Featured Being upfront

Yes it is, and as you said, people do not realize that.

 

Soon you will be convinced that pigs can fly and politicians are honest.

 

1. The Sentiment in this statement is not without Biblical Warrant: "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord."

2. It could, however reveal lack of understanding about what the future holds for us...which is an embodied existence in a recreated earth & heaven. So I see your point.

3. I suspect that those who think eternal bliss is floating on clouds believe that in total separation from their views on the CAL/ARM. issue...so I'm not sure how it applies to this thread.

 

I'm not sure if this argument holds water. Why? because the SBC is made up of individual AUTONOMOUS churches...which run the gamut from strongly Calvinistic to mixed to strongly Arminian.

For many SBC Churches, their association with the SBC is akin to an independent church that sends money to a missions agency. It is a different type of organization than the PCA for several reasons:
-Each church can believe (almost) whatever they want...they aren't even required to use the BF&M.
-The group, as a whole, does not have a stated position on Calvinism...which is unique among the large denominations/groups.

So, if I were interviewing at a wesleyan church as an arminian...I would not need to identify myself as such because it would likely be assumed.

If I were interviewing in a Presbyterian church (PCA) as a calvinist...I would already know it is not a problem.

MAIN POINT COMING: If, however, as one who leans toward reformed soteriology, should I not at least prod and see if that is a problem, knowing full well that it could be?

 

Yes, look for a Photoshop posting of your body and John Calvins face sitting next to your better half. Got to admit, you got me on that one. LOL

Oh, and BTW, John will keep the ball cap. Just a word of advice, tell your family to keep the matches away from you.

 

I believe it would foolish not to. Sure. You could keep quiet about it only to have the issue rear it's head later. Is it worth dividing a local body? Is it worth having to resign over? Is it worth being dismissed over?

 

I have heard that from more people with Arm. leanings than from Calvies.

 

Cough/BS, Cough/ BS......sorry, had to clear my throat (of the crap floating around)!

 

...only left wing ones!

 

You really should see a doctor about that.

 

So, you don't believe there is tendency in some Christian circles to Gnosticism? I see it all the time, with this idea that the physical doesn't matter or that it is evil and a good thing when it is rid of. Do you think our future is to live as disembodied spirits in some ethereal existence? That is not scriptural, friend.

 

Nor is it limited to Calvinists as CTB asserted or implied. As a matter of fact I would be willing to bet that view is embraced by far more Arm's than Cal's.

 

I certainly don't believe it is limited to Calvinists. This has a been a problem since the early ages of Christianity. It has two sources: Augustine, and Neoplatonic philosophy.

 

It certainly is; especially among Charismatic Arminians. There is a militant subset within the Charismatic and Pentecostal movement that emphasizes the power and ministry of the Holy Spirit to a point where it supercedes all other aspects of Christianity. It is almost Holy Spirit idolatry.

 

And, I might add, the Holy Spirit is the only member of the Trinity that never is worshiped nor accepts worship in Scripture. It isn't His role. His role is to point to Christ (and the Father).

But, what more is to be expected by those churches, individuals, and denominations who do all they can do to get "decisions" rather than focusing on "discipleship?" What more would we expect from that brand of Arminian?

The Archangel

 

Certainly there is a tendency toward Gnosticism in many so-called Christian circles. The Calvinist circle is not one of them.

Gnosticism developed earlier (at least that which grew into Gnosticism) than either Augustine or the full-blown Neoplatonism.

Augustine, nor his thought, however, cannot be considered Gnosticism by any person rightly understanding what Gnosticism actually is.

Archangel

 

:thumbsup::applause::thumbsup::applause: Earlier this poster quoted from the Dave Stewart website where all manner of false witness is taking place 24/7

 

To the degree that Calvinism was influenced by Augustine, it was thus influenced by Gnosticism, if there is a connection between Gnosticism, Manichaesm, and Neoplatonism. And there is, in that all of them considered the flesh as evil or lower, "baser", than the spirit.

 

Augustianism and Calvinism are united in their views of predestination and election. The 16th Century Reformers were not monolithic. Reformed theology on the European continent was not always in sync with Reformed theology in Scotland, and later, England. But even with their intramural squabbles they were united by their christology. They believed Jesus is the God-man. The believed in the hyposatic union. They believed in Jesus' physical ressurection. They believed Jesus will come again bodily. They believed in the worship of the Father and Son, through the Spirit.

Is it possible that an individual Calvinist can be Gnostic or have Gnostic tendencies? Sure. Is it possible that an individual Gnostic can have Calvinist tendencies? Sure. What does that prove? It proves such aberrations are sufficient to fuel foolish speculations proposed by individuals who would be better served staying silent.

 

Everyone could stay forever silent, and that wouldn't change the background or historical facts of Calvin and his system or Augustine and his system.