- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,131
- Reaction score
- 1,145
- Points
- 113
Free John MacArthur Kindle Download.
- Thread starter Tarheel Baptist
- Start date
C
christundivided
Guest
Tarheel Baptist said:
Just another slippery Calvinist. I don't know why anyone would want to read a book on assurance from a borderline Hyper-Calvinist. 226 pages to find assurance? Yeah, right,
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,399
- Reaction score
- 2,414
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
christundivided said:
Because the alternative is either a theological position that cannot offer assurance at all, or which simultaneously affirms it while simultaneously denying its theological foundation.
For the purpose of discussion, I am assuming that the "hyper" in "hyper-Calvinist" in your usage doesn't actually mean anything.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,131
- Reaction score
- 1,145
- Points
- 113
OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
C
christundivided
Guest
Ransom said:
You really are hoot sometimes Ransom. Your entire theological world revolves Calvinism.
Calvinism isn't the foundation of anything. Maybe you should read the Bible a little more. Paul clearly stated no man can establish any OTHER foundation than that which is already established. That foundation is Christ. Its not any flavor of childish Calvinism. Do you want to do a formal debate on Calvin's teachings?
I'm not the only one that has accused MacArthur of hyper Calvinism. Maybe you should study his background a little. Did those same people have a worthless definition of "hyper"?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,399
- Reaction score
- 2,414
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
christundivided said:
You brought it up, not me. :
Tarheel Baptist said:
Overpriced
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,131
- Reaction score
- 1,145
- Points
- 113
qwerty said:
You should wait for the big sale at Hyles Publications.....
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
Tarheel Baptist said:
Hyles Publications does not exist, we shut it down because it was loosing money big time. It'll be a long wait.
Thanks for the heads up on John's book, it is free of charge when you order it for your Kindle. That's right $0.00.
bgwilkinson said:
Overpriced
You can still purchase through Hyles Publications (shows First Baptist Publications on my recent credit card purchase), it is more like the days of old. They were morphing it all into Pulse 18 but that has been dismantled (after the hundreds of thousands spend on office remodeling and equipment).
Pulse print is still operating, basically the expanded college print shop.
Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
OZZY said:Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
Over the last several years I have studied for myself much of what Bro. Hyles spoon Fed us. One of those things was the blood of Christ kerfluffle.
Bro. Hyles told us to be kind to people, but he said some of the most malevolent things about John that one could say.
When Bro. Hyles left we were in a vacuum theologically. We waited for Bro. Hyles to tell us what we believed.
Much of what he taught was not in the Bible, it had to be derived and pulled out between the lines. Such is the Divine blood theory. It has Catholic overtones to it. It fits well with the Catholics literal interpretation of drinking Christ's blood for salvation that they derive from John 6.
As for John I did my own investigation. Found out Bro. Hyles had been lying about and slandering John for years.
It all started with Bob Jones taking John out of context, Bro. Hyles jumped on that hobby horse and road the legs off it. It made for Great preaching to incite the minions. It's all out there for anyone interested in truth and due diligence.
Very simply John did and does not believe Jesus had everlasting Divine blood, He had the blood of a man and was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin. Jesus is 100% man and 100% Deity. Thus the God-man or God with us.
You might call it my Recantations like Augustine did toward the end of his life.
bgwilkinson said:OZZY said:Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
Over the last several years I have studied for myself much of what Bro. Hyles spoon Fed us. One of those things was the blood of Christ kerfluffle.
Bro. Hyles told us to be kind to people, but he said some of the most malevolent things about John that one could say.
When Bro. Hyles left we were in a vacuum theologically. We waited for Bro. Hyles to tell us what we believed.
Much of what he taught was not in the Bible, it had to be derived and pulled out between the lines. Such is the Divine blood theory. It has Catholic overtones to it. It fits well with the Catholics literal interpretation of drinking Christ's blood for salvation that they derive from John 6.
As for John I did my own investigation. Found out Bro. Hyles had been lying about and slandering John for years.
It all started with Bob Jones taking John out of context, Bro. Hyles jumped on that hobby horse and road the legs off it. It made for Great preaching to incite the minions. It's all out there for anyone interested in truth and due diligence.
Very simply John did and does not believe Jesus had everlasting Divine blood, He had the blood of a man and was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin. Jesus is 100% man and 100% Deity. Thus the God-man or God with us.
You might call it my Recantations like Augustine did toward the end of his life.
In my opinion Jack Schaap's vaccum was not much better!
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2012
- Messages
- 4,013
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 38
BALAAM said:bgwilkinson said:OZZY said:Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
Over the last several years I have studied for myself much of what Bro. Hyles spoon Fed us. One of those things was the blood of Christ kerfluffle.
Bro. Hyles told us to be kind to people, but he said some of the most malevolent things about John that one could say.
When Bro. Hyles left we were in a vacuum theologically. We waited for Bro. Hyles to tell us what we believed.
Much of what he taught was not in the Bible, it had to be derived and pulled out between the lines. Such is the Divine blood theory. It has Catholic overtones to it. It fits well with the Catholics literal interpretation of drinking Christ's blood for salvation that they derive from John 6.
As for John I did my own investigation. Found out Bro. Hyles had been lying about and slandering John for years.
It all started with Bob Jones taking John out of context, Bro. Hyles jumped on that hobby horse and road the legs off it. It made for Great preaching to incite the minions. It's all out there for anyone interested in truth and due diligence.
Very simply John did and does not believe Jesus had everlasting Divine blood, He had the blood of a man and was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin. Jesus is 100% man and 100% Deity. Thus the God-man or God with us.
You might call it my Recantations like Augustine did toward the end of his life.
In my opinion Jack Schaap's vaccum was not much better!
I totally agree. We loved JS because he was Jack Hyles son in law.
He did not have a pastors heart.
He was chosen as pastor using the Jack Hyles method, which was not scriptural and was set up so that we would choose Jack Schaap.
Hind site shows us how bad the method was. The flaws were legion.
For choosing our new pastor we followed only the Bible not Jack Hyles. Hard to admit we were so wrong.
We only needed Jesus.
bgwilkinson said:BALAAM said:bgwilkinson said:OZZY said:Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
Over the last several years I have studied for myself much of what Bro. Hyles spoon Fed us. One of those things was the blood of Christ kerfluffle.
Bro. Hyles told us to be kind to people, but he said some of the most malevolent things about John that one could say.
When Bro. Hyles left we were in a vacuum theologically. We waited for Bro. Hyles to tell us what we believed.
Much of what he taught was not in the Bible, it had to be derived and pulled out between the lines. Such is the Divine blood theory. It has Catholic overtones to it. It fits well with the Catholics literal interpretation of drinking Christ's blood for salvation that they derive from John 6.
As for John I did my own investigation. Found out Bro. Hyles had been lying about and slandering John for years.
It all started with Bob Jones taking John out of context, Bro. Hyles jumped on that hobby horse and road the legs off it. It made for Great preaching to incite the minions. It's all out there for anyone interested in truth and due diligence.
Very simply John did and does not believe Jesus had everlasting Divine blood, He had the blood of a man and was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin. Jesus is 100% man and 100% Deity. Thus the God-man or God with us.
You might call it my Recantations like Augustine did toward the end of his life.
In my opinion Jack Schaap's vaccum was not much better!
I totally agree. We loved JS because he was Jack Hyles son in law.
He did not have a pastors heart.
He was chosen as pastor using the Jack Hyles method, which was not scriptural and was set up so that we would choose Jack Schaap.
Hind site shows us how bad the method was. The flaws were legion.
For choosing our new pastor we followed only the Bible not Jack Hyles. Hard to admit we were so wrong.
We only needed Jesus.
I always said he reminds me more of a Donald Trump with a Bible than a pastor.
bgwilkinson said:BALAAM said:bgwilkinson said:OZZY said:Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
Over the last several years I have studied for myself much of what Bro. Hyles spoon Fed us. One of those things was the blood of Christ kerfluffle.
Bro. Hyles told us to be kind to people, but he said some of the most malevolent things about John that one could say.
When Bro. Hyles left we were in a vacuum theologically. We waited for Bro. Hyles to tell us what we believed.
Much of what he taught was not in the Bible, it had to be derived and pulled out between the lines. Such is the Divine blood theory. It has Catholic overtones to it. It fits well with the Catholics literal interpretation of drinking Christ's blood for salvation that they derive from John 6.
As for John I did my own investigation. Found out Bro. Hyles had been lying about and slandering John for years.
It all started with Bob Jones taking John out of context, Bro. Hyles jumped on that hobby horse and road the legs off it. It made for Great preaching to incite the minions. It's all out there for anyone interested in truth and due diligence.
Very simply John did and does not believe Jesus had everlasting Divine blood, He had the blood of a man and was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin. Jesus is 100% man and 100% Deity. Thus the God-man or God with us.
You might call it my Recantations like Augustine did toward the end of his life.
In my opinion Jack Schaap's vaccum was not much better!
I totally agree. We loved JS because he was Jack Hyles son in law.
He did not have a pastors heart.
He was chosen as pastor using the Jack Hyles method, which was not scriptural and was set up so that we would choose Jack Schaap.
Hind site shows us how bad the method was. The flaws were legion.
For choosing our new pastor we followed only the Bible not Jack Hyles. Hard to admit we were so wrong.
We only needed Jesus.
You used Jack Hyles method? I don't think so I am not saying he method is correct but don't dare blame JH on the debacle that FBCH got into with JS.Below are three point FBCH failed to consider when they called JS
BIBLE
l. Choose someone who believes the same Bible. Do not ask possible pastors what they believe or what they use. Ask them if they believe that the King James Version is the preserved Word of God. It is not enought that they use the right Bible; they must believe that IT IS the Word of God. Many men in America will say they are not saying that they do not believe in others. That is not good enough. The man chosen ought to believe that the King James Bible is THE inspired and preserved Word of God.
DOCTRINE
2. Choose someone who has the same standards, convictions and doctrine. Many churches make the mistake of choosing a pastor who is not as strong in his stand of separation as he should be. When that happens, a moral breakdown begins to take place in that church, and that church is headed for destruction. Choose a man who stands firm against sin AND against compromise and manifests that by enforced standards.
SOME THAT WAS A PASTOR
7. Choose someone who knows and emulates the work of the First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana. A man who has emulated First Baptist Church already knows how to run a church like it. He already is familiar with what makes it tick. He has experience in building a smaller version of that church. It would be tragic if my church decided to call a man to pastor who had never pastored a church with the same philosophy with which we have built our church over the years.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,131
- Reaction score
- 1,145
- Points
- 113
OZZY said:Tarheel Baptist said:OZZY said:
Just for curiosity's sake, what is your understanding of Macarthur's belief concerning the blood of Christ in salvation?
Clear!
My understandings s that his comments in the nineties where misconstrued and we (IFBx) ran with it like a scalded dog for a few years! CLEAR, BTW just found out where you church is ! I attend church just about three miles away CLEAR!
Sounds about right to me....
Three miles.....that could be any number of churches...since we have one on every corner down here.
