Comments on: What Got You Started in Reformed Theology?

By: Richie W.

Richie W. — Sun, 24 Mar 2013 22:31:27 +0000

Believe or not, listening to Harold Camping on Open Forum. I used to listen to him every evening on a Family Radio station broadcast out of Philadelphia in the mid-80’s. He was “spot on” at that time.

By: Barry G.

Barry G. — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 23:35:49 +0000

I am very much humbled and impressed with the testimonies that I have read about how many have becomed Refromed. I too was saved into an arminian dispensational church (specifically an I.F.B one). I was heavily influenced by J.I. packer, Augustine, R.C. Sproul, and the like. I could only wish to come in contact with more of those who were drawn into the Reformed Faith, even if it’s only on-line.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 05:00:08 +0000

In reply to Rev. Dr. I. Ray Berrian. Thanks for posting Rev., you are the PERFECT example of the noetic effect of the fall (see Rom. 1). I don't think one could find a better example of one unable or unwilling to accept certain truths than you have given us here. Great!

By: brother troy

brother troy — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:43:52 +0000

i read the bible all the way through. i was raised in an arminian style church, so most of my life i was a dispensationalist as well. i didnt know any better or differant until the Lord delivered me from a life of alcohol and rebellion, i lost everything to start anew. I began to get serious about bible study, and after a few years I was impressed to preach the gospel. I began listening to sermons from ch spurgeon, i liked them so well that i bought the entire library of his work, which led to reading aw pink, calvin, augustine, and many more capable theologians throughout history. I knew that when i read the bible i could not harmonize the scripture with what i had been taught, especially romans 8 and 9, and when the Lord said, nobody comes to me unless the Father draws him, i didnt even have a clear understanding of the divine nature of Christ or the trinity, and many more foundational doctrine of the church through history. i came to find out that i was raised on charles finny style doctrine rather than the real baptist faith of history after studying the confessions of faith and the catachisms, i didnt even know they existed until i was 30 something. then i got interested in church history, read systematic theology (hodge), and works by john bunyan( again, i knew nothing of bunyan, not even pilgrims progress)
but now i am faced with another delimna as everyone in my churceh that i now pastor has the, arminian background, i have a hard time with discussions with them as nobody agrees with me expect for the last point of tulip. please keep me in your prayers that God will help me to become a better speaker, pastor, and christian.

By: Rev. Dr. I. Ray Berrian

Rev. Dr. I. Ray Berrian — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 04:30:21 +0000

I spent only one year at Reformed Episcopal Seminary because of the false doctrines of Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irrestible Grace taught in Systematic Theology. The thing that turned it around for me is because said professor would not allow students questioning various parts of theology like Election Conditioned by Faith, Atonement sufficient for all, but efficient in the Elect, nor Resistible Grace. A theological education should give the contrary view and not just one view. Dr. Sproul takes great joy in Reformation Theology, while many Christians have moved on and into Biblical theology, thanks be to God. Reformed theologians have got caught in the web of ancient Roman Catholic theology and even Luther stayed there also believing in “The Bondage of the Will.” Much of Reformed Theology is simply, spiritually sleeping on the doorstep of the Vatican.

Thank God that we are not saved on the basis of our theology, but by a simple faith-trust in JESUS.

The Rev. Dr. I. Ray Berrian, Th.D. & Ph.D.

By: George Bryson

George Bryson — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 23:56:25 +0000

The first point of Calvinism is referred to as Total Depravity. Everyone is nodding their heads up and down. I will take that as a yes. According to Calvinism, because man is totally depraved, he is spiritually dead and therefore unable to believe in Jesus Christ. Again I see the same heads nodding up and down. Since the spiritually dead man is unable to savingly believe as a spiritually dead or unregenerate man, he cannot be justified, because justification is by faith alone in Christ alone. I still sense agreement among the multitudes reading this blog.

Therefore, according to Calvinism, asking an unregenerate man to believe so that he can be justified is like asking a blind man to see. Right! Just as a blind man must have eyes capable of sight (i.e., he cannot be blind) so he can see, so a spiritually dead man must given life or be regenerated so he can believe. So far all my Calvinist friends seem to be in full agreement. Thus, to be consistent the Calvinist cannot expect an unregenerate man to believe so that he can be justified. His appeal to believe and be justified should (logically and theologically) be to the regenerate man, because only the spiritually alive or regenerated man is capable of believing in Christ. I am sure I have no Calvinists present who will deny this.

However, the Calvinist also says, the truly regenerate man receives saving faith (which is faith in Christ) immediately upon being regenerated or born of the Spirit. Thus, there is not need to ask the regenerate or born again person to believe so that he can be justified by faith. This is because all born again people immediately become believers when they are born again and all true believers are justified the instant they believe. From a Calvinist point of view, did I go wrong somewhere? It will not do to say that â€œGeorge is just being philosophical and using logic when he should be using Scriptureâ€. The question is; do my logical conclusions follow from the Calvinists position, which Calvinists argue is biblical.

By way of review, in this thinking and theology, there is no need to call upon an unbeliever to believe while unregenerate because he cannot. Even so, there is no need to call upon a regenerate person to believe because he already does. Many Calvinists say that since they do not know who the elect are, out of obedience they call upon the lost to believe in Christ. All Calvinists agree that all of the elect will eventually believe when they are regenerated. Therefore ignorance as to who and who is not among the elect is irrelevant. So is the question of who and who is not regenerate because as long as they are not regenerate, faith and justification are not possible. Again, according to Calvinism, once they are regenerate, as all of the elect will one day be, calling the regenerate to believe so they can be justified is to call upon those regenerated and already justified by faith to become what they already are. Is this really what a Calvinist thinks he is doing?

If anyone doubts that this is indeed an accurate representation of the first point of Calvinism I would happily send you a few comments from Piper, MacArthur, Sproul, Boice etc. I suspect that most of you already have seen what they have said and you know what I am saying is a fair and accurate representation of the first point of Calvinism? These are not trick questions, though you may feel they are if you feel that you are trapped. I honestly believe they are valid questions and represent what a lot of your non-Calvinists friends would like you to answer.

By: George Bryson

George Bryson — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 04:35:11 +0000

To all others:

If you are convinced that Reformed theology is true (i.e., that the Reformed or Calvinist doctrine of salvation is the biblical doctrine of salvation), when would you say you became a true and saved believer in Christ? Was it before you became convinced of Reformed Theology, simultaneous to becoming convinced that Reformed theology was biblical or after? If after, how long were you a true believer before you became convinced of Calvinism. If there is a time gap between your conversion to Christ and your conversion to the doctrines of grace, does that mean that you do not accept that the Five Points or the doctrines of grace equals the Biblical Gospel or that a person is not required to believe the Biblical Gospel to becomes truly saved (Rom. 1:16)? Not a trick question. Thanks

By: George Bryson

George Bryson — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 04:17:36 +0000

Hey Junior

What date would you give for the earliest you became convinced that the Reformed “Doctrines of Grace” were true and biblical? When would you say you first received (by faith) Christ as your Savior? In your thinking and theology, which came first or did they happen at the same time? Thanks

By: Raymond M.

Raymond M. — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:14:44 +0000

Listening to Francis Chan and Robert V. Schuller I became interested in John Piper, listening and reading John Piper I became aware of John Calvin and Calvanism. That sparked a great interest for theology, I’m my search for knowledge I came across RTS Virtual Courses in Theology (podcast).

– raymmrtnz

By: Gilda Thury

Gilda Thury — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:21:15 +0000

Praise God. It is nice to read that someone who claims to be a calvinist actually reads or has read calvin. …and Luther of course. If more so-called calvinists would read the original sources and the confessions like Heidelberg Catechism, Canons of Dordt, the church would see how far it has strayed from the original Gospel. The main quibble I have with ALL the reformed churches today is that they SAY they are reformed or Calvinist but would let Arminius become a member in a heartbeat. They want the Gospel to be GRACE and, if, or but and not GRACE ALONE. They put their people back under the yoke of the law as if the active and passive obedience of Jesus Christ were not enough for our justification AND the Holy Spirit not enough for our sanctification.
In Christ
Gilda Thury

By: David R.

David R. — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:58:43 +0000

My Calvinist “conversion” was about five years ago. After 15 years as a dispensationalist (and sensing increasingly that something was wrong), I was becoming increasingly influenced by the likes of Packer, Piper and Schaeffer – but the real revolution occurred for me when I read Calvin’s Institutes. I made several false starts, but once I really got started, I devoured that book. Over the next few months, the onion peeled (as it were) and I joyfully embraced Calvinist soteriology, eschatology, sacramentology and ecclesiology (in that order). Also very helpful for me at that time were Luther’s On the Bondage of the Will, Edwards’ Freedom of the Will, Owen’s The Death of Death, and of course numerous Reformed confessions and catechisms.

By: Debbie

Debbie — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:41:33 +0000

In reply to McWilliams. I can think of many author's who have been true men of God, men after God's own heart, Pink is most certainly one of them. God has his people everywhere, maybe in ones and twos, oh but Lord, how I wish you would pour out your Spirit upon a handfull of men such as Pink,Boetner,Huntingdon, men who made not a meal of teaching Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, for the Word is simple not with great swelling words, but a sweet savour, a real meal of meat and not milk sops

By: Debbie

Debbie — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:34:05 +0000

In reply to William. Dear William, Ditto.

By: Susan

Susan — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 04:32:29 +0000

In 1965, I was given “an odd book” (A.W. Pink’s “The Sovereignty of God”) to “read and see what you think.” It went against nearly everything I had been taught in the arminian/dispensational churches I had attended all my life. I was afraid to believe what Pink taught, but as I examined what I had been taught, and what Pink taught, against Scripture, I found myself unable to refute the reformed doctrines, even thought I was not ready to espouse them. I shared the book with my youth group and was soundly reprimanded that these teachings were unbiblical; still, I was not satisfied. I began to question everything I had been taught (legalism, eschatology, witnessing, etc.), even though I still did not fully understand the reformed faith.

Shortly after being “silenced” by the youth leaders in our church, those same leaders went on a mission to Scotland. In the providence of God, they came into contact with reformed ministers and were also given Pink’s book to read. When they returned to the States, they had all become reformed. We were all at a loss where to go from there. The church we attended asked us to leave, and we knew nothing about other reformed churches. I felt as if we were the only ones who believed this “stuff” and it was frightening because we were branded as heretics.

Ultimately, we heard about two reformed seminaries (Westminster and Reformed Episcopal). Several of the men attended Westminster and my pastor (we had formed a small church) encouraged me to attend Reformed Episcopal.because it would accept women. What an eye-opener to find so many other Christians who were reformed! My three years under the teachings of such godly men as Robert K. Rudolph, Fred C. Kuehner, Theophilus J. Herter, Milton Fisher, Dwight Zeller, and Howard Higgins were the best and most character/scripture-buildings years of my life.

And it all started with A.W. Pink’s book being providentially placed in the hands of unsuspecting young people who tried very hard, unsuccessfully, to not believe what ultimately changed all our lives according to the good pleasure of His will.

By: William

William — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:30:36 +0000

The Irresistable Grace and Effectual Calling of the Sovereign God of all creation.

By: mary

mary — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:09:10 +0000

In reply to mary.

I NOW attend………..

By: mary

mary — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:06:49 +0000

Came to this article by Twitter………

I was in the Free Methdist Church since I went to a “camp meeting” when I was 15 [1957]
I thought this was the only christian view.

The RADIO changed my mind, praise God!

The White Horse Inn and Renewing Your Mind.

I not attend RPCNA

By: Eric Burns

Eric Burns — Sat, 02 May 2009 18:04:25 +0000

In reply to Chuck Bridgeland. It may be Tulip: The Five Points of Calvinism in Light of Scripture written by Duane Edward Spencer. Publishe by Baker books in 1979. Spencer was a OPC pastor in Texas.

By: Eric Burns

Eric Burns — Sat, 02 May 2009 17:57:25 +0000

I was raised in pragmatist Arminian evangelicalism, Christian schools, etc. yet never embraced the Christ of scripture. I was amazed by grace and brought to the faith and Reformed theology through the radio ministry of RC Sproul. Sproul’s ministry served as a catalyst to many other great Reformed resources and books. Putting those resources and doctrines under the authority of scripture was impactful. It helped me see those same verses I heard as a youngster in a different light.

The specific books that stand out…..

Willing To Believe by RC Sproul
Putting Amazing Back Into Grace by Michael Horton (still in my book the best modern day primer on Reformed theology)
Tulip: The 5 points of Calvinism In Light of Scripture by Duane Edward Spencer
The Holiness of God by RC Sproul
Christianity & Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen

Later I found Iain Murry’s book Evangelicalism Divided to be a big help.

By: Thomas Sullivan

Thomas Sullivan — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:35:00 +0000

This program referred the listener to WIKI for show notes, and I was going to add some bibliography there, but it isn’t ready. Let me just mention a few books. Elisha Coles – The Sovereignty of God has been reprinted for awhile. Also, the show mentioned Pinks’ Sovereignty of God. This work was republished by Banner of Truth to – as they supposes – more reflect his later convictions on reprobation and also the free offer of the gospel. But it has not been that well received. This title was Pink’s fourth book, written in 1918, and all other books before it defended dispensationalism! Pink changed his view roughly around 1932 about eschatology
Pinks’ work The Total Depravity of Man is one of the fullest treatments since Thomas Goodwin’s works volume 10, Man’s Guiltiness Before God, and Human Nature in its Fourfold State – a classic by Thomas Boston that I have narrated at least three times. Edwards’ Doctrine of Original Sin Defended should be mentioned as well as Freedom of the Will. J I Packers’ INTRODUCTION to Owen’s Death of Death is worth reading alone, and there is a small booklet by Lloyd-Jones called, The Plight of Man and the Power of God. I was personally helped by Robert Haldane’s commentary on Romans chapter 9, and Strong’s and Shedds’ theology ESPECIALLY on soteriology. Shedd has the most excellent treatment of the antecedents to regeneration I have ever read that is so similar to puritan thought. R L Dabney actually had a title called, The Five Points of Calvinism. As far as expositions on the catechisms only Thomas Ridgely, to my knowledge, ever wrote a commentary on the Larger Catechism. Thomas Vincent, Ashbel Green, and Thomas Boston all wrote commentaries on the shorter catechism. Here is a historic note that you may find interesting because the name Leonard Woods in our day is almost totally unknown. Woods wrote an Essay on Native Depravity of 292 pages. I mention this because this is something so interesting that I could not imagine being repeated in our day. This essay one a prize. Here is the story, “The premium of three hundred dollars which was awarded to the writer of the Essay,
was offered by Mr. John Dunlop of Edinburgh, Scotland. The Judges appointed were, the
Reverend Jeremiah Day, D. D. L. L. D. President of Yale College, the
Reverend Edward D. Griffin, D. D. President of Williams College,
and the Reverend Heman Humphrey, D. D. President of Amherst College.
The publication of the Essay was delayed some time, for the purpose of receiving the directions of Mr. Dunlop. That was in 1835! I am done, I realize I could talk about books all day, but just thought I would whet the appetites here.
Thomas – a mailman in Michigan.

By: Roberto G

Roberto G — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:57:33 +0000

I was attending a Southern Baptist college in the mid nineties as an education major. The dorm debates over theology didn’t interest me that much, but little did I know some seeds of doubt were sown. I started to ask myself about the state of the world and the nature of God’s control. Reading and paying attention to the Psalms were the first step in God removing the scales from my eyes.
I transferred to Moody Bible Institute and changed my major to theology. As a Baptist, I got into John Gill and Charles Spurgeon. I then discovered Gordon H. Clark. I found that his Predestination (P&R Publishing) was overwhelmingly Biblical, coherent, and irresistable. I would say that of all the authors/teachers I have read, Gordon H. Clark has had the biggest impact on me. I used much of his theological works as a helpful source to teach various Bible Studies in Spanish. There is now a core group of Spanish speaking, self-consciously calvinistic believers who form part of an OPC church plant in the Chicago area. Praise God!!!

By: Tim Wilson

Tim Wilson — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:11:11 +0000

This is a great podcast.

I grew up in a Methodist church, but I knew nothing of the debate. After my first year at Uni I became aware of the differences and looked at the 5 points of Calvinism vs 5 points of Arminianism on wikipedia. I only found Limited Atonement to be something I struggled with from scripture. As time went by basically I just read scripture and Arminianism fell for me. It was simple as that. I seriously was probably a Calvinist because of the Bible.

By: junior

junior — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 15:45:38 +0000

I was attending a Calvary Chapel (an Anti-Calvinist denomination) when in my 2nd or 3rd year of reading through the bible i came across this: “because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:7-8). I asked my Pastor about Calvinism and he gave me the Calvary Chapel booklet by George Bryson, “The Five Points of Calvinism Weight and Found Wanting”.

This was my first exposure to the Calvinist-Arminian dialogue. What I found here has remained constant throughout the years in this dialogue – One side submits to their reasoning (above Scripture), while the other side submits to Scripture. In his book I noticed when he quoted Calvinists, they quoted Scripture. His arguments against Calvinism was severely deficient in use of Scripture.

So I became an unhappy Dispensational Calvinist – ’til I read Graeme Goldsworthy’s “Gospel and Kingdom” (Part of the “Goldsworthy Trilolgy”). It was then that i understood Covenantal Theology was not “spiritualising the text, nor was it imposing your own structure upon the Scriptures, but Covenant Theology understands that Christ is the Hermeneutic. Then i finally understood the “big picture” of scripture, the drama of Redemption, the History of Salvation. (If you’ve read Goldsworthy you’ll see the obvious influences of Vos and Van Til)

By: McWilliams

McWilliams — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 06:55:59 +0000

Most influential book was The Sovereignty of God by Arthur W. Pink. This book was overwhelming and challenged my thinking greatly. Then I read The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination by Boettner and I was totally taken by the truth of it all! The study of The Five Points of Calvinism by Steele then answered my remaining questions and I’ve never looked back but continued then reading the puritans and building a ‘reformed library’.

By: Chuck Bridgeland

Chuck Bridgeland — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:56:41 +0000

Wish I could remember.

I remember stumbling on a paperback primer on TULIP, in the 1976-77 time frame, and working through it. Agree, agree, agree, agree, ummmm, yes agree, and that was it. Pretty soon I was reading the likes of Warfield and going to PCRT (Wheaton, on the Atonement, with Sproul, Gerstner, Boice and Roger Nicole.). Somewhere along the way that book got mislaid, as I can’t find anything like it in my library now. If anyone has any ideas, let me know.

Also, about then, Frederick Dale Bruner’s _A Theology of the Holy Spirit_, read to try to make sense of the church we were in at the time going off into charismatic signs and wonders. It’s been that long since I read it, but I remember it being radically grace centered and Christ centered.

By: Tim H.

Tim H. — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:24:14 +0000

Thanks for this episode guys! I wish I could call in. I will try in the future to call.
I was “reformed” by the youth pastor at the EPC church my family started attending when I was 16. He taught a class for high schoolers on Sunday night where he taught us reformed theology.
I remember trying to read Loraine Boettner not too long after that, but I’m not sure how much I gleaned from it. started reading Concise Theology (Packer) also.
Beyond that class and the Bible, I think the thing that most helped me was Williamson’s study guide to the Westminster Confession. That is a great volume!

By: In Light of the Gospel » Blog Archive » What got you started in reformed theology?

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:51:49 +0000

[…] Reformed Forum recently discussed the question, â€œWhat got you started in reformed theology?â€ The first book […]

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:29:53 +0000

â€¢ First was Carl Trueman giving a seminar at my church in Albuquerque, titled "The Pastoral Heart of the Reformation." Here. â€¢ There he quoted Q/A #1 from the Heidelberg Catechism, which floored me, and I read it afterwards. â€¢ Packer's introductions to both Luther's The Bondage of the Will and Owen's The Death of Death. â€¢ Sproul, What is Reformed Theology? â€¢ Gerhard O. Forde, On Being a Theologian of the Cross â€¢ Calvin, "Reply to Cardinal Sadolet" â€¢ Piper, sermons and biographies

By: Raymond Coffey

Raymond Coffey — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:19:33 +0000

The most significant books and articles were as follows:
J.I. Packer, “Arminianisms,” in Through Christ’s Word, FS for Philip Hughes;
The True Image, Philip E. Hughes;
The Justification of God, John Piper;
Sermons of Charles Spurgeon