Donations for the month of March


We have received a total of "0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Tom
Tom
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 4,513
Joined: April 2001
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,776
Posts54,866
Members974
Most Online732
Jan 15th, 2023
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,445
Tom 4,513
chestnutmare 3,320
J_Edwards 2,615
John_C 1,864
Wes 1,856
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 2
John_C 1
Recent Posts
The When and How of Justification
by Pilgrim - Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:06 AM
Why a New Covenant Theology
by DiscipleEddie - Fri Mar 15, 2024 9:52 AM
Jordan Peterson ordered to take sensitivity training
by Anthony C. - Thu Mar 14, 2024 11:01 PM
Revisionist History vs. Conspiracy History by Gary North
by Anthony C. - Mon Mar 11, 2024 9:40 AM
the New Covenant
by Tom - Mon Mar 04, 2024 3:31 AM
"The Necessity of the Atonement" - Jonathan Edwards
by Pilgrim - Fri Mar 01, 2024 7:46 AM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rating: 4
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#48333 Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:59 AM
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,864
John_C Offline OP
Permanent Resident
OP Offline
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,864
Is it the 5 Solas, or the 5 points of the fundamentals of the faith declared back in the 1910's. Are there essentials that are underneath non-essentials to the above?

Why I'm thinking of this is that a forum friend on another board is encouraging his denomination, EFCA, to remove its standard regarding pre-millennial only. He thinks the denomination standard should include a-mil and post-mil. (I gather his denom lumps historical pre-mill and dispy pre-mill together). IOW, one's view on eschatology is really non-essential. I do think the 3 views except for dispy pre-mill are within orthodoxy, but is that where the essential vs non-essential argument flows? In my denomination there is a growing (still distinct minority) traction in regards to women deaconesses. The denom's standard on this seems essential when it comes to church polity, but non-essential when it comes to soteriology.

How best to view this essential vs non-essential elements.

Last edited by John_C; Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:15 AM.

John Chaney

"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
John_C #48334 Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:23 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Originally Posted by John_C
Is it the 5 Solas, or the 5 points of the fundamentals of the faith declared back in the 1910's. Are there essentials that are underneath non-essentials to the above?
First, I'm not 100% clear on what the following means: "Are there essentials that are underneath non-essentials to the above?", but I'll take a guess. grin

Second, for clarification of those who may not be familiar with the "Five Essentials of the Faith" of 1910:
  1. The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.
  2. The virgin birth of Christ.
  3. The belief that Christ's death was an atonement for sin.
  4. The bodily resurrection of Christ.
  5. The historical reality of Christ's miracles.

Third, I view those "Five Essentials" as being far too broad in scope because they would acknowledge Arminianism, semi-Pelagianism, Pelagianism, Roman Catholicism and most sects as being legitimately Christian, i.e., acceptably teaching biblical truth, especially in the matter of salvation, to which I would strongly disagree.

Fourth, so I obviously believe that there are far more "essentials" that need to be included than those listed in the "Five Essentials of the Faith" of 1910.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
John_C #48395 Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:53 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Essential has to do with salvation.
Non-essential does not.

Thus in my opinion, eschatology is non-essential. So a Dispensational Preimillenialist believes in justification by grace through faith without salvific works. An amillenialist believes in justification by grace through faith without salvific works. Both agree on essential doctrine yet disagree on eschatology (and yes, I realize they would disagree on other things as well).


Grace is not common.
li0scc0 #48397 Fri Apr 27, 2012 1:15 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Originally Posted by li0scc0
Essential has to do with salvation.
Non-essential does not.

Thus in my opinion, eschatology is non-essential. So a Dispensational Preimillenialist believes in justification by grace through faith without salvific works. An amillenialist believes in justification by grace through faith without salvific works. Both agree on essential doctrine yet disagree on eschatology (and yes, I realize they would disagree on other things as well).
[Linked Image] Most Dispensationalists (classic in particular) are semi-Pelagian and sometimes Arminian (classic) and thus although giving lip service to salvation by grace alone do in fact embrace a works (synergistic) salvation [their free-will exercising of their faith].

Secondly, classic Dispensationalists believe that OT saints were saved in a different manner than NT saints. Thus there is that crucial difference as well.

So, there is some truth to your response in that generally speaking, eschatology isn't necessarily an essential. grin


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
li0scc0 #48441 Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:13 AM
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,864
John_C Offline OP
Permanent Resident
OP Offline
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,864
That is where the argument takes us. Are only those parts of the Bible teaching about salvation to be consider essential? My thread question leads to that somewhat in that I asked if their are a subset of essentials underneath the the core tenets of the 5 solas and other vital truths.

Say for instance, is it not essential to adopt a non-ordination of women view based on Scripture. Sure, someone can be a 'invisible church' Christian in having that belief, but at the same time that particular belief is a man-made one, not from biblical teaching. So, is it essential for a church or denomination to restrict women from ordination?

Another point I would like to make is the use of non-essential. Let's take the women ordination question again. My bet is that the majority of those who agree with women ordination takes it not from the view that it is non-essential, but that it is essential to ordain women. They argue that it is non-essential when talking to those who disagree with women ordination, but argue that it is essential when talking to their like-minded friends.

In retrospect, non essentials really belong to the grey areas, which I would put some elements of eschatology in.

Last edited by John_C; Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:17 AM.

John Chaney

"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
John_C #48442 Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:28 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Originally Posted by John_C
That is where the argument takes us. Are only those parts of the Bible teaching about salvation to be consider essential? My thread question leads to that somewhat in that I asked if their are a subset of essentials underneath the the core tenets of the 5 solas and other vital truths.
Again, my concerted opinion is "NO! The doctrine of salvation is certainly one of the "essentials", which obviously includes LOTS of other doctrines of which it is derived. But there are other doctrines which are not directly part of soteriology but are expressions of how a true Christian and particular the Church practice that salvation, e.g., ecclesiology; its worship, church government, and sacraments.

Originally Posted by John_C
Say for instance, is it not essential to adopt a non-ordination of women view based on Scripture. Sure, someone can be a 'invisible church' Christian in having that belief, but at the same time that particular belief is a man-made one, not from biblical teaching. So, is it essential for a church or denomination to restrict women from ordination?
Yes, the doctrine of ordination of church officers is essential because it falls under ecclesiology, the doctrine of the Church of which the visible Church is to govern itself, wherein is the gathering of those who are saved. The argument that it is "man-made" is self-defeating. What doctrine isn't "man-made"? This is how God has intended that doctrine (biblical teaching) is to be established. When Christ ascended on high He gave good gifts to men that some should be "pastor/teachers" who would bring the will of God to His people. The Bible isn't an encyclopedia where one can simply look up Trinity and there is an article explaining it. And, the Bible itself provides the proper hermeneutical principles (method of interpretation) by which truth is found in Scripture.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #48559 Sun Apr 29, 2012 12:24 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 428
My Dispensational experience was for 2 years in a very solid 4 point Calvinist (Amyraldian) church. The Calvinist preaching and teaching there was, sadly, more solid than what I have seen in most alleged 5 point chuches. Most folks here would have been comfortable with all the teachings BUT those that were Dispensational in related. Especially solid were those teachings relating to Salvation, both Old and New Testament.
Honestly the reason I switched was because I am not a Zionist. But I would still characterize their teachings as solid and still remain in friendship with their pastors.
In the essentials, this was a very solid church.


Grace is not common.
John_C #48643 Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:53 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 6
The Boy Wonder
Offline
The Boy Wonder
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 6
Raised "Dispie" and Charismatic, I always assumed that all Christians had the same eschatology and that it was essential. In college learning history, though, I found out how very wrong I had been, and how very amazingly Christ's Olivet prophecy was fulfilled in the next 40 years following His ascension!

My change of eschatology (from Dispie premill to Amil) forced a change from Pentecostalism to Puritanism as well.

And for a time, like all newly Reformed perhaps, eschatology remained essential in my eyes. It defines the role and duration of the Charismatic signs, but also the very nature of the Kingdom. While I can accept as brethren those who hold to some forms of historic premillennialism and postmillennialism, it seems to be that old-style Dispensationalists worship a different god! One whose plans failed and who had to come up with not one, but up to seven (depending on the "brand" of dispensationalism) new "plans of salvation" before he found one that works. Their god has two distinct "peoples of God," each with it's own separate plan of salvation! It's very hard to accept believers in that god as brethren who worship the Almighty God of the scriptures, Who has always had one single people with one single path of salvation - by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.

Robin #48755 Sun Apr 29, 2012 10:55 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,513
Likes: 13
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life
Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,513
Likes: 13
My experience is much like Robins, yet I also know that there are Dispensationalists that do not believe the same way when it comes to issues such as what Robin brought up.

Right off the top of my head John MacArthur comes to mind.

Tom

John_C #48756 Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:53 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
'Tis true, Tom, that there is a great variance of beliefs among Dispensationalists and thus it is near impossible to know what any particular Dispensationalist holds to be true doctrinally. But one thing is most always held in common among them and that is the fundamental importance of eschatology for it involves not just the rapture, Israel, the great tribulation, the millennium, etc., but how one actually interprets the Bible. To illustrate the importance they put on one holding to Dispensationalism, since you mentioned John MacArthur, here is a very salient and disturbing article: John MacArthur on Calvinism, Dispensationalism, Israel and Hermeneutics: A Few Comments. In short, MacArthur whose "Dispy Lite" eschatology, aka: Progressive Dispensationalism is perhaps furthest from Classic Dispensationalism comes close to making Dispensationalism an essential of the faith.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
li0scc0 #48877 Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:13 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Plebeian
Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by li0scc0
Essential has to do with salvation.
Non-essential does not.

Thus in my opinion, eschatology is non-essential.
Eschatology, I believe is essential in the way of harmony with all of God's word. When discussing eschatological issues with people throughout the years, I have notice in 99% of the cases Dispensationalists were Arminian, semi-Pelagian or Pelagian.

Most Post Mil's and A-Mils, were Reformed.

I personally cannot understand how someone who is reformed (5Point Calvinist)can be a Dispensationalist, it just does not harmonize. I and shocked John Macarthur is a Dispensationalist, I really am.


"There is no possibility of taking a mercy out of God's hand, till the mercy be ripe for us, and we ripe for the mercy."

THOMAS BROOKS
Pilgrim #48878 Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:23 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Plebeian
Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by Pilgrim
[Linked Image] Most Dispensationalists (classic in particular) are semi-Pelagian and sometimes Arminian (classic) and thus although giving lip service to salvation by grace alone do in fact embrace a works (synergistic) salvation [their free-will exercising of their faith].
I agree Pilgrim, in my experiences I have noticed the same.

Quote
Secondly, classic Dispensationalists believe that OT saints were saved in a different manner than NT saints. Thus there is that crucial difference as well.
You do realize John MacArthur is a Dispensationalist?



"There is no possibility of taking a mercy out of God's hand, till the mercy be ripe for us, and we ripe for the mercy."

THOMAS BROOKS
John_C #48879 Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:31 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Plebeian
Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
I would like to mention something in regards to this issue.

My pastor is a Dispensationalist, but he is also a 5 point Calvinist. I cannot for the life of me understand why he is a Dispensationalist; the only think I can gather out of it is, he does not put much study into the end time issues, and therefore really does not have a solid foundation in these issues. However, I believe, if he does one day invest time, prayer and study into Eschatology, his stand will probably change.

The church I attend, I attend with a fried of mine, who used to be a full time pastor of a (Reformed) Congregational church, he also cannot understand it. Well he attends when he can, because the pastor is a 5 pointer; when not attending he is preaching at a Presbyterian church while their pastor is away.


"There is no possibility of taking a mercy out of God's hand, till the mercy be ripe for us, and we ripe for the mercy."

THOMAS BROOKS
Dennis #48881 Wed Jun 13, 2012 10:08 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,445
Likes: 57
Originally Posted by Dennis
My pastor is a Dispensationalist, but he is also a 5 point Calvinist. I cannot for the life of me understand why he is a Dispensationalist;.... <cut>
1. There are 5-Point Calvinists and there are 5-Point Calvinists. wink
2. There are Dispensationalists and there are Dispensationalists. There are many "varieties" of Dispensationalism so it is important to know which "variety" someone embraces, from 'Acts 28' ultra-extremists, to the more docile and inconsistent "Progressive Dispensationalism" held by men like John MacArthur. Elsewhere I provided a link to an article by Kim Riddlebarger who took MacArthur to task for some very disparaging and foolish remarks he made in regard to Dispensationalism and Calvinism. At least MacArthur, albeit, on the other side of the proverbial fence, realizes there is a consistency and necessity of coherence in Reformed Theology. Of course, I believe he violates that coherence by embracing Dispensationalism. evilgrin


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #48882 Wed Jun 13, 2012 10:40 PM
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Plebeian
Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by Pilgrim
Originally Posted by Dennis
My pastor is a Dispensationalist, but he is also a 5 point Calvinist. I cannot for the life of me understand why he is a Dispensationalist;.... <cut>
1. There are 5-Point Calvinists and there are 5-Point Calvinists. wink
2. There are Dispensationalists and there are Dispensationalists. There are many "varieties" of Dispensationalism so it is important to know which "variety" someone embraces, from 'Acts 28' ultra-extremists, to the more docile and inconsistent "Progressive Dispensationalism" held by men like John MacArthur.
Yes sir, I agree.

Quote
Elsewhere I provided a link to an article by Kim Riddlebarger who took MacArthur to task for some very disparaging and foolish remarks he made in regard to Dispensationalism and Calvinism. At least MacArthur, albeit, on the other side of the proverbial fence, realizes there is a consistency and necessity of coherence in Reformed Theology. Of course, I believe he violates that coherence by embracing Dispensationalism. evilgrin
Again, I agree. Thanks for the reply. smile


"There is no possibility of taking a mercy out of God's hand, till the mercy be ripe for us, and we ripe for the mercy."

THOMAS BROOKS
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 51 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
PaulWatkins, His Unworthy Son, Nahum, TheSojourner, Larry
974 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,505,587 Gospel truth