Featured How do you identify yourself?

It seems you have a pretty good handle on the use of labels. The only point I would disagree on is the use of the label "Calvin." Doctrines of Grace is IMO a much more honorable label. There have been numerous threads on the character of Calvin, but to me, the three areas of infant baptism, his hand in the Servetus execution, and his inconsistency on seperation of church and state, but involving himself in a theocracy, and other issues, disqualify him from any label as profound as God's sovereignty. A Christ filled life does not murder someone who disagrees on a theological issue.

Some labels define a person quite accurately. For example, despite some people's admiration for Rush Limbaugh, and while I admire conservative ideals, he could be characterized as a self indulgent, arrogant, pill popping, womanizing, gluttonous slob.

 

Labels can be very misleading. For instance, the Free-Will Baptist (I am not one) are considered Arminian, but they do not believe a Christian can lose his salvetion. If that does not appear to be correct to you, it shows how labels can be misleading.

 

We are called Free Will Baptists because we believe in "free will, free grace, and free salvation." Because man has the free will to choose to respond to God's call and repent and be saved, we also believe man can choose to turn away from God.
Free Will Baptists separated from Baptists because we would not subscribe to the doctrine of "eternal security" that salvation, once received, could never be forfeited, no matter what the person did. While we do not believe that committing a sin forfeits your salvation, we believe it is possible for a person to turn their back on their faith, by returning to a sinful lifestyle. It is a choice they make, not God "withdrawing their salvation."

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Baptists-954/f/Free-Baptist-Doctrine.htm

I'm not a Free Will Baptist either.

 

See Bob's post...

Also, again, one does not have to believe a Christian can lose their salvation to be an arminian.

The question is, I think, should we only use labels that people want used for themselves, or is it fair to look at someone (like a free-will baptist who believes they can lose their salvation) and say, "that's an arminian."?

 

At this point of time in the debate/discussion of theology, such a resistence to receive the label "Arminian" by free-will adherents (ie. such as some baptists) is, imo, indicative of their disconnect with the overall discussion and can weaken their credibility for objectivity or magnanimity. Someone may want to NOT be classified as 'Arminian' but if they want to engage the larger community there are some things they must allow. It seems seperatists and divisives are prone to this, which is why, for as much as they claim to dislike lables they sure do put lots of them on their church sign: Indipendent, fundamental, KJV, Baptist... yes, most of the time these would apropriately be labeled Arminian. Of course many OSASers are correctly labeled Arminians... that really is already understood.

 

I think you may have missed my point about labels (or made my point). The Free-Will Baptist do not believe they can lose their salvation; they believe a Christian can forfeit their salvation by apostacy. The label "lose you salvation" only applies to Wesleyan Arminians, not Classic Arminians (Free-Will Baptists) who believe a Christian can forfeit, but not lose, their salvation.

My point is that the label Arminian can be misleading in that it is many times taken to mean those who believe they can lose their salvation; when Classic Arminians do not believe a Christian can lose their salvation.

 

That's a good point, Most people do not want to be called arminians because the believe it implies a belief in loss of salvation.

I understand what you mean when you say free-will baptists belief one can forfeit their salvation, but how is the Wesleyan doctrine different? Would not a Wesleyan also "forfeit" their salvation, rather than lose it?

 

I have 4 sons so most often I identify myself like this, "Hi, I'm (insert appropriate sons name here) dad."

As to the OP, I usually don't use a label to identify myself unless it is appropriate for the discussion at hand. One important example is while seeking God's place for me to pastor I try to be upfront about a few issues even before they are asked.

They are:
1. I am a Calvinist (this directs the conversation on key doctrinal issues)
2. I am divorced and remarried (its part of my testimony and its appropriate to discuss it for obvious reasons)
3. I have 3 tattoos (again the reason is obvious)

I am not a fan of labels. However, they have their place in polite conversation and serious discussions. They become an issue only when used maliciously. Only the parties involved can be the judge on that.

 

I'm a biblicist thankfully and not a DOG. Some say that the doctrine that dogs believe may be likened to that which comes up out of their guts and to which they always return, but a lot of dogs will contest that notion. Still, the hot stuff in the guts thing is also reminiscent of LDS.

 

Wesleyan Arminians also believe a Christian can forfeit their salvation. In addition, Wesleyan Arminias also believe that a Christian can lose their salvation while still believing. If a Christian continues to resist the conviction of the Holy Spirit about a known sin and refuses to repent of that sin, he is in danger of losing his salvation. An example could be being convicted by the Holy Spirit about forgineness, but refusing to forgive someone of something that happened a long time ago. They believe a Christian cannot lose their salvation by only committing a sin or sins.

The label "lose you salvation" is popular among eternal security believers for labelling other Christians, but can mean something different for other Christians. Just an example of how labels can be misleading.

 

Since some here want to reject the use of creeds and confessions, let me point out that the word creed is simply shorthand for what I believe.

And a confession is simply what I say i believe.

Over time, individuals of like mind have come together and written out what they collectively believe. Those creeds and confessions thus are the basis for fellowship.

When we were searching for a pastor years ago, we informed a candidate that we subscribed to the Baptist Faith and Message as our statement of doctrine and practice. We asked if he was comfortable with it, and he said yes.

Had he said no, there would have been a problem.

 

Wow, Icon....I never knew. :applause::applause:

 

Easy there S/N you are going to blow a fuse or throw a breaker.:tonofbricks:

And topping all that off I am not sure he really knows what constitutes the Conservative ideology. I have thought that I might send him Holmes Alexander's definition, which I have posted on this Board, but doubt it would accomplish anything.

 

I see no evidence in the above post that you are a biblicist!

 

Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. Thing is, I did not come up with the doggie label. They came up with that all on their own. Now they complain that they don't like labels so much. I wonder why.

 

How Else?

Biblicist. I believe the book and all it says.

 

Hello JCG,
Welcome to the BB. Sometimes those in cults make the same claim.
The question is...what do you really believe the bible teaches?

Several claim to believe Jesus only, the word only, the Spirit only. It sounds very spiritual but does not really get to the issue.:thumbsup:

 

Sometimes you'll even hear them using the Latin forms (sola scriptura, solus Christus, etc.). Because it sounds even more spiritual in Latin:laugh:

 

How do you identify yourself?

By stating my name.

 

That response reminds me of this book:

The Pearly Gates Syndicate;: Or, How to sell real estate in heaven