Role of theologians

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
OzSpen said:
I notice you do not have a Baptist icon associated with your name and the posts you make in this Baptist directory. Is there a reason for this?

I used the Baptist icon up until a few months ago when a poster in the Semper Reformanda forum asked me to change it in order to answer questions in the Ask a Calvinist forum. No one who has ever read my posts has ever questioned whether I am a Baptist or not.

As far as a false assumption goes I didn't assume anything I simply went with what you intimated in your post.

The other so-called false accusations can easily be checked by looking at the history of your posts on this board. If anyone cares to do that they can.
 
Upvote 0

Job8

Senior Member
Dec 1, 2014
4,634
1,801
✟21,583.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hi i am just wondering what role do you think theologians should play? Like in the Church?

None whatsoever.

Every born-again believer should have a reliable Bible (and there's nothing more reliable than the 400+ years old AV or KJV), an exhaustive concordance (Strong's), and a commitment to study God's Word seriously, comparing Scripture with Scripture, and setting aside all theologians ans commentators,

Every church should also recognize that "the apostles and prophets" are present with us in the Old and New Testaments. Therefore we should expect that there will be men (not women) with the spiritual gifts of evangelist, pastor, or teacher. These are the men who should preach in the church using Scripture alone (and setting aside all man-made ideas and entertainment).

Believers should know the Word for themselves, so that when the preachers and teachers are expounding the Word, they will know that this is Bible Truth, and can heartily say "Amen". If the preachers are false teachers, they must be asked to leave (Revelation, chapters 2 & 3). The Lord gives each believer the gift of the Holy Spirit, and one of the Spirit's functions is to "guide us into all truth". But that will not happen if we ourselves are not laboring in the Word (2 Tim 2:15).

Sadly, when it comes to serious Bible study, too many Christians are "plain lazy", and prefer to be spoon-fed. Hence we have so many being "carried away with every wind of doctrine". And too many preachers have also become lazy, and prefer to entertain, relate anecdotes, stories, and jokes.

Theologians have done more harm than good to the Body of Christ. They are also not mentioned in Scripture for obvious reasons. Generally Bible schools and seminaries today are not upholding the inspiration and authority of Scripture, nor are many upholding true Bible doctrines. Therefore theologians should be "suspect" unless proven otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
The other so-called false accusations can easily be checked by looking at the history of your posts on this board. If anyone cares to do that they can.

What history about what subjects?
 
Upvote 0

JLR1300

Newbie
Dec 16, 2012
341
39
Oklahoma
✟8,189.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hello everyone...

I just wanted to point out one or two things... When Paul said that all scripture was profitable for doctrine etc. He very likely was speaking not only of Old Testament writings but also of New Testament writings and possibly even what he was writing at that very moment. Here is why... In 2nd Peter 3:15-16 we find that Peter considered Paul's writings to be Scripture.

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES, unto their own destruction.


So Peter called Paul's writings Scripture. Now Paul himself said that He got his beliefs and ideas straight from Jesus Christ. In Galatians 1:12 Paul said, " But I make known to you Brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ."



So Jesus revealed the Gospel straight to Paul and when Paul wrote the epistles Peter considered it to be scripture. So when Paul said that all scripture is profitable for doctrine etc. He not only was speaking of Old Testament Scripture but was most likely speaking of the New Testament Scripture that He and the other Apostles had written and were writing.



Of course, the other point I made applies as well... namely, if Paul called the Old Testament sufficient then the New Testament is ultra sufficient since the New Testament is superior to the Old Testament because it reveals so much more about God.



Finally I want to say that one person on here suggested that if I was correct in saying that the Scriptures are sufficient then I shouldn't be on this board teaching people by quoting them. However, I am quoting them and teaching them because they ARE sufficient. Since they are sufficient I am quoting them and teaching them instead of other things. Also I am quoting them and teaching them as the supreme authority. I guess he thought that the scriptures being sufficient meant that the Bible could walk around and talk to people on it's own and that no one would need to quote it.



Now if it is wrong for me to teach the scriptures because they are all-sufficient then it would obviously be even more wrong to teach creeds and confessions since they are in-sufficient... especially it is wrong if you teach that they have some type of authority or are somehow to be used to correct, rebuke, restrain, stifle, shame, control, shun, marginalize and separate believers.



I think the real point I am trying to make is not that it is wrong to write a confession, read a confession or even quote a confession but that we are not to use a confession in the same way that we use scripture.... "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..."



This is where the real problem lies. Not that some people wrote down what they believed and not that some people read it or even occasionally quote it to show that in the past there were some who believed such and such.... The real problem is that a group of Churches adopt one of those confessions as their official statement of faith and then start using it in exactly the same way that Paul said scripture is to be used... to teach doctrine, to reprove people, to correct people, to instruct people in righteousness etc. They say that they don't put it equal with scripture but then they use it exactly like you use scripture.... so I just have to say that actions speak louder than words. Stop doing what you say you are not doing. (If this doesn't apply to you or your church then fine... I didn't mean it for you)



And the biggest problem is when a confession is put not just over a single congregation but when it is put over multiple congregations. Because if a single congregation votes to have a certain doctrinal statement that congregation is free to vote to get rid of it just as soon as a member points out that something in it is unbiblical. But if a confession is put over many churches it becomes a creed that all of those churches have to submit to and if a member of an individual church points out that something in it is unbiblical the church cannot vote to get rid of the confession because the other churches might not go along with them. Once a certain confession or creed becomes a guide that is binding over multiple congregations it is almost impossible to get rid of it by an individual church and that confession is being used in the same way as scripture... and also pretty much the same way as the Pope.



Now these ideas are obviously just the opinion of one person but the scriptures I quote are binding. ; ) (also no animals were harmed in the making of this post)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Revelation210Faith

Presbyterian(PCA), Adherent to Reformed Theology
Jun 24, 2014
428
249
24
United States
✟22,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I made this thread in order to seek opinions on what other baptists feel about theologians themselves, not as a place for a couple people to argue with and accuse each other...I wasn't asking about creeds or confessions but rather just simply what you think about theologians...not to sound like a moderator or anything but if you are here to just argue about creeds and confessions, don't post on this thread
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
I made this thread in order to seek opinions on what other baptists feel about theologians themselves, not as a place for a couple people to argue with and accuse each other...I wasn't asking about creeds or confessions but rather just simply what you think about theologians...not to sound like a moderator or anything but if you are here to just argue about creeds and confessions, don't post on this thread

I think I have tried to communicate that I consider theologians to be God's gift to the church of teachers. Sadly, with Bible teachers down through the centuries, there have been those who have not been faithful to the biblical teaching. In the latter category, I'm thinking of people such as Paul Tillich, Rudolph Bultmann, and in more recent times those with a postmodern emphasis. So, in all Bible teachers there will be a mixture of sheep and goats.

However, the role of a faithful teacher is to be a person of discernment according to this teaching:

1 John 4:1, 'Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world' (ESV).

Heb 5:14, 'But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil' (ESV).

2 Cor 11:13-15, 'For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds' (ESV).

Col 2:8, 'See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ' (ESV).

I have found the ministry gift of teaching through theologians to be beneficial in my walk with Jesus.

Oz
 
Upvote 0

preacher4truth

Jesus saved me.
Nov 26, 2014
180
22
59
✟18,670.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The OP asks about the role of theologians in the church.

I suppose a definition of what a theologian is would help. Basically a theologian would be defined as an expert in theology. This would place them well above most in the pew and also above many preaching/teaching elders (accept of course for those elders here on CF). :p

I believe their role is in the same stead as in Eph. 4:11ff in that they help to equip others via teaching to understand the Scriptures.

They would also serve to help those who seek them in teaching to have a more solid Biblical foundation so as to not be 'tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes'. They help to raise the discernment of believers to discern between truth and error.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Hello everyone...

I just wanted to point out one or two things... When Paul said that all scripture was profitable for doctrine etc. He very likely was speaking not only of Old Testament writings but also of New Testament writings and possibly even what he was writing at that very moment. Here is why... In 2nd Peter 3:15-16 we find that Peter considered Paul's writings to be Scripture.

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES, unto their own destruction.


So Peter called Paul's writings Scripture. Now Paul himself said that He got his beliefs and ideas straight from Jesus Christ. In Galatians 1:12 Paul said, " But I make known to you Brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ."



So Jesus revealed the Gospel straight to Paul and when Paul wrote the epistles Peter considered it to be scripture. So when Paul said that all scripture is profitable for doctrine etc. He not only was speaking of Old Testament Scripture but was most likely speaking of the New Testament Scripture that He and the other Apostles had written and were writing.



Of course, the other point I made applies as well... namely, if Paul called the Old Testament sufficient then the New Testament is ultra sufficient since the New Testament is superior to the Old Testament because it reveals so much more about God.



Finally I want to say that one person on here suggested that if I was correct in saying that the Scriptures are sufficient then I shouldn't be on this board teaching people by quoting them. However, I am quoting them and teaching them because they ARE sufficient. Since they are sufficient I am quoting them and teaching them instead of other things. Also I am quoting them and teaching them as the supreme authority. I guess he thought that the scriptures being sufficient meant that the Bible could walk around and talk to people on it's own and that no one would need to quote it.



Now if it is wrong for me to teach the scriptures because they are all-sufficient then it would obviously be even more wrong to teach creeds and confessions since they are in-sufficient... especially it is wrong if you teach that they have some type of authority or are somehow to be used to correct, rebuke, restrain, stifle, shame, control, shun, marginalize and separate believers.



I think the real point I am trying to make is not that it is wrong to write a confession, read a confession or even quote a confession but that we are not to use a confession in the same way that we use scripture.... "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness..."



This is where the real problem lies. Not that some people wrote down what they believed and not that some people read it or even occasionally quote it to show that in the past there were some who believed such and such.... The real problem is that a group of Churches adopt one of those confessions as their official statement of faith and then start using it in exactly the same way that Paul said scripture is to be used... to teach doctrine, to reprove people, to correct people, to instruct people in righteousness etc. They say that they don't put it equal with scripture but then they use it exactly like you use scripture.... so I just have to say that actions speak louder than words. Stop doing what you say you are not doing. (If this doesn't apply to you or your church then fine... I didn't mean it for you)



And the biggest problem is when a confession is put not just over a single congregation but when it is put over multiple congregations. Because if a single congregation votes to have a certain doctrinal statement that congregation is free to vote to get rid of it just as soon as a member points out that something in it is unbiblical. But if a confession is put over many churches it becomes a creed that all of those churches have to submit to and if a member of an individual church points out that something in it is unbiblical the church cannot vote to get rid of the confession because the other churches might not go along with them. Once a certain confession or creed becomes a guide that is binding over multiple congregations it is almost impossible to get rid of it by an individual church and that confession is being used in the same way as scripture... and also pretty much the same way as the Pope.



Now these ideas are obviously just the opinion of one person but the scriptures I quote are binding. ; ) (also no animals were harmed in the making of this post)

You are not alone in this opinion. The fact is that God has ordained that the foolishness of the preaching of the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to them that believe. So what is the Gospel that we preach? It is Christ. Read 1
cor. 15:1-4. The Gospel is about the work of Christ according to the Scriptures. The Gospel isn't according to the confession.
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I made this thread in order to seek opinions on what other baptists feel about theologians themselves, not as a place for a couple people to argue with and accuse each other...I wasn't asking about creeds or confessions but rather just simply what you think about theologians...not to sound like a moderator or anything but if you are here to just argue about creeds and confessions, don't post on this thread

You have been given answers on the question of the OP. The fact is that the question of confessions goes to the point of the OP. The confessions were drawn up by theologians.
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I think I have tried to communicate that I consider theologians to be God's gift to the church of teachers. Sadly, with Bible teachers down through the centuries, there have been those who have not been faithful to the biblical teaching. In the latter category, I'm thinking of people such as Paul Tillich, Rudolph Bultmann, and in more recent times those with a postmodern emphasis. So, in all Bible teachers there will be a mixture of sheep and goats.

However, the role of a faithful teacher is to be a person of discernment according to this teaching:

1 John 4:1, 'Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world' (ESV).

Heb 5:14, 'But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil' (ESV).

2 Cor 11:13-15, 'For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds' (ESV).

Col 2:8, 'See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ' (ESV).

I have found the ministry gift of teaching through theologians to be beneficial in my walk with Jesus.
Oz
:thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
The OP asks about the role of theologians in the church.

I suppose a definition of what a theologian is would help. Basically a theologian would be defined as an expert in theology. This would place them well above most in the pew and also above many preaching/teaching elders (accept of course for those elders here on CF). :p

I believe their role is in the same stead as in Eph. 4:11ff in that they help to equip others via teaching to understand the Scriptures.

They would also serve to help those who seek them in teaching to have a more solid Biblical foundation so as to not be 'tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes'. They help to raise the discernment of believers to discern between truth and error.
I believe every truly God called and gifted pastor/teacher is a theologian. Being a theologian has nothing to do with education it has everything to do with being gifted with an understanding in the Scriptures. That only comes by the Spirit. A man can learn all the correct doctrine and be as lost as a goose in a snowstorm. Theology that doesn't have shoeleather is useless intellectual pride. Theology that doesn't reach the heart, no matter how Biblical and correct, is a damning deception.

Christ is the key to all theology. The truths and doctrines of the Scriptures are centered on Him and have no meaning apart form Him. My wife wears many beautiful dresses. But I do not take them out and admire them when she isn't wearing them.

Those theologians who have become famous, especially in the modern age, are very susceptible to pride and ego. It soon becomes about them not about truth. They want to continue to sell books and be admired by many. I am not making an accusation but simply recognizing the nature of man. Ego among professional theologians is a real problem.
 
Upvote 0

Revelation210Faith

Presbyterian(PCA), Adherent to Reformed Theology
Jun 24, 2014
428
249
24
United States
✟22,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I think I have tried to communicate that I consider theologians to be God's gift to the church of teachers. Sadly, with Bible teachers down through the centuries, there have been those who have not been faithful to the biblical teaching. In the latter category, I'm thinking of people such as Paul Tillich, Rudolph Bultmann, and in more recent times those with a postmodern emphasis. So, in all Bible teachers there will be a mixture of sheep and goats.

However, the role of a faithful teacher is to be a person of discernment according to this teaching:

1 John 4:1, 'Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world' (ESV).

Heb 5:14, 'But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil' (ESV).

2 Cor 11:13-15, 'For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds' (ESV).

Col 2:8, 'See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ' (ESV).

I have found the ministry gift of teaching through theologians to be beneficial in my walk with Jesus.

Oz
Good points. But don't theologians in a way control the Church as a whole, for instance was anybody a predestinarian before Calvin came along? I mean if the predestination doctrine Calvin taught is as important as it seems to be, how can it be that it wasn't taught until like 1500 years after the scriptures were written, unless there were already predestinatarians and Calvin just solidified it into a single doctrine? Could anyone clarify this for me?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Revelation210Faith

Presbyterian(PCA), Adherent to Reformed Theology
Jun 24, 2014
428
249
24
United States
✟22,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I believe every truly God called and gifted pastor/teacher is a theologian. Being a theologian has nothing to do with education it has everything to do with being gifted with an understanding in the Scriptures. That only comes by the Spirit. A man can learn all the correct doctrine and be as lost as a goose in a snowstorm. Theology that doesn't have shoeleather is useless intellectual pride. Theology that doesn't reach the heart, no matter how Biblical and correct, is a damning deception.

Christ is the key to all theology. The truths and doctrines of the Scriptures are centered on Him and have no meaning apart form Him. My wife wears many beautiful dresses. But I do not take them out and admire them when she isn't wearing them.

Those theologians who have become famous, especially in the modern age, are very susceptible to pride and ego. It soon becomes about them not about truth. They want to continue to sell books and be admired by many. I am not making an accusation but simply recognizing the nature of man. Ego among professional theologians is a real problem.
I agree.
 
Upvote 0

JLR1300

Newbie
Dec 16, 2012
341
39
Oklahoma
✟8,189.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good points. But don't theologians in a way control the Church as a whole, for instance was anybody a predestinarian before Calvin came along? I mean if the predestination doctrine Calvin taught is as important as it seems to be, how can it be that it wasn't taught until like 1500 years after the scriptures were written, unless there were already predestinatarians and Calvin just solidified it into a single doctrine? Could anyone clarify this for me?

Actually the belief in a calvinistic predestination is fairly common in the centuries prior to Calvin. Augustine who lived in the late 300's and early 400's plainly taught it. Augustinian monks believed it. Gottschalk taught it. Thomas Aquinas taught it. Martin Luther taught it before Calvin did. What is harder to find is someone who taught justification by faith alone prior to the 1500's. So the real question is "how can it be that it (Justification by faith alone) wasn't taught until like 1500 years after the scriptures were written"?
 
Upvote 0

Revelation210Faith

Presbyterian(PCA), Adherent to Reformed Theology
Jun 24, 2014
428
249
24
United States
✟22,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Actually the belief in a calvinistic predestination is fairly common in the centuries prior to Calvin. Augustine who lived in the late 300's and early 400's plainly taught it. Augustinian monks believed it. Gottschalk taught it. Thomas Aquinas taught it. Martin Luther taught it before Calvin did. What is harder to find is someone who taught justification by faith alone prior to the 1500's. So the real question is "how can it be that it (Justification by faith alone) wasn't taught until like 1500 years after the scriptures were written"?
Does this mean that some big aspects of our faith are constantly changing throughout the centuries? So the Christianity we believe today may be vastly different in some senses in the future or past? Is this a good or a bad thing? I mean obviously the fundamental pillars of our faith(like salvation by grace through faith alone) have remained unchanged(excluding the Roman Catholic Church) since the apostles, but if other important aspects are constantly being changed, what are we to do?
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,865
1,714
59
New England
✟512,371.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Actually the belief in a calvinistic predestination is fairly common in the centuries prior to Calvin. Augustine who lived in the late 300's and early 400's plainly taught it. Augustinian monks believed it. Gottschalk taught it. Thomas Aquinas taught it. Martin Luther taught it before Calvin did. What is harder to find is someone who taught justification by faith alone prior to the 1500's. So the real question is "how can it be that it (Justification by faith alone) wasn't taught until like 1500 years after the scriptures were written"?

Good Day, JLR

If you take the time to read over some of the reformed works and the historical doctrine of justified thought faith alone (Sola Fide) you will find it in many writings in the early church.

John Chrysostom

"Attend to this, ye who come to baptism at the close of life, for we indeed pray that after baptism ye may have also this deportment, but thou art seeking and doing thy utmost to depart without it. For, what though thou be justified: yet is it of faith only. But we pray that thou shouldest have as well the confidence that cometh of good works" (Homilies on Second Corinthians, 2:8, vv. 10-11)


"They said that he who kept not the Law was cursed, but he proves that he who kept it was cursed, and he who kept it not, blessed. Again, they said that he who adhered to Faith alone was cursed, but he shows that he who adhered to Faith alone is blessed." (Commentary on Galatians, 3, v. 8)

Clement of Rome:

"And we who through his will have been called in Christ Jesus are justified, not by ourselves, or through our wisdom or understanding or godliness, or the works that we have done in holiness of heart, but by faith, by which all men from the beginning have been justified by Almighty God, to whom be glory world without end. Amen. What, then, shall we do, brethren? Shall we cease from well-doing, and abandon charity? May the Master never allow that this should happen to us! but let us rather with diligence and zeal hasten to fulfil every good work. For the Maker and Lord of all things rejoiceth in his works. By his supreme power he founded the heavens, and by his incomprehensible understanding he ordered them. The earth he separated from the water that surrounded it, and fixed it on the firm foundation of his own will. The animals which inhabit therein he commanded to be by his ordinance. Having made beforehand the sea and the animals that are therein, he shut them in by his own power. Man, the most excellent of all animals, infinite in faculty, he moulded with his holy and faultless hands, in the impress of his likeness. For thus saith God: Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness. And God made man. Male and female made he them. When, therefore, he had finished all things, he praised and blessed them, and said, Be fruitful, and multiply. Let us see, therefore, how all the just have been adorned with good works. Yea, the Lord himself rejoiced when he had adorned himself with his works. Having, therefore, this example, let us come in without shrinking to his will; let us work with all our strength the work of righteousness." (32-33)

Augustine:

"no one is delivered from the condemnation which was incurred through Adam except through the faith of Jesus Christ, and yet from this condemnation they shall not deliver themselves who shall be able to say that they have not heard the gospel of Christ" (On Rebuke and Grace, 11)

In addition to the fact that is biblical...


In Him,

Bill
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Good points. But don't theologians in a way control the Church as a whole, for instance was anybody a predestinarian before Calvin came along? I mean if the predestination doctrine Calvin taught is as important as it seems to be, how can it be that it wasn't taught until like 1500 years after the scriptures were written, unless there were already predestinatarians and Calvin just solidified it into a single doctrine? Could anyone clarify this for me?

I'm not convinced that theologians 'control' the church, but they certainly influence churches. I haven't done a check of the history of predestination to determine its prevalence before Calvin. However, PrincetonGuy in #252 of this thread, http://www.christianforums.com/t7842244-26/, provided a history of OSAS to show that the only one prior to Calvin to promote it was Augustine. For the first 1500 years of the church, the teachers/theologians were silent on OSAS. Why don't you follow some of the comments after #252 to see the objections and support?

My experience is that it is nigh impossible to have an open discussion with teachers in a Calvinistic church regarding any of the doctrines of TULIP (Unconditional election being parallel with predestination). I was talking with a fellow in our church last night at a Christmas celebration and he said a church member told him the church doesn't do much evangelism, but God will bring in the elect.

How much of that kind of teaching was taught before Calvin?

Oz
 
Upvote 0