Calvinistic trend in the SBC

[webdog]

Ah, ic. You'll get over it.

There is nothing to get over. You violated a BB rule. I reported you. If you see no room to repent, but instead hypocritically want a mod to "slap" Allan on the wrist for stating your ignorance on the matter, that's between you and God.

 

[kmichael]

Why are you defensive if you have said nothing worthy of criticism?

Oy, that was not defensive, that was explaining what happened to a 5 year old.:BangHead:

 

[StefanM]

Oy, that was not defensive, that was explaining what happened to a 5 year old.:BangHead:

You seem frustrated and angry. What frustrates you about this topic?

 

[kmichael]

There is nothing to get over. You violated a BB rule. I reported you. If you see no room to repent, but instead hypocritically want a mod to "slap" Allan on the wrist for stating your ignorance on the matter, that's between you and God.

lol



:laugh:

 

[kmichael]

You seem frustrated and angry. What frustrates you about this topic?

I think you might have a perception issue.


I am not angry or frustrated. I find a few folks on here to be Baptist Babies. But its all good.

:jesus:

 

[StefanM]

I think you might have a perception issue.

Apologies. I was going by the use of this emoticon. :BangHead:

 

[webdog]

I think you might have a perception issue.


I am not angry or frustrated. I find a few folks on here to be Baptist Babies. But its all good.

:jesus:

...this coming from someone who's response is "duh"

 

[saturneptune]

I think you might have a perception issue.


I am not angry or frustrated. I find a few folks on here to be Baptist Babies. But its all good.

:jesus:

One of the characteristics of a "Baptist baby" would be those who think of the SBC as a "narrow tent", maybe similar to "narrow mind" or "misperception."

One of the things on this board that causes such heated debate between Calvinists and free willers is either side joining this issue with the issue of exclusion. For example, in this case, joining Calvinism with exclusionary mind sets, when they have nothing to do with each other, is deceptive at best.

I am a strong believer in God's sovreignty and grace doctrines. To see these doctrines mindlessly mixed together with being an exclusionist, is outrageous. This is just as bad as the other side trying to keep Calvinism out of the SBC. What is it that makes people think that they cannot work with others who do not agree with them? What makes one think that their interpretation of the Bible is correct to the exclusion of all others?

That is the exact mindset that has torn churches apart. One of the reasons we are down in attendence is that the average person wants to go to church, be accepted , and worship in peace. They are not there to hear a bunch of secondary arguments.

Maybe you could start your own denomination conformed to your image.

 

[Dr. Bob]

It's roots have ALWAYS been the working of both Cal and Non-Cals together.

The SBC was NEVER a soley Calvinistic organization.

The majority of SBC were, at its founding, fully calvinistic. Hence the return emphasis is called the "founders" organization - a return to the "founders" position.

SBC and NBC did have some (great minority) "General" or Arminian Baptists (sadly). Over the past 150 years, and especially since the 1930's, both the SBC and [now] ABC have allowed in a lot of folks that should not have ever been welcome.

Again, I applaud the ARBCA, the SBC Founders, and ALL groups returning to biblical truth and away from compromise and doctrinal pelagianism.

 

[Dr. Bob]

BTW, let's grow up and show a modicum of maturity in dealing with a topic that will bring out both sides with guns, knives, chains and clubs!!

And for the men, . . .

 

[Tom Butler]

I'm grateful to serve a church which in which most of the members are not Calvinists, but allow us C's to stay around. Our views are well known within the congregation. At least three of us are deacons, three are teachers, and one is choir director. All C's serve in various capacities. We get along fine.

Eschatology varies, too in our church. We still get along. Because we want to.
We have our debates and discussions, but not dissension.

Do I think everybody should believe as I do? Sure. But that's not likely to happen in this life. But we agree on a lot, and that's enough.

 

[webdog]

I'm grateful to serve a church which in which most of the members are not Calvinists, but allow us C's to stay around.

I'm in the opposite situation. Maybe we can switch :laugh:

 

[Tom Butler]

Just curious, web, how do you get along with the C's in your church? What's their attitude toward you and the other non-Cals?

 

[webdog]

Just curious, web, how do you get along with the C's in your church? What's their attitude toward you and the other non-Cals?

Just fine. My pastor is a calvinist (and another elder), and he and his wife have us over for dinner.
To be honest, the attitude is not any different. As someone who almost fully embraced the TULIP, I can see the proselytizing being done at times about examining Scripture deeper, and being taught things like reading Romans 9 in regards to our personal salvation experience (which is taken totally out of context, IMO), but as with anything, you eat the cherries and spit out the pits.

 

[Dale-c]

WebDog, what church do you attend?
The reason I ask is that my brother was an intern at a calvinistic church in the Cleveland area last year.
probably not the same but your comment made me curious.

 

[webdog]

WebDog, what church do you attend?
The reason I ask is that my brother was an intern at a calvinistic church in the Cleveland area last year.
probably not the same but your comment made me curious.

www.lakeridgechurch.com

We haven't had any interns (only 150 members) since I've been a member there, though. Maybe he interned at Parkside Church? (Alistair Begg)

 

[Allan]

The majority of SBC were, at its founding, fully calvinistic. Hence the return emphasis is called the "founders" organization - a return to the "founders" position.

I do not dispute that a majority was calvinistic. But when you use the discriptor 'majority' please remember that it was not 90% Calvinistic - 10% Non-Cal. The number is much closer to 65% - 45%. maybe as low are 70/30

SBC and NBC did have some (great minority)

You need to define your discriptors.

"General" or Arminian Baptists (sadly).

They didn't think so. They were their brothers in Christ and gladly came along side them in the work of the ministry. Apparently you disagree.

Over the past 150 years, and especially since the 1930's, both the SBC and [now] ABC have allowed in a lot of folks that should not have ever been welcome.

Depends on your criteria. I agree in part but not on the whole since you don't see the inclusion of our Arminian brothers as those who should not have been included


[/quote]Again, I applaud the ARBCA, the SBC Founders, and ALL groups returning to biblical truth and away from compromise and doctrinal pelagianism.[/QUOTE]
LOL! Not THAT was funny.
Presumably being that you are a Dr. (of which I don't doubt) you need to go back grasp what Pelagainism is. There isn't a Baptist around that I know of (in the SBC) which adheres to the view of man coming to God withouts God intervention and coming to man first. AND that grace is not necessary to come to God or be saved.

 

[PK]

Dale - C, Do you come from a Calvanistic Family?

 

[Dale-c]

Dale - C, Do you come from a Calvanistic Family?

Yes and no. I don't really come from one but many other members of my family are now calvinistic as well, though only a couple of us are "5-Pointers"
I certainly didn't grow up with these doctrines but I began to see that they were true in my late teens.
I struggled with it for a few years because it was not what my friends believed and it was not what I had grown up with.

I bought A.W. Pink's book the Sovereignty of GOd about 3 years ago and that really helped me to admit what I already knew was true.
I still struggled with the "L" as in limited attonement until recently
It seemed to be somewhat logical but I didn't see the Biblical basis until recently.

One of the best things I have ever heard on the topic was a series from the 1689 London Baptist Confession by Pastor Arden Hodgins from California.
It was the most balanced message between God's sovereign decree and mans duty and responsibility I have heard.

 

[Dale-c]

Here is the link to the downloads:
http://www.theamericanview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1575&highlight=God%27s+decree