To Non Cals here:Does Man Need Prevenient Grace or Not To Accept Jesus ?

I thought you said you were not a Calvinist....per se.

 

Correct. But, on the BB it has become the norm for me to accept this, as I've allowed some to label me such. Doing so propels further dialogue, and to fight against the label would be to no avail.

So I accept it in that sense.

 

Other than "paedo baptism" (sp). What is (are) the differences between DoG and Calvinism?

 

That is my question, so I do not remain ignorant of the differences between DoG and Calvinism. I really would like to know.

 

Does your church baptize infants? Probably not since they are Baptists.

Same here.

Paedobaptisms are a carry-over doctrine.

Keep in mind I was never taught by man to believe DoG or "calvinism" but my ministry and walk were directed by God into these discoveries.

Of course, as a fundamental Baptist, I reject infant baptism as error.

- Peace

 

I did "assume" you rejected paedo baptism. I was after more "meaningful" differences between DoG and Calvinism.

 

You are incorrect... Calvinism is a popular synonym for Doctrines of Grace, and both are limited to soteriology. I thought that I detailed Calvinism for you earlier today.

Again, it is this error in what Calvinism IS that is driving most of the discussion surrounding it. It is NOT becoming a follower of Calvin. It IS a particular soteriological view that carries the name of Calvin, but not developed by him nor pressed forward by him, but rather as a response to the Articles of the Remonstrance at the Synod of Dort. The TULIP was the response to the 5 Articles of the Remonstrance (5 articles of Arminian theology).

Also, it probably pays to add here that Calvinism does not make God deterministic, for it ONLY deals with soteriology, where God's sovereignty is necessary (so says even the articles of the Remonstrance!) for man to even begin the act of salvation. That is what the Bible says, and it is this misinformed view of Calvinism that has everyone up in arms that is in large part driving a "no-name" theology that is neither biblical nor cohesive.

If Calvinism meant that one had to baptize infants, and follow other Ecclesiology practices of Calvin, then it would be called Presbyterianism (and it is!). But Calvinism is not Presbyterianism, which is a comprehensive sect of Christianity with a soteriological view, an ecclesiological view, an eschatological view, and a Christiological view all to its own, distinct from the baptistic view.

 

Your second group is a deliberate misrepresentation and you know it. You have started enough threads and "asked" enough "questions" to no longer say such things.

 

...and you say my purpose here is to derail threads...while you continue your short novel approach in doing just that. Pot or kettle?

Nice...you lump us in with humanists, atheists and communists. Your true colors are bleeding through.

 

Start with "damaged but not killed" in reference to spiritual death. You know that is a misrepresentation...please stop repeating it over and over again.

 

You know it is not. Please stop repeating "what we believe" after being told what we actually believe.

 

Precisely. Not dead, just got the wind knocked out of them, not hostile toward God, not enemies by wicked works, not at enmity with God, instead pretty good ol' boys that were seeking God and doing good stuff! :laugh: :thumbsup:

 

And you deny Romans 1:16

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

An analogy: You begin to have severe headaches and your vision is blurred. You go to the doctor and he tells you that you have a large tumor in your brain that is growing quickly. You ask if there is some natural cure. The doctor says no, but he has the power and ability to safely remove the tumor.

So, you schedule the surgery and go in. You completely trust the doctor. You allow him to put you to sleep and operate. He successfully removes the tumor and you are cured.

Now, did you save yourself? Did your trusting the doctor magically make the tumor go away? Did you do any work to make the tumor go away?

NO. Your faith did nothing. You simply submitted and committed yourself to the doctor, you put your very life in his hands and completely depended on him to heal you. The doctor had all the power and ability, you had nothing.

The gospel itself has the power, it is God's word, the same word that created the universe. But just like the doctor, you must come to Jesus and place yourself in his hands. He has the ability and the power to save you, you have nothing.

Faith is not a work, it is ceasing from work and placing yourself in Jesus's hands, just as you would trust a doctor to heal a brain tumor.

 

First, its no mere "quip," it is an article written for the sole purpose of addressing a negative trend of Reformed believers toward what he thinks is a false understanding of God's love. (he even wrote a book about it)

Second, he is not the ultimate weight, but I figured some of the Calvinists here might be more likely to here is exposition of the text more openly, than from the likes of me. Plus, it wasn't just MacArthur. I also quoted from Piper and Calvin...and listed many other mainstream Calvinists who concur with their views.

So, now would you call their efforts socialistic and attack them as you have me?

I quoted them in articles where their purpose was to address these questions regarding what should be "common ground" for them and arminians. You have mistaken this desire to find common ground on these points of doctrine as being solely mine, when in reality they were Calvinistic scholars who sought to bring this understanding and affect the trend toward extremism.

So now you can read the heart and mind of other through the keyboard? Amazing.

Heaven forbid someone come to a Baptist debate forum to debate controversial baptist doctrines. Especially if it is with an "olive branch" (of kindness), because we all KNOW that can't be real. And how dare HE discredit views with which he disagrees! Oh the horror!

Yeah, we shouldn't have argumentation on a debate forum....

Dr. Bob is an Admin (higher than a Mod) and Calvinist who oversees this forum. When I joined there were 4 Calvinistic mods and no active non-Calvinists....the "good ol days," I suppose.

You caught us. We all got together at Chucky Cheeses last year and came up with this plan to get the post count up. It was hard because DHK wanted to play the role of a Calvinist, but TomVols insisted on that part. Tom won at a game of skeet ball and broke the tie. Me, I was playing in the fun pit with all the plastic balls so I got stuck with this bit. But the pizza was good. :laugh: