Christians?
And so then, what are people called from the Reformed Theology?
-
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!
Calvinism vs. DoG??
- Thread starter convicted1
- Start date
And so then, what are people called from the Reformed Theology?
If I buy you a gift and offer it to you, in what way did you assist in purchasing the gift?
Calvinists? DoG'rs? Whatever you want to call yourself. I want to be called a Christian.
It's not....but the Pastor just proved it thru Scripture.
No, see it's not us that should have the qualifier. We do everything according to scripture. So therefore, I will just call myself Christian then & to heck with all these silly names given.
I had to, first of all, want the gift. The bible tells us that, prior to our salvation, we don't want anything God has to offer, and we are, in fact, His enemies.
I must, second of all, value the gift. The lost man does not value eternal life.
I must, third of all, accept the gift from someone who I hate.
On the other hand, if God, in His Sovereign Election, regenerates me, gives me the desire to have the gift, the ability to value the gift, and the faith to accept the gift, then, of course, I receive eternal life.
See the difference?
Yeah. You have God making the choice for you to love Him. That's not love.
You are right. It was not my love for God that resulted in my salvation. It was God's love for me! All of Him, none of me.
I don't get your point. I was responding to TCassidy asking what non cals should be called. He thinks we should be called "self salvationists". I said call us Christians. Is there a problem with wanting to be called a Christian?
You are right. It was not my love for God that resulted in my salvation. It was God's love for me! All of Him, none of me.
Of course it was God's love for "all" that motivated Him to die on the cross. But you will not find any scripture stating that God loves "for" us.
Jesus purchased salvation for us on the cross. I had NOTHING to do with it. It was His plan, His decision, His offer. But if I don't take my hands out of my pockets and receive His gift, I will not be saved. He does not make that decision for me. Scripture does not bear it out.
You are right. It was not my love for God that resulted in my salvation. It was God's love for me! All of Him, none of me.
No no No.....when he awakens you, you still have a choice to reject him.
Actually you were responding to Earth, not me.
Se-salvationist is not what I call people who deny God's Sovereign Grace. I usually call them by their given names.
Se (or Self) salvationist is a soteriological description, not a means of address.
So, are you saying your salvation is based on what you did? I thought you said it was based on what Christ did for you?
It seems to me you want it both ways. Christ did part of it and you did the rest.
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Absolutely nothing & we have that right as well. Of course we have our differences but their not large enough to say one is Christian & the other isnt. We just play these games with names in the desire (I think anyway) to separate ourselves from one another....this is what I resent the most & Im certain Quantum would back me up that this has been my position all along.
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
I really don't have an answer as to how you should refer to them.
My point, though, is to give deference to our opponents who do claim that they are not self-saved.
You and I may (and do) disagree with them on this in that we see salvation as a work of God from beginning to end, not based on "foreknowledge" wrongly defined. However, to use "Self-Saved" puts an unnecessary stumbling block between to conversants that might other wise have a fruitful conversation.
Perhaps ask how their theology doesn't emphasize the "self?" Try to change their mind. But, please don't make it harder for them by having to stomach a term they see as offensive.
Blessings,
The Archangel
I also agree. I don't particularly like the term "Calvinist" either. Wouldn't it be great if we could have intelligent dialog & debate without this competitive brow beating....besides we all know thats NOT what our Master wanted.
You have no opinion on how I should refer to them but have an opinion on how I should NOT refer to them? Well, I understand your sentiments but don't find them very helpful.
Should we give the same deference to the lost who refuse to acknowledge they are sinners, undone, and in danger of hell fire?
Why? I am under the impression that "the truth shall make you free." Even uncomfortable truths.
Did it ever occur to you that was exactly why I used the term? To draw them into the discussion and explain why their soteriology does not contain a major element of synergism? So far only Amy G. has even attempted to do so. It seems rather odd to me that this dear lady is the only one willing to defend her soteriology.
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
You have no opinion on how I should refer to them but have an opinion on how I should NOT refer to them? Well, I understand your sentiments but don't find them very helpful.
Yeah...my opinions and sentiments may not be too helpful.
No, we should not. However, someone who has a synergistic understanding of salvation is not the same as one who is not saved in the first place.
Therefore, deference should be given based on someone being a Christian.
Why? I am under the impression that "the truth shall make you free." Even uncomfortable truths.
While that is true, the stumbling block makes it soooo much harder for us all to engage in meaningful exchanges without degenerating into name calling.
Did it ever occur to you that was exactly why I used the term? To draw them into the discussion and explain why their soteriology does not contain a major element of synergism? So far only Amy G. has even attempted to do so. It seems rather odd to me that this dear lady is the only one willing to defend her soteriology.
I have no doubt this word can be used to draw some into discussion. But, for others they start seeing red and insulting someone for whom Christ died. It's the idea that honey attracts more flies than vinegar.
Blessings,
The Archangel
You have no opinion on how I should refer to them but have an opinion on how I should NOT refer to them? Well, I understand your sentiments but don't find them very helpful.
Should we give the same deference to the lost who refuse to acknowledge they are sinners, undone, and in danger of hell fire?Why? I am under the impression that "the truth shall make you free." Even uncomfortable truths.
Tom, Ive learned allot from you my time here & I'm thankful to you. We have had several heated dialogs sometimes too heated my brother. God knows we must have these talks so we understand each others theological difference. What I have seen is genuine interest in our Reformed theology as well as some misconceptions. Hopefully we are resolving them but we also have hotheads on both sides that cause resentment. Id like to wade through this & get us all to the point where mature discussions occur. I know you also want that my brother & I hope you will work with us to make that happen.
Please hang out & back us up in this endeavor.
Thanks for your understanding in this matter!
Archangel and Earth, Wind & Fire,
I know you both may believe my methodology may seem to be too confrontational or even combative, but that is not my intent.
The Gospel is the lynch-pin of all that we believe. If we lose the lynch-pin we lose all. History teaches us that, once the Gospel was compromised, way back in the 2nd century AD, the decline became so ubiquitous that only a very small remnant was left, hiding in the most remote places available to them. It was 1300 years before the main stream, visible, claimants on the name of Christendom where openly challenged resulting in the semi-reformation of the 16th century.
My greatest fear is that, as we approach the return of Christ, and sin continues to wax worse and worse, we will again lose the lynch-pin of our faith, the Gospel, and another dark age as experienced in that time of the ascendancy of the apostate "Church" of Rome will be upon us.
You may consider this to only be a diverting dalliance on a discussion board, but I believe it to be the battle for "the faith once delivered." Jude warned us of this very thing in verse 3 of his epistle, "Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints."
Some things are worth the effort.
I know you both may believe my methodology may seem to be too confrontational or even combative, but that is not my intent.
The Gospel is the lynch-pin of all that we believe. If we lose the lynch-pin we lose all. History teaches us that, once the Gospel was compromised, way back in the 2nd century AD, the decline became so ubiquitous that only a very small remnant was left, hiding in the most remote places available to them. It was 1300 years before the main stream, visible, claimants on the name of Christendom where openly challenged resulting in the semi-reformation of the 16th century.
My greatest fear is that, as we approach the return of Christ, and sin continues to wax worse and worse, we will again lose the lynch-pin of our faith, the Gospel, and another dark age as experienced in that time of the ascendancy of the apostate "Church" of Rome will be upon us.
You may consider this to only be a diverting dalliance on a discussion board, but I believe it to be the battle for "the faith once delivered." Jude warned us of this very thing in verse 3 of his epistle, "Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints."
Some things are worth the effort.