Christ's Bride
Active Member
- Jun 3, 2026
- 109
- 16
- 86
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Widowed
oh there are and I am leaving in a few minutes to assemble with them
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Modern Day Antinomianism.
- Thread starter Aussie52
- Start date
- Apr 18, 2020
- 3,042
- 807
- 67
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
What did I say that you would exclude me from an invitation?
Upvote
0
under grace1
Well-Known Member
- Jan 20, 2026
- 629
- 72
- 68
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Widowed
* '''The teaching that all our sins; past, present and future were forgiven at the Cross. This unscriptural view misunderstands the meaning of the atonement of Christ.'''
Paul repeatedly states the christian is not under law/righteousness of obeying the law. This is only possible if Jesus died for all a believers sins, past, present and future.
What in Paul's view is the result of such a belief?
For sin shall no longer be your master for you are not under law but under grace Rom6:14
A spiritual message the rational mind cannot comprehend
Upvote
0
under grace1
Well-Known Member
- Jan 20, 2026
- 629
- 72
- 68
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Widowed
Then let us hope for example you do not suffer from dwelling on any impure thought. You never lust, unless it is for your spouse, you never desire anything of your neighbours, whether material goods or a member of their household. You never tell any even little fib about another etc, as in your view Jesus did not die for future sins.
I would say, antinominasm could be described as watering down applicable law of God for convenience
Upvote
0
NewLifeInChristJesus
Well-Known Member
- Sep 4, 2011
- 1,842
- 522
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
This seems simple enough. Don't break the law or the law will break you. But it begs a question. How does a sinner (a law-breaker) get his sins (his law-breaking) taken away? The law doesn't take it away. His commitment to a law-abiding future doesn't take it away. The answer is well-known to Old and New Testament saints alike:
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.” (Ro 4:5–8)
This is a presumptuous thing for an old man to say to another old man.
We know all too well that the flesh sees grace as an opportunity to sin. But to refuse to stand fast in our liberty for fear that we will become licentious is to entangle oneself again with a yoke of bondage.
For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh (Ga 5:13).
When a person receives Jesus into his heart, he is deliverd from sin and is made a servant of righteousness. This does not track bact to slavery to the law to obey every dot and tittle. No, it points to a truly righteous and holy new creation (Eph 4:24) -- one that joins a person to the Lord and makes him one spirit with Him (1 Cor 6:17). And a person does not flip-flop from one kingdom to the other and back again over time as life continues.
[Repeat comment from above]
The delight we have for the law of God in the inward man (in the new man) and our mind's (our spirit's) servitude to the law of God is contrasted with the law of sin that is in our members (our flesh) and wars against the law of our minds (spirits). Our closeness to the sins of our own flesh make us feel wretched, miserable, and poor. But thanks to the deliverance that new life in Christ gave us, "There is therefore now no condemnation" (Rom 8:1).
So we see that these are not just words on a page. They reveal things that are happening inside the hearts and minds of those who are in Christ and they give us hope. Turning these vereses (Rom 6-7) into an obligation to obey the law misses the change of nature that occurred when Jesus freed us from our sins and gave us eternal life.
To me, it is neither antinomian nor anti-antinomian.
Upvote
0
Soyeong
Well-Known Member
- Mar 10, 2015
- 12,975
- 4,725
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Single
In Romans 5-8, Paul spoke about the Law of God as being something that is the good that he wanted to do and the law of sin as being something that was causing him not to do the good that he wanted to do. For example, in Romans 7:22-23, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Law of God, so it would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:5-6 as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death and in being held captive to sin, but rather that is the role of the law of sin.
In Romans 6:14, Paul described the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over us, which clearly is not describing something that is the good that Paul wanted to do, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but is how we have knowledge of what sin is, so we are still under it. In Romans 6:16. Paul contrasted these two directions by saying that we are slaves to the one that we obey, either the law of sin, which leads to death, or obedience to the Law of God, which leads to righteousness. In Romans 6:17-23, we are no longer to present ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin but are now to present ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification, and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so being a doer of the Law of God is His gift of eternal life in Christ. So everything in Romans 6 is speaking in favor of obedience to the Law of God and against sin.
In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, and the Law of God was how hi audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26).
The Law of God was not given as a way of earning our righteousness and eternal life but to teach us how to experience the gift of righteousness and eternal life. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus affirmed that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments and something that we inherit is a gift, so he was speaking about the way to experience the gift of eternal life, not about the way to earn it.
In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the Law of God is to graciously teach us how to know God and Jesus, which is His gift of eternal life (John 17:3). So it doesn't work to interpret Philippians 3:8-9 as Paul staying that the Law of God is rubbish and we just need to know Christ, but rather Paul had been going through the motions of obeying the Law of God while neglecting to be focused on knowing Christ, so he had been missing the goal goal of the law and that is what he counted as rubbish.
We are not under the law of sin and we have been delivered from the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Law of God. We can't earn our righteousness even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Law of God (Roman 4:1-5), but is it also true that only the doers of it will be declared righteous (Romans 2:13), so there is a reason why our righteousness requires us to choose to be doers of the Law of God other than in order to earn it as way, namely faith insofar as the faith by which we are declared righteous apart from works done in order to earn it as the result also upholds the Law of God (Romans 3:28-31).
Upvote
0
Soyeong
Well-Known Member
- Mar 10, 2015
- 12,975
- 4,725
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Single
The fact that cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything in the Law of God straightforwardly means that those who do not continue to do everything in the Law of God subject themselves to the cruse of the law, not those who place themselves under it. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Law of God was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent as the promised seed in order to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26). But do you think that Gospel calling people to repent from their disobedience to the Law of God is actually calling those who are not cursed to become cursed? Do you think that the way to avoid being cursed is by refusing to turn from what the Law of God reveals to be wickedness?
The issue of the way to become righteous is different than the issue of what describes the behavior of someone who is righteous. The Law of God was not given as a way of becoming righteous as the result of our obedience, but rather it was given to describe the behavior of someone who is righteous as it describes the behavior of Christ (1 John 3:4-7, Isaiah 51:7), so it is what we get to experience by being given the gift of righteousness through faith. A person can speak against being required to obey the Law of God for an incorrect reason without being an antinomian, but if they speak against being required to obey it for any reason, then they are an antinomian.
Upvote
0
- Nov 26, 2019
- 17,498
- 9,405
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Generic Orthodox Christian
- Marital Status
- Celibate
Indeed, I myself was a Calvinist during my Congregationalist time, or rather more of a semi-Calvinist; I never believed in double-predestination but my Calvinist view was driven by a recognition of God’s omnipotence and sovereignity, thus I was somewhere between Wesley and Calvin theologically.
Now, interestingly, Orthodox synergism and other traditional synergist interpretations was not as different from Calvinist monergism as I thought, and is very close to Lutheranism, in that it is genuinely recognized that the activity of the Holy Spirit allows us to make a choice. The only difference is that we believe our love for God is voluntary and He allows for that love to be voluntary, since love that is forced upon us would be ontologically different from voluntary love. God is omniscient and omnipotent; he knows who will love Him; due to his omnipotence, that does give Him the power to enable us to make a choice. Likewise God also wants us to chose to love each other. But it is the Holy Spirit that allows us to make the choice - we do not save ourselves as Pelagius taught; Pelagius was entirely wrong, rather, it is through the grace of the Holy Spirit that we have the ability to recognize the sacrifice Christ our True God made for us of his own free will on the Cross in order to save us from the deadly fruit of our own sin, and the Holy Spirit allows us to respond to God in love and thanksgiving and also encourages us to love one another.
Pelagius reduced Christ to a savior-by-example, which is such an insidious error, in that it amounts to an attack on the Incarnation itself, since if Christ only demonstrated how to be saved, it weakens the case for his deity. Why would God need to offer Himself as a pure and unblemished sacrifice in the person of the Son and Logos if He was merely showing us an example? Under Pelagianism, one could not say that Christ had risen from the dead, trampling down death by death..
This is not to say that the behavior of Christ our True God is not exemplary, it absolutely is, and it reveals to us the love of the Father, and in turn we are filled with this divine love through God in the person of the Holy Spirit, who is our Comforter and Paraclete, who enables us to be aware of sin, and to be aware of salvation, and to respond to Christ in a meaningful way.
But whether or not one is Calvinist or Lutheran or Methodist or Orthodox or Roman Catholic or any other Nicene Christian, we worship one God: the Father, Son and Holy Ghost - the Holy Trinity, that unity of perfect love, one God abiding in three coequal, coeternal and uncreated persons, the Father unoriginate, the son Only Begotten, the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father, eternally, uncreated, all holy, and undivided. And we are called to make ourselves a living icon of the Trinity in our relationship with our families, with our brethren in the Church, and with our neighbors and with humanity as a whole. However, what saves us ultimately is what Christ did for us, in His triumph over death on the Cross. It is the victory over death on the Cross that I am grateful for, as you are, and it makes me aware of my sin, for the same reasons you described (for although the Orthodox do not believe in penal substitutionary atonement, we do believe that Christ suffered and died in order to save us from our sins; sacrificing HImself and offering His life a ransom for many, before rising from the dead, so that death would be swallowed up in victory; the only aspect we disagree with is that we do not believe this was done to placate God the Father who would otherwise be angry with us; God is infinitely loving, the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross rather being necessary as a means of correcting the extreme defect in humanity introduced by sin.
And thus it is absolutely the case that Christ suffered torture and humiliations for me, and thus my love for him is immense.
It is not a coincidence that God created man on the sixth day in Genesis chapter 1, but rather is prophetic, and the Gospel of John in its exquisite first chapter makes clear the prophetic context of Genesis 1 (without rejecting it as also being literal).
Upvote
0
- Mar 18, 2004
- 72,011
- 8,490
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I’d like to clarify one thing you stated about Calvinists, and that double-predestination is the mindset of a hyper-Calvinist. Whether you believe in predestination or double-predestination depends on what your view of God is. I’ve never heard of a semi-Calvinist, but Calvinism refers to the 5 points of the Doctrines of Grace. Most people who don’t hold to the total 5 points generally disagree with the doctrine of limited atonement. When you go beyond the Doctrine’s of Grace, theologically, you are roaming into reformed theology. There are many Protestant churches that are Calvinist, but are not reformed.
I did enjoy reading the rest of your post.
Upvote
0
- Nov 26, 2019
- 17,498
- 9,405
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Generic Orthodox Christian
- Marital Status
- Celibate
Could you clarify what you mean in your distinction between Calvinist and Reformed theology?
The reason why I regarded myself as semi-Calvinist was because it seemed to me that a state of effective free will existed from our perspective, in that while God knew who would be saved and who would not be, from a human perspective these decisions looked like individual cooperation with divine grace (and my current view is that it is individual cooperation with divine grace, that is to say, that God desires our love voluntarily and His grace and omnipotence allows us to love Him of our own accord.
If memory serves the Five Points postdated Calvin himself, and there were aspects to Calvin’s theology shared with us by @hedrick that I had not been aware of which I quite liked in retrospect. The main areas where I disagree with Calvin are in respect to worship practices which are no longer commonplace among Calvinist or Reformed churches with the exception of a few smaller denominations such as the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America (the “covenanting Presbyterians” in Scotland and the US, basically). I can’t find Scriptural support for the regulative principle, and if the regulative principle is in effect, I am unable to see wherein the regulative principle would require a capella exclusive Psalmody.
Now that being said, I actually like a capella Psalmody and I love the metrical Psalters the RPCNA publishes. The direction of St. Paul regarding singing “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” seems to me that it would additionally include at a minimum the other canticles and songs found in Scripture (and of course all of Scripture was historically chanted by Jews and early Christians, and still is in some denominations, like the Eastern Orthodox Church, but some songs have specific musical settings both in Judaism and in Christianity, for instance, the Ode of Habbakuk, the Song of the Three Children in Daniel (and the longer canticle found in the longer version of Daniel in the Septuagint, used by Anglicans, Orthodox, Roman Catholics and some Lutherans called “Benedicite Omni Opera” in the West), and the Evangelical Canticles found in luke chapter 1 and 2 (the Song of Zecariah, the Magnificat and the Song of Symeon also known as the Nunc Dimitis). And there are a few others of note, for instance, the Songs of the Suffering Servent in Isaiah.
Additionally there is a wealth of creedal hymnody from the early church - in addition to the Nicene Creed being sung as a hymn in both East and West, there is also the canticle Te Deum Laudamus, much loved by my Lutheran friend @MarkRohfrietsch and by myself, and the Christological hymn Ho Monogenes composed by St. Severus but later misattributed by Eastern Orthodox during periods of bitter EO-OO tension which have largely passed to Emperor Justinian (who was responsible for its inclusion in the Byzantine synaxis, but did not write it) and by the Armenians to St. Athanasius (who did write many important and beautiful things and defended the Trinitarian faith at the Council of Nicaea, but he did not write that, nor did he write the Canticle “Quincunque Vult” sometimes called the Athanasian Creed). There are several other ancient hymns which are quite splendid, and the tradition of the highly dogmatic hymn was revitalized by Luther with his chorales, a style later adopted by John Wesley and Charles Wesley.
Upvote
0
- Mar 18, 2004
- 72,011
- 8,490
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Calvinism deals strictly with the 5 points of the Doctrines of Grace (or TULIP for those used to the old moniker developed by Arminius). Those 5 points are:
T - total depravity
U - unconditional election
L - limited atonement
I - irresistible grace
P - perseverance (or protection) of the saints
This is how Calvin believed salvation by grace to be defined (though Calvin, himself, did not seem to totally subscribe to limited atonement in his writings, it seems to be the logical extrapolation of the totality of the other four points). It deals entirely with soteriology. It does not intermingle with other surrounding theologies. Reformed theology is the sum total of how the other theologies work together for those who consider themselves reformed. For instance, many reformed believers believe in Covenant Theology, which impacts how they believe God does, or doesn’t, relate to Israel anymore. They believe in infant baptism, which contradicts, in places, the biblical admonition that being baptized is a response to believing.
As I mentioned, the Doctrines of Grace have been accepted by many churches even though they are not reformed in nature.
Upvote
0
- Nov 26, 2019
- 17,498
- 9,405
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Generic Orthodox Christian
- Marital Status
- Celibate
Well to be fair, John Calvin also practiced Infant Baptism; the Synod of Dort, where the Five Points first appeared, likewise was not an Anabaptist synod. In the 16th century only the Anabaptists subscribed to the idea of Believer’s Baptism and were viewed unfavorably by the other Protestants and were not treated graciously, which is unfortunate; I am descended from an early Baptist pilgrim to the US, but I have also never subscribed to Baptist theology; I was baptized as an infant and I agree with Orthodox and Lutheran views on Baptism and Baptismal Regeneration.
Upvote
0
- Mar 18, 2004
- 72,011
- 8,490
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I agree with that, as I said above, that is a reformed position, but it is separate from Calvinism. Calvinism is strictly a soteriology theology.
However, we are somewhat off-topic. My original post was to speak to the very biased POV of the OP, who feels that people who believe they are saved again subscribe to cheap grace.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
