Featured Only calvinists are believers.

I agree with you WD such suggestions....by either side of debate should be "anathema" irrespective of any impassioned debate.

 

Since I do not belong to a SBC Church (actually never ever going in to worship in one) I am surprised that there is this much contention in them. Do you feel scripture calls for unity or do consider this a house divided?

 

It seems to me that more than any other church the Baptist are hated most. I can only say that, I'm a baptist and just because it seems the majority hates my faith I consider it a compliment. Christ told us we would be hated if we follow after Christ. and we are.MB

 

Webdog posted....

Pretty much agree.

Dont know how he gets away with it.

His "modis opporendi" is to constantly refer to non cals as "denying" the true god, being reprobates, being false worshipers, being blasphemers, etc etc etc..

Forget being "warned"...the poor guy should be BANNED.

 

But to answer your question Webb, I am not a Calvinist & I dont believe that Icono would put me in the roll of a Reprobate. I do not think he is putting you there either quite frankly. But let me give you a cometary by the Scottish Presbyterian & Calvinist, Samuel Rutherford....." The reprobate has exactly the same warrant to believe in Jesus Christ as do the elect."

So to summarize the position of most orthodox believing people (including most Calvinists)....we do not offer Christ on the basis of the person who hears the offer, but we offer Christ exclusively on the basis that Christ is able to save them who come to Him.

Once again, Jesus the Christ is able to save ALL who come to God through Christ in faith. Even the reprobate.

 

There is vitriol enough on both sides of most discussions on the BB.

What YOU are attempting is nothing short of adding fuel to the fire.

Rather than seeking for unity of the faith, this thread seeks to continue the rancor. It doesn't seek clarification, it seeks breaking camp to join one side or the other in the battle lines.

In my opinion, all posters on the BB have, at a point of post or more, foamed in excessive claim that one is short in meeting the standard someone else assumes.

Personally, the most difficult part of the BB for me is application of the Scripture, "A soft answer turns away wrath."

Admittedly, there may be far too much time spent on answering the fool, rather than letting the foolish display their foolishness for all to see. (proverbs)

On my own, as I have typed a response to some thread, there has come the question of what spirit is driving some folk's view; the familiar spirit or the Spirit of God.

I personally think the moderators do a rather excellent work in allowing some of the threads' heat to occasionally boil over, just to show everyone how absolutely necessary it is to be humble before the Lord Jesus.

I will say in regard to what may have generated your thread, that when one says they do not worship the same God as Calvinistic thinkers, that does present a significant problem.

If any scheme exalts the absolute sovereignty, righteousness, and justice of God, it is without doubt that of the Calvinistic view(s).

The non-cal views, which would in some way ascend some humankind of ability, fail in that regard. That is not to state they have some other God, but the claim that the God Calvinistic thinkers worship is not "their" God, has been leveled by the non-cal view writers toward the cal view. Is that not questioning the salvation, too? Will you start a thread of who is in that battle line?

For instance, recently a poster admitted they do not worship the same God as a Calvinistic thinker, and therefore, is by default admitting a worship of some other god. What they may call that god is up to them; it is never the less true that there is only one Sovereign God.

For Iconoclast to point that out and defend the truth of both the sovereignty and work of God's grace, is contending for the faith that is in him.

That is not to be regarded as impure, nor sinful.

 

And so our response is to ban those we disagree with? Now what would we have learned from that I wonder.

 

If the rules of conversation aren't followed then we all loose. The rules here are not unreasonable. I believe they should be enforced with no exceptions. They are on other boards I go to.MB

 

EWF....

Who said anything about banning peoplr we disagree with??

We are referring to a crude, self centered rogue poster who flagrantly declares non calvinists as being lost..over and over and over again..in direct defiance of the administrators warning to not do that.

Banning this clown for a week or so might teach him that you can not flagrantly ignore the rules.

 

Seems like the rules say something about calling other poster's names.

Perhaps you should be banned for a week or so???

Just seeing if the shoe fits.

 

If I were constantly declaring people to be lost and blasphemers and reprobates I would deserve it.

But I do not do that as Iconoclast does.

 

How did SBC get pulled in to this?

 

Maybe some people think that all Baptists are SBC?

 

Speaking personally from the heart, I have no "bitterness", only wish for upfront and honesty about positions when pastors come to a church in view of a call as pastor. If the church wants to be calvinistic then that should be their decision, if not, that too should be honored.

 

I don't understand what you're trying to convey Bob. Could you rephrase?