-
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!
So Where Do those Who hold To Arminianism Receive Their Assurance From?
- Thread starter JesusFan
- Start date
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
The promise of Jesus that no man can take us out of His hand or the Father's hand.
The fact that Christ gave us eternal life that cannot be taken away.
One doesn't have to be a Calvinist to believe in the security of the believer.
The fact that Christ gave us eternal life that cannot be taken away.
One doesn't have to be a Calvinist to believe in the security of the believer.
That isn't an Arminian position, though. (I know the Remonstrants were unsure about loss of salvation, but as it developed, Arminians as a whole came to believe that a loss of salvation is possible.)
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
If I was an arminian, that would might be true. But, alas, I am not.
Tom Butler
New Member
This thread is a good example why most Baptists deny that they are Arminian. A true Arminian believes that one may lose his salvation; most Baptists do not.
That's why webdog, for instance, rejects the Arminian label. And that's why I would label him simply as a non-Cal.
That's why webdog, for instance, rejects the Arminian label. And that's why I would label him simply as a non-Cal.
You must not have received the memo...it is now called "no name" or "nameless" theology :laugh:
how about a No-Arm?::smilewinkgrin:
Last edited by a moderator:
Well... it doesn't really have a name...so.....
I'm not a big fan of the common uses of terms "Calvinist" or "Reformed," either.
IMO, these terms should be reserved for adherence to TULIP AND covenantal understanding of theology.
I think the terms monergist and synergist are better descriptors because they strike at the core of the soteriological issue.
Most Baptists are not "Calvinists" or "Arminians," but they are generally closer to Arminians than Calvinists.
What I cannot fathom is the idea of a "two" or "three" point Calvinist. Such a creature does not exist. The Calvinist understandings of T, U, and I all stand or fall together. IMO, you can hold 4 or 5 points, you can hold only one (P), or you can hold none.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tom Butler
New Member
I got the memo and threw it into the trash.
I will take credit for giving it the name non-Cal. Before I used it on the Baptist Board, I don't remember ever seeing the description before.
I do remember just about every non-Cal Baptist bristled when labeled Arminian; I came to the conclusion that they had a point.
I'm also thinking of dumping the term Calvinist, or Reformed, for myself. I'm coming around to liking DoG (Doctrines of Grace). More specifically, I like TomDoG. But let's don't go too far by calling me Tom the DoG. Somebody would be tempted to call me Tom the Dirty DoG.
If only we could make something fit DawG....
how bout "Divine Sovereignty" theology for Calvinists & Human Capability ...was going to say Human Dependency but Capability is a positive word...... "Human Capability" theology for Arms & No-Cals so everyones ego is stroked, right. You can even shorten it to DS & HC! :wavey:
I thought you might like Charles Stanley since he too doesn't believe we have an Old Sin Nature.If I had to pick one theology that represented my views, the Free Grace position (I know, redundant
Well I am not Calvanist and not Arminian. My pastor i grew up under called us Pauline. Following the Doctrines of Paul.
Me too & I was Catholic.
My Pastor was far far from Catholic teaching since he had been raised a Catholic and knew their teachings. My Dad also had been raised Catholic and he knew too that what our pastor taught and what the Catholics believed were far apart. Both our pastor and my Dad became baptist. The catholics in no way follow the doctrines of Paul as you want to try and label folks good try though.
I don't like that arrangement. It's heavily slanted toward the Calvinist side. Arminians believe in divine sovereignty, too; they just believe that God exercises it in a different fashion. Also, (orthodox) Arminians do not believe in human capability per se; they believe in divine enablement to choose (cf. Wesley and prevenient grace).
IMO, the simplest bifurcation is monergism vs. synergism. In monergism, only one will is determinative (God's); in synergism, two wills are determinative (God's and man's).
quantumfaith
Active Member
:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:
quantumfaith
Active Member
Well... it doesn't really have a name...so.....
I'm not a big fan of the common uses of terms "Calvinist" or "Reformed," either.
IMO, these terms should be reserved for adherence to TULIP AND covenantal understanding of theology.
I think the terms monergist and synergist are better descriptors because they strike at the core of the soteriological issue.
Most Baptists are not "Calvinists" or "Arminians," but they are generally closer to Arminians than Calvinists.
What I cannot fathom is the idea of a "two" or "three" point Calvinist. Such a creature does not exist. The Calvinist understandings of T, U, and I all stand or fall together. IMO, you can hold 4 or 5 points, you can hold only one (P), or you can hold none.
:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: