What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Value of Evangelism in Reformed Theology

brightfame52 said:
The other Sheep are the Gentile Sheep distinct from the Sheep of the jewish fold. The Sheep are the Church Flock Acts 20:28

28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Click to expand...
You answered in post 938 that the sheep are the elect of God.
Or the Church, the Body of Christ.
Chosen in Jesus before the foundation of the world.


You have now changed your reply to say that the sheep are the sheep of the Jewish fold.
NOT the elect.
This, of course, is right.
And the other sheep are the Gentiles which Jesus must draw into the fold.
This refers to the Wedding Banquet in Matthew 22 when those who were invited were not worthy and
so those from the streets were called to the feast. The Jews and the Gentiles.

You posted Acts 20:28 and I'm not sure why.
It would seem to me that THE FLOCK means everyone that is saved by faith.

It seems clear from scripture that faith comes first, then salvation, then regeneration.
Jesus preached to the Jews and to some Gentiles and left instructions to preach to all nations, that were known at that time,
and eventually salvation was preached to men of all nations.

First, I still don't understand why a reformed person would see any value in preaching since it is God that will do the choosing of who
is saved and who is not. God is able to save those He wishes to save --- He h as made Himself be known from the beginning of time.

Second, the N.T. is clear that one must believe first, which brings faith, which brings salvation, and then regeneration.

It would be interesting to know how you understand the following which are very clear:

Philippians 3:9
9and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,

Righteousness, or being right with God,
comes from God
on the basis of faith.

So the basis is our faith......step one
God gives us righteousness.....step two

We have faith,
We become right with God.


Romans 3:22
22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe;


We receive the righteousness of God
through faith in Jesus
for those who believe.

We believe.....step one
We receive faith.....step two
We become right with God....step three

We believe
We have faith
We become right with God.
 
TibiasDad said:
I have just begun reading the book Deconstructing Calvinism, by Hudson Smelley, and in the prologue found this statement:

Calvinism completely compasses God's redemptive plan and teaches that God saves a small percentage of humanity based on His elective determination before creation and passes over the rest. Since God's redemptive plan excludes most people, there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things. Indeed, it is difficult to see how we could make any honest gospel presentation knowing most people are by God's purposes not savable. Not only that, since salvation hangs on God's elective determination before creation and not on a present decision for Christ, we must make this TULIP reality personal. We must come to grips with the fact that many of those we know, and perhaps some of those closest to us, have no possibility of being reconciled to God because they are not elect.

What caught my eye is the idea that "there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things."

I had always thought the Calvinistic evangelism was like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack,, the rare Elect person in the mass of reprobates, but had never thought of the effect of the presentation of the gospel to those who would never be able to experience it. Smelley terms it "misleading" them to think that they might be savable, when in fact, there isn't a sliver of hope that this would happen.

What are your thoughts, either pro or con to Smelley's thought?


Doug
Click to expand...
Just listen to the word... Calvin.. Ism..
Those isms.. We don't want them. We don't need them!
Period!
GB
 
wondering said:
You answered in post 938 that the sheep are the elect of God.
Or the Church, the Body of Christ.
Chosen in Jesus before the foundation of the world.


You have now changed your reply to say that the sheep are the sheep of the Jewish fold.
NOT the elect.
This, of course, is right.
And the other sheep are the Gentiles which Jesus must draw into the fold.
This refers to the Wedding Banquet in Matthew 22 when those who were invited were not worthy and
so those from the streets were called to the feast. The Jews and the Gentiles.

You posted Acts 20:28 and I'm not sure why.
It would seem to me that THE FLOCK means everyone that is saved by faith.

It seems clear from scripture that faith comes first, then salvation, then regeneration.
Jesus preached to the Jews and to some Gentiles and left instructions to preach to all nations, that were known at that time,
and eventually salvation was preached to men of all nations.

First, I still don't understand why a reformed person would see any value in preaching since it is God that will do the choosing of who
is saved and who is not. God is able to save those He wishes to save --- He h as made Himself be known from the beginning of time.

Second, the N.T. is clear that one must believe first, which brings faith, which brings salvation, and then regeneration.

It would be interesting to know how you understand the following which are very clear:

Philippians 3:9
9and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,

Righteousness, or being right with God,
comes from God
on the basis of faith.

So the basis is our faith......step one
God gives us righteousness.....step two

We have faith,
We become right with God.


Romans 3:22
22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe;


We receive the righteousness of God
through faith in Jesus
for those who believe.

We believe.....step one
We receive faith.....step two
We become right with God....step three

We believe
We have faith
We become right with God.
Click to expand...
I have not changed you just proved you can't understand what I am saying.
 
Fastfredy0 said:
Interesting ...
Why are you against baptism? (both of the Spirit and water baptism)
Why are you against theism? (the belief in God).
Why are you against synergism? (the belief in the interaction or cooperation of man and God for salvation)
Click to expand...
I was of course talking about man made. Maybe you knew.. If not. Then God bless!
 
Link1983 said:
Just listen to the word... Calvin.. Ism..
Those isms.. We don't want them. We don't need them!
Period!
GB
Click to expand...
I kinda like isms. Saves me a bunch of time in discussions. Would be nice if isms didn't cause schisms unless the ism is a heretical ism.

There is a poem somewhere in all this. Maybe a limerick.

There were no isms from Oslo​
With that, the talk came quite slow​
Lots of repeats​
No more short tweets​
oh! the posts did grow grow grow​

I really should've been a poet, eh?
 
Hospes said:
I kinda like isms. Saves me a bunch of time in discussions. Would be nice if isms didn't cause schisms unless the ism is a heretical ism.

There is a poem somewhere in all this. Maybe a limerick.

There were no isms from Oslo​
With that, the talk came quite slow​
Lots of repeats​
No more short tweets​
oh! the posts did grow grow grow​

I really should've been a poet, eh?
Click to expand...
I live in Oslo,lol
 
Hospes said:
I know. (I saw it on your member info.) That line was specifically my shoutout to you. :)
Click to expand...
I'm not talking,the capital of Norway but the namesake is that city .funny I was photographong. and old home and church ,radio station originally Sunday and pondered Oslo and Viking history .
 
brightfame52 said:
I have not changed you just proved you can't understand what I am saying.
Click to expand...
I understand that you think a person is regenerated first...
and THEN saved.

This is not what the N.T. teaches.

You shouldn't start threads unless you plan to participate in that thread.
 
wondering said:
I understand that you think a person is regenerated first...
and THEN saved.

This is not what the N.T. teaches.

You shouldn't start threads unless you plan to participate in that thread.
Click to expand...
Yes, regeneration is saved from the power of sin, then they can act in spiritual matters, but not until then.
 
Fastfredy0 said:
Interesting ...
Why are you against baptism? (both of the Spirit and water baptism)
Why are you against theism? (the belief in God).
Why are you against synergism? (the belief in the interaction or cooperation of man and God for salvation)
Click to expand...
Maybe i didn't think this one threw. I'll back down. Lol
Theism tho.. haha
 
jasonc said:
a small unincorporated community that one time had a post office in,the u.s.
Click to expand...
I've heard about it. I guessed right. It's Minnesota. Many Norwegians came there in the end of the 1800 beginning of 1900
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top