DAVEH wrote: > Wow!!! So whether or not (as Kevin is questioning) Jeff > understood the pastor's reply correctly, there are actually > Christians who believe God created people specifically > to burn in hell to glorify Him. (Have I got that right, > DavidM?)
Yes, that is correct. The Calvinists believe in "Limited Atonement," meaning that they do not believe that Jesus died for everyone. They claim that Jesus died only for the Elect. There are five points of Calvinism which are represented by the acronym TULIP. I did a quick search for you, and here is one link that seems to explain it: http://www.mslick.com/tulip.htm DaveH wrote: > Now I wonder if there are any TTers who subscribe > to such thinking. But I bet nobody is going to > admit it to me, even if they do believe such. I think most on TT shy away from Calvinism, but there are some here who embrace much of it. Bruce Murch is a street preacher who use to be on the list who is a Calvinist. He hosts a website BBS where there are other Calvinists at www.FullQuiverMission.com Click on the Discussion Board and if you can't find a topic you like, you can create your own. I will warn you that it is a Christian list, so you might get booted off just for being Mormon. I think Bruce is somewhat open to discussion, but he has kicked off quite a few pagans and other non-Christians. To tell you the truth, I'm kind of curious as to whether he would allow a polite Mormon such as yourself there, or whether he would boot you off just because you are Mormon. I suppose you could always lurk if you didn't want to get the boot. :-) I don't think he ever kicks off lurkers. DaveH wrote: > However......I wonder if he represents mainline Reformed > thought. From the sound of his ministry, he may be as > much an oddball as many TTers! ;-) No, he is not as oddball as many of us. He is part of the establishment. He went to seminary, has a doctorate, is a seminary professor, and is an elder in a Reformed Baptist Church in Arizona. His Reformed Doctrine is very orthodox as far as Reformed Doctrine goes. DaveH wrote: > I assume you know him, DavidM? I have met him and I have written back and forth with him via private email. He is not too friendly toward me. :-) DaveH wrote: > Does he (his preaching) mesh well with other > Protestants and popular Protestant beliefs? He takes a strong stand on the side of Calvinism. He has been a big influence upon many who I have ministered to such that I have been in the position of trying to conduct damage control. :-) So he meshes with other Calvinists very well, but he debates those who are not Calvinist. For example, his latest book will be a written debate with Dave Hunt, a well known and established Protestant author. DaveH wrote: > I assume you have invited him to join TT? LOL. No, that would be kind of like inviting the pope to join TT. :-) I have invited him to try and work with the Street Preachers and help train us in theology, but he refuses as he thinks we are way off base. DAVEH wrote: > I find it interesting to hear of a SP who agrees > with me on that. Ooops! No, James White is NOT a street preacher. He hates street preachers. He mocks them and derides them on his radio program. DaveH wrote: > Is JW a lonesome voice on this, or are there many > more who support his concerns about the image of > Christianity being affected by actions like those > that take place in SLC? Almost EVERYONE in mainline Protestant churches rejects the public ministry of street preaching. The establishment has always been against public ministry in that it is always considered undignified by the generation in which it is practiced. This was true in Jesus' time, and it is true now. DAVEH wrote: > I've heard the term, but know virtually nothing > about it. Does Calvinism have a big foothold in > Reformed theology? The phrase "Reformed Theology" today is generally equivalent to Calvinism. When you hear it, you should think predestination, election, once-saved-always-saved, etc. DaveH wrote: > Do we have any/many TTers who are Calvinist? We have had some, but I think most of them have left. I often correspond with past members who now consider themselves Calvinists. It is interesting how Calvinists always seem to leave this list. :-) DAVEH wrote: > I'm sure my perspective on this is a bit skewed, but > when I think of Presbyterians, I get the impression > they really aren't as mainline as churches like the > Baptists, Methodists and Lutherans. Are the Ps > considered to be fringe Christians due to the fringe > practices (with regard to gay acceptance) that border > on heretical? The Presbyterians are fragmented so that some of their sects, like the PCA (Presbyterian Church in America), are very conservative and condemn homosexuality. Presbyterians are certainly mainline, perhaps more so than the Baptists and Methodists which generally are more recent in origin. It seems to me that the more mainline and traditional a Christian group is, the more apostate they become. Of the Protestants, the Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Anglicans (Episcopalians) go back the furthest and they seem to be the ones opening the door to all manner of apostate ideas, such as homosexuality. Splinter groups such as the Mormons, Churches of Christ, Methodists, etc. see the problems and create their own sects in an attempt to restore or repair the problems. Then they themselves head down the same road of apostasy. DAVEH wrote: > Ahhhhhh.....now I see why/how the pastor could/would > have said what he did. Hmmm......apparently the > supralapsarians believe in a pre-existance similar > to LDS folks....is that correct? No. They believe in ELECTION. In other words, God planned the fall and orchestrated it in order to damn the sinners to eternal destruction. This supposedly glorifies God in that it shows his utter sovereignty and power of rule such that we are what we are because of Him. They object to any other idea because it would mean that God is not in complete control. If God is not in complete control, then in their minds he is a weak God. The extreme opposing viewpoint to this is called "open theism." Jed Smock is a campus preacher in this camp (www.brojed.org). Jed would say that God does not know the future; therefore, God is not omniscient, omnipotent, etc. A Calvinist would say that God knows every choice that every man, woman and child will make, whereas an open theist like Jed would say that God does not know for sure what we will choose. Jed would say that God might make an intelligent prediction about what we would choose based upon his knowledge of us, but the will is free and sometimes the choice of a man might surprise God. It seems to me that the crux of the debate about Calvinism and Open Theism boils down to assumptions about time. Did God create time or is time an eternal thing that has always existed just as God has? Does God exist within time or outside of time? Does God exist in the future and the present at the same time? David Miller wrote: >> The infralapsarian Calvinists see the non-elect as >> fallen individuals damned solely because of their >> own sin. DAVEH wrote: > Sounds like something you might subscribe to, DavidM. > Are you in their camp? No, I am not a Calvinist. I am Arminian. If you read the works of Jacobus Arminius, that would be very close to my views about predestination, election, and free will. You can download his works in PDF format for free at: http://www.ccel.org/a/arminius/ Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
