The Narrow Path Ministries

A friend of mine who graduated from Baptist Seminary has begun to question my salvation due to my general aversion to calvinism. Can you please comment on his letter below so that I may have a clearer path of clarity when discussing this with him.

Thank You,
Shinja (your brother in Jesus)

--------------------snip-----------------------------------------------------------

Hey bro,

Yeah, if you study church history there are reoccurring trends of heresy that is helpful to understand in our modern context.
The beginning of any paradigm is your presuppositions when coming to a text of Scripture and your view of the role of the Holy Spirit within church history. The combination of these two things will dictate (most of the time) what your conclusion on any theological subject. Likewise, with eschatology.

There are three main camps:
1) Man/tradition gives meaning to Scripture. (historic Catholicism)
2) Scripture alone edits & interprets all theology & any 'new understanding'. (historic orthodoxy)
3) Progress and evolution can reinterpret and give new meanings to theology/Scripture. (modernism)
My presupposition is that Scripture alone is the final authority for any conclusion of theology. (#2)

The second set is your presuppositions/assumptions of how & what the Holy Spirit operated in Church history.
The basic camps (and there are more nuances):
1) The Holy Spirit is unchanging in His work in the Old & New Testaments & modernity. i.e. God is unchanging.
2) The Holy Spirit worked primarily the same but with minor differences in manifestation & to whom. (Jews/Greeks; Prophets/Priests/Kings/regular people)
3) The Holy Spirit is constantly evolving in how deals with humanity, in time, in persons, in places, in manifestation, in signs, in miracles, etc....

Again, my presupposition coming to Scripture is that God is an unchanging God. However, He has had slight differences in dealing with His people; which some people define as either 'dispensations' or 'covenants'. (#2) I prefer covenants, as I am not a dispensationalist as defined by modern evangelicalism.

So, when I speak of eschatology, these are my assumptions I bring to the table. I believe that Augustine (354 AD) had the same access to the Holy Spirit and Scriptures that I do today. The canon of scripture was closed with the book of Revelation. There is not 'new inspiration', new enlightenment, new theology, new ....whatever. The canon is closed. If it is not then the Book of Mormon, the Pope's writings (canon law), etc., etc., are all up for grabs. Which means everything is up for grabs & interpretation, which means we have no final authority & pure modern relativism. Either Scripture is done, or we end up with an evolving text that is subject to modernity. Is it the same Holy Spirit teaching us or not? So, if there is a right answer, someone is wrong. The question we ought to always bring to Scripture is: "Holy Spirit teach me what you taught the author of this book." There is only one right answer.

I hold to much of the same eschatology as Augustine (354), John Calvin (1509), and Spurgeon (1834). Much of the modern understanding of theology and scripture is exactly that, modern. It is not based in the historical, orthodox understanding of Scripture. That is not to say that historical Christianity at any one point did not have its blind-spots. The heretical Catholicism reigned for a thousand years. However, meanwhile there was biblical-orthodox believers throughout that entire period. They were often tortured and killed for their biblical beliefs. God was converting His elect despite the heresy of the Catholic church. God today is converting His elect despite most of modern churches, not because of them.

Anyway, I am rambling on. I love this stuff!!

If you want more of an understanding of historical-Christian orthodoxy, go to RBC-Lou, meet the pastors, spend time with them, learn at their feet. I am a better man for doing so, a better husband, father, theologian, and disciple of Christ. Or go online and search for Augustine, Calvin, Spurgeon, Matthew Henry.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I didn't see any challenge to your salvation nor an over-emphasis on Calvinism.

Is there anything you can add?

I agree with Christopher. The man seems to be a Calvinist (judging from his list of theologians he says he agrees with and the fact that he seems to be recommending a reformed church), but he does not appear to be pushing anything specifically Calvinistic in this particular letter. While I would disagree with his Calvinism, I do not find much to disagree with in this letter.

There is nothing in it questioning anyone's salvation, though it may be that he is doing this in personal conversation with you, apart from this letter. There is no biblical reason to attach one's opinion of another's salvation to their beliefs on these particular doctrines. If non-Calvinists are not saved, then there was no one saved prior to the first Calvinist, which was Augustine, in the very late fourth century. This does not strike me as a very reasonable thesis.