Curch of Christ - John Calvin vs. Ezekiel part 1

[dickiebow2003]

Norm Fields is an IDIOT and a false teacher SUPREME!

[rotary57]

prove it

[dickiebow2003]

Eph. 2 "you were DEAD in your transgressions and sins,.....4BUT GOD.....MADE US ALIVE with Christ even when we were DEAD in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 10For we are God's WORKMANSHIP.

John 1: 13 "children born NOT of natural descent, NOR OF HUMAN DECISION or a husband's will, BUT BORN OF GOD.

1 John 5: 13 "I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that YOU MAY KNOW that you HAVE eternal life."

Touche' - clearly enough said !!

[rotary57]

You don't know what touche means or how to use it - get a dictionary.

In response to your mangled quotation of random bits of Eph 2, we are saved by grace THROUGH faith (verse 8), and faith without works is dead James 2:20

You are taking part of the plan of salvation and treating it as the whole -

James 2:24

"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

[dickiebow2003]

And you folks miss the overall message as usual, by focusing on particular passages to the exclusion of others. Yes, "faith w/out works is dead" AND "we are saved by grace thru faith and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works" - clearly two sides of the SAME COIN. Before MEN we are justified by works, before GOD we are justified by faith.

Luke 16:15 You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of men, but God knows your hearts.

Debating CofC folks is futile.

[dickiebow2003]

....and why is it neccesary for you guys to scramble all over the NT picking a verse here and there like God's redemption is a zig-saw puzzle. If Paul thought Baptism was essential why not mention it in Ephesian 25 times instead of not at all.

1 Cor 1:17 "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel." Nice contrast of import.

1 Cor 1:14 "I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius" Not exactly a HIGH PRIORITY for Paul!

[cooltkll]

dickiebow2003.....have a public discussion with norm fields and put it on youtube so we all can see

[dickiebow2003]

Go to:

PreacherNorm titled "I'm Your Friend"

There's your answer!

[calvinismisacult]

Calvinism is a cult

[mothcorrupteth]

Moreover, how do you respond to Exodus 34:6-7? "The LORD passed before him and proclaimed,'The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the childrens children, to the third and the fourth generation."

[mothcorrupteth]

You see, by taking Ezek. 18:20 to be the starting point in your theology, you've created an internal contradiction in the logic of the Scriptures. But as John Calvin noted in his commentary on Ezek. 18:20, the doctrine of original sin actually resolves the paradox:

[mothcorrupteth]

"For when we consider the perishing of the whole human race, it is said with truth that we perish through anothers fault: but it is added at the same time, that every one perishes through his own iniquity. If then we inquire into the cause of the curse which presses upon all the posterity of Adam, it may be said to be partly anothers and partly our own: anothers, through Adams declension from God, in whose person the whole human race was spoiled of righteousness and intelligence..."

[mothcorrupteth]

"...and all parts of the soul utterly corrupted. So that every one is lost in himself, and if he wishes to contend with God, he must always acknowledge that the fountain of the curse flows from himself... Thus, the son properly speaking shall not die through the iniquity of his father, but is considered guilty before God through his own fault."

In other words, by not considering the specific audience to whom Ezekiel was speaking, you have missed the scope of the passage.

[mothcorrupteth]

Calvin then explains Ex. 34:

"But the first punishment with which God threatens the reprobate is that which I have mentioned, namely, that their offspring are destitute and deprived of spiritual gifts, so that they sink deeper and deeper into destruction: for there are two kinds of punishment, the one outward and the other inward, as we express it...

He asks,

"But how will this now be suitable, 'shall not the son bear the iniquity of the father?' "

[mothcorrupteth]

He answers:

"Ezekiel here speaks of adults, for he means that the son shall not bear his fathers iniquity, since he shall receive the reward due to himself and sustain his own burden."

In a nutshell, original sin solves the problem because Ex. 34 is explained by a Calvinist God who is free to appoint a man's children to gospelless lives (which cannot be said of your Pelagian god), and Ezek. 18 is explained by the personal effects of original sin.

[mothcorrupteth]

I'm interested in how you support the claim that Calvinism permeates all Protestant denominations. Lutheranism long ago departed from Luther's predestinarian views, and it has never agreed with the Reformed view of the sacraments. Wesley's Methodism was developed in direct opposition to Calvinism, and in its mother Anglican church you'll be lucky to find two or three Calvinists in the entire Communion. Mainstream "Presbyterians" aren't even Calvinists these days.

[mothcorrupteth]

Calvinistic Baptists exist in handfuls; most Baptists are Arminian or "Free Grace". It's debateable whether some Baptists should even be called Protestants, since they themselves claim that they are not "protesting" the Roman Church so much as claiming to be a part of a long, unbroken line of Christians who have stood outside of the Roman Church.

All my best friends growing up were CoC, and I have NEVER attended a "gospel meeting" where "denominationalism" was portrayed accurately.

[rachrach50]

thanks for a great lesson again Brother Norm...I haven't had a chance to listen in in a while til now, and it's refreshing to hear what you have to say again

[Super778]

Dude have you ever read classical protestant history. Your the new guy on the block, Reformed THEOLOGY is not. So you better read your Bible some more because what your doing here isn't BIBILICAL.

[michaelflat]

This is irrelevant.(Im not a church of christ memebr) Its not about tracing it back over 400 years or not(which isnt a long time compared to 2000 years). Its not about Reformed faith its about Christian faith. I dont mean any disrespect okay but its a hollow argument :). Check the first 3 centuries of the church it could give a good concept of what they might have believed. God Bless my friend. Hey that goes for any denomination okay not just reformed nessesarily :)

[michaelflat]

Cont sorry my comments are not being posted to who I want them too I saying this to Super778 :)

[Super778]

Ok so lets go deeper to theolgians like Ephrem, Augustine, Turtillian, and Ignatius who all have a concept of election. Church History is relevant to practical Bibilcal issues and it is revelant. The issue is that Arminianism hit the church at about the same time as humanism and individualisms, which are both blots against the church. One of the ways you do exegesis is by looking at what you've got and then comparing it to 2000 years of Church History. If you have something "new" its usually bad

[michaelflat]

Hey Im always open for discussion debate Ive done too much discussion is much better because it is much kinder and can be open if you have info you want to show me Ill look at it and I can show info on the early church I have. Thanks for the reply. :)

[michaelflat]

Cont sorry I meant that to Super778 again

[cobusbron]

"almost holds totally to some form of... to some degree or an another...."....make up your mind, dude. is it, or is it not.

[jonnyivers]

WOW. read one passage out of the bible and ignore the rest. you should just rip out romans 9, ephesians 1,2, galations 1, and matthew 6:44. Jesus Christ died to pay the price for everyone who comes to salvation. for you to say that NOT all whom the father has "called" will come to him, is blasphamy.

[TabithaHopeSmith]

And yet, "Many are called, but few are chosen." (Matthew 22:14)

[Oct31st1517]

The Church of Christ denomination (that is what they are) teaches a false gospel of works.

[purduekenn]

Please explain what false teaching is under consideration? Thanks

[pbcinla]

What a travesty. I don't notice him quote calvin once.

He puts one small section of Ezekiel up against a someone who has not only read, but wrote commentaries on virtually the entire bible (Namely J. Calvin). Not to mention his "institutes"

Sorry, Norm Fields doesn't even come close to the education of John Calvin.

[purduekenn]

Education does not always equate to truth. The bible is truth and John Calvin is wrong about predistination. Read Acts10:34 Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism. Also 1Peter1:17 God impartialy judges

[learlessfeader]

Ask Michael Servetus how much of a man of God John Calvin was.

[Oct31st1517]

Calvinism has nothing to do with John Calvin, yet everything to do with the bible.

[rotary57]

Then why does Ezekiel say that we are responsible for our own sins and not someone else's?

[CharlieRight]

Acts of sin , not the fact that we were born with a sinful nature

[purduekenn]

Calvinism has nothing to do with the bible, he taught predestination and limited atonement. Read 2Peter3:9 not wishing any to perish. Understand that predestination is a group not individuals read 1Peter2:9 a holy nation a people of his own possession, note: plural not singular.

[C3exotics]

Why is campbellism wrong? Pelagianism, salvation by works, baptismal regeneration, salvation by organizational membership, eisegesis of Scripture, etc.

Any "church" that says people go to hell for having music in a worship service is obviously missing something vital...

[trash7921]

Stick to the issue - how can we be responsible for Adam's sin when Ezekiel says we are only responsible for our own?

[C3exotics]

The issue is understanding original sin - the entire book of Romans makes it clear that in Adam all die, even creation is groaning because of Adam's sin. Context is everything. Proper Bible interpretation is crucial. And I'm not even a calvinist.

[studyjesus]

The church of Christ has music , beautiful music. Just not instuments. This shows your misunderstanding.

[purduekenn]

Use the bible not just your opinion.Salvation is by faith not by works. When works is used in the NT it means the works of man or the Law of Moses. Baptism is from God and is not a work. Read the great commission MT28:16-20 and is for the forgiveness of sins Acts 2:38 not my opinion that's what the Bible says.

[C3exotics]

John Calvin didn't start the concept of original sin. Campbellites need to be thankful for men of God such as Calvin, otherwise the Campbellites wouldn't have a Bible, concordance, or hymnal to use. Norm can only espouse Campbellite mumbo, not serious Bible exegesis.

[rotary57]

If it's not serious, then surely you could give a quick reason why it's wrong instead of evading the issue.

[purduekenn]

It started with Augustine who died in 430 AD and Calvin had nothing to do with Christians having the bible today. That's why in latter times the Catholic Church started baptizing babies, Read the book of Acts no babies where baptized. The problem with Calvin is that he taught limited atonement for only the predestined. The bible teaches that Christ died for ALL and that God is impartial wishing that none should perish and that all will come to repentance.