Jump to content

RevT

Male Lutheran

Profile

Occupation

Pastor and musician

My Details

Last visited
DenominationLutheran
GenderMale
  • Content Count

    133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

RevT last won the day on March 28 2017

RevT had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

148 Excellent

About RevT

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile

  • Denomination
    Lutheran
  • Gender
    Male

Personal informations

  • Occupation
    Pastor and musician

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I make it plain to all and also to my congregation that I affirm the perpetual virginity of Mary. In fact, our Lutheran Confessions also affirm it. In the Latin version of the Smalcald Articles she is "ever-Virgin" and in other places such as in the German version of the Formula of Concord there is an argument to say that they also affirm this. But this should come as no surprise considering that the Reformers believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. But, however, there are modernists in every corner of the Church so now we have people who think of Mary as having other children after Jesus. From a purely Lutheran perspective, I have always found it interesting that modern day Lutherans will split over things like whether or not one can be a boy scout or if one can pray with a dying family member from another denomination, but leave the very important theological matter of Jesus' mother out of it. Personally, I would consider a doctrine such as Mary's perpetual virginity to be more important, and I think it should be a matter of fellowship, because it helps us weed out modernism from the Church.
  2. There's lots of differing Arminian points of view to begin with. Most Arminians I have met would simply respond that John 6:37 speaks of those already given the gift of faith by the Father. In other words, the Father has already given faith and those who receive it come to Christ and are never cast out. Here's another version: "All that the Father giveth me - All that feel themselves lost, and follow the drawings of the Father, he in a peculiar manner giveth to the Son: will come to me - By faith. And him that thus cometh to me, I will in nowise cast out - I will give him pardon, holiness, and heaven, if he endure to the end - to rejoice in his light." (Wesley's commentary) and another... "Shall come to me - All that are drawn by the Father, Joh_6:44, i.e. all those who are influenced by his Spirit, and yield to those influences: for as many as are Led (not driven or dragged) by the Spirit of God, they are the children of God, Rom_8:14. God sent his prophets to proclaim his salvation to this people; and he accompanied their preaching with the influence of his Spirit. Those who yielded were saved: those who did not yield to these drawings were lost. This Spirit still continued to work and to allure; but the people being uncircumcised both in heart and ears, they always resisted the Holy Ghost; as their fathers did, so did they; Act_7:51. And though Christ would have gathered them together, as a hen would her chickens under her wings, yet they would not. See the note on Mat_23:37. Those who come at the call of God, he is represented here as giving to Christ, because it is through his blood alone that they can be saved. God, by his Spirit, convinces of sin, righteousness, and judgment; those who acknowledge their iniquity, and their need of salvation, he gives to Christ, i.e. points out unto them the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. Our Lord may here also refer to the calling of the Gentiles; for these, according to the ancient promise, Psa_2:8, were given to Christ: and they, on the preaching of the Gospel, gladly came unto him. See ample proofs of this in the Acts of the Apostles. (Adam Clarke' commentary) But a modern Arminian is another creature altogether! Most of them are useless- but there are three authors I have read that give a good account for their theology- Roger Olson, Robert Shank and Vic Reasoner. They all would tend to put prevenient grace as what this verse speaks about- God drawing men to Christ and those who receive Him by faith are never cast out. Edited to add: the idea that foreseen faith is the cause of election is one of the least tenable theologies currently in the modern world. Even with the caveat of prevenient grace it still doesn't add up. And I forgot to add W.T. Purkiser to the list of good Arminian authors. He was very good, actually.
  3. The word "free will" is indeed in the Bible in relation to OT freewill offerings. But no, man's will in bound by sin and completely unable to choose God. That's why God does all the work in salvation.
  4. RevT

    Chosen But Free?

    As far as I know, this would be pretty accurate. Of course modern Arminians also say that Calvinists don't take their presuppositions far enough either, but I actually think most Calvinists I know understand the theological tensions that can arise when human reason is challenged by God's revelation. I'm enjoying the video!
  5. RevT

    Chosen But Free?

    Brother, I actually have the works of Arminius on CD-Rom. I recall reading them (not all of them of course) and I came to the conclusion on what I read that he was an intelligent, well educated writer. Likewise Wesley, who obviously agreed with much of what he wrote. But I think the Synod of Dort had a good case against the followers of Arminius. They had taken human logic in the question of election beyond what Arminius himself wished to, I believe. The idea that the Remonstrants pushed about God electing "in view of faith" is clearly teaching a meritorious election. If I remember rightly, Arminius himself left the "how" of election an open question. I may be wrong, though. It's been years. One thing's for sure- modern soteriology takes Arminianism way beyond that. Not good.
  6. RevT

    Chosen But Free?

    I have this book. It's been gathering dust on my shelf. I respect Geisler's academic works (eg his book on Aquinas) and someone recommended I read this book as well to get a handle on modern Evangelicalism's endless war between the two major Reformed Creeds (we Lutherans tend to batch Calvin and Arminius in the same "Reformed" bundle, which I don't think is fair really). After reading this, it looks like this work is well critiqued. Interesting!
  7. Great way to summarize a prolific false doctrine!
×
×
  • Create New...