cal and non-cal agreement

[Herald]

More than five years ago I had a thread(since closed) called N-C's Really Agree With Much Of Calvinism. I went through some contents of the 32 chapters of the Westminster Confession of Fath. Allan,a non-Cal agreed with much of what I posted from the WCoF. It is possible for a non-Cal after dithering and being in a nasty mood to finally examine things and exclaim"I did't know I was in agreement with a Calvinistic document!"

Of course the 1689 Baptist Confession (otherwise known as the London Confession)would bring the percentages up even more with a common consensus.

I another thread from the past I had spoken of the Golden Booklet of the Christian Life. It originally was apart of The Institutes. I dare to say that a non-Calvinist would agree with 90% of it at the very least providing they are indeed regenerate folks.

The reason they would agree with much of the content in the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith is because most of those things are not in dispute. It is God's will of decree, election, and probably the Sabbath (Lord's Day) that are the lightening rod chapters.

 

[John I Morris]

Hey folks, are we having fun yet!? The study and debate of God's Word can be fun if done correctly...
:jesus:

 

[Yeshua1]

In the church I serve (as does saturneptune), the large majority of our members are not Calvinists. We DoGs are in a definite minority, yet, we get along just fine, focusing on areas of agreement where we can, and agreeing to disagree where we can't. So we have some experience in this area of seeking agreement.

We all agree that all have sinned.
We all agree that the Holy Spirit must initiate the process with illumination and conviction. It is the Holy Spirit who opens the eyes of the sinner to spiritual truth; convicts him of sin and its consequences; and draws him to repentance and faith.

Whether one believes all are enabled, or only the elect, we all agree on illumination, conviction and drawing.

We all agree that salvation involves repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

We all agree that God is able to keep those who have committed to him, and no one can snatch them out of his hand, that the gifts and calling of God are "without repentance."

Even though we may approach the subject of election from different perspectives, these agreements are something we can all embrace as the basis for unity among us. Because, in the final analysis, we agree on the Gospel.

Think that there can be found common agrements of a sort between calvinists and classical arminians, its just that when we try to include in "non cals", that gets much harder!

 

[12strings]

Think that there can be found common agrements of a sort between calvinists and classical arminians, its just that when we try to include in "non cals", that gets much harder!

Sorry, but what do you mean?

 

[Rippon]

The reason they would agree with much of the content in the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith is because most of those things are not in dispute. It is God's will of decree, election, and probably the Sabbath (Lord's Day) that are the lightening rod chapters.

In that thread of mine from the past it was determined that chapter 5 dealing with providence would meet no objection from non-Cals. Chapter 6 Of The Fall Of Man, Of Sin, And The Punishment Thereof would pass muster. Chapter 9 Of Free Will non-Cals would not put up a fuss. Chapter 28 regarding Baptism; three out of the seven heads would be acceptable to them. Chapter 29 dealing with the Lord's Supper --all eight propositions would meet with agreement by non-Cals.