I answered in a general way also (I answered "no"). Soteriologically I may be considered Calvinistic, but that’s about it. Being Baptist, I have to remember that the Calvinists were at one time trying to kill us.
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Are You a Calvinist or a Non-Cal?
- Thread starter InTheLight
- Start date
- Status
I answered in a general way also (I answered "no"). Soteriologically I may be considered Calvinistic, but that’s about it. Being Baptist, I have to remember that the Calvinists were at one time trying to kill us.
jonathan.borland
Active Member
I answered in a general way also (I answered "no"). Soteriologically I may be considered Calvinistic, but that’s about it. Being Baptist, I have to remember that the Calvinists were at one time trying to kill us.
Yes, but in our day and time the term "Calvinist" generally denotes only the soteriological question.
True. And soteriological issues often boil down to how many petals are on your tulip. But Calvinism, regardless of the present day term, includes much more than soteriology just as "Baptist" as a denomination denotes more than just water dunking. We sometimes divorce ourselves from history.
Calvinistic soteriology divorced from Calvinism, doesn’t really say much about one believes, other than some adherence to the doctrines of grace. It is better to simply state one’s belief rather than claiming a theological system that has become so vague that it only states a position in opposition to another.
I suppose my complaint is that we now take a rebuttal (the 5 points) as the theological system itself. But the implications of the system far exceed soteriology regardless of where one draws the line in accepting Reformed belief.
jonathan.borland
Active Member
The question remains, "Would you consider yourself to be a Calvinist or not?"
Last edited by a moderator:
jonathan.borland
Active Member
And I'm a non-Calvinist Baptist!
Alive in Christ
New Member
Hmmm. I notice that Da Chaser1 has been banned.
I wonder what happened. I thought he was always a civil poster.
Oh well
Alive in Christ
New Member
AmyG...
Well, you know the the old military saying...
Well, you know the the old military saying...
:laugh:
Thousand Hills
Active Member
I still haven't voted in this poll. In Post #41 I decided to call myself a Peculiar Baptist. I have since had a disagreement with myself about what to call myself, and now have determined that I would like to be called a Peculiar Non-Conformist Baptist. :saint:
I'm sure there is a church out there somewhere where I will fit in?
I'm sure there is a church out there somewhere where I will fit in?
jonathan.borland
Active Member
Thanks to voters #38, #39, and #40! Your votes are appreciated!
jonathan.borland
Active Member
Thank you, voter #41, your vote is appreciated!
jonathan.borland
Active Member
If you haven't voted yet, take just a second and do so!
jonathan.borland
Active Member
Seems we are stuck on 41 voters. Anyone else describe yourself as of the Calvinist persuasion, or of the non-Calvinist kind?
seekingthetruth
New Member
This is an intersting comment, and as a non-cal/regular Christian I do agree with you.
However, i am told over and over by Cals on this board that freewill is faith in ones self and not God.
So, while you and I believe that our salvation is based on our faith in God, the Cal believes that salvation is based on God's faith in us.
John
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Maybe a better way to ask the question of this poll is: Do you believe God preselected a particular number of individuals to effectually save, while passing over the rest of humanity leaving them in their helpless condition without hope or opportunity to willingly accept God's appeal for reconciliation. Yes or no?
Who has actually said this?
Nobody here would agree with the bolded part. (ok, maybe an exception or two with a hyper)
Last edited by a moderator:
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
You are incorrect IMO. I know what you are attempting to argue. You are attempting the ol' "Men are able but not willing," line that Calvinists often throw out, but that is why I purposefully put the phrase, "without hope or opportunity to willingly accept God's appeal for reconciliation..."
Every Calvinists, who understands his own view correctly, affirms that mankind is born "unable to willingly accept," and can only do so if first born again (quickened). His willingness, according to Calvinism, must be changed by the effectual work of regeneration. I'm not sure why you deny this.
How can I be incorrect? I pretty sure I know what I believe...
He is unable because he's unwilling. He has the opportunity to be saved. All hope is in Jesus Christ. To say anything different about Calvinist is to be disingenuous about Calvinist's beliefs. All people have every opportunity to willingly accept.
- Status