Why is it worth fighting over?

[Reynolds]

For the most part, even Baptist "Arminians" hold to O.S.A.S. "Eternal Security" is one point of debate gone.
The other points are academic, but not truly important if you boil them down to their practical level. An Arminian believes all can be saved so the Gospel must be preached to The World. A true Calvinist believes that we do not know who can and who can not be saved, thus we must preach The Gospel to The World.
Since there is agreement on the point of The Gospel must be preached, why are the other points worth the bitter contention they cause?

 

[Revmitchell]

There are few actual "Arminians" on this board. There are a great deal of people who are neither Arminian nor cal. What you are unaware of is that even when the subject has nothing to do with Calvinism there are those who work to turn unrelated discussions into Calvinism. It has been going on for years.

 

[Reynolds]

There are few actual "Arminians" on this board. There are a great deal of people who are neither Arminian nor cal. What you are unaware of is that even when the subject has nothing to do with Calvinism there are those who work to turn unrelated discussions into Calvinism. It has been going on for years.

I am not really talking about this board. I have seen the problem begin to surface in churches in my area. The heated discussions are even popping up with regularity at ministerial meetings. I am a true Arminian (all points.) Having said that, some of my best friends are Calvinists (all points.) I affectionately call them "D. James Kennedy Calvinists." They are hyperevangelistic. We will have discussions on the scriptures and the issues, but they are always in love and are for enrichment and not tearing down each other.

 

[Revmitchell]

I am not really talking about this board. I have seen the problem begin to surface in churches in my area. The heated discussions are even popping up with regularity at ministerial meetings.

Aaahhh...there has been a run on cagey young "New Calvinists" who are very aggressive. Even to the point of hiding their Calvinism from potential churches until they become pastors and work to change it from a non cal church to a cal church. It has been splitting a good number of churches.

 

[Reynolds]

Aaahhh...there has been a run on cagey young "New Calvinists" who are very aggressive. Even to the point of hiding their Calvinism from potential churches until they become pastors and work to change it from a non cal church to a cal church. It has been splitting a good number of churches.

Sad to know it is not limited to my area.

 

[Revmitchell]

Sad to know it is not limited to my area.

Germantown Baptist in Memphis was one that split by an Cal pastor doing his thing.

 

[steaver]

For the most part, even Baptist "Arminians" hold to O.S.A.S. "Eternal Security" is one point of debate gone.
The other points are academic, but not truly important if you boil them down to their practical level. An Arminian believes all can be saved so the Gospel must be preached to The World. A true Calvinist believes that we do not know who can and who can not be saved, thus we must preach The Gospel to The World.
Since there is agreement on the point of The Gospel must be preached, why are the other points worth the bitter contention they cause?

I often said there are not many Calvinist that I've heard who preach TULIP through and through. They often sound just like the non-cals, John MacArthur always comes to mind. Can you imagine a preacher standing up before the congregation and saying "I have some good news for some of you, and some of you have no choice but to live in hell for eternity"??? Even worse, can you imagine telling your children the same? Generally I would doubt the true Calvinist would be so "truthful" to his subjects, whether they be strangers or family.
Therein lies the debate from my perspective. Why not be honest about the final conclusion of your beliefs and state it up front to your audience?

 

[Yeshua1]

I often said there are not many Calvinist that I've heard who preach TULIP through and through. They often sound just like the non-cals, John MacArthur always comes to mind. Can you imagine a preacher standing up before the congregation and saying "I have some good news for some of you, and some of you have no choice but to live in hell for eternity"??? Even worse, can you imagine telling your children the same? Generally I would doubt the true Calvinist would be so "truthful" to his subjects, whether they be strangers or family.
Therein lies the debate from my perspective. Why not be honest about the final conclusion of your beliefs and state it up front to your audience?

If you think about this though...

Regardless if one is a calvinist or arminian in regards to salvation, BOTH will be telling and teaching sinners that they are accountible to God, and that their ONLY hope is the death and resurtion of jesus, as those who receive him as lord/Messiah will be saved!

Spurgeon does not need o state the doctrines of faith to preach christ, regardless wether cal/arm, the message should be the same, as those finer details more set up for sunday school or other teaching setting!

 

[Reynolds]

. Why not be honest about the final conclusion of your beliefs and state it up front to your audience?

The answer I have always received from Calvinists about this is that they are being upfront and honest. Anyone who wants to be saved can be saved. Anyone who wants to accept Christ can accept Christ as their Savior. However, only the elect/chosen/predestined will want to accept Christ. His "irresistable grace" will in essence make the elect, and only the elect, respond to the salvation message.

 

[Reynolds]

If you think about this though...

Regardless if one is a calvinist or arminian in regards to salvation, BOTH will be telling and teaching sinners that they are accountible to God, and that their ONLY hope is the death and resurtion of jesus, as those who receive him as lord/Messiah will be saved!

Spurgeon does not need o state the doctrines of faith to preach christ, regardless wether cal/arm, the message should be the same, as those finer details more set up for sunday school or other teaching setting!

I agree. Mountains are being made of molehills.

 

[Gina B]

Perhaps because both sides are rightfully passionate about what they see as issues that need to be addressed and dealt with.

1. The proliferation of easy-believism that is causing the church to be a laughing stock around the world. Weak churches, with people walking away because they do not understand grace or were never truly discipled, and often could not grasp why they didn't feel fulfilled by their actions.

as opposed to...

2. The evangelistic mindset (not pastors/teachers) that are called to and enjoy being the initiators, the first on the scene, to tell the story and see the first response and move one, fulfilling the call to reach as many as possible.


I wonder if more C's tend to be those who disciple and more A's tend to be Evangelists.

Of course that clashes to a degree, even if both have the exact same goals, because they're seeing the different problems with the exact same thing and both have the same goal but different jobs within that goal. (I've got this hilarious teacher/principal boxing match comparison in my head, wish you could see it!)

And off topic, but maybe I should start one - I'm tired of seeing evangelists working as pastors and being unhappy because they don't get it. SQUIRREL!

So anyhow, simplistic answer, but that's my initial thought right this minute.

 

[Reynolds]

Perhaps because both sides are rightfully passionate about what they see as issues that need to be addressed and dealt with.

1. The proliferation of easy-believism that is causing the church to be a laughing stock around the world. Weak churches, with people walking away because they do not understand grace or were never truly discipled, and often could not grasp why they didn't feel fulfilled by their actions.

as opposed to...

2. The evangelistic mindset (not pastors/teachers) that are called to and enjoy being the initiators, the first on the scene, to tell the story and see the first response and move one, fulfilling the call to reach as many as possible.


I wonder if more C's tend to be those who disciple and more A's tend to be Evangelists.

Of course that clashes to a degree, even if both have the exact same goals, because they're seeing the different problems with the exact same thing and both have the same goal but different jobs within that goal. (I've got this hilarious teacher/principal boxing match comparison in my head, wish you could see it!)

And off topic, but maybe I should start one - I'm tired of seeing evangelists working as pastors and being unhappy because they don't get it. SQUIRREL!

So anyhow, simplistic answer, but that's my initial thought right this minute.

In the SBC, I have seen no difference between Calvinist and Arminians when it come to discipleship. Pentecostal Arminians, as a whole, are a different story.

 

[Yeshua1]

Perhaps because both sides are rightfully passionate about what they see as issues that need to be addressed and dealt with.

1. The proliferation of easy-believism that is causing the church to be a laughing stock around the world. Weak churches, with people walking away because they do not understand grace or were never truly discipled, and often could not grasp why they didn't feel fulfilled by their actions.

as opposed to...

2. The evangelistic mindset (not pastors/teachers) that are called to and enjoy being the initiators, the first on the scene, to tell the story and see the first response and move one, fulfilling the call to reach as many as possible.


I wonder if more C's tend to be those who disciple and more A's tend to be Evangelists.

Of course that clashes to a degree, even if both have the exact same goals, because they're seeing the different problems with the exact same thing and both have the same goal but different jobs within that goal. (I've got this hilarious teacher/principal boxing match comparison in my head, wish you could see it!)

And off topic, but maybe I should start one - I'm tired of seeing evangelists working as pastors and being unhappy because they don't get it. SQUIRREL!

So anyhow, simplistic answer, but that's my initial thought right this minute.

the biblical model is to teach/preach jesus is the Lord, that his death was atonement for sinners, and that the Holy Spirit will do His work among the lost to save out His own people...

AFTER the salvation experience, then we are to start discipling, the meat of the word, NOT to go thru the DoG right when presenting the Gospel, as that is given to the saved!

 

[Gina B]

the biblical model is to teach/preach jesus is the Lord, that his death was atonement for sinners, and that the Holy Spirit will do His work among the lost to save out His own people...

AFTER the salvation experience, then we are to start discipling, the meat of the word, NOT to go thru the DoG right when presenting the Gospel, as that is given to the saved!

How do you separate grace from salvation? Please explain that one.

 

[steaver]

The answer I have always received from Calvinists about this is that they are being upfront and honest. Anyone who wants to be saved can be saved. Anyone who wants to accept Christ can accept Christ as their Savior. However, only the elect/chosen/predestined will want to accept Christ. His "irresistable grace" will in essence make the elect, and only the elect, respond to the salvation message.

If a Calvinist says anyone who wants to accept Christ as their savior can, is telling a lie when they know in their heart that is a deceitful statement coming from the beliefs of a Calvinist. This is why there is a huge difference between cals and non cals, and if the Calvinist were true to their beliefs they would preach their beliefs up front. But how do you think that would go? Probably have to close the doors.

 

[InTheLight]

Since there is agreement on the point of The Gospel must be preached, why are the other points worth the bitter contention they cause?

And which Gospel shall be preached? Limited Atonement or Unlimited Atonement? Irresistible grace or resistible grace? Faith is the gift of God or salvation is the gift of God? Regeneration precedes faith or faith precedes regeneration?

It makes a difference.

 

[steaver]

I have a good Calvinist friend who always says to me after we have a debate "I hope you understand someday". I'm like "why?" What do I gain? How would that change my relationship with Jesus Christ ?

 

[steaver]

If you think about this though...

Regardless if one is a calvinist or arminian in regards to salvation, BOTH will be telling and teaching sinners that they are accountible to God, and that their ONLY hope is the death and resurtion of jesus, as those who receive him as lord/Messiah will be saved!

Spurgeon does not need o state the doctrines of faith to preach christ, regardless wether cal/arm, the message should be the same, as those finer details more set up for sunday school or other teaching setting!

Why not preach as you believe? The whole of tulip? I'm always hearing from Calvinist how tulip is the gospel.

 

[steaver]

We r getting ready to interview for a new pastor. I want to ask him if he is Calvinistic. If he says yes I will not vote for him. If he says yes but he will not preach it from the pulpit, I will not vote for him either for it shows he is dishonest.

 

[steaver]

It's no different than a non cal preacher believing hell is eternal and refusing to preach it from the pulpit in case he might offend someone.