Pristine Grace
Page 1 of 4 1 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 62

Thread: Duty Faith?

  1. #1
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Duty Faith?

    What is your opinion of Duty Faith?
    This is my signature.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    The Bible teaches it and I believe it
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  3. #3
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    An interesting article on the subject..

    An Internet Chat on Duty Faith and the Protestant Reformed Churches
    http://www.evangelica.de/Duty_Faith_...d_Churches.htm
    This is my signature.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Warrington, UK
    Posts
    488
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    WB, I think this is what is known as a "set-up".

  5. #5
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Charles, Martin, I am not asking because I hope to set someone up hehehehe

    No seriously, I have never really studied the doctrine of Duty-Faith in depth and I want to focus on it like I have on the free offer and common grace.
    This is my signature.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Warrington, UK
    Posts
    488
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    It just looked like it because you posted the question, WB "bit the bait" and you came straight back with something refuting the position of the PRC on it. Oh well, I still laughed even though it was unintentional.

    Anyway, looks like a good topic. Unfortunately there's not quite enough to go on for me to be clear what exactly is being said. Surely faith is a gift not a duty so am I missing something?

    What do you know about this "George Ella" Brandan, I've never heard of him before but he looks like he has his head screwed on right - unlike me!

    Martin

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Mauldin, SC
    Posts
    42
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    DUTY FAITH
    The name given, usually by hyper-Calvinists, to describe those, usually Calvinists who believe that in the gospel Christ is offered to all men if they will believe on Him. In this scheme, all who hear the gospel should believe on Christ in the certainty that if they do they will be saved (hence the name duty-faith preachers).

    Hyper-Calvinists reject the idea of the free offer of the gospel. They look on telling sinners that they ought to believe on Christ as inherently absurd, because sinners are dead and cannot believe until the Hol Spirit regenerates them. Here they go beyond Scripture. The sinner's inability in no way lessens his responsibility. God commands siners to keep His law, though they cannot do it. Equally, He commands them to beleive His gospel and His Son. If these were not so, how could Christ state that the Hly Spirit would reprove the world, "of sin, because they believe ot on me" (Jn.16:8-9)? If unbelief is a sin, then faith is clearly a duty.

    taken from the Thelogical Dictionary, Alan Cairns, Faith Free Presbyterian Church Org.

    Brandon, sounds like you are opening another can of worms!!!
    Pilgrim

  8. #8

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Hawaiian Islands
    Posts
    3,672
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    74
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    119
    Thanked in
    65 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Well, where is the expression 'duty faith' in the New Testament? Anyway, I can see that I have a lot of reading and catching up to do.

    For me, faith is belief with an 'amen' in the gospel of revelation. It embraces the Christ of revelation with assured confidence that he is the only hope of eternal life.

    The popular view of today seems to be FAITH IS WORKS. I see it, hear it, read it at every turn. Men want to force this sewage down my throat.

    That's all, I cannot yet intelligently join this discussion! I only know that my view of faith will not change as a result of it.
    I got four things to live by: don't say nothin' that will hurt anybody; don't give advice--no one will take it anyway; don't complain; don't explain. Walter Scott

  10. #10
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    OK, in this discussion, I'm thinking of taking the anti-duty faith position merely for the sake of debate. Like I said, I haven't made up my mind and am not leaning toward any position. However, since we already have a PRO Duty Faith man, (WildBoar), then we're gonna need an ANTI Duty Faith person even if his heart isn't truly in it! So let's see where this takes us.

    Charles, would you please tell me why you think saving faith is a duty by which all men are bound?

    Brandan
    This is my signature.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    I believe there are problems with duty-faith both as defined by the article and as defined by the definition given by Pilgrim.

    Duty-faith just as duty-repentance is the belief that every person who hears the gospel has a responsibility to believe and to repent. It does not mean that God desires that all men repent and believe but it means that each person is responsible to believe. In answer to other questions I will post two short articles by Rev. Ron Hanko here:

    What's Wrong with Hyper-Calvinism?
    We continue here our examination of hyper-Calvinism in answer to the question posed in the last issue: "What is hyper-Calvinism? How would you define it?"

    In that last issue we said that hyper-Calvinism is NOT the denial that God well-meaningly offers salvation to all who hear the gospel, showing a love for all and a desire to save everyone. It IS the denial that the command of the gospel to repent and believe must be preached to all without exception.

    The heart of hyper-Calvinism, therefore, is a rejection of so-called "duty faith" and "duty repentance," i.e., that it is the solemn duty and obligation of all who hear the gospel to repent and believe. Hyper-Calvinism concludes that because men are lost in sin and are unable of themselves to repent and believe, it is a mistake to command them to do so. Such a command would imply that they are able to repent and believe.

    The hyper-Calvinist, then, makes the same mistake as the Arminians and free-willists, only he draws a different conclusion. Both think that to command or demand repentance and faith of dead sinners must imply that such sinners are not dead and have in themselves the ability to repent and believe. The free-willist says, then: "To command must imply ability, therefore, men have the ability." The hyper-Calvinist says: "To command must imply ability, therefore we will not command any but the elect."

    This means that while a true hyper-Calvinist will preach the "facts" of the gospel to all who will hear (and insist that he is preaching the gospel), he will not command a "mixed" audience to repent and believe. Those commands, he thinks, should be preached only to those who show evidence of being "sensible sinners," that is, sinners who have come under conviction by the work of the Holy Spirit.

    We reject these notions for various reasons. First, it is difficult to imagine how anyone, without divine inspiration, can ever be sure that he is preaching only to "sensible sinners" in order confidently to bring the command of the gospel. In reality, therefore, the command of the gospel will seldom, if ever, be heard in hyper-Calvinist preaching.

    Second, hyper-Calvinism turns the command to repent and believe into a command to continue to repent and believe or to persevere in repenting and believing. So-called "sensible sinners," the only ones who may be called to repent and believe are those who have already begun to do so by the secret operations of the Holy Spirit. The faith called for, in that case, is not saving faith in the truest and deepest sense of the word, i.e., faith that brings a person into communion with Christ, justifies him and gives him salvation, but only faith as it continues to manifest itself in its fruits of assurance and hope.

    It is in this connection that true hyper-Calvinists usually teach that person is justified completely in eternity and that justification by faith involves only the assurance of justification. Thus the faith called for in the gospel does not in fact justify us before God, but only assures of a justification that has already taken place.

    It is in this connection also that hyper-Calvinists are also accused, and rightly, of a certain antinomianism (anti-lawism or anti-commandism) regarding faith. They do not take seriously the command to repent and believe, exactly because the call to faith is for them only the call to be assured of one's faith. It is on these grounds that we emphatically repudiate hyper-Calvinism.

    Rev. Ron Hanko
    What Is Hyper-Calvinism?
    We continue here with the question: "What is hyper-Calvinism? How would you define it?" In answer we have shown in our last article that hyper-Calvinism is a denial of so-called "duty faith" and "duty repentance."

    This denial is against Scripture. Scripture says in Acts 17:30 that "God now commandeth all men every where to repent." John the Baptist in his preaching even called the unbelieving Pharisees and Saducees to repentance (Matt. 3:8; Lk. 3:8). Jesus, too, called all to repentance in His preaching (Matt. 4:17) and upbraided the cities of Galilee because they did not repent (Matt. 11:20). When He sent out the 70 He sent them also to those who would reject the gospel and even warned them about this rejection (Mk. 6:10, 11), yet we read that they went out and preached that men should repent (Mk. 6:12).

    Nor is there any evidence that when Peter, in the temple after the healing of the lame man, preached "repent ye and be converted" (Acts 3:19), that he was preaching only to "sensible sinners." Certainly, Simon the sorcerer was not a "sensible sinner" when Peter said to him: "Repent therefore of this wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee" (Acts 7:22).

    Several of the passages already cited (Acts 3:19; 7:22) also imply that the gospel calls for faith on the part of all who hear. Faith is part of conversion, and one cannot pray God for forgiveness without also praying in faith. So, too, it is not possible that Jesus condemned the Pharisees for not believing if believing was not required of them (Matt. 21:25; Lk. 22:67; Jn. 10:25, 26).

    The hyper-Calvinist gets around these verses by speaking of different kinds of repentance and faith. He speaks of "Jewish repentance," "reformation repentance," "circumstantial repentance," "collective repentance," etc., and claims that Scripture also calls for different kinds of faith. So he insists that many of the verses we have referred to call only for such kinds of faith and repentance, but not for saving repentance and faith.

    We do not deny, of course, that Scripture speaks of "faith" and "repentance" that are not saving (Acts 8:13; II Cor. 7:10; James 2:19; Heb. 12:17). But these, as we know, are simply hypocrisy, and do not find favor with God. They cannot possibly, then, be something God calls for. How could God, Who does not lie, speaking through the gospel, call men to a repentance or faith which is not sincere and saving? There is not the slightest evidence in Scripture that He does so, either.

    We believe, therefore, that the Word of God in Acts 17:30 must be taken seriously by those who preach the gospel. We reject the notion that the command to repent and believe savingly should be heard only by those who show some evidence of conviction. That would not only limit the preaching of the gospel, but would in the end destroy true gospel preaching.

    As we hope to show in the next article, the command to repent and believe is an integral part of the preaching not only as far as God's elect are concerned, but also as far as the "reprobate" are concerned. All who come under the preaching MUST hear that command! Not only is it according to the will of God that it be preached to all promiscuously, but it is necessary as far as the gospel itself is concerned. To deny this is to strip the gospel of its power and make it an empty and vain show. Rev. Ron Hanko
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  12. #12
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Charles, I had already linked to those articles...

    I have a question and I'd like to know if you can answer it for me...

    If everyone has a duty to exercise saving faith as you say, what about the reprobate? The reprobate cannot exercise saving faith. Second how can the reprobate believe something is true for him when it isn't? Didn't Christ die only for the elect? How is the reprobate responsible for believing the gospel is true for him when it isn't since Christ did not die for him?
    This is my signature.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    If everyone has a duty to exercise saving faith as you say, what about the reprobate? The reprobate cannot exercise saving faith.
    Romans 9:19-20 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

    This is the same objection raised by every Arminian who hears the Gospel of grace. The reasoning is that since man is born with a sinful nature and incapable of doing any good then man cannot be held responsible for not doing good. The Bible says otherwise.

    Didn't Christ die only for the elect? How is the reprobate responsible for believing the gospel is true for him when it isn't since Christ did not die for him?
    The Gospel is never presented in the Scriptures as "Christ died for you", no matter how much David Hunt may think it is. The Gospel is that God justifies the ungodly.

    This is why hyper-Calvinism is not some sort of consistent Calvinism, hyper-Calvinism is backwards Arminianism.

    Sola Gratia,
    WildBoar
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  14. #14
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    Romans 9:19-20 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

    This is the same objection raised by every Arminian who hears the Gospel of grace. The reasoning is that since man is born with a sinful nature and incapable of doing any good then man cannot be held responsible for not doing good. The Bible says otherwise.
    I don't think non duty faith people would think that at all. This is dealing with having the gift of faith versus repenting of sin. Anti-Duty faith people would not say that men are not under obligation to repent. Men are under obligation to repent even though they cannot. Are you suggesting that faith comes because men repent? (please don't misunderstand me, I'm not taking an anti duty faith position, simply arguing as I think an anti would LOL)

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    The Gospel is never presented in the Scriptures as "Christ died for you", no matter how much David Hunt may think it is. The Gospel is that God justifies the ungodly.
    And I would agree with that. However, those that believe the gospel come to the realization that Christ did indeed die for the individual. If men are under duty to savingly believe then also men are under duty to be the elect of God and come to the knowledge that Christ did indeed die for them. Further, they are under duty to be justified by Christ and to be loved by Him and to be preserved by faith, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    This is why hyper-Calvinism is not some sort of consistent Calvinism, hyper-Calvinism is backwards Arminianism.
    I haven't seen those you call hyper-calvinists present the gospel as "Christ died for you." They simply present the facts that Christ died for sinners. Everyone that I've seen that denies duty faith says that we must preach the gospel message indiscriminately. If someone denies duty faith and preaches the gospel indiscriminately, what is the problem with that?
    This is my signature.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    2,655
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    The Gospel is never presented in the Scriptures as "Christ died for you", no matter how much David Hunt may think it is. The Gospel is that God justifies the ungodly.
    great comments WB. there is a good little book by tom wells about limited atonement called "price for a people". in it he discusses this misunderstanding of what the gospel message is. in a nutshell, he says that the message that the apostles in acts gave (not the gospel but the message of challenge that follows the gospel) was not that Christ died for them but that Christ has been crucified and is now resurrected as Savior, Messiah, Lord, and King and He demands your allegience. therefore all are commanded and responsible to put down their weapons and surrender (the issue of whether they are able or not is moot here).

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    This is why hyper-Calvinism is not some sort of consistent Calvinism, hyper-Calvinism is backwards Arminianism.
    this is a very interesting, and i think correct way to put it. i really think this issue is as simple as you said it is that, "Duty-faith just as duty-repentance is the belief that every person who hears the gospel has a responsibility to believe and to repent. It does not mean that God desires that all men repent and believe but it means that each person is responsible to believe." the issue is not about ability but responsibility.

    Acts 17:30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, 31 because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead." 32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, "We shall hear you again concerning this." 33 So Paul went out of their midst.

    paul here is declaring this message to everyone. he does not cater one message to those he believes to be reprobate and another to those he believes to be elect. in fact we find in v.32 that some laughed about it. i don't think the issue is that saving faith is expected of all (as if it is assumed that all are able) but that allegience is commanded of all (reprobate and elect alike). the Scripture is crystal clear of this regardless of all of the extra-biblical language that is thrown around.

    2 Thess 1:7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed for our testimony to you was believed.

    the reprobate is facing judgment for unbelief just as much as he is facing judgment for breaking God's law. he is responsible to obey whether or not he has the ability to do so. all that his non-compliance does is increase his judgment and magnify God's glory and power.
    When I get a little money, I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes.
    --Erasmus

    A room without books is a body without soul.
    --Cicero

  16. #16
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Further comments, I don't think anyone who is against duty faith would say that unbelief is not a sin. They would say those who do not believe the gospel are indeed sinful because of their unbelief, but they would say men are not duty bound to exercise saving faith.
    This is my signature.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    disciple:

    Exactly. To not believe is to call God a liar.

    brandan:

    I haven't seen those you call hyper-calvinists present the gospel as "Christ died for you." They simply present the facts that Christ died for sinners. Everyone that I've seen that denies duty faith says that we must preach the gospel message indiscriminately.
    I'm not suggesting that the methods or that the end result is the same. I'm saying that they both adopt the same erroneous premises. that if God holds man responsible to do x, man has the ability or has been given the ability by God to do x.

    Men are under obligation to repent even though they cannot. Are you suggesting that faith comes because men repent?
    By no means. I'm stating that men sin when they do not believe just as they sin when they do not repent, both actions say that God is a liar.

    If men are under duty to savingly believe then also men are under duty to be the elect of God and come to the knowledge that Christ did indeed die for them. Further, they are under duty to be justified by Christ and to be loved by Him and to be preserved by faith, right?
    Men are commanded by God to believe. No man elect or reprobate is commanded by God to be justified, loved by Him, etc.

    Sola Gratia,
    WildBoar
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  18. #18
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    Men are commanded by God to believe. No man elect or reprobate is commanded by God to be justified, loved by Him, etc.
    Anti-Duty Faith people say that men are commanded to believe...
    http://geocities.com/Heartland/Lake/...race/gs26.html
    Whatever our worthy predecessors intended by the terms of this Article, they certainly did not mean to minimize the sin of unbelief. The purpose was to rebut the flesh-pleasing error taught by the Arminian that man in his natural state (that is, dead in trespasses and sins) is possessed of some latent power to exercise savingly the spiritual acts of faith and repentance. Our belief is that fallen man has neither power, nor will, nor inclination to anything spiritual. Scripture abundantly teaches this (I Cor. 2:14 Rom. 8: 7,8; Matt. 15: 19; John 1:11-13; 3:3-7). But this notwithstanding, we believe that all men are under obligation to believe and obey God.
    It sounds like anti-duty faith people are teaching the same thing.
    This is my signature.

  19. #19
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    93
    Thanked in
    61 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    I invited an anti duty faith individual to this conversation (Mike Krall of the Pristine Grace website). Let's hope he joins and can give his insight! I seriously want to get to the bottom of this issue and exhaust this topic because right now I'm very confused about it.

    Brandan
    This is my signature.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    2,655
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Duty Faith?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar
    I'm not suggesting that the methods or that the end result is the same. I'm saying that they both adopt the same erroneous premises. that if God holds man responsible to do x, man has the ability or has been given the ability by God to do x.
    this is just like the logic used by luther in his bondage of the will. erasmus was reading the imperatives (mood of command in Greek) as if they were indicatives (mood of reality in Greek). because God commands everyone to believe and repent and because they have the responsibility (or duty bound) to obey Him, it does not logically follow that they have the ability to obey Him.
    When I get a little money, I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes.
    --Erasmus

    A room without books is a body without soul.
    --Cicero

Page 1 of 4 1 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Blessed are they that mourn
    By beloved57 in forum Churchianity Archive
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-02-06, 12:49 PM
  2. John Calvin on 1 John 2:2
    By Bob Higby in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 01-14-06, 04:25 PM
  3. The Gospel Way Website Changed and Updated
    By Tobias Crisp in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-30-05, 11:52 AM
  4. Tobias Crisp’s View of Christ Made Sin
    By Tobias Crisp in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-29-05, 07:34 PM
  5. The Sean Gerety / Trinity Foundation / Luba BLOWUP
    By bauerpauer in forum Noteworthy Discussions
    Replies: 207
    Last Post: 09-24-05, 09:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •