• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Does it really matter if you're a Calvinist?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Skandelon

<b>Moderator</b>
I feel like maybe they look down on new christians because they aren't spirtually mature. I know of course they rejoice.

When you come across Calvinist like this send them this message:

"I love the doctrines of grace with all my heart, and I think they are pride-shattering, humbling, and love-producing doctrines. But I think there is an attractiveness about them to some people, in large matter, because of their intellectual rigor. They are powerfully coherent doctrines, and certain kinds of minds are drawn to that. And those kinds of minds tend to be argumentative.

So the intellectual appeal of the system of Calvinism draws a certain kind of intellectual person, and that type of person doesn't tend to be the most warm, fuzzy, and tender. Therefore this type of person has a greater danger of being hostile, gruff, abrupt, insensitive or intellectualistic.

I'll just confess that. It's a sad and terrible thing that that's the case. Some of this type aren't even Christians, I think. You can embrace a system of theology and not even be born again."

- John Piper
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Excuse me? I never said this nor do I believe it. I'd appreciate you not putting words in my mouth. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Skandelon
.....I'm only supposing the eternal effect that each camp would have IF it is wrong. Calvinists, you need to consider that your error is much more grave than ours, so tread lightly and carefully brethren.

You wouldn't be speaking out of both sides of your mouth would you?
 

Skandelon

<b>Moderator</b>
You wouldn't be speaking out of both sides of your mouth would you?

:confused::confused::confused:

I think you must be misunderstanding what I wrote brother. I'm not attempting to say one is saved through correct doctrine (Calvinism/Arminianism), I'm saying that IF Arminians are wrong that we have done NO eternal harm because NO less people will be in heaven due to our error, after all all the elect will be effectually saved regardless of our teaching (if Calvinists are right).

If, however, Calvinists are wrong then their errors are much more severe because they COULD be distracting or influencing man's free will to come to Christ thus leading to less conversions.

The point is that Calvinists have much more to lose if they are wrong in this debate.
 

glfredrick

New Member
Satan likes them. Their theology originated with Satan. Satan likes to get the Christian busy, busy, busy and not producing.

2/3 to 80% of the chruches in America are pleateaued or dying.

No comment on Satan's activity. I'm not among the privileged few that seem to know his business. Apart from the fact that "he prowls as a roaring lion, seeking who he can devour..." and that he is the "father of lies..." and the "accuser of the brethren..." I'm not privy to what else he is doing in any local context. Perhaps some who are closer to him than I can fill me in...

I know that you blame this decline on a lack of discipleship, but I will suggest that virtually every one of these churches has some form of discipleship program. In fact, I'd lay odds that they are SO busy doing their discipleship program that they don't have time to BE the people of God. I've been blessed to do some church consulting as a part of my work with some seminary professors who do this sort of thing. I've seen other problems that cause plateaued and declining churches beside the lack of discipleship. In fact, the primary reason I see so many churches plateaued and declining is that they are:

1) Culturally irrelevant and in many or most cases just downright weird people. They dress weird, they talk weird, their music is weird, and no one is welcome in their congregations unless they do likewise. I've seen people in these sick churches outright fight to continue their plink-and-plunk hymnbook singing, then the same people get into their cars and rock out or play Country music. I often wonder who wrote the rule that deacons have to wear green suits with plaid pants. Who said that they should decry almost any public activity "sinful" then go out the back door of the church and smoke like chimneys. They have lost their winsomeness to the world around them, not that the church has to imitate the world -- God forbid -- but they also don't have to go out of their way to be 1960s throwbacks... Who ARE those people?

2) Theologically inept and in many cases downright heretical. Many churches make it a matter of pride to be "conservative" but they seriously misunderstand what that means --- they are all about culture and they think they're all about God's Word -- but for the most part they are just proof-texting each other with biblical platitudes instead of seriously exegeting the Scriptures for the edification and building up of the body for ministry. The same ones who are against almost every cultural indication that they actually live in 2011 are downright liberal in their theology. They have, in many cases, become SO human-centered that if God actually showed up, no one would even recognize Him.

3) Many of these failing churches also have failing or failed leadership. Though I recognize and support the congregational model where each church is autonomous and "calls" their own pastoral staff, what I see in practice leads me to believe that most churches do not actually get the right leaders, and even if they do somehow arrive at the right man, they fail to allow him to truly lead as the professional pastor he is. In fact, rebellion against the pastor is one of the key issues that drives down membership and growth.

4) Many of these failing churches also have no real idea about their purpose, and their identity in the gospel. The main purpose that I've discerned in most of the churches I've worked with is to "meet again next Sunday (Wednesday, etc.)" They have no sense of mission, no work to do, apart from satisfying their own demands, wants, and wishes, and they've in essence learned one of the most disastrous of all lessons, that they can vote themselves comfortable, and this is not a strike against making the building modern and adequate -- far from it -- rather this is about them directing their time, talents, and resources to stuff that is neither essential nor missional, nor particularly godly. We know, from multiple accredited national surveys that a very high percentage of those who come to know the Lord do so before age 18, yet the youth and children's ministry is almost an afterthought in many dying churches. That is weird... They let any idiot who is silly enough deal with the youth and God help them if they make noise or some mess somewhere. Don't even THINK about asking for some money... These are leadership and rebellion issues. They also fail to know their biblical identities as Christians -- learners, ministers, missionaries, family, and worshipers. They may do one of these areas to the exclusion of the others, and in so doing, miss the boat scripturally.

I am currently pastoring a church that has doubled in the last four months that was shackled by some troublemakers. When I came, I started teaching them how to make disciples by doing personal discipleship.Every man I currently meet with meets with at least one other man.

Personal discipleship quickly silences the bulldogs who think they know what reaches people but are not personally reaching anyone. The bulldogs are surrounded by those who are reaching people. At this point there are those who are asking about removing the troublemakers in leadership who are not reaching anyone. The proof of leadership is in reaching people and leading them.

To the above, I would say, kudos... Doubled from what to what, though? The church I attend has built a congregation of 2200 in 10 years by operating within the whole counsel of the gospel, including community, and the biblical identities I mentioned above. We're doubling in size every 3 years at the current rate of growth.
 

The Archangel

Well-Known Member
If, however, Calvinists are wrong then their errors are much more severe because they COULD be distracting or influencing man's free will to come to Christ thus leading to less conversions.

What does this mean? I fear I know what you mean--and it is wrong, DEAD WRONG.

Please explain yourself.

The Archangel
 

mets65

New Member
Simple, if you believe someone isn't elect or someone is led to believe through Calvinism that they aren't elect they could end up in hell.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
Satan likes them. Their theology originated with Satan. Satan likes to get the Christian busy, busy, busy and not producing.


2/3 to 80% of the chruches in America are pleateaued or dying.

I am currently pastoring a church that has doubled in the last four months that was shackled by some troublemakers. When I came, I started teaching them how to make disciples by doing personal discipleship.Every man I currently meet with meets with at least one other man.

Personal discipleship quickly silences the bulldogs who think they know what reaches people but are not personally reaching anyone. The bulldogs are surrounded by those who are reaching people. At this point there are those who are asking about removing the troublemakers in leadership who are not reaching anyone. The proof of leadership is in reaching people and leading them.

Satan likes them???? That's where their theology came from???

Where is DHK, now?

Where is quantum and his high horse from whence he rebukes those who act unchristian?

And just for the record the church which is dying in America is BY AND LARGE Arminian or espousers of this nameless theology that many here on baptistboard espouse.

Her sickness and death began with the influx of Arminian theology about 100 years ago. She has been splitting and dying and losing ground ever since.

Frankly, the church in America was at her best during the first Great Awakening which was instrumental in her pursuit of independence- and she was then THOROUGHLY Calvinistic.

Only somebody who does not know SQUAT about Church History would make such an ignorant remark.
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
:confused::confused::confused:

I think you must be misunderstanding what I wrote brother. I'm not attempting to say one is saved through correct doctrine (Calvinism/Arminianism), I'm saying that IF Arminians are wrong that we have done NO eternal harm because NO less people will be in heaven due to our error, after all all the elect will be effectually saved regardless of our teaching (if Calvinists are right).

If, however, Calvinists are wrong then their errors are much more severe because they COULD be distracting or influencing man's free will to come to Christ thus leading to less conversions.

The point is that Calvinists have much more to lose if they are wrong in this debate.

This post of yours is rife with contradiction. You say, “I'm not attempting to say one is saved through correct doctrine”, and then you turn around in the same breath and say, “NO eternal harm....all the elect will be effectually saved regardless of our teaching (if Calvinists are right).”

What do you mean by 'eternal harm'? You connect 'eternal harm' with Calvinist teaching [DOCTRINE]. Period.

The point is that Calvinists have much more to lose if they are wrong in this debate.

Is this why you left the doctrines of God's Sovereign Grace? Fear of what you might lose if you were wrong?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gb93433

Active Member
Site Supporter
No comment on Satan's activity. I'm not among the privileged few that seem to know his business.
How can one give quality time to people if he is busy on things that do not bring fruit or area second best?

I know that you blame this decline on a lack of discipleship, but I will suggest that virtually every one of these churches has some form of discipleship program.
Discipleship as Jesus showed is leadership. Maybe I am missing something, but I seldom see that being done as the major focus in churches. Making disciples requires an intense focus on making disciples and flying in the face of the typical church programs. Personal discipleship tends to silence the troublemakers because they are unable to reach people and rely on programs. Jesus taught his disciples to make disciples and it worked. Any way to improve on what Jesus did? I believe that when we follow the model Jesus demonstrated then we will reach people God leads us to do.

2) Theologically inept and in many cases downright heretical. Many churches make it a matter of pride to be "conservative" but they seriously misunderstand what that means --- they are all about culture and they think they're all about God's Word -- but for the most part they are just proof-texting each other with biblical platitudes instead of seriously exegeting the Scriptures for the edification and building up of the body for ministry.
I have found a lot of what you described to be among denominational leaders playing politicians instead of studying scripture and being honest about their study or lack of study. I call them heretical cheerleaders leading people astray.

Many of these failing churches also have failing or failed leadership. Though I recognize and support the congregational model where each church is autonomous and "calls" their own pastoral staff, what I see in practice leads me to believe that most churches do not actually get the right leaders, and even if they do somehow arrive at the right man, they fail to allow him to truly lead as the professional pastor he is. In fact, rebellion against the pastor is one of the key issues that drives down membership and growth.
I do not support the exclusively congregational model for one simple reason. The reason is that the tares have as much voice and vote as the wheat. When I look at the qualifications of elders I see godly men, not tares. In a congregational form of government the people have as much voice as the leaders. If that is the case then why have qualifications for leaders?


Many of these failing churches also have no real idea about their purpose, and their identity in the gospel. The main purpose that I've discerned in most of the churches I've worked with is to "meet again next Sunday (Wednesday, etc.)" They have no sense of mission, no work to do, apart from satisfying their own demands, wants, and wishes, and they've in essence learned one of the most disastrous of all lessons, that they can vote themselves comfortable, and this is not a strike against making the building modern and adequate -- far from it -- rather this is about them directing their time, talents, and resources to stuff that is neither essential nor missional, nor particularly godly. We know, from multiple accredited national surveys that a very high percentage of those who come to know the Lord do so before age 18, yet the youth and children's ministry is almost an afterthought in many dying churches.
You are right on. Making a difference requires that the church die or a pastor comes in and changes the focus to one of ridding themselves of themselves. That is done by showing the people how to reach others.

The church I attend has built a congregation of 2200 in 10 years by operating within the whole counsel of the gospel, including community, and the biblical identities I mentioned above. We're doubling in size every 3 years at the current rate of growth.
Years ago I spent two days (a total of 24 hours) visiting a church and talking with almost every staff member for one to 1-1/2 hours each. In ten years that church grew from about 200 to 4400. All of that was started by one of the staff meeting with five men and discipling them. The senior pastor was not all that good of a preacher but he knew how to make disciples.
 

pinoybaptist

Active Member
Site Supporter
Simple, if you believe someone isn't elect or someone is led to believe through Calvinism that they aren't elect they could end up in hell.

That's not in the Bible, regardless of version.
What is in the Bible is that WHOSOEVER have been saved have been saved not because of their works of righteousnesses but because of God's mercy (Titus 3:5).
Now, correct doctrine is a righteous thing.
Calvinists and those of the Doctrine of Grace believe that the correct soteriology is Election and that God has a definite number of people whom He foreknew and whom He predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ and whom He called and whom He justified, and notice: IT WAS ALL GOD'S WORK from foreknowing to justification.

You and others believe that the correct soteriology is that sinful man has a free will that overcomes his sinful nature at some point and so he is able to choose good over evil, God over Satan, righteousness over unrighteousness, holiness over sinfulness.

Whether it be Calvinism, or Doctrine of Grace for PB's, or your whosoever, these are all works of righteousnesses, and they all stand aside for God's mercy.

So, when death comes and we open our eyes in heaven, God will not be standing there holding a list in his hand and reading out anyone's soteriology and based on that admit you into heaven or kick you out to hell.

Instead He will be standing there ready to wipe away tears from our eyes, and guess what: NEITHER YOU NOR I NOR ANY OF THE WISE GUYS IN THIS FORUM AND BOARD WILL EVEN BE ABLE TO REMEMBER WHETHER WE WERE CALVINISTS, DoG, WHOSOVER, PELAGIAN, SEMI-PELAGIAN.
 

slave 4 Christ

New Member
No, I know Calvinists evangelize. But, if you are wrong then think of how many throughout history have spent time distracted by this controversy rather than obeying the great commission? How many who misapplied Calvinism and became non-evangelistic? How many church splits and other distractions that kept the word from being spread to the lost? Again, I know this is PRESUMING that Calvinism is wrong, which is something you clearly reject. The hope is that you might consider the POSSIBILITY that you are wrong and be careful considering what is at stake.

That is presuming that God is as Calvinism teaches, whereas my warning is presuming otherwise.

No, I know Calvinists evangelize. But, if you are wrong then think of how many throughout history have spent time distracted by this controversy rather than obeying the great commission?

It takes two if a controversy is to be continued.
Did it cross your mind that a "blog" called "critiquing Calvinism" is very much responsible for the "distractions" you have condemned?????

It is "an appeal to pity" you have tried to assert with these statements, and it has no place in a biblical and logical debate.
 

pinoybaptist

Active Member
Site Supporter
This thread and some posters in it seem to be implying or heading towards the direction that Calvinists are children of the devil with the devil's doctrine.

It's got to constitute a violation of board rules.
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
This thread and some posters in it seem to be implying or heading towards the direction that Calvinists are children of the devil with the devil's doctrine.

It's got to constitute a violation of board rules.
...yet Aaron's post stating those who do not adhere are of the father of lies and love the darkness more than light can stand AFTER such posts are reported?

Having said that I am not endorsing calvinists as the offspring of satan ,nor do I believe that is the point gr was making. If it was, then I do NOT agree.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
No, I know Calvinists evangelize. But, if you are wrong then think of how many throughout history have spent time distracted by this controversy rather than obeying the great commission? How many who misapplied Calvinism and became non-evangelistic? How many church splits and other distractions that kept the word from being spread to the lost? Again, I know this is PRESUMING that Calvinism is wrong, which is something you clearly reject. The hope is that you might consider the POSSIBILITY that you are wrong and be careful considering what is at stake.


That is presuming that God is as Calvinism teaches, whereas my warning is presuming otherwise.

No, no.

Arminians came AFTER Calvinists.

The Remonstrants brought the controversy and it has been here ever since.

The DoG brought us forth out of the darkness of Roman Catholicism.

Perhaps you'd prefer if we left us all there?


And as for this country of ours and the controversy here over these issues- once again- the Calvinists were here first.

Arminianism was not a dominant force until centuries after the Pilgrims landed and the Puritans carved out this nation of ours.

You guys brought the controversy. Not us. We were here first.
 

pinoybaptist

Active Member
Site Supporter
...yet Aaron's post stating those who do not adhere are of the father of lies and love the darkness more than light can stand AFTER such posts are reported?

Having said that I am not endorsing calvinists as the offspring of satan ,nor do I believe that is the point gr was making. If it was, then I do NOT agree.

I haven't read Aaron's post nor that of GL.
My comment stems from the fact that it is very subtly insinuated that Calvinists may have been leading people astray all these centuries.
If Aaron said anything like that, I will put it as a reaction to the subtleties of this thread and some of its posters.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top