# Preaching Double-Predestination



## ch0zen (Mar 21, 2013)

Hey Guys,

I'm looking for a preacher / teacher / scholar who talks about double-predestination _in a pastorally sensitive, and compassionate way. _

But at the same time doesn't compromise or water down his message to be seeker sensitive.


----------



## Gforce9 (Mar 21, 2013)

R.C. Sproul's book _Chosen By God_ has a chapter dedicated to the topic....


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 21, 2013)

I guess that rules out the Apostle Paul, seeing as he goes straight for the jugular in Rom 9.


----------



## earl40 (Mar 21, 2013)

One Little Nail said:


> I guess that rules out the Apostle Paul, seeing as he goes straight for the jugular in Rom 9.



That is a good observation in how can we dispute Paul was not being pastoral. "Who are you?"


----------



## KMK (Mar 21, 2013)

Gforce9 said:


> R.C. Sproul's book _Chosen By God_ has a chapter dedicated to the topic....



Here is an essay by Sproul on the topic: "Double" Predestination by R.C. Sproul


----------



## jwithnell (Mar 21, 2013)

In my experience, people rarely come around to a solid view of the doctrines of grace when hearing/reading topical preaching/writing. Exegetical preaching on Romans or Ephesians might be your best bet. This should, by its very nature, be pastoral and compassionate.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Mar 22, 2013)

The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination


----------



## ThyWord IsTruth (Mar 22, 2013)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination



I second this work by Zanchius. Look at my avatar and there he is...lol


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 22, 2013)

ch0zen said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I'm looking for a preacher / teacher / scholar who talks about double-predestination _in a pastorally sensitive, and compassionate way. _
> 
> But at the same time doesn't compromise or water down his message to be seeker sensitive.



G'Day Josh, Its a difficult subject as the majority of Calvinists are of the Infralapsarian School they tend more to
the view that God leaves the reprobate in their fallen state rather than Actively & Positively Decreeing their 
Damnation,Boetner in his Reformed Doctrine of Predestination,has a three page spool on Infra & Supra which is a 
good little primer on the subject though he's Infra, States that the difference in the Decrees whether God viewed 
Mankind as Fallen or Unfallen, Refers to Supra as High Calvinism that tends to emphasize the Idea of God's 
Discrimination in His dealings with Man & that they go to the one extreme in this as Universalism does in the 
Other Direction.
Now I never expect the muddle Headed Infra's or Subcalvinists to get the point without having to misrepresent
the true biblical position of the Supra's they were the beginning of the original downgrade controversy,( just as 
their Janus Doctrine of the well meant offer is another example of seeker friendly preaching)their watering down 
of the subject so many centuries ago was the original seeker sensitive response to the Lord God Jehovah's 
frightening Decree,that very fear of God inspiring Doctrine is a means of bringing about the Salvation of the Elect.
It is my opinion that the Doctrine of Double Predestination should be taught directly to your audience, in a Plain
& somber manner , with the Message of the Gospel alongside exhorting men to believe as this is the means through 
which God effectually call's mankind & works out His Divine Decree.
If your looking for a good read on the subject I'd recommend John Calvin's Sermons on Election & Reprobation 
published by Old Paths Publications & also Calvin's Calvinism his Treatises on the The Eternal Predestination of God
& the Secret Providence of God Plus I'd consult his Institutes.Theres also John Gill's The Doctrine of Predestination 
stated, and set in the Scripture Light & Truth Defended, being an Answer to an Anonymous pamphlet, entitled, 'Some
Doctrines in the Supralapsarian Scheme impartially examined by the Word of God'. Gill say's that part of the decree, 
which is called Preterition, be considered either in the corrupt or pure mass of mankind, as fallen or unfallen creatures, 
they are to be considered in the same view, and as on an equal foot and level with those that are chosen and therefore 
no other reason can he given, but the will of God, that he should take one, and leave another.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Mar 22, 2013)

Robert,
I doubt anyone here principially objects to your strong position on lapsarianism. Certainly you haven't been with us long enough for anyone to have even a mild exchange of views with you.

So, introducing your interest and commitment by belligerently name-calling people who disagree with it (muddle headed subcalvinists) warns potential partners in the conversation about your vehemence. People are just going to give you a wide berth, and you'll end up talking to yourself.

Have you read any Infra- posting on the PB going the opposite way, and name-calling? Any fellow supralapsarians- talking that way? Let's try to keep it civil, OK?


----------



## KMK (Mar 22, 2013)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Robert,
> I doubt anyone here principially objects to your strong position on lapsarianism. Certainly you haven't been with us long enough for anyone to have even a mild exchange of views with you.
> 
> So, introducing your interest and commitment by belligerently name-calling people who disagree with it (muddle headed subcalvinists) warns potential partners in the conversation about your vehemence. People are just going to give you a wide berth, and you'll end up talking to yourself.
> ...



Also, it looks like you are typing your response in another program and then cutting and pasting it to the PB. It makes it hard to read.


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 23, 2013)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Robert,
> I doubt anyone here principially objects to your strong position on lapsarianism. Certainly you haven't been with us long enough for anyone to have even a mild exchange of views with you.
> 
> So, introducing your interest and commitment by belligerently name-calling people who disagree with it (muddle headed subcalvinists) warns potential partners in the conversation about your vehemence. People are just going to give you a wide berth, and you'll end up talking to yourself.
> Have you read any Infra- posting on the PB going the opposite way, and name-calling? Any fellow supralapsarians- talking that way? Let's try to keep it civil, OK?



Hi Bruce,That was a reply to Boetner's view there & it was a little bit tongue in cheek, I think vehemence is a little exaggerated don't you think Sir? But as long as Subby Theologians like Boetner,which is on public record & 
publically published by P & R for all to see want to call us High Calvinists , then I think Supra's have every right to self defence & rebuttal,I can't see any wrong in calling Sublapsarians subcalvinists.Also there was a bit of
brinksmanship mixed in there as well,not belligerence man which is worse than my comment(Isnt that name calling on your part!).I was trying to bait for a reply & stir up a little heat on the subject to keep the post rolling along,
seems it worked. I take back the muddled thinking reply & apologise if I've caused you or any other subby brother any offence.


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 23, 2013)

Also, it looks like you are typing your response in another program and then cutting and pasting it to the PB. It makes it hard to read.[/QUOTE]

Actually no i haven't been typing my response on another program ,though I did cut & paste John Gill's Quotes just to elaborate on the Subject
of the decrees cause I thought it was a worthwhile quote & relevant to the subject at hand ,remember Iron sharpens Iron brother.


----------



## KMK (Mar 23, 2013)

One Little Nail said:


> Actually no i haven't been typing my response on another program ,though I did cut & paste John Gill's Quotes just to elaborate on the Subject
> of the decrees cause I thought it was a worthwhile quote & relevant to the subject at hand ,remember Iron sharpens Iron brother.



Are you typing on a phone?


----------



## VictorBravo (Mar 23, 2013)

One Little Nail said:


> Also there was a bit of
> brinksmanship mixed in there as well,not belligerence man which is worse than my comment(Isnt that name calling on your part!).I was trying to bait for a reply & stir up a little heat on the subject to keep the post rolling along,
> seems it worked. I take back the muddled thinking reply & apologise if I've caused you or any other subby brother any offence.



Robert, Bruce is an admin, a seasoned pastor, and was giving you straight advice.

Ken was pointing out the odd line breaks, as are indicated in the portion I quoted. They make it hard to understand your writing.

Finally, more advice from another admin: 1. Do not call an administrator's or moderator's advice brinksmanship, 2. avoid accusing them of belligerence, 3. avoid "baiting", which is not favored here, and 4. avoid deliberately stirring up "heat."

I'm hoping the party spirit you mention in your signature is tongue-in-cheek and not the defining aspect of your presence here.


----------



## JM (Mar 23, 2013)

ch0zen said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I'm looking for a preacher / teacher / scholar who talks about double-predestination _in a pastorally sensitive, and compassionate way. _
> 
> But at the same time doesn't compromise or water down his message to be seeker sensitive.



Don Fortner 

Gilbert Beebe (epub at Sweet Savor)


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 24, 2013)

KMK said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > Actually no i haven't been typing my response on another program ,though I did cut & paste John Gill's Quotes just to elaborate on the Subject
> ...



I use an ipad which I'm using for this message or my desktop for longer posts as the one above how about yourself?


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 24, 2013)

VictorBravo said:


> One Little Nail said:
> 
> 
> > Also there was a bit of
> ...




Mr R. Victor Bottomly who goes under the Name VictorBravo
I Believe that you've misrepresented me in parts of the post.
Your parts 1 & 2 in particular,

1. I was saying that my post was brinksmanship not the the administrators

2. He was accusing me of belligerence in his original reply

If you go back to my reply you will see that the admins reply to my post said
that I was belligerently name calling with vehemence,if the admin can "exaggerate"
then why cant i use exaggeration, hyperbole & metaphor, whats good for the goose
is good for the gander, what I'm saying is that the rules should apply both ways.

I made a broad general Statement against Infra's while the admin made a direct 
personal & private Charge against me, I quoted Boetner then made a Broad 
general application against Infralapsarians. I Did not make any Personal Remarks
against the Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan under Contra_Mundum,you should go back
& read the Post more carefully before you misrepresent me.

I would like you to Publically retract your statement & Accusation that I accused the 
Admin,Rev Bruce G. Buchanan who goes under the the Name Contra_Mundum of
being belligerent & of calling their advise Brinksmanship as you will find that I have
not done so & as such believe that you have Falsely Accused me as much.

P.S. I will give parts 3 & 4 further consideration,Yours Sincerely Robert.


----------



## VictorBravo (Mar 24, 2013)

Robert, feel free to call me Vic. I don't need all the titles.

After your clarification, I am happy to retract implying you were accusing others of brinksmanship and belligerence. The reference to "name calling on your part" threw me off of what the object of the sentence was.

I am also encouraged that you will "give parts 3 & 4 further consideration." Actually, those bits of what I called "advice" are drawn from our forum rules: vBulletin FAQ


I am reminding you, me, and all of us to remember them.


----------



## One Little Nail (Mar 25, 2013)

VictorBravo said:


> Robert, feel free to call me Vic. I don't need all the titles.
> 
> After your clarification, I am happy to retract implying you were accusing others of brinksmanship and belligerence. The reference to "name calling on your part" threw me off of what the object of the sentence was.
> 
> ...



Thats alright Vic,wasn't really upset about it.Good to see u have a good honest humble nature
I'll try to make an effort to abide by the Forum Rules & also keep brinksmanship out of the Forum 
I'll save it for the Arminians & Pelagians,as a Calvinist it has been said in the past that we tend to be 
Pugnacious, I'll make an effort to live in the bond of Peace with my Reformed Brethren.

Regards Robert


----------

