Featured How Should Arminians and Calvinists Approach One Another?

I disagree. Baptists are congregational in polity. There can be unity without uniformity.

 

It would be true except the battle for the seminaries is too important.

 

If you are painting so called Arminians with a broad brush and calling all Christians who are not Calvinists by that title, then I suggest the distinction be made by saying the following.

Calvinism interprets the scriptures by reading them from the right to left and bible believers read them from left to right.

Here is a couple examples to ponder.

Bible believers read God saying that salvation is by grace through faith and Calvinism reading the same scripture says God says salvation is by faith through grace.

Bible believers read God saying that regeneration by his Holy Spirit is the gift of God after we believe and Calvinists say that faith is the gift of God after regeneration.

Bible believers read that Christ died so all might be saved and Calvinism reading those scriptures come out saying that Christ died that a few will be saved.

That is enough to make my point but I could go on. Bible believers have nothing in common but the names and some are even blotting out the familiars names in some cases..

Separation is the only way forward when one learns this.

 

Separation should be from ignorant caricatures
Caricatures show a disrespectful attitude towards scripture.

 

How so if it is a true representation?

Isn’t it true that things I presented are actual points of disagreement as well as being opposites? Obviously I think I am right, being a non Calvinist, and so therefore I present myself in the crowd who reads from left to right.

 

Why can't Calvinists and Arminians teach at the same seminary?

 

They could, but it does not work that way. One group always slowly purges the other, except for a token or two.

 

It is not a true representation.

 

How is that Christ-like?

 

Actually, I was thinking of this statement that truly illustrates the point.

16 Therefore it (imputed righteousness in the context) is of faith, that it might be by grace;

Don't you agree that the order is contested between the two groups. And if it is by grace that it might be by faith, As Calvinism teaches, one would need to read from right to left?

 

Not to sound like a know it all but my view is that of those who even know anything about the A vs. C debate are rare these days. I don't intend to insult anyone but during a theological discussion, as the heat gets turned up, at some point the As drop out and the Cs will appeal to a confession or quotes from a famous theologian.

My view though is it isn't one or the other there is a 3rd option. I have reached the point in my life where I only worry about my relationship with Christ and my knowledge of the Scriptures, outside in the real world I say what I think and leave it at that.

Just this last Sunday I got ambushed at Church by a guy I don't even know, not on A & C doctrine but on translations and study Bibles. We have been attending this church for about 8 months and I haven't said literally one thing to anyone about my personal theology or my thoughts on Bible translations or choices in commentaries, not even to the pastor so I don't know where this came from perhaps I have emit the stench of rebellion unknowingly?

 

There's really no point to arguing with an anti-Calvinist. Those who read their own human standards of fairness into the Bible will not listen, no matter how many verses you quote to them.

Calvinists, on the other hand, typically lack the philosophical presuppositions that would prevent them from accepting Arminianism, if it were proved from scripture.

At the end of the day, it's more important to love God than to be right about everything.
1 Corinthians 8:2-3

 

It's trying to preserve what each group sees as sound doctrine.

 

no, I completely disagree.
All through the bible faith is an instrumentality.
Men are justified by or through faith....never because of faith.
Calvinists are primarily Covenant theologians who begin at Gen.1:1 are go through the bible seeing the grace of God revealed from start to finish.
Start a thread and give your best attempt to offer where you think you can show a clearer understanding.
I doubt you can make such a biblical case.

 

carnal philosophy does not replace revealed truth.

 

If saving faith is entirely a gift of the Holy Spirit, irrespective of our free-willed efforts to believe or disbelieve, as Augustine, Luther and Calvin taught, then those who deny it are blaspheming the Holy Spirit, committing the unpardonable sin.

Anti-Calvinists should be sure, then, that the Bible rejects irresistible (enabling, efficacious) grace before they reject it too.

 

Coming soon from Founders Ministries...

 

I will be honest. My only gripe with the SBC Calvinists as a whole is their willingness to rally around Calvinism and overlook huge problems in other areas just for the sake of furthering Calvinism. Example would be supporting the Woke leaders just because they are Calvinists.

 

I might not agree with your definition of "woke." Not everyone who supports police reform is a left-wing activist.

Also, now that Calvinism is gaining in popularity, Founders Ministries is treated like the Darth Vader of the SBC, but they were largely responsible 30 or so years ago for the SBC's decision to stick to the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy. People forget that today.

 

Woke is woke. Those who support police reform are ignorant of statistics. Abuse happens, but it's not based on race. Black community culture is the problem.

Founders ministries has slidden way downhill in 30 years.