Hidemi. Thanks for your response. I am not saying my certain theological position is perfect, but I believe it is certainly more in line with scripture than many other choices available in today's doctrinal cafeteria. At least it keeps me alert to some silly preachers(like ones who say God tells them to hit people to deliver healing....Todd Bentley, Guy Peh, Smith Wigglesworth are three I know of in this line of experience). Also it keeps me free of bondage to days and rituals without scriptural warrant(I cherish my liberty regarding things not clearly commanded by God). Sprinkling? Yes, some do, but not the Baptists...consider Mr. Spurgeon and today's Primitive Baptists and others of like faith(Reformed Baptists is a general term for them). Well, that's just my observation and some words of my opinion on the matter. God bless you.
Hidemi Williges wrote: 7. If Calvinism is great and Biblical, then why do your congregations keep so many of the traditions of the catholic church and rarely, if ever evangelize?
Rejecting supposed "holy days"(which the RCC has many--Christmas, Easter, All Saints, etc) by many Calvinists and all Calvinists believing such days do not merit salvation sounds quite different from the traditions of the RCC, also rejecting the papal and priestly duties, RCC teaching losing salvation instead of the Reformed/Calvinist position of assurance based on God's will and His place in predestination(God's will and predestination being biblical). That's just a short list, but some other good folks here can lengthen the list if they feel it is necessary.
Hidemi Williges wrote: Calvinism sounds a lot like catholicism in disguise.
I have been to Catholic and Calvinist churches and don't see a similarity in doctrine or practice or find a disguise. Calvinists(Reformed Christians) are anathema by the Roman Catholic Church. I used to be Catholic also, but I'll go the Reformed way any day...at least it submits to the Bible alone, by faith alone, by Christ alone, grace alone and to God's glory alone. What other position gives glory to God alone in salvation and the ultimate redemption and renewal of the whole creation? None other except so-called Calvinism as far as I know.
Jim Lincoln wrote: IHCC is Calvinistic,
Oh, good. Nice when we discover some common ground.
May be, Jim. Much of Roman Catholicism is eclectic...perhaps eclecticism is a name for this type of mix of theologies and religions. However, the Constantine(Roman) Catholic Church has been practicing eclecticism for a long time. May the daughter and mother be delivered unto scriptural salvation.
Actually Jim, orthodox Anglicans are perfectly fine Christians. They believe in Faith Alone, Scripture alone, etc. Their interpretation may vary from yours, but that's about all. The liberal Anglicans, on the other hand, are a religion unto themselves and have abandoned the traditional(and therefore orthodox) Anglican doctrine of Scripture Alone.
Yep, keep passing out the KJV. It makes more sense than the confusion of multiple versions published in multiple varieties of Engish we have today. The great doctrines of the Faith are best preserved in the KJV--words like Justification, atonement, sanctification, etc are necessary to keep the true faith.
Patrick, I mostly agree with you. I believe in a literal creation and also support strict environmental regulations and cleaner and wiser use of resources. I don't think it's a contradiction, but simply a conclusion you reach on what you know--information you have received, studied, processed, how you may interpret the Bible and particularly verses related to creation and the earth, etc. I don't see a problem with your view and generally agree with you.
Many Anglicans today doubt the Bible, but their Anglican forefathers took care of this re-evaluation once and for all when they stated correctly: "Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church."
Too bad this isn't good enough for many Anglicans today, but many Christians today don't like to submit to the Bible as sufficient.
Thanks Wayne. There is a congregation of the Reformed Church in America in Estonia's capital city, but it is a long commute to the capital from where I am. I attend services at one of the local Lutheran churches and this is good enough for me, but I do hope the spiritual situation here gets better. The people here need to be warned about the dangers of the ecumenical and charismatic movements. There is a small group of devout believers here, but it is very small.
Hi DJC, In addition to Guy and Ilke Peh, she knows about Bentley as well. When I had a discussion with her a few weeks ago about the Peh meeting and his punching a person, she said there are others who do this. I think she meant Bentley, because a year earlier she showed me the Lakeland Revival website. I didn't think much of it until I heard about Bentley's behavior. Interestingly, I found out a famous early Pentecostal pioneer named Smith Wigglesworth dropkicked a baby back to life(sounds more like primitive CPR instead of a biblical miracle), so this violence is nothing new; it seems to find a home among the pentecostal and charismatic movements.
I agree with Jim. Furthermore, it does not make sense to call something a cult based on a doctrine in a creed and not found in the New Testament. Judaism is simply another religion which rejects Jesus Christ, but it is not a cult.