Okay, exactly how many of us have gone over to the dark side?

[Robin in Tx]

We won't sort it all out until we are face to face with Jesus (and then it won't matter because it will all be so obvious), but until that time, we should keep our hearts teachable, lay down our pride, seek the wisdom of righteous teachers past and present, seek the Spirit's aid, and be very careful in our handling of Scripture. There is a right way and a wrong way to interpret Scripture

 

With that, I believe we can agree. I just don't have it in me to walk up to someone and pronounce that they've been handling scripture wrong all along -- not to anyone, but especially not to someone like Sproul... *or* Billy Graham :).

[HappyGrace]

The great wonder is not that God saves some and not others. The great wonder is that God saves any at all. We do not deserve his love or mercy or forgiveness. He has chosen to bestow it upon His own, His "sheep" nevertheless. Why? No answer - only He knows that one. That is why I, for one, am so very, very thankful for my salvation. I do not deserve His love or forgiveness, yet in His great mercy and grace He saved me from eternal punishment in hell anyway. By saving those who least deserve it, He gets the most glory. I cannot glory in my goodness because I have none. I am undone and lost apart from His grace.

 

I mean this with the utmost respect and seeking-couldn't one who understands the gospel and chooses by the influence of the Holy Spirit to follow Christ be just as grateful for Christ's work on the cross as one who was chosen by God (elect)? Doesn't God get the glory for mercy either way? The way I see it, both points of view believe that the sinner does NOT deserve this love and mercy and forgiveness. And that since God provided Christ's atoning sacrifice, He gets the glory?

 

Sincerely seeking and questioning-I can see both viewpoints!

[mommaduck]

And Billy Graham's wife is Presbyterian :D ;)

[Rosy]

Here's that John Piper article: http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/1995/1580_Are_There_Two_Wills_in_God/

[Jugglin'5]

I think that you are right that one could become unbalanced if one emphasized only the decrees and election of God...which we cannot see or do anything about, to the exclusion of doing what God has specifically COMMANDED us to do. The sovereignty of God has more to do with my comfort in my assurance of salvation, and knowing that God has always purposed to save me. That I don't have to keep myself in His hand, or constantly worry that I wasn't sincere enough in my sinner's prayer for it to take effect.

 

Some random thoughts (posted under Robin in TX, because she's "safe" :)!

 

My brother said (disclaimer: went to DTS, and I don't know whether this was original to him, but it helped me!) that the whole predestination/free will debate was like a coin - both sides true, but you can't "see" them both at the same time.

 

Another wise friend said (when I was agonizing over this), "You know, there are a LOT of things in Scripture that I *do* understand and don't do, and should be doing, so I try to concentrate on those rather than getting all exercised about who did what when! God is sovereign." Oh. Yup - that ALSO makes a lot of sense (to me).

 

A previous pastor's wise wife said (same time, when I was agonizing over this - how could some NOT be elect), "It comes down to 'I am not more merciful than God'." Well, I can buy THAT!

 

I became a believer in a Southern Baptist church, but now attend an OPC church. But we sit toward the back. :D

 

I don't know that I'll ever be a "true" Calvinist, but I DO know that God is Sovereign, Just, and Merciful. The more I realize my depravity, the more I see His Goodness (which is NOT to say a staunch Arminian doesn't see that, too!).

 

(I had to laugh when a group of us attended the Billy Graham event in Baltimore a yr or so ago - there was some concern over whether the invitation would be "I Have Decided to Follow Jesus.")

 

Remudamom, thanks for posting. Interesting discussion!

(But now, back to work, and to do the things I KNOW I should be doing. Hmph.)

[Melissa in CA]

St. Augustine was the foe of Pelagius. Reformed people are definitely Augustinian in many ways. Luther was an Augustinian monk. Really' date=' I don't think the early reformers had many differences over the God's sovereignty and free grace. Their differences were more sacramental. The Arminian controversy was later.[/quote']

 

Exactly! I hope I didn't imply that Calvin was part of the Palagism debate.:001_huh::confused: My history timeline at the moment is a bit shaky...I will chalk it up to pre-menopause. That seems to always do the trick. :lol:

 

I just wanted to address the misconception of some that Calvin invented the doctrines of Calvinism and that by following them we are in effect following the doctrines of a man. These doctrines were the basic beliefs of the early church fathers, not some strange doctrines that came on the scene changing things. It was Palagius and later Arminius who challenged these basic beliefs trying to change them, while St. Augustine and later Calvin & Luther who defended them.

 

...or was that Calvin and Hobbs? I'm so confused! LOL

[Jugglin'5]

Good post. In the same way, God hates evil, yet decreed it to exist for His own reasons. So He desires none to perish, yet He allows some to perish. This is what theologians call His decretive will vs His prescriptive will.

 

This is how I think about it, based on an article by John Piper (I'll see if I can dig it up--I know I sent it to my anti-Calvinist former pastor many years ago! ;) )--regardless of your take on election, not everyone is saved, right? Some are saved and some are lost. And Scripture says that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. But God didn't give everyone an automatic free pass, even though He could have. So you have to believe that God's will in salvation exists on two levels--that God wants everyone to be saved, in a sense, but that only some are--either because God was powerless to stop them from being lost, or because God has purposes in electing some that are impossible for us to understand. A Calvinist believes the latter.

[HappyGrace]

So you have to believe that God's will in salvation exists on two levels--that God wants everyone to be saved, in a sense, but that only some are--either because God was powerless to stop them from being lost, or because God has purposes in electing some that are impossible for us to understand. A Calvinist believes the latter.

 

That God definitely wants everyone to be saved, in fact grieves that anyone would be lost, but allows them free choice as to whether they will be or not? (and He knows ahead of time who will choose salvation or not, of course.)

 

I think that must be the teaching I've been thoroughly grounded (brainwashed over the years) in, because it keeps coming to the forefront of my mind. I'm seriously trying to see the "elect" point of view too!

[mommaduck]

I mean this with the utmost respect and seeking-couldn't one who understands the gospel and chooses by the influence of the Holy Spirit to follow Christ be just as grateful for Christ's work on the cross as one who was chosen by God (elect)? Doesn't God get the glory for mercy either way? The way I see it, both points of view believe that the sinner does NOT deserve this love and mercy and forgiveness. And that since God provided Christ's atoning sacrifice, He gets the glory?

 

Sincerely seeking and questioning-I can see both viewpoints!

 

I don't think anyone is judging that one does or doesn't...it's more what people have experienced and how we view it. When one believes "they have chosen" then God has relinquished some of His Sovereignty and therefore isn't Sovereign. THEY have the pride of having "made that decision"...but the truth of the matter is, we are not capable because of our Nature. When one sees that's it's God that chose us...not that he looked into the future like some crystal ball, but that He is ultimate Sovereign over the universe...and we realise that we are NOTHING, NADA, have no capabilities of our own BECAUSE of our nature...there is no pride, there is only a humbling of realising that God's Grace is everything, He did FOR us what we were incapable of doing ourselves.

[Robin in Tx]

And Billy Graham's wife is Presbyterian :D ;)

 

And their love and respect for each other, and they way they yoked together in the mission field, not allowing this minor point of theology to estrange them within the body of Christ, should be an example to us all. ;)

[Jugglin'5]

I'm totally trackin' your vibe, with apologies to anj!:D

 

Exactly! I hope I didn't imply that Calvin was part of the Palagism debate.:001_huh::confused: My history timeline at the moment is a bit shaky...I will chalk it up to pre-menopause. That seems to always do the trick. :lol:

 

I just wanted to address the misconception of some that Calvin invented the doctrines of Calvinism and that by following them we are in effect following the doctrines of a man. These doctrines were the basic beliefs of the early church fathers, not some strange doctrines that came on the scene changing things. It was Palagius and later Arminius who challenged these basic beliefs trying to change them, while St. Augustine and later Calvin & Luther who defended them.

 

...or was that Calvin and Hobbs? I'm so confused! LOL

[Melissa in CA]

I mean this with the utmost respect and seeking-couldn't one who understands the gospel and chooses by the influence of the Holy Spirit to follow Christ be just as grateful for Christ's work on the cross as one who was chosen by God (elect)? Doesn't God get the glory for mercy either way? The way I see it, both points of view believe that the sinner does NOT deserve this love and mercy and forgiveness. And that since God provided Christ's atoning sacrifice, He gets the glory?

 

Sincerely seeking and questioning-I can see both viewpoints!

 

Yes, but who gets the glory for the "choosing?" If I know that I am saved because *I* chose Christ, then *I* have something in which to boast.

[Tracy in Ky]

Yes! You are responsible, and therein lies another arguement. Hyper Calvinists (is that the proper term?) have the mindset that "I'm saved and can do whatever I want." My bil is one of these.

 

Just for the record, Hyper Calvinism is historically defined as referring to those who think that the gospel should be preached only to the elect, which means you have to somehow discern who they are before you preach to them, which is impossible. It is totally unbiblical.

 

People today use the term to mean different things, but it has a well-entrenched history being defined as the above. It used to be a bigger problem that it is now I think. I don't even know any Hyper Calvinists.

 

:)

[VaKim]

This is how I think about it, based on an article by John Piper (I'll see if I can dig it up--I know I sent it to my anti-Calvinist former pastor many years ago! ;) )--regardless of your take on election, not everyone is saved, right? Some are saved and some are lost. And Scripture says that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. But God didn't give everyone an automatic free pass, even though He could have. So you have to believe that God's will in salvation exists on two levels--that God wants everyone to be saved, in a sense, but that only some are--either because God was powerless to stop them from being lost, or because God has purposes in electing some that are impossible for us to understand. A Calvinist believes the latter.

 

Excellent!

 

James White: "Then why do you embrace Christ, and your moral Buddhist neighbour across the street does not? Are you smarter than he is? More spiritually sensitive? Better, in any way? What makes you to differ? Is the Holy Spirit working just as hard on him as He did on you? If so, why do you believe, and he does not? No matter how hard you try, you can’t avoid coming to the conclusion that, in a 'free will' system of salvation, those who believe do so because there is something different about them. If the Spirit is bringing equal conviction to bear upon each individual, the only deciding factor, given equality in everything else, is something in the person himself. I believe the only possible difference between the redeemed in heaven and the guilty, condemned, punished sinner in hell is a five-letter word ... It’s called 'grace.'"

[Tracy in Ky]

Our church is actually sort of presbyterian' date=' but we are studying the Heidelberg at our Wednesday night home small group meetings "What is you only comfort in lief and death? " It is wonderful and precious.[/quote']

 

 

Oh. Can I come? I want to come.

[1bassoon]

Would that be Briarworld? :) We just moved to Dallas and are still circling the airport, trying to decide where to land... but I do believe we'll be at the largest PCA church. Never would have dreamed it.

 

Yup, that would be us!

 

Thought I'd hate it - I love it.

 

We have a terrific, family-integrated Sunday School class, with all the positives of a larger church.

 

I'm dreading the thought of moving. . . .. .

[Melissa in CA]

I don't think anyone is judging that one does or doesn't...it's more what people have experienced and how we view it. When one believes "they have chosen" then God has relinquished some of His Sovereignty and therefore isn't Sovereign. THEY have the pride of having "made that decision"...but the truth of the matter is, we are not capable because of our Nature. When one sees that's it's God that chose us...not that he looked into the future like some crystal ball, but that He is ultimate Sovereign over the universe...and we realise that we are NOTHING, NADA, have no capabilities of our own BECAUSE of our nature...there is no pride, there is only a humbling of realising that God's Grace is everything, He did FOR us what we were incapable of doing ourselves.

 

:iagree: Well said, Mommaduck!

[mommaduck]

I don't even know any Hyper Calvinists.

 

:)

 

I do...and he believes the rest of us Reformed folk are going to hell for not agreeing with him.

[Kathleen in VA]

I mean this with the utmost respect and seeking-couldn't one who understands the gospel and chooses by the influence of the Holy Spirit to follow Christ be just as grateful for Christ's work on the cross as one who was chosen by God (elect)? Doesn't God get the glory for mercy either way? The way I see it, both points of view believe that the sinner does NOT deserve this love and mercy and forgiveness. And that since God provided Christ's atoning sacrifice, He gets the glory?

 

Sincerely seeking and questioning-I can see both viewpoints!

 

 

My understanding of Paula's post was to question why God chooses to save some and not others. Didn't mean to imply or infer that because I am so thankful for my salvation that others who are not of a DoG persuasion are not equally grateful - just expressing my own personal gratefulness. In my case I think it did develop a deeper gratefulness, but I cannot speak for anyone but myself.

[Tracy in Ky]

I've always been taught that the Holy Spirit draws you to repentance-and you could choose to ignore it or not. That God does get all the glory for salvation because in His grace He provided Christ as the atoning sacrifice.

 

I can see how believing that you are one of the elect would make you more thankful. I feel like I'm on the cusp of understanding and the things we're discussing here are starting to turn some lights on, but I'm still somehow missing it! And I've lived a very "dead" Christian life all my life-I'm definitely missing something!

 

Happy Grace,

 

Please go to this link:

 

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/BySeries/2/

 

and listen to Dr. John Piper preach his way through the book of Romans. You will be changed forever. It took him I think 8 years to preach through it. It is glorious. It is all free. You can download the MP3's, and at some point in the series they begin offering the videos free to download also.

 

Exquisite joy awaits you.

 

:) Tracy

[Robin in Tx]

either because God was powerless to stop them from being lost, or because God has purposes in electing some that are impossible for us to understand

 

assuming, of course, those are the only two choices...

[Kimber]

My kids and I were memorizing this. We would chant it.

 

 

That I am not my own, but belong

body and soul

in life and in death

to my faithful savior Jesus Christ.

 

This conversation is great! I think I'm going to add this back in to our memory work for this year! I have been inspired!

[Jugglin'5]

Yes, but who gets the glory for the "choosing?" If I know that I am saved because *I* chose Christ, then *I* have something in which to boast.

 

This is why the doctrines are not peripheral, but very important. Well said!

[HappyGrace]

mommaduck, and so was the James White quote. I guess it just seems that if God is sovereign, He could in His sovereignty give us the freedom to choose. I don't see how allowing humans to choose would make Him lose His sovereignty. I always understood that He wanted to give us that choice so that only those who wanted to be part of the Kingdom would be part of the Kingdom, that He loved us so much He gave us that freedom to choose.

 

I'm not arguing-I actually like the other point of view much better-that He loved us so much that He chose us-"us" being the elect. I do think that point of view would make you feel even more grateful that you were chosen by Him. I think taking yourself and your choosing out of the equation lends security. I'm just trying to reconcile all this in my mind!

[Kathleen in VA]

That God definitely wants everyone to be saved, in fact grieves that anyone would be lost, but allows them free choice as to whether they will be or not? (and He knows ahead of time who will choose salvation or not, of course.)

 

I think that must be the teaching I've been thoroughly grounded (brainwashed over the years) in, because it keeps coming to the forefront of my mind. I'm seriously trying to see the "elect" point of view too!

 

Sticking my neck out here, because I am not the most well-versed in this topic, but just want to say that God always accomplishes what He sets out to accomplish. Nothing stands in God's way of accomplishing salvation in those whom He has elected. He is God - no one can stay his hand. If God desires to save someone they will be saved. He is sovereign and man cannot keep Him from accomplishing His will. Hope that made sense.:)

[Tracy in Ky]

I do...and he believes the rest of us Reformed folk are going to hell for not agreeing with him.

 

Yikes

[Jugglin'5]

The Heidelberg is so pastoral and comforting. I love it. Of course I also love "What is the chief end of man?" "Man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever". But the Heidelberg is definitely more pastoral.

 

My kids and I were memorizing this. We would chant it.

 

 

That I am not my own, but belong

body and soul

in life and in death

to my faithful savior Jesus Christ.

 

This conversation is great! I think I'm going to add this back in to our memory work for this year! I have been inspired!

[Rosy]

That God definitely wants everyone to be saved, in fact grieves that anyone would be lost, but allows them free choice as to whether they will be or not? (and He knows ahead of time who will choose salvation or not, of course.)

 

 

 

Not quite--more like God definitely wants everyone to be saved, in fact grieves that anyone would be lost, but chooses to save some for reasons we can't understand.

 

This is what John Piper says in the article I referenced:

The difference between Calvinists and Arminians lies not in whether there are two wills in God, but in what they say this higher commitment is. What does God will more than saving all? The answer given by Arminians is that human self-determination and the possible resulting love relationship with God are more valuable than saving all people by sovereign, efficacious grace. The answer given by Calvinists is that the greater value is the manifestation of the full range of God's glory in wrath and mercy (Romans 9:22-23) and the humbling of man so that he enjoys giving all credit to God for his salvation (1 Corinthians 1:29).

 

The Calvinist position of Total Depravity says that we cannot and would not choose God, that we are utterly unable to do so. From my perspective, there was a time that I responded to God by faith, but this was directed by his calling/choosing of me.

[CAMom]

That God definitely wants everyone to be saved, in fact grieves that anyone would be lost, but allows them free choice as to whether they will be or not? (and He knows ahead of time who will choose salvation or not, of course.)

 

I think that must be the teaching I've been thoroughly grounded (brainwashed over the years) in, because it keeps coming to the forefront of my mind. I'm seriously trying to see the "elect" point of view too!

 

If there are people that God wants to be saved but they are not, doesn't that strip God of His power? He's not sovereign if man can thwart His will.

 

Again, I ask, how can a dead person choose life? If man is spiritually dead, how can he choose God? I think that's the basic question where election is concerned.

[mommaduck]

To believe that God would give us Free Will and then sit back and watch...well, that turns Him into a Reactionary Gd rather than a Sovereign One. Gd created ALL things, Gd had a Plan (Providence)...He Determined who would be His...He was not subject to some of, "woe, my angels rebelled against me, now I have try to head them off" and "woe, I'm trying to get that person to come, but they just keep rejecting me, let me set another item before them...maybe then they will be convinced". No, and may it never be so! All was planned...why? To show His Glory! We can only see small portions of the picture and the "timeline"...Gd not only sees the Entirety of the Picture...He Painted it!

 

 

(btw, I hope none of this sounds snarky or sarcastic...internet is not always helpful in "hearing" how someone sounds and I know I can sometimes come off differently online than I intend...so Grace, not tomatoes, please :) )

[*anj*]

I am entering this thread really late in the game. I have only read the first page of posts, and I don't know when I'll be able to read the rest. But I wanted to just throw in my experience.

 

I am Reformed theologically, and attended a PCA church for six years. We've been in a non-Reformed (Arminian! gasp!) church for the past year. It's a reallllllly long and personal story, but dh and I needed to find a mid-point at which we could both be comfortable. And you know, it's been a great experience for me/us. I am still Reformed, but I've learned a lot about balance and focusing on the essentials as opposed to the differences. And agreeing to the TULIP is not a salvation issue, you know? I personally believe that in the end we'll all find out that there were things that we "got" and things that we didn't "get" but that as long as the Gospel wasn't compromised, it's all fine. We'll understand it by and by.

[Kimber]

Well Said!

[Robin in Tx]

Yes, but who gets the glory for the "choosing?" If I know that I am saved because *I* chose Christ, then *I* have something in which to boast.

 

I don't know a single non-calvinist who thinks that way. Seriously. That is a gross misrepresentation of how people (who believe in free will) view their actions. You don't have to believe in election to appreciate and be humbled by God's grace...

[HappyGrace]

Can I just ask one thing before I listen? Because I'm trying to maintain balance here in my mind. Couldn't it happen that I could listen to John Piper preach his way through Romans, and then listen to a non-Reformed pastor preach his way through it with the opposite view? That's what's confusing me-it is actually like sides of a coin, and you have to pick one or the other. I'm afraid at this point to listen to one side or the other, since I'm pretty much a "double-minded man" at this point-I guess I just need to study the Scriptures for myself and try to figure out what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell me. If it weren't for needing to find a church, I wouldn't be in such a hurry to try to figure this out!

[mommaduck]

I don't know a single non-calvinist who thinks that way. Seriously. That is a gross misrepresentation of how people (who believe in free will) view their actions. You don't have to believe in election to appreciate and be humbled by God's grace...

 

Robin, I know many that do view it that way and have boasted that Gd can't "make them" do anything...that it was "their" decision and then go on as though Gd should be grateful that they are "attending His church".

[mommaduck]

Can I just ask one thing before I listen? Because I'm trying to maintain balance here in my mind. Couldn't it happen that I could listen to John Piper preach his way through Romans, and then listen to a non-Reformed pastor preach his way through it with the opposite view? That's what's confusing me-it is actually like sides of a coin, and you have to pick one or the other. I'm afraid at this point to listen to one side or the other, since I'm pretty much a "double-minded man" at this point-I guess I just need to study the Scriptures for myself and try to figure out what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell me. If it weren't for needing to find a church, I wouldn't be in such a hurry to try to figure this out!

 

The best I could tell you is listen to both and weigh it up against Scripture.

[Robin in Tx]

Robin, I know many that do view it that way and have boasted that Gd can't "make them" do anything...that it was "their" decision and then go on as though Gd should be grateful that they are "attending His church".

 

Wow... that's just... amazing. Never once encountered that in my entire life as a baptist in a VERY large city!

 

Must be regional or something... Even if there are pockets of congregations who believe this, I think it is safe to say that they are very fringe... not the norm at all.

[Jugglin'5]

Robin, I know many that do view it that way and have boasted that Gd can't "make them" do anything...that it was "their" decision and then go on as though Gd should be grateful that they are "attending His church".

 

Me too...in fact I used to harbor those thoughts myself, though I would have never stated it that way out loud.

 

To be fair, I have known Calvinists who were proud that they "got" it. There's that cage stage again. Which is ridiculous since if you understand, it is only because God allowed you to.

[Kimber]

Forgot to add, that I think the area that was hardest for me to understand concerning election was that some people are good and deserved to be saved.

 

I think R C Sproul cleared it up for me with his comparison of God, Hitler, and us. I never had a problem with the idea that Hitler was bad and didn't deserve to be chosen. But on the spectrum where God is on one end and Hitler on the other extreme, where do I fall? My first thought was about 1/4 of the way from Hitler, but definitely closer to God--maybe even right in between.

 

But when R C Sproul followed up with that we are all in a bear hug with Hitler, then I saw myself in a whole new light. And the goodness of God became even greater to me. And with that as my backdrop, then election doesn't confuse me as much because we truly all are as empty vessels none of us deserving to be saved.

 

In fact, I often have a hard time praying for God's mercy because, while I want it, I think of the suffering of the little children; and I look at how sinful I am and how blessed I am; and I have to say--I simply don't deserve it.

[Melissa in CA]

I guess it just seems that if God is sovereign, He could in His sovereignty give us the freedom to choose. I don't see how allowing humans to choose would make Him lose His sovereignty. I always understood that He wanted to give us that choice so that only those who wanted to be part of the Kingdom would be part of the Kingdom, that He loved us so much He gave us that freedom to choose.

 

 

But, what if, in this freedom to choose, no one actually decided to choose Him? Would God allow the possibility that Jesus came and died for none?

 

Or is it more biblical that Jesus died for those the Father gave to him. Those chosen before the foundation of the world, as mentioned in scripture. :D

[mommaduck]

Me too...in fact I used to harbor those thoughts myself' date=' though I would have never stated it that way out loud.

 

To be fair, I have known Calvinists who were proud that they "got" it. There's that cage stage again. Which is ridiculous since if you understand, it is only because God allowed you to.[/quote']

 

Bingo! Every bit of it.

[Jugglin'5]

The truth is that there are an infinite number of ways in which we can fall into spiritual pride. I have family members that are some of the most spiritually proud people I know, because they "speak in tongues". I have other family members that are charismatic who are extremely humble and gracious. I have seen spiritual pride in myself, and in other reformed people for sure. I have seen it in Baptists, Episcopalians, you name it. No group has a lock on it. It is a common failing of mankind, with which even the regenerate struggle.

[Frelle]

Reformed here, raised Catholic, been in a Presbyterian PCA church for 12 years.

[Tracy in Ky]

Can I just ask one thing before I listen? Because I'm trying to maintain balance here in my mind. Couldn't it happen that I could listen to John Piper preach his way through Romans, and then listen to a non-Reformed pastor preach his way through it with the opposite view?

 

I see your point, but both preachers can't be right. The truth is objective. I think that you will be amazed at how closely Piper sticks to scripture. And he would rather die than mis-interpret God's word. Pray like crazy and start listening. The first 3 or 4 sermons may be a bit slow to get through--as he deals with the introduction of the letter, but oh my goodness. Please stay with it. Let me know what you think. I have listened to hundreds and hundreds of hours of his preaching, and I am simply not the same person as a result. I've transcribed probably close to 80 of his sermons-they are that rich. He has a way of communicating God's word that will knock your socks off.

 

PM me if you have any questions as you listen through. I'm so excited for you!

 

Blessings,

Tracy

[mommaduck]

I've seen (see it everyday) people that take pride in being humble! They don't wear jewelry, makeup...they wear drab colours (and never RED!)...yep, some of them are truly humble and some of them are proud of "who they are".

[Kathleen in VA]

Can I just ask one thing before I listen? Because I'm trying to maintain balance here in my mind. Couldn't it happen that I could listen to John Piper preach his way through Romans, and then listen to a non-Reformed pastor preach his way through it with the opposite view? That's what's confusing me-it is actually like sides of a coin, and you have to pick one or the other. I'm afraid at this point to listen to one side or the other, since I'm pretty much a "double-minded man" at this point-I guess I just need to study the Scriptures for myself and try to figure out what the Holy Spirit is trying to tell me. If it weren't for needing to find a church, I wouldn't be in such a hurry to try to figure this out!

 

Pray first, that God will open your eyes to His truth, that He would help you discern truth from error. Be a Berean and search the Scriptures, whether these things be so, as it were. Ask God to teach you His ways and to lead you in His paths. I believe He will honor those prayers.

[HappyGrace]

If there are people that God wants to be saved but they are not, doesn't that strip God of His power? He's not sovereign if man can thwart His will.

 

I guess I just meant that God would desire for all to choose salvation, but knows that all won't, but He sovereignly gives over that choice to humans, to come to Him or not. Not that it strips Him of His power; He is sovereignly and willingly choosing not to overpower and make the choice for us.

 

Like I said, until today, I didn't realize how thoroughly I've been brainwashed with this free will idea, and I'm very interested that there is another valid and very alluring viewpoint.

[Jugglin'5]

I know of a pastor who became a Calvinist while he was preaching through Romans. His wife asked him, "What are you gonna do when you get to those verses?" He said he was just gonna preach them straight up and when he came to end of it, he was a Calvinist.:)

 

I see your point, but both preachers can't be right. The truth is objective. I think that you will be amazed at how closely Piper sticks to scripture. And he would rather die than mis-interpret God's word. Pray like crazy and start listening. The first 3 or 4 sermons may be a bit slow to get through--as he deals with the introduction of the letter, but oh my goodness. Please stay with it. Let me know what you think. I have listened to hundreds and hundreds of hours of his preaching, and I am simply not the same person as a result. I've transcribed probably close to 80 of his sermons-they are that rich. He has a way of communicating God's word that will knock your socks off.

 

PM me if you have any questions as you listen through. I'm so excited for you!

 

Blessings,

Tracy

[HappyGrace]

put it, about being in with Hitler. I don't think you have to be Calvinistic though to believe that we are all in that same boat-totally depraved without Christ. I must say though that I love the Calvinistic viewpoint of election as far as that it would make an "elect" person just absolutely humbled with gratitude. And that's the crux of why this intrigues me-I'm wondering if all the free will beliefs I've always learned have caused me to not be as grateful, if that makes any sense. (Not saying that those who believe in free will are not grateful-but it may be part of it for me!)

[CAMom]

I guess I just meant that God would desire for all to choose salvation, but knows that all won't, but He sovereignly gives over that choice to humans, to come to Him or not. Not that it strips Him of His power; He is sovereignly and willingly choosing not to overpower and make the choice for us.

 

 

Even if we presuppose that your above statement is correct, how do we get over the fact that those who are spiritually dead cannot choose spiritual life?