give you an official warning point against your status, but I do want this to serve as a warning that such behavior will not be tolerated. Salyan has instructed you to "move on" and if you do not comply, you will be moved on without further notice.

You obviously haven't read the last post in this thread, so I'll repeat it  "If it upsets shallow thinkers so much I'm happy to let it drop".  That should have been sufficient for you to know that i'm not pursuing the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Total lack of respect for the moderators.........

How about an apology to the moderators.

Salyan, OFP, and Jim are moderators, and the way you have spoken to each of them is disrespectful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
50 minutes ago, DaveW said:

Total lack of respect for the moderators.........

How about an apology to the moderators.

Salyan, OFP, and Jim are moderators, and the way you have spoken to each of them is disrespectful.

How about you issuing apologies to Dr Macarthur for calling him "poison"?

I'm happy to let the matter drop as I can see that tempers are rising.

Kind regards

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recent Achievements

  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Eagle One

      Havent been on for years, but have been studying with Jews for Jesus weekly Bible Study which has been wonderful.  Not sure any of your views on that group, but if you are from a Jewish background a great place to be grounded in the word and to learn.
      · 0 replies
    • Barbara Ann

      I am a researcher and writer at Watch Unto Prayer which I started 25 years ago. On this website there are many well-documented articles and audio programs by myself and other researchers whose ministry is to expose the endtime apostasy of the Church. Now more than ever Christians need information in order to identify and avoid the various deceptions that are in nearly all the churches.
      My husband and I attended the IFB Bible Baptist Church of James Knox a couple of years ago. We left the church after we were informed by the assistant pastor that we were not allowed to express views to other members that do not agree with the views of the pastor and leaders of the church. We were not introducing heresy but expressing our views concerning the State of Israel. We had never been in a church which forbade private conversations on issues where there are diverse opinions. This we recognized as cultlike control of church members. To inform Christians, my husband, who is also a researcher and writer, started a website on the subject: Zionism Exposed: A Watchman Ministry.
      · 0 replies
    • Free Spirit

      Jesus said:"I am the truth, the way, and the life. No man can come to The Father, but by Me."
      · 0 replies
    • Richg  »  BrotherTony

      Brother Tony, I read your reply on Anderson, I know you all think I'm argumentative but, when you don't agree.....the first thought I had is, I wish you would introduce me to the guy that hasn't sinned, maybe David, that had a man killed so he could commit adultery, yet, he was & is a man after Gods own heart, or maybe Paul the guy that persecuted and had Christians killed, or maybe Richg or Kent H, or even you ! I used to listen to personalities also when I was younger but today and for some time, my only concern is, does it line up with scripture & to me its hilarious that you think "I'm in a fix" LOL, I interpreted what we've discussed perfectly, not because I'm smart, but because with an open mind to things of God, its an easy read.
      · 1 reply
    • Richg  »  Jerry

      I thought you wanted me to stop talking to you !
      · 0 replies
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...