Baptists And Calvinism Debate - October 16th

Thanks for posting this information. I would love to obtain a video or a transcrpt of this debate.

 

The title can be easily misunderstood to read "Baptists vs Calvinists". Why didn't they call it "Baptists and Arminians"? Home field advantage I guess.

 

I agree. The person that set this up is foolish.

Calvinism is a systematic theology that crosses denomination lines....Swiss Reformed Church, The Dutch Reformed Church, The English Puritans, The French Huguenots, The Presbyterian and Congregational Churches, AND>>>>>>> Baptist Churches....which all are denominations.

Non Calvinist are...United Methodist, Roman Catholic, Seventh Day, Church of the Nazarene, Church of God, and BAPTIST...which are all denominations.

 

And I would add one more to the non calvinist list....Church of Christ.

 

And to think that a calvinist was the founder of the Church of Christ. Alexander Campbell was a "reformer" who lead out of the Baptist faith into the Church of Christ. He was against missions and a one testament man.

 

I didn't know that about him. Some of the most angry anti-calvinists I know today are CofC people.

 

Yeah J.D., it is rather ironic huh? He was actually hyper calvinist... and as such was against missions.

 

Live Video Feed of Debate

Just a FYI...

there will be a live video feed of the debate on this website. Don't know how good the feed will be. Some of these live feeds are not so good because of the number of people watching.

 

No debate

Apparently there will be no debate because the folks from LU decided--twelve days before the debate was to take place--that they couldn't follow through on the already agreed upon details of the debate format and video distribution.

You can read the details here.

 

==As a Liberty Seminary alumni I am amazed at how badly they have handled this situation...:tear:

How hard is it to hold a debate?

Drs White & Ascol were really willing to go the extra mile to have this debate. However some people in the Liberty leadership were not, in fact they were not even willing to meet White/Ascol half way.

Which "side" am I own?

I am a 4-point Calvinist. So I am more comfortable with White/Ascol than with the Caners. I also don't agree with Ergun Caner's assertion that he, as a Baptist, is not a Arminian or Calvinist. I don't see "baptist" as a seperate group. Even a brief survey of church history will show that baptists have been both Arminian and Calvinistic and everywhere in between.

 

Personally, I am witholding judgement until I hear from both sides. It's too easy to get acid-tongued in such situations. And the more direct and confrontational the debaters are, the more suspicious I become.

 

The cancellation of the debate is disappointing. The whole attempt to hold it has been very strange with lots of wrangling over rules.

 

You'll find Tom Ascols take on the situation here, including this statement in the comments:

 

Both Sides

Both sides speak...

Click Here for Transcripts

 

You know I find it very interesting that Dr White can easily set up debates with men like Marcus Borg, John Shelby Spong, and John Dominic Crossan. These men reject the Gospel and hold to all sorts of non-Christian views. Yet Dr White had no problem setting up debates with them. In fact various Catholics (etc) have also been no problem. Why is it that this debate is such a problem? I don't think it is Drs White or Ascol. Let's not over look the fact that Falwell, through the moderator who works at Liberty, is now demanding totally copyright control of the video (etc). What does that, along with the other last minute "changes", tell us? Probably Falwell, and others, don't want to allow this debate to "get out" if things don't go well for their side. I think that is what is really going on here. Certainly that is understandable but they should go about protecting themselves in a different way. Maybe if Ergun Caner is not "up to the debate" he should not have agreed to it at the start. I also think Drs White and Ascol made a mistake. They allowed Liberty to host the event when one of its professors is in the debate. The debate should have been held at a neutral location with a neutral moderator. Then none of this would have been an issue. Also Drs White, Ascol should have gotten the agreement in written form (contract, etc) beyond emails (though it is good to have those).

A danger for the reformed position here, and for White and Ascol personally, is that Thomas Road and Liberty have both been pushing this debate on their various web-sites (etc). Now that it has been cancelled how will Liberty and Falwell explain this? See the danger. This was a no win situation for White and Ascol. I am afraid they are greatly out matched here. However I, as a Liberty alumni, and others will work very hard to keep Liberty (Ergun and Falwell) honest about "why" this debate was cancelled. I will be watching TRBC on Sunday to see if Falwell says anything. Hopefully they will be honest and, at least, say that it was cancelled because neither side could agree on format. I also hope that White and Ascol drop the subject and move on. That would be best for everyone involved.

This whole situation makes me very sad :tear: .

 

Well, maybe it's just me, but in my job I resolve issues routinely, and I do it between people who can be rather hard to get along with at times. I've found email to be a very poor way to try to negotiate anything. It's slow to write and read them, and it's easy to miscommunicate. If I have problems getting things done, I simply set up a phone meeting among all parties involved, and we can usually hash it out in an hour or two. Why spend months bickering over email when one meeting could resolve it? It liklely took more than two hours to type some of those emails.

In this area, emotions have again gotten in the way of cold-blooded discussion. I'm done with this one.

 

==You will find that Dr Ascol, and someone from Alpha and Omega, have tried to talk to various people on the phone. However most of the time the "other party" did not return their calls. I do believe, however, that a few actual "phone meetings" occured. Keep in mind that Tom Ascol and Emir Caner had worked out an agreement that everyone was on board with. Then, all of the sudden, on Wednesday there is a 180 that both Caners are going along with. Something is up.

 

Mental notes to self:
Self, remember the following:
1. Do not get into email wars with people who are itching for a debate. It is a no-win situation.
2. Before I hit the Send button, always remember that my private emails might end up published somewhere.
3. Don't respond when I'm emotional. I'll end up sounding childish again, even though I've convinced myself that I'm intelligent.
4. Always speak to everyone with Christian love and respect, even if they don't desserve it.

Self, write that in the front of your mind, please.

 

Wise thoughts Humble, wise thoughts.

Is that copyrighted or can I have it etched into the front of my head as well. :laugh: :tongue3: :laugh: