He didn't circumcise their hearts. He circumcised their...

Didn't this doctrine originate in Rome?

" They also practice baby dedication "

And Hannah gave Samuel to God.

"and teach an age of accountablility,"

Isaiah 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

Deuteronomy 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

Your baptism follows closely with the Campbellites.

How did Paul say in II Timothy 1:12

For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.

Tell me, how can baptizing an infant seal him or graft him into Christ?
This merits grace because you will need to wait for the child to grow up to prove weather or not he was chosen.

Pure heresy. It is Jesus Christ who save completely, and in his own words "except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish."

Minnow - "As for whom the "authority" is - We the Reformed Church always speak of and acknowledge the "Sovereignty" of God."

Yes you may SPEAK of the Sovereignty of God, but all that is ever displayed on these posts is "Reformation", "Calvin", "Westminster Cofession", oh, did I say Calvin? - ya, I did...OK.

Tell me who has more contol - a tyrant like Hitler who is dictator over the people who have no freedom, or a president who isn't afraid of people who have freedoms to make their own decisions? It is the man who has to have his thumb on everything who is in actuality a weak person. And I know that God is bigger than you make him out to be because he is able to run his creation and accomplish his purpose even with man's free will. Your doctrine has actually made God weak, and this personality is manifest in the originator of this doctrin - Calvin. He was a classic dictator who if dissagreed with, punishment came.

This statement, and many other posts that have been entered on this site.

Glory isn't really given to God, glory is really given to Luther and Calvin and the Reformation. It was they who rescued the church.

But I understand you will not agree.

Yes I was complaining because I have run out of room before and couldn't continue.

Yes I did read them.

The church Jesus started was still in existance. Constantine had nothing to do with true Christianity, and Rome was a false system from the begining.

Jesus said he would build his church. And he is! And to say that the church was not around during the time of Constantine is utterly false. AND, to say the church wasn't around when Luther wanted to return Rome to Augustinianism is false also.

All of the aspects of Christianity that you have said the Reformation recued and perpetuated were not due to the Reformation. They were due to God, and he was performing his work before, during and after the reorganization.

I grew up reading what I now have found out is Reformed church history. Not until I found out what the Reformation was did I learn the history that has been hiden from the modern Church.

Hearing must be mixed with belief.

Remember in Hebrews when it said Israel could noy enter into the rest God had for them because of unbelief.

They obviously heard, but they didn't believe.

I agree with you assesment of these fatalistic Calvinists, but there are foudational scriptures that deal with this issue. Especially where it says we are "sealed until the day of redemption"

It might be exciting to do a study on the seal and what it meant when God said we are sealed with the Holy Spirit.

So the true church fell into deceit and was led into Rome?

Try again.

And, do you believe the true church was led by God to kill those that were against Rome AND Reformed Rome?

And, please show me in Scripture a New Testament "invisible" church.

Minnow - I love it when people forget to gard their speech and let their words reveal their heart.
"So don't forget folks, "Once a Calvinist always a Christian.' "

"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power (authority) thereof."

Why didn't Luther join the already existant church when he "left Rome"?
The church was already being persecuted by Rome, like the Lollards in Luther's day, and they would continue to be presecuted by the Reformed Catholics. I don't think they re-established the truths of the Bible - they constructed their own system.
Remember, it is the cults who have a central head for their system, and it is a man, not God. Every argument goes back to what "he" said or to what "he" wrote.

It might be good to study Reformed history and see the treatment of Baptists by Calvinists. Study what the Puritans did to the early Baptists in Massachusetts and how many were burned and flogged, including women. See why Rhoad Island was founded. I have posted the quote before of what Luther's thought of the Anabaptists were and what should be done to them. ( I would re-quote it but I don't want to take the chance of having this pulled down. Seems to happen when I bring this up).
It was Baptists that went to to Indians from the begining, and it was their belief that the land should be paid for, not taken. But it was the Reformed Catholics who left the rule of England to come to another country to do what they left, enslave to a Religion.

So, maybe I haven't slandered anyone, but just told the truth. And maybe you are right - you can't divorce a system/religion from the originator of the system.

Maybe if you understood the history of the Reformed Catholics you might reconsider your position.

And I know you say you hold the Bible position, but I say I do, so one of us is wrong.

Concerning the law and people getting around them...you need to attend a Fundamental Baptist Church and here how sin is preached against and the admonition for a holy, seperated life.
People love to throw out the law and forget that "All Scripture is given by inspiration...and is profitable...". But what they end up doing is throwing out the principle and the moral aspect of the law. To this we might agree

You missed my point.
And let me first interject a thank you for your kind responses. I think many of these people who respond have veins popping from thier necks

Now, back to my point.
This is not human reasoning, but logic. Isaiah said "come now, let us reason together..."
I am taking a position, that I believe is unbiblical, and trying to see how it lines up with how God has revealed himself.
Think about it. If God has chosen only an elect few to salvation, and he does everything to bring them there, why go soul-winning? Why debate your (calvinists) theology, for debating theology will not save anyone. And, if debating your theology does save someone, well then where is Jesus? Have you not just won someone to Calvin?
I guess all I am saying is that calvinistic theology does not mesh with what God has revealed. But I know we will not agree, so it might be rather futile to keep debating, lest these turn into "vain janglings".

Please remember that when God closes the ears of the hearer it is because there hase been extended (sometimes 400+ years) times of Israel closing their ears to the prophets. After a while, God says, "FINE! Now I will send my prophets and I will cause you NOT to hear"

Se, the Bible says God hardened Pharoah's heart, but it also says Pharoah hardened his own heart. The two are both correct. Pharoah hardened his heart while God sent the plague's, and then, after Pharoah wouldn't changed, he made it so he couldn't believe.

This is true in II Thessalonians. Those who have heard the Gospel and rejected it, will be unable to believe after the rapture and the wicked one is revealed. God says he will cause them to believe a lie.

If God doesn't please to lead me, why do you people waste your time debating the issues. If God has choosen who he wills, then why on earth fight for your position? Your arguing can't change what God will do. Your pleading with people to believe Calvin is in vain if God hasn't choosen them. I don't know if it's adding up, but there is a disconnect in your theology.

Why does Satan continue to work if God has already chosen his children? And if God has chosen everything, doesn't that have to mean that he has chosen when you sin? How can man be accountable for sin in their life when God has predetermined what they will and won't do? How can Satan be accountable if God made him do what he does.