Can a 5 Point Calvinist Be A Baptist Fundamentalist?

No "Calvinist" I know believes God created mankind corrupt. Though, they do believe God allowed man to willfully rebel, thus it was ordained by God.

No Calvinist I know thinks God is ever arbitrary. Humans are born under the curse of sin, from Adam. That corruption means all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Every Calvinist believes all humans are guilty of sin. Paul expresses this in Romans 1-11.

Every Calvinist believes the saints are preserved by God and thus will also persevere in faith.

As you can see, Calvinists are true fundamentalists. They see the fundamentals being expressed in scripture.
Romans 5 expresses the fundamentals.
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

So, Calvinists are fundamentalists, which answers the question you originally asked.

 

Well, I am fun and mental, so I guess...

 

typical, not quote what the WHOLE verse actually says!

even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and without defect before him in love

NOTHING to do with "choosing for salvation", but rather that the saved should be "without defect before him in love"!!!

This is called the abuse of Scriptures

 

What? No duh?

 

Our IFB church doesn't believe ANY man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & that includes calvinism.
2 Peter 3:9The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
This verse sinks most calvinist points.

 

Hmmm...I doubt your assertion is true.
Second, the verse you share actually sinks your position when you read what Peter placed all around it in his letter.
Question: does your church believe humans choose God by their free will?

 

As a former IFB, I say, "no".

To me, those who hold to what is commonly called "Calvinism" believe and teach more than just a set of "fundamentals"...
To clarify, something along the lines of, "what is the absolute minimum that can be held to, and be in the faith / saved" is what I was taught growing up in IFB circles from 1978 and continued until 2005 or so when I left.

They were often referred to as "the fundamentals of the faith".

I heard that subject being preached and taught from pulpits the entire time that I was attending those churches in my area, and I was in them for some 28 years, give or take.

I agree, and for the reasons I've stated above.

 

I agree.
Many so-called "Calvinists" believe that, as well, and they do not teach that the Lord created mankind corrupt.
They teach this:

" And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." ( Genesis 1:31 ).

They also teach and preach that mankind sinned and was subsequently given over to that which we began to love and hate, and that is how we, as a race, became corrupted ( Romans 1:18-32 ).

I agree.
As a former IFB, I can attest that they do not believe that mankind was created...some for mercy and some for destruction ( Romans 9:22-23, 2 Peter 2:12 ).
They believe that mankind was created with a will that is somehow neutral ( or is made neutral, similar to what is taught by "Wesleyans" in the doctrine of Prevenient Grace ) and we can use that will to either believe on Christ when the Gospel is preached, or we can reject Him as Saviour in that moment.

They also believe and teach that we as sinners can change our minds and decide to believe even after formerly rejecting the Gospel countless times.

Agreed.
That is what I was taught when I was in IFB churches, for the most part.

Again I agree.

In comparison, I see that many "Calvinists", at least most of the ones that are Baptists, teach the preservation of the saints as meaning that they are kept by the power of God ( 1 Peter 1:5 ).
However, they also teach that there are "wheat" and there are "tares" in the body of Christ ( Matthew 13:36-43 ), and that not everyone that claims to be saved, actually knows God and is known by God ( Matthew 7:21-23 ).

They teach that the "perseverance of the saints" is not that God's people are saved because they persevere,
but that their perseverance is the evidence of their salvation....their being kept by the power of God.

I agree, and one of the reasons that I left the IFB's was because they taught that salvation relied on, or was characterized by, believing a set of basic fundamentals;
That false doctrines lead to shipwrecked souls...
And those fundamentals and doctrines did not include what is embodied in "T.U.L.I.P.", nor in many other teachings that have come to be known as "Calvinism", such as reprobation.

 

You can have that opinion. But as stated that really does not give an actual why for it. I see no contradiction between the 5 points of Calvinism and the 5 points of fundamentalism. And I am not a Calvinist.

 

What do you mean? Ephesians 1:4, ". . . as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, . . ." <and context>

 

The "why" is because to them,
God's choosing people to salvation apart from anything that person ever did or had, is not something that they see and agree with from the Scriptures.

From my perspective of having been involved in IFB circles for the time that I was,
they see a cooperative effort between God and man being carried out, and not a God-sponsored and operative one that ignores anything that we as men can do or have in order to grant salvation to someone.

I do, and it's not those differences that made me leave.
Rather, I saw a marked difference between the overall Gospel message that was preached and taught, and what I saw in the Scriptures as to how God's work of salvation is actually carried out and why.

Finally, neither am I a Calvinist, but many here would call me one.

 

" But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."

As discussed in many threads before, roby,
I see the "us-ward" as being the "beloved" spoken of in verse 8, and the "any" and "all" as also describing the "us-ward" and "beloved", whom the Lord is not willing that any of should perish, but that all of should come to repentance due to His love for them...as seen in Romans 8:31-39, Ephesians 2:1-10, and many other places in His word.

To me, that one verse, in context, confirms the "U" in "TULIP" and serves to demonstrate why I am no longer an IFB ( what many nowadays seem to call an "Independent Baptist" )...
Because few of the ones that I know ( past and present ) even see it that way.
With that stated and used as one objective reason why I left that movement,
I will go back to the sidelines, as I have no desire to participate in a debate of any kind.

My reason for replying to this thread is and was as a former IFB...
and while I commend them for their stand on certain doctrines, practices and what they see as fundamentals, I personally see more being taught in the Scriptures than they do, and it was because of those differences that I reluctantly left.

If anyone has any questions for me, I invite them to start a conversation privately.

 

Can a 5 Point Calvinist be a Fundamentalist Baptist? Of course anyone can profess to be this or that, as integrity is not a given. So the question assumes a valid agreement of doctrines. However, the Fundamentalist doctrines are not given. Here is one list from the internet:

Summarized, these points were: (1) the inerrancy of Scripture, (2) the Virgin Birth of Christ, (3) his substitutionary atonement, (4) his bodily resurrection, and (5) the authenticity of the miracles. ​

Certainly a Calvinist agrees with Biblical inerrancy, the Virgin Birth, His bodily resurrection, and the authenticity of the biblical miracles. So, using this list, only the undefined "his substitutionary atonement" might be a stumbling block if integrity is assumed.
Penal Substitution Atonement is a Trojan horse for "Limited Atonement" (Christ only died for the elect - the Calvinist view) but since whether Christ died as a ransom for all or a ransom for some is not stated, no conclusion can be reached.

There are other lists of 5 such as:

1) The inerrancy of Scripture meaning Scripture is without error.
2) The virgin birth of Christ.
3) The substitutionary atonement of Christ.
4) Christ’s bodily resurrection.
5) Christ’s bodily return to earth in the second coming.​

In this second list, the miracle item is replaced with Christ's bodily return.

 

In reply to the O.P., the late Tom Cassidy who was the doyen of this board for many years was certainly a Calvinist whether or not he described himself as one. He and I had a few disagreements, but on Monergism we were as one.

Don Fortner, who died on 2020, is someone who is usually described as a Fundamentalist, but he was Calvinistic to the point of being Hyper.

 

because the majority of your arguments are exactly how the Calvinist would!