Born Again Christian; Biblical Fundamentalist, Received Text-KJV, Dispensational
Thursday, December 31, 2020
What does my Faith mean to me?
The reason for my faith is not of my own I was regenerated by ABBA Pappa Father Yahweh. What does my Faith mean to me in my heart?
My heart is regenerated by the Holy Triune God and the very question is to not put God first. I was a wretched sinner my works as per The word of God were dirty rags. My heart is guided by what The Holy Spirit wants which is to look to Jesus/Yeshua which in turn points me back to God.
My heart is not mine it is a new heart from God my old heart that was concerned with self is not there. My new heart is all about dying to sin, dying to self and dying to the world to instead take up my cross as Jesus taught in even the oldest and most original of autographs or Scriptures uncovered.
My heart to use that term is to follow God and follow his commands thus my heart is not about what I want or need ultimately.
However, to better answer the questions. My hope I receive is that of all regenerated peoples and that is that I love God with all my heart, soul and mind. My neighbors as myself. As well as the fact that I know the savior God himself took on the role of a servant by incarnation into human flesh. That by his willingness to sacrifice to the point of death which took my place as a born again man I am saved. Because of this I will see my God when I leave this world. For as the Word says I am in this world, but, not of this world. I will be at home with the Lord and a beautiful addition to that I will be home with all truly saved humans which will include my Mother and any other transitioned people I knew or known in this world.
That I am saved from punishment and judgement of the lake of fire and I pray that as many people as possible that are in this world will be Graced the same way by Gods metaphoric hand to be renewed and saved from the separation and torment of an afterlife under judgement of their unrepentant lives.
Everything belongs to Yahweh, Jesus, The Holy Spirit and may his mercy be upon you. Amen!
Wednesday, December 30, 2020
Tuesday, December 29, 2020
Interacting with Pastor Mike Winger's Statements on Acts 13:48
I love both of these brothers in Christ, but, brother Winger does not understand the Doctrines of grace.
Romans 9, James White vs. Leighton Flowers
I love both brothers, but, Leighton has a wrong understanding of Roman's 9.
What is old earth creationism? Why I am a Creationist.
This post is an article from gotquestions.org no infringement intended.
Old earth creationism (OEC) is an umbrella term used to describe biblical creationists who deny that the universe was created within the last 6,000 to 10,000 years over the course of six consecutive 24-hour days. Rather, old earth creationists believe that God created the universe and its inhabitants (including a literal Adam and Eve) over a much longer period of time than is allowed for by young earth creationists. The list of notable Christian leaders who are at least open to an old earth interpretation is a long one, and that list continues to grow. The list includes men such as Walter Kaiser, Norman Geisler, William Dembski, J.I. Packer, J.P. Moreland, Philip E. Johnson, and Chuck Colson, as well the late Francis Schaefer and Old Testament scholar Gleason Archer.
Old earth creationists usually agree with the mainstream scientific estimates of the age of the universe, humanity, and Earth itself while at the same time rejecting the claims of modern evolutionary theorists with respect to biological evolution. Old earth creationists and their young earth creationist brothers hold several important points in common, including:
1) The literal creation of the universe out of nothing a finite time ago (creation ex nihilo).
2) The literal creation of Adam out of the dust of the ground and Eve out of Adam’s side as well as the historicity of the Genesis account.
3) The rejection of the claim of Darwinists that random mutation and natural selection can adequately account for the complexity of life.
4) The rejection of the claim that God used the process of evolution to bring man to today (theistic evolution). Both old earth and new earth creationism categorically reject the theory of common ancestry.
However, old earth creationists differ with young earth creationists on the following:
1) The age of the universe. Young earth creationists believe that God created the universe 6,000-10,000 years ago. Old earth creationists place the creation event at approximately 13.7 billion years ago, thus being more in line with “mainstream” science, at least on this point.
2) The time of the creation of Adam and Eve. Young earth creationists place the creation of Adam no later than 10,000 years ago. Old earth creationists are varied on this point with estimates ranging somewhere between 30,000-70,000 thousand years ago.
The controversy between the two views of creationism hinges on the meaning of the Hebrew word yom, meaning “day.” Young earth creationists insist that the meaning of the word yom in the context of Genesis 1–2 is a 24-hour period of time. Old earth creationists disagree and believe that the word yom is being used to denote a much longer duration of time. Old earth creationists have used numerous biblical arguments to defend their view including the following:
1) Yom is used elsewhere in the Bible where it is referring to a long period of time, particularly Psalm 90:4, which is later cited by the apostle Peter: “A day (yom) is like a thousand years” (2 Peter 3:8).
2) The seventh “day” is thousands of years long. Genesis 2:2-3 states that God rested on the seventh “day” (yom). Scripture teaches that we are certainly still in the seventh day; therefore, the word “day” could also be referring to a long period of time with reference to days one through six.
3) The word “day” in Genesis 1–2 is longer than 24 hours. Genesis 2:4 reads, “This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven” (NASB). In this verse, “day” is referring to the first six days as a whole and thus has a more flexible meaning than merely a 24-hour period.
4) The sixth “day” is probably longer than 24 hours. Genesis 2:19 tells us that Adam observed and then catalogued every living animal on the earth. At face value, it does not appear that Adam could have completed such a monumental task in a mere 24-hour period.
To be sure, the issues dividing young and old earth creationists are both complex and significant. However, this issue should not be made a test for orthodoxy. There are godly men and women on both sides of this debate. In the final analysis, biblical creationists—both young and old Earth varieties—have a great deal in common and should work together to defend the historical reliability of the Genesis account.
How do beliefs about creation impact the rest of theology? Why I am a Creationist
This post comes from an article on gotquestions.org.
The creation/evolution debate has been raging for years. To many, it seems like two opponents yelling at each other with no one really listening. The vitriol has increased to the point where each side reflexively dismisses the other—evolutionists dismiss creationists as completely ignoring science, and creationists accuse evolutionists of engaging in all sorts of Machiavellian conspiracies to silence their side. This is not to dismiss the arguments of either side as being hyperbolic but simply to point out that there is precious little honest dialogue going on in this verbal war.
Because of the difficulty of sorting out the truth, many Christians relegate the creation/evolution debate to the status of a secondary issue that does not relate to how one becomes right with God through the gospel of Jesus Christ. For the most part, this line of thinking is correct. We can get so caught up in this debate that we lose our focus from the main issue: the spread of the gospel. However, as with many other “secondary” issues, what one believes regarding creation plays a role in how one views theology in general and the gospel in particular. More to the point, how one views creation has a major impact on the rest of their theological views.
Regarding the doctrine of creation, there are several views within Christianity:
1. Literal 24x6 creation – God created all there is in six 24-hour days.
2. Day-Age view – The creation events occurred as depicted in Genesis 1, but instead of six 24-hour days, the “days” of creation represent indeterminate, finite periods of time.
3. The Framework view – The days of Genesis 1 represent a theological framework within which to narrate the creation of all things.
Throughout most of church history, up until the last 150 years, the 24x6 view of creation was the most commonly held view within the church. Not all Christians held to this view, and not all who did were committed to it. However, there is no question that this has been the dominant interpretation of Genesis for most of Christian history. We don’t want to believe something simply because it’s traditional and historical, including the 24x6 view of creation; rather, we want to believe a doctrine because it’s supported by the text of Scripture.
In this particular case, many conservative theologians believe that the 24x6 view also has the strongest exegetical support from the text. First and foremost, it’s the natural view one gets from simply reading the text. Additionally, there are other points, such as the way the seven-day pattern set forth during creation week is the pattern for our calendar week (Exodus 20:8–11).
Since the advent of modern science, the 24x6 view of creation has been increasingly abandoned by Christians. The primary reason for this rejection is the fact that the 24x6 view of creation necessitates a “young earth” age of the universe (anywhere from 6,000 to 30,000 years), and the prevailing scientific view is that the universe is billions of years old. The Day-Age view (sometimes called progressive creationism) is an attempt to reconcile the Genesis creation account with an “old earth” view of the age of the universe.
Please note that the Day-Age view still posits that God created all things and it still rejects atheistic (naturalistic) evolution. Nor should the Day-Age view be confused with “theistic evolution,” the view that macroevolution is true but, instead of being guided by blind chance, was guided by the hand of God. Day-Age proponents see themselves as reconciling the biblical account with science. Its opponents see this view as a slippery slope to rejecting the veracity of God’s Word.
Because many Christians view the creation/evolution debate as of secondary importance, there is usually little or no concern over the theological implications of how one interprets the Bible’s view of creation. In truth, however, what one believes regarding creation is crucial because it goes to the issue of the inerrancy, trustworthiness, and authority of Scripture. Of primary importance is why a person chooses a particular view, in light of the Word of God. Believing that the Bible is inspired and inerrant but not literal in the first two chapters of Genesis is one thing. Believing that the Bible is simply wrong or cannot be trusted is another. In other words, the key issue when it comes to one’s view of creation is how that view relates to the authority and reliability of the Bible.
If the Bible can’t be trusted in the first two chapters, what makes it trustworthy throughout the rest of the book? Typically, critics of the Bible focus their attacks on the first eleven chapters of Genesis, in particular the creation account. The question is, why do they target this part of Scripture? The first eleven chapters of Genesis set the stage for the rest of the biblical story. You can’t understand the unfolding narrative of Scripture without Genesis 1–11. There is so much foundational material in these chapters for the rest of the Bible—e.g., creation, the fall, sin, the certainty of judgment, the necessity of a Savior, and the introduction of the gospel. To ignore these foundational doctrines would render the rest of the Bible as unintelligible and irrelevant.
Yet critics of the Bible want to treat these opening chapters of Genesis as ancient Hebrew myth rather than primeval history. The truth of the matter is that, compared to the creation stories of other cultures, the Genesis account—even in its most literal interpretation—reads more like history than myth. In most ancient literature, creation is seen as a struggle between the gods. Most creation myths portray the culture in question as the center of the religious universe. The Genesis account, while sharing many similarities with other creation stories, differs in that it portrays God as the sole Sovereign over creation (not one among many gods) and mankind as the pinnacle of His creation, serving as His stewards over creation.
To be sure, there are unanswered questions with the Genesis account, such as the exact date of creation. Nor are there many details about the specific means or methods God might have used. This, of course, is why there are debates about the different biblically compatible creation accounts. The purpose of the Genesis account isn’t to give a complete historical account that would pass muster with modern-day historians. The Genesis account was a pre-history of the Jewish people as they were preparing to enter the Promised Land; they needed to know who they were and from where they came.
Another thing to note is that much of Christian theology is based on the historical accuracy of the Genesis account. The concept of marriage comes right out of the creation account (Genesis 2:24) and is referenced by Jesus in all three Synoptic Gospels. Our Lord Himself acknowledges that man was created male and female “from the beginning of creation” (Matthew 19:4). These statements, to be comprehendible, rely on the historical accuracy of the Genesis creation account. Most importantly, the doctrine of salvation depends on the existence of a literal person named Adam. Twice in the Pauline Epistles (Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15), Paul links our salvation in Christ with our identification in Adam. In 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, we read, “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” The entire human race is in a fallen state by virtue of being “in Adam” through natural birth. In similar manner, those whom God has chosen for salvation are saved by virtue of being “in Christ” through spiritual birth. The in Adam/in Christ distinction is crucial to a proper understanding of Christian soteriology, and this distinction makes no sense if there were no literal Adam from whom all humanity descended.
Paul argues in a similar vein in Romans 5:12–21. But what makes this passage unique is that it explicitly says, “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12). This verse is the linchpin in the argument for total depravity (the “first plank” in the Calvinist platform), and, like the 1 Corinthians passage, it depends on a literal Adam for it to make any kind of sense. Without a literal Adam, there is no literal sin and no need for a literal Savior.
Despite what position one takes on the doctrine of creation, at least one point is clear and not open to debate within Christianity: God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1). While we at Got Questions believe the 24x6 view possesses the strongest biblical argument, there are other views offering valid interpretations within the sphere of Christian orthodoxy.
We need to stress that the Bible does not (either explicitly or implicitly) teach an atheistic or “Darwinian” view of our origins. Therefore, to state that the creation/evolution debate is not important is to have a low view of Scripture. It does matter, particularly because how we approach the Bible with respect to origins speaks to how we will approach it everywhere else. If we cannot trust the Bible when it speaks on the matter of creation, why should we trust it to speak on salvation? Logically, what we believe regarding creation is important to the rest of our theology
What is young earth creationism?
Young earth creationism is the counterpart of old earth creationism (OEC), which says that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old, based on the geologic timescale, carbon dating, and other common dating methods. Variations of old earth creationism include progressive creationism, the day-age theory, the gap theory, and theistic evolution.
Skeptics, both secular and Christian, often portray young earth creationism as an unsophisticated, ignorant theory espoused only by a few religious (and therefore unscientific) zealots. Much of the bias comes from the fact that the old-earth perspective has held a monopoly in schools, major universities, and the media for generations; it’s no surprise that most scientists have an old-earth worldview. It is all they were ever taught. It is what most, if not all, of their colleagues profess.
Young earth creationists often call themselves biblical creationists because their position takes a direct, literal interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis. Young earth creationism views Genesis as a historical record of what actually happened, not an allegory or metaphor. Young earth creationism interprets the words day, evening, and morning without symbolism, as plain terms meant to be understood literally. Young earth creationism keeps the creation of the plants, sun, and animals in the biblical sequence, whereas old earth creationism usually rearranges the order listed in Genesis. Young earth creationists believe that when Romans 5:12 says “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin,” it is saying that death did not exist prior to Adam, while old earth creationists believe that Romans 5:12 only refers to human death and insist that a lot of dying happened (billions of years’ worth) before Adam appeared.
Young earth creationists see no need to be in harmony with uniformitarian models of the earth’s beginnings, especially when such models are usually rooted in a naturalistic (and atheistic) worldview. Science demands that evidence be examined, and young earth creationism does not shy away from geology, astronomy, biology, or any other field of study. It is the interpretation of the evidence that makes the difference. Proofs for young earth creationism are published by organizations such as the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis.
Why is biblical Creationism so important? Why I am a Creationist
This post comes from an article on gotquestions.org.
A clear view of origins is important for the same reason that a foundation is important to a building. Christianity is established in the book of Genesis chapter one, with “In the beginning God created . . . .” This one statement affirms creationism and opposes any view that embraces naturalism (the belief that the universe started without the intervention of God and/or proceeds without His involvement).
One’s views regarding creation reflect whether we believe the Word of God or call its truthfulness into question. As Christians, we must differentiate between creationism and naturalism; that is, how are they different? Which one is true? Is it possible to believe in both creationism and some form of evolution? These questions can be answered by defining what biblical creationism is and how it affects our fundamental belief system.
The importance of biblical creationism is that it answers the fundamental questions of human existence:
1. How did we get here? Where did we come from?
2. Why are we here? Do we have a purpose, and what is the cause of all or our problems? Are the issues of sin and salvation important?
3. What happens to us when we die? Is there life after death? A person’s stance on origins is important because Genesis is the foundation for the rest of Scripture, in which these questions are answered. Genesis has been likened to the root of a tree in that it anchors Scripture. If you cut the root from a tree, the tree dies. If you discredit Genesis, you remove the authoritative value of all Scripture.
Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” This gives us three great truths foundational to biblical creationism and the Christian faith. First, God is one. This stands in contrast to the polytheism of the pagans and the dualism of modern humanist philosophy. Second, God is personal and exists outside of creation. This is in contrast to pantheism, which sees God as immanent but not transcendent. Last, God is omnipotent and eternal. This is in contrast to the idols that people worship. God was before, is now, and always will be—He created all that is out of nothing by His spoken word.
This answers our creation question of beginnings, but what about our second question: why are we here?
Biblical creationism answers the question of the condition of the human race. Genesis 3 deals with the fall of man but also gives us the hope of redemption. It is important that we understand we are unified in one man, Adam—a literal, real-life person. If Adam is not a literal person, then we have no plausible explanation for how sin entered into the world. If mankind, in Adam, did not fall from grace, then mankind cannot be saved by grace through Jesus Christ. First Corinthians 15:22 says, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive” (NJKV). This parallel—Adam is the head of the fallen race, and Christ is the head of a redeemed race—is important to our understanding of salvation. “Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:18–19, NKJV).
We must look to biblical creationism as the basis for our value system. The creation narrative must be factual and not just a myth, for, if it is fictional, then the values it imports are man-reasoned, subject to change as man “evolves,” and therefore invalid. The basis of the modern-day conflict between science and religion (especially Christianity) is the assumption that (atheistic) science is fact and religion is merely superstition and myth. If this were true, then our Christian values are just that—values for Christians with no relevance in the secular world.
The last basic question for mankind is what happens to us when we die? If man is merely part of an un-designed and accidental universe and simply changes from one kind of matter to another when he dies, it means we have no soul or spirit and this life is all there is. This belief leaves us with only one purpose in life: to follow the plan of evolution, which is survival of the fittest.
Christianity, on the other hand, presents us with a moral good established by a transcendent, supernatural Being. The moral nature of God sets an unchanging standard that not only promotes a better life for us personally but also teaches us how to love others and ultimately bring glory to our Creator. This standard is exemplified by Christ. It is through His life, death, and resurrection that we find purpose for this life and hope of a future life with God in heaven.
Biblical creationism is important because it is the only system that answers the basic questions of life and gives us significance greater than ourselves. It should be clear to all Christians that creationism and naturalism are mutually exclusive and stand in opposition to one another.
Is creationism scientific? Why I am a Creationist
This post comes from gotquestions.org.
There is currently a lot of debate over the validity of creationism, defined as "the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution." Creation science is often dismissed by the secular community and accused of lacking scientific value. However, creationism is clearly compatible with a scientific approach to any topic. Creationism makes statements about real world events, places, and things. It is not concerned solely with subjective ideas or abstract concepts. There are established scientific facts that are consistent with creationism, and the way in which those facts relate to one another lends itself to a creationist interpretation. Just as other broad scientific ideas are used to lend coherence to a series of facts, so, too, does creationism.
How, then, is creationism—as opposed to "naturalism," defined as "a philosophical viewpoint according to which everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted"—scientific? Admittedly, the answer depends on how you define "scientific." Too often, "science" and "naturalism" are considered one and the same, leaving creationist views out by definition. Such a definition requires an irrational reverence of naturalism. Science is defined as "the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena." Nothing requires science, in and of itself, to be naturalistic. Naturalism, like creationism, requires a series of presuppositions that are not generated by experiments. They are not extrapolated from data or derived from test results. These philosophical presuppositions are accepted before any data is ever taken. Because both naturalism and creationism are strongly influenced by presuppositions that are neither provable nor testable, and enter into the discussion well before the facts do, it is fair to say that creationism is at least as scientific as naturalism.
Creationism, like naturalism, can be "scientific," in that it is compatible with the scientific method of discovery. These two concepts are not, however, sciences in and of themselves, because both views include aspects that are not considered "scientific" in the normal sense. Neither creationism nor naturalism is falsifiable; that is, there is no experiment that could conclusively disprove either one. Neither one is predictive; they do not generate or enhance the ability to predict an outcome. Solely on the basis of these two points, we see that there is no logical reason to consider one more scientifically valid than the other.
One of the major reasons naturalists give for rejecting creationism is the concept of miracles. Ironically, naturalists will typically say that miracles, such as special creation, are impossible because they violate the laws of nature, which have been clearly and historically observed. Such a view is ironic on several counts. As a single example, consider abiogenesis, the theory of life springing from non-living matter. Abiogenesis is one of the most thoroughly refuted concepts of science. Yet, a truly naturalistic viewpoint presumes that life on earth—self-replicating, self-sustaining, complex organic life—arose by chance from non-living matter. Such a thing has never been observed in all of human history. The beneficial evolutionary changes needed to progress a creature to a more complex form have also never been observed. So creationism actually holds the edge on evidence for "miraculous" claims in that the Scriptures provide documented accounts of miraculous happenings. To label creationism as unscientific on account of miracles demands a similar label for naturalism.
There are many facts that are used by both sides of the creation vs. naturalism debate. Facts are facts, but there is no such thing as a fact that absolutely requires a single interpretation. The divide between creationism and secular naturalism rests entirely on different interpretations. Regarding the evolution vs. creation debate specifically, Charles Darwin himself made this point. In the introduction to The Origin of Species, he stated, "I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I arrived." Obviously, Darwin believed evolution over creation, but he was willing to admit that interpretation was key to choosing a belief. One scientist might view a particular fact as supportive of naturalism; another scientist might view that same fact as supporting creationism.
Also, the fact that creationism is the only possible alternative to naturalistic ideas such as evolution makes it a valid topic, especially when this dichotomy has been admitted to by some of the leading minds of science. Many well-known and influential scientists state that the only possible explanations for life are naturalistic evolution or special creation. Not all scientists agree on which is true, but they almost all agree that one or the other must be.
There are many other reasons why creationism is a rational and scientific approach to learning. Among these are the concepts of realistic probability, the flawed evidential support for macro-evolution, the evidence of experience, and so forth. There is no logical basis to accept naturalistic presuppositions outright and flatly reject creationist presuppositions. Firm belief in creation is no barrier to scientific discovery. Simply review the accomplishments of men like Newton, Pasteur, Mendel, Pascal, Kelvin, Linnaeus, and Maxwell. All were clear and comfortable creationists. Creationism is not a "science," just as naturalism is not a "science." Creationism is, however, fully compatible with science itself.
What is Calvinism and is it biblical? Why I am a Reformed Protestant
This post comes from an article from gotquestions.org.
The five points of Calvinism can be summarized by the acronym TULIP. T stands for total depravity, U for unconditional election, L for limited atonement, I for irresistible grace, and P for perseverance of the saints. Here are the definitions and Scripture references Calvinists use to defend their beliefs:
Total Depravity - As a result of Adam’s fall, the entire human race is affected; all humanity is dead in trespasses and sins. Man is unable to save himself (Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-18).
Unconditional Election - Because man is dead in sin, he is unable to initiate a response to God; therefore, in eternity past God elected certain people to salvation. Election and predestination are unconditional; they are not based on man’s response (Romans 8:29-30;9:11; Ephesians 1:4-6, 11-12) because man is unable to respond, nor does he want to.
Limited Atonement - Because God determined that certain ones should be saved as a result of God’s unconditional election, He determined that Christ should die for the elect alone. All whom God has elected and for whom Christ died will be saved (Matthew 1:21; John 10:11; 17:9; Acts 20:28; Romans 8:32; Ephesians 5:25).
Irresistible Grace - Those whom God elected He draws to Himself through irresistible grace. God makes man willing to come to Him. When God calls, man responds (John 6:37, 44; 10:16).
Perseverance of the Saints - The precise ones God has elected and drawn to Himself through the Holy Spirit will persevere in faith. None whom God has elected will be lost; they are eternally secure (John 10:27-29; Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:3-14).
While all these doctrines have a biblical basis, many people reject all or some of them. So-called “four-point Calvinists” accept Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints as biblical doctrines. Man is definitely sinful and incapable of believing in God on his own. God elects people based on His will alone – election is not based on any merit in the person chosen. All those whom God has chosen will come to faith. All those who are truly born-again will persevere in their faith. As for Limited Atonement, however, four-point Calvinists believe that atonement is unlimited, arguing that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, not just for the sins of the elect. “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). Other verses in opposition to limited atonement are John 1:29; 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:6; and 2 Peter 2:1.
The five-point Calvinists, however, see problems with four-point Calvinism. First, they argue, if Total Depravity is true, then Unlimited Atonement cannot possibly be true because, if Jesus died for the sins of every person, then whether or not His death is applicable to an individual depends on whether or not that person “accepts” Christ. But as we have seen from the above description of Total Depravity, man in his natural state has no capacity whatsoever to choose God, nor does he want to. In addition, if Unlimited Atonement is true, then hell is full of people for whom Christ died. He shed His blood in vain for them. To the five-point Calvinist, this is unthinkable.
What is Reformed Theology? Why I am a Reformed Protestant.
The following post comes from an article on got questions.org and is bot intended to be plagiarism or infringe any copyrights. It is for education only.
Broadly speaking, Reformed theology includes any system of belief that traces its roots back to the Protestant Reformation of the 16th Century. Of course, the Reformers themselves traced their doctrine to Scripture, as indicated by their credo of "sola scriptura," so Reformed theology is not a "new" belief system but one that seeks to continue apostolic doctrine.
Generally, Reformed theology holds to the authority of Scripture, the sovereignty of God, salvation by grace through Christ, and the necessity of evangelism. It is sometimes called Covenant theology because of its emphases on the covenant God made with Adam and the new covenant which came through Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).
Authority of Scripture. Reformed theology teaches that the Bible is the inspired and authoritative Word of God, sufficient in all matters of faith and practice.
Sovereignty of God. Reformed theology teaches that God rules with absolute control over all creation. He has foreordained all events and is therefore never frustrated by circumstances. This does not limit the will of the creature, nor does it make God the author of sin.
Salvation by grace. Reformed theology teaches that God in His grace and mercy has chosen to redeem a people to Himself, delivering them from sin and death. The Reformed doctrine of salvation is commonly represented by the acrostic TULIP (also known as the five points of Calvinism):
T - total depravity. Man is completely helpless in his sinful state, is under the wrath of God, and can in no way please God. Total depravity also means that man will not naturally seek to know God, until God graciously prompts him to do so (Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-18).
U - unconditional election. God, from eternity past, has chosen to save a great multitude of sinners, which no man can number (Romans 8:29-30; 9:11; Ephesians 1:4-6,11-12).
L - limited atonement. Also called a "particular redemption." Christ took the judgment for the sin of the elect upon Himself and thereby paid for their lives with His death. In other words, He did not simply make salvation "possible," He actually obtained it for those whom He had chosen (Matthew 1:21; John 10:11; 17:9; Acts 20:28; Romans 8:32; Ephesians 5:25).
I - irresistible grace. In his fallen state, man resists God's love, but the grace of God working in his heart makes him desire what he had previously resisted. That is, God's grace will not fail to accomplish its saving work in the elect (John 6:37,44; 10:16).
P - perseverance of the saints. God protects His saints from falling away; thus, salvation is eternal (John 10:27-29; Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:3-14).
The necessity of evangelism. Reformed theology teaches that Christians are in the world to make a difference, spiritually through evangelism and socially through holy living and humanitarianism.
Other distinctives of Reformed theology generally include the observance of two sacraments (baptism and communion), a cessationist view of the spiritual gifts (the gifts are no longer extended to the church), and a non-dispensational view of Scripture. Held in high esteem by Reformed churches are the writings of John Calvin, John Knox, Ulrich Zwingli, and Martin Luther. The Westminster Confession embodies the theology of the Reformed tradition. Modern churches in the Reformed tradition include Presbyterian, Congregationalist, and some Baptist.
What are the doctrines of grace? Why I am a Reformed Protestant.
This is a copy of an article from gotquestions.org for education only. No infringing or plagiarism intended.
The phrase “doctrines of grace” is used as a replacement for the term “Calvinism,” in order to remove the attention from John Calvin and instead focus on how the specific points are biblically and theologically sound. The phrase “doctrines of grace” describes the soteriological doctrines that are unique to Reformed theology, which is Calvinistic. These doctrines are summarized with the acronym TULIP. The T in TULIP stands for Total Depravity, U for Unconditional Election, L for Limited Atonement, I for Irresistible Grace, and P for Perseverance of the Saints.
Reformed Christians believe that all five of the doctrines of grace are derived directly from the Scripture and that the acronym TULIP accurately describes the Bible’s teaching on soteriology—the doctrine of salvation. The following is a brief description of each of the letters in the acronym TULIP.
Total Depravity - As a result of Adam’s fall, the entire human race is affected; all of Adam’s descendants are spiritually dead in their trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1, 5). Calvinists are quick to point out that this does not mean that all people are as bad as they could be. Rather, this doctrine says that, as a result of man’s fall in Adam, all people are radically depraved from the inside and that their depravity affects every area of their lives.
Unconditional Election - Because man is dead in sin, he is unable (and stubbornly unwilling) to initiate a saving response to God. In light of this, God, from eternity past, mercifully elected a particular people unto salvation (Ephesians 1:4–6). These people are comprised of men and women from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation (Revelation 5:9). Election and predestination are unconditional; they are not contingent on man’s response to God’s grace (Romans 8:29–30; 9:11; Ephesians 1:11–12) because man, in his fallen state, is both unable and unwilling to respond favorably to Christ’s offer of salvation.
Limited Atonement - The purpose of Christ’s atoning death was not to merely make men savable and thus leaving the salvation of humanity contingent on man’s response to God’s grace. Rather, the purpose of the atonement was to secure the redemption of a particular people (Ephesians 1:4–6; John 17:9). All whom God has elected and Christ died for will be saved (John 6:37–40, 44). Many Reformed Christians prefer the term “particular redemption” as they feel that this phrase more accurately captures the essence of this doctrine. It is not so much that Christ’s atonement is limited as it is particular, intended for a specific people—God’s elect.
Irresistible Grace - God has elected a particular people to be the recipients of Christ’s atoning work. These people are drawn to Christ by a grace that is irresistible. When God calls, man responds (John 6:37, 44; 10:16). This teaching does not mean that God saves men against their will. Rather, God changes the heart of the rebellious unbeliever so that he now desires to repent and be saved. God’s elect will be drawn to Him, and that grace that draws them is, in fact, irresistible. God replaces the unbeliever’s heart of stone with a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26). In Reformed theology, regeneration precedes faith.
Perseverance of the Saints - The particular people God has elected and drawn to Himself through the Holy Spirit will persevere in faith. None of those whom God has elected will be lost; they are eternally secure in Him (John 10:27–29; Romans 8:29–30; Ephesians 1:3–14). Some Reformed theologians prefer to use the term “Preservation of the Saints” as they believe that this choice of words more accurately describes how God is directly responsible for the preservation of His elect. It is clear in Scripture that Christ continues to intercede for His people (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25). This continues to provide believers with the assurance that those who belong to Christ are eternally His.
These five doctrines together form the "doctrines of grace." They summarize the salvation experience as the result of the grace of God, who acts independently of man’s will. No effort or act of man can add to the grace of God to bring about the redemption of the soul. For truly it is “by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9).
Perseverance of the Saints - is it biblical? Why I am a Reformed Protestant
This article is from gotquestions.org.
Perseverance of the saints is the name that is used to summarize what the Bible teaches about the eternal security of the believer. It answers the question, “Once a person is saved, can he lose his salvation?” Perseverance of the saints is the P in the acronym TULIP, which is commonly used to enumerate what are known as the five points of Calvinism. Because the term “perseverance of the saints” can cause people to have the wrong idea about what is meant, some people prefer to use terms like “preservation of the saints,” “eternal security,” or “held by God.” Each of these terms reveals some aspect of what the Bible teaches about the security of the believer. However, like any biblical doctrine, what is important is not the name assigned to the doctrine but how accurately it summarizes what the Bible teaches about that subject. No matter which name you use to refer to this important doctrine, a thorough study of the Bible will reveal that, when it is properly understood, it is an accurate description of what the Bible teaches.
The simplest explanation of this doctrine is the saying: “Once saved, always saved.” The Bible teaches that those who are born again will continue trusting in Christ forever. God, by His own power through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, keeps or preserves the believer forever. This wonderful truth is seen in Ephesians 1:13-14, where we see that believers are “sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchase possession, to the praise of His glory.” When we are born again, we receive the promised indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit that is God’s guarantee that He who began a good work in us will complete it (Philippians 1:6). In order for us to lose our salvation after receiving the promised Holy Spirit, God would have to break His promise or renege on His “guarantee,” which He cannot do. Therefore, the believer is eternally secure because God is eternally faithful.
The understanding of this doctrine really comes from understanding the unique and special love that God has for His children. Romans 8:28-39 tells us that 1) no one can bring a charge against God’s elect; 2) nothing can separate the elect from the love of Christ; 3) God makes everything work together for the good of the elect; and 4) all whom God saves will be glorified. God loves His children (the elect) so much that nothing can separate them from Him. Of course this same truth is seen in many other passages of Scripture as well. In John 10:27-30, Jesus says, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one." Again, in John 6:37-47, we see Jesus stating that everyone who the Father gives to the Son will come to Him and He will raise all of them up at the last day.
Another evidence from Scripture of the eternal security of a believer is found in John 5:24, where Jesus says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.” Notice that eternal life is not something we get in the future but is something that we have once we believe. By its very nature, eternal life must last forever, or it could not be eternal. This passage says that, if we believe the gospel, we have eternal life and will not come into judgment; therefore, it can be said we are eternally secure.
There is really very little scriptural basis that can be used to argue against the eternal security of the believer. While there are a few verses that, if not considered in their context, might give the impression that one could “fall from grace” or lose his salvation, when these verses are carefully considered in context it is clear that is not the case. Many people know someone who at one time expressed faith in Christ and who might have appeared to be a genuine Christian who later departed from the faith and now wants to have nothing to do with Christ or His church. These people might even deny the very existence of God. For those who do not want to accept what the Bible says about the security of the believer, these types of people are proof that the doctrine of eternal security cannot be right. However, the Bible indicates otherwise, and it teaches that people such as those who profess Christ as Savior at one time only to later walk away and deny Christ were never truly saved in the first place. For example, 1 John 2:19 says, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out from us, in order that it might be made manifest that they all are not truly of us." The Bible is also clear that not everyone who professes to be a Christian truly is. Jesus Himself says that not everyone who says, “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 7:21-22). Rather than proving we can lose our salvation, those people who profess Christ and fall away simply reinforces the importance of testing our salvation to make sure we are in the faith (2 Corinthians 13:5) and making our calling and election sure by continually examining our lives to make sure we are growing in godliness (2 Peter 1:10).
One of the misconceptions about the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints is that it will lead to “carnal Christians” who believe that since they are eternally secure they can live whatever licentious lifestyle they wish and still be saved. But that is a misunderstanding of the doctrine and what the Bible teaches. A person who believes he can live any way he wants because he has professed Christ is not demonstrating true saving faith (1 John 2:3-4). Our eternal security rests on the biblical teaching that those whom God justifies, He will also glorify (Romans 8:29-30). Those who are saved will indeed be conformed to the image of Christ through the process of sanctification (1 Corinthians 6:11). When a person is saved, the Holy Spirit breaks the bondage of sin and gives the believer a new heart and a desire to seek holiness. Therefore a true Christian will desire to be obedient to God and will be convicted by the Holy Spirit when he sins. True Christians will never “live any way they want” because such behavior is impossible for someone who has been given a new nature (2 Corinthians 5:17).
Clearly, the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints does accurately represent what the Bible teaches on this important subject. If someone is truly saved, he has been made alive by the Holy Spirit and has a new heart with new desires. There is no way that one that has been “born again” can later be “unborn.” Because of His unique love for His children, God will keep all of His children safe from harm, and Jesus has promised that He would lose none of His sheep. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints recognizes that true Christians will always persevere and are eternally secure because God keeps them that way. It is based on the fact that Jesus, the “author and perfecter of faith” (Hebrews 12:2), is able to completely save those whom the Father has given Him (Hebrews 7:25) and to keep them saved through all eternity.
Irresistible Grace - is it biblical? Why I am a Reformed Protestant
This article was from gotquestions.org
“Irresistible grace” is a phrase that is used to summarize what the Bible teaches about the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of sinners. It is represented by the “I” in the acronym TULIP that is commonly used to enumerate what are known as the five points of Calvinism or the doctrines of grace. The doctrine is also known as “effectual calling,” “efficacious grace,” “efficacious call of the Spirit,” and “transformed by the Holy Spirit.” Each of these terms reveals some aspect of what the Bible teaches about the doctrine of irresistible grace. However, what is important is not the name assigned to the doctrine but how accurately the doctrine summarizes what the Bible teaches about the nature and purpose of the work of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of sinful, spiritually dead men. No matter which name you use to refer to the doctrine of irresistible grace, a thorough study of the Bible will reveal that, when properly understood, it is an accurate description of what the Bible teaches on this important subject.
Simply put, the doctrine of irresistible grace refers to the biblical truth that whatever God decrees to happen will inevitably come to pass, even in the salvation of individuals. The Holy Spirit will work in the lives of the elect so that they inevitably will come to faith in Christ. The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit never fails to bring to salvation those sinners whom He personally calls to Christ (John 6:37-40). At the heart of this doctrine is the answer to the question: Why does one person believe the gospel and another does not? Is it because one is smarter, has better reasoning capabilities, or possesses some other characteristic that allows him to realize the importance of the gospel message? Or is it because God does something unique in the lives of those whom He saves? If it is because of what the person who believes does or is, then in a sense he is responsible for his salvation and has a reason to boast. However, if the difference is solely that God does something unique in the hearts and lives of those who believe in Him and are saved, then there is no ground for boasting and salvation is truly a gift of grace. Of course, the biblical answer to these questions is that the Holy Spirit does do something unique in the hearts of those who are saved. The Bible tells us that God saves people “according to His mercy…through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5). In other words, those who believe the gospel and are saved do so because they have been transformed by the Holy Spirit.
The doctrine of irresistible grace recognizes that the Bible describes natural man as “dead in his trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1; Ephesians 2:5; Colossians 2:13), and, because man is spiritually dead, he must first be made alive or regenerated in order to understand and respond to the gospel message. A good illustration of this is seen in Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. In John 11:43, it is recorded that Jesus told Lazarus to “come forth” and that Lazarus came forth out of the tomb. What had to happen before Lazarus—who had been dead for several days—would be able to respond to Jesus’ command? He had to be made alive because a dead man cannot hear or respond. The same is true spiritually. If we are dead in our sins, as the Bible clearly teaches, then before we can respond to the gospel message and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ we must first be made alive. As Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3:3, one must be “born again to see the kingdom of God.” John 1:12-13 tells us that being born again is not the result of something we do—“the will of man”—but is a sovereign act of God. Just as Lazarus could not bring himself back to life or respond to Jesus’ command without being brought back to life, neither can sinful man. Ephesians 2:1-10 makes it very clear that while we are still dead in our trespasses and sin God makes us alive. The Bible is also clear that the act of being born again or regenerated is a sovereign act of God. It is something He does which enables us to believe the gospel message, not something that comes as a result of our belief.
The reason this doctrine is called “irresistible” grace is that it always results in the intended outcome, the salvation of the person it is given to. It is important to realize that the act of being regenerated or “born again” cannot be separated from the act of believing the gospel. Ephesians 2:1-10 makes this clear. There is a connection between the act of being made alive by God (Ephesians 2:1, 5) and the result of being saved by grace. (Ephesians 2:5, 8). This is because everything pertaining to salvation, including the faith to believe, is an act of God’s grace. The reason God’s grace is irresistible and efficacious (always bringing forth the desired result) is that God “has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into” His kingdom (Colossians 1:13). Or, as Psalm 3:8 puts it, “Salvation belongs to the Lord.”
To understand the doctrine of “irresistible grace,” it is important to recognize that this is a special grace given only to those God has chosen for salvation (His elect) and is different from what is known as “common grace” which God bestows on both believer and unbeliever. While there are many aspects of common grace, including life and all that is necessary to sustain it, common grace is what is often referred to as the “outward call of God.” This is God’s revelation of Himself given to all men through the light of creation and their consciences. It also includes the general call of the gospel that goes out anytime the gospel message is preached. This call can be resisted and rejected by those that receive it. (Matthew 22:14; Romans 1:18-32). However, God also gives an “inward call” which always results in salvation. This is the call of God that Jesus spoke of in John 6:37-47. The certainty of this inward call is seen in John 6:37: “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.” John 6:44 confirms this: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Other verses where irresistible grace can be seen include 2 Corinthians 4:1-6; Acts 13:48; Acts 16:14 and Romans 8:30. In 2 Corinthians 4:1-6, after explaining why some people do not believe the gospel (it is veiled to them and their minds have been blinded toward it), Paul writes, “For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6). The God who said, “Let there be light” (Genesis 1:3) is the same God who gives the light of salvation to those He chooses, and the result is just as sure. The same truth is seen in a different way in Acts 13:48. Here it is said that “as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” God saves those He chooses to save; therefore, His saving grace is always effective or efficacious. In Acts 16:14, we have another example of God’s irresistible grace in action. The Lord opened the heart of Lydia “to respond the things spoken of by Paul.” Finally you have what is called the “golden chain of redemption” in Romans 8:29-30. Here we see that everyone God calls to salvation (the inward call) will be saved (justified).
A common misconception about the doctrine of irresistible grace is that it implies men are forced to accept Christ and men are dragged kicking and screaming into heaven. Of course, neither of these is an accurate description of the doctrine of irresistible grace as revealed in the Bible. In fact, the heart of irresistible grace is the transforming power of the Holy Spirit whereby He takes a man dead in his trespasses and sins and gives him spiritual life so that he can recognize the surpassing value of God’s offer of salvation. Then, having been set free from the bondage of sin, that man willingly comes to Christ.
Another misconception concerning this doctrine is that it teaches the Holy Spirit cannot be resisted at all. Yet, again, that is not what the doctrine teaches because that is not what the Bible teaches. God’s grace can be resisted, and the Holy Spirit’s influence can be resisted even by one of the elect. However, what the doctrine does correctly recognize is that the Holy Spirit can overcome all such resistance and that He will draw the elect with an irresistible grace that makes them want to come to God and helps them to understand the gospel so they can and will believe it.
The doctrine of irresistible grace simply recognizes that the Bible teaches God is sovereign and can overcome all resistance when He wills to. What God decrees or determines will come to pass. This truth is seen throughout Scripture. In Daniel 4:35, we see that “He does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay His hand!” Psalm 115:3 declares, “Our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.” God’s grace in salvation is irresistible because when God sets out to fulfill His sovereign purpose, no person or thing can successfully resist Him.
The doctrine of irresistible grace accurately summarizes what the Bible teaches about the nature of saving faith as well as what must happen to overcome man’s depraved nature. Since natural man is dead in his trespasses and sins, it stands to reason that he must be regenerated before he can respond to the outward call of the gospel. Until that happens, man will resist the gospel message and the grace of God; however, once he has been “born again” and has a heart that is now inclined toward God, the grace of God will irresistibly draw Him to put his faith in Christ and be saved. These two acts (regeneration and faith) cannot be separated from one another. They are so closely connected that we often cannot distinguish between them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)