Can a 5 Point Calvinist Be A Baptist Fundamentalist?

[robycop3]

The bible is clear a multitude will perish.
All who Remain in Adam perish.
All who are found in Christ have eternal life.
The same word all, two different groups of people.

Those who perish do so by their own will, or lack of it. But salvation is open to all living as mortals on earth.

 

[Van]

It depends on whether you understand who the elect are.SNIP

No it does not. Either Jesus died as a ransom for all or only for the elect. Did Jesus die for the non-elect (those never to be saved)? Again, I predict you will not answer.

Folks real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, because they believe Jesus gave His life as a ransom for all.

 

[JD731]

No matter to whom Peter's letter was originally intended, GOD preserved it & made it become Scripture, available to all. The facts in that letter are GOD'S, & He made sure they were available to the whole world.

James 5 has some facts and some promises concerning sickness. He told them what to do to get well and it worked every time it was tried because the conditions for success were built in. However, during that same time period Paul, who had probably read the letter from James (James was the first NT epistle written in 45 AD) would know about his cure at the time of this important incident.

Phil 2:24 But I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly.
25 Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellowsoldier, but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants.
26 For he longed after you all, and was full of heaviness, because that ye had heard that he had been sick.
27 For indeed he was sick nigh unto death: but God had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.
28 I sent him therefore the more carefully, that, when ye see him again, ye may rejoice, and that I may be the less sorrowful.
29 Receive him therefore in the Lord with all gladness; and hold such in reputation:
30 Because for the work of Christ he was nigh unto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service toward me.

Philippians was written in 60 AD.


You got to ask yourself; why didn't Paul practice the James expedient? And what about this;

2 Timothy 4:20
Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.

Why didn't Paul heal him? He said the following under inspiration.

2 Cor 1211 I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing.
12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

What are the signs of an apostle?

Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

HEAL THE SICK??? He left Trophimus at Miletum sick. Epaphroditus was sick nigh unto death and they did not practice the James 5 treatment and Paul did not heal him, God did.

There has to be an answer for these questions, and there is. It takes rightly dividing the scriptures and letting words mean what they say, and drawing conclusions from a literal understanding of words that are in a historical as well as a theological context.

 

[JD731]

No it does not. Either Jesus died as a ransom for all or only for the elect. Did Jesus die for the non-elect (those never to be saved)? Again, I predict you will not answer.

Folks real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, because they believe Jesus gave His life as a ransom for all.

Yes he did, he died for the sins of the whole world and because of his death the wrath of God against sinners was satified and sin was pur away. God no longer imputes personal sins to one's account while they are alive. However if they die - it is appointed unto men once to die and after this the judgement.

If God was satisficed, the word is propitiated, by the death of his son so that he will receive all who come to him in the name of Jesus, then how can sin still be a dividing issue? It is because that Jesus dealt with the whole issue of sin when he was on the cross that believers in him can say to those who have not believed, COME. God will save you for Jesus sake!

Your theology denies the work of Christ on the cross and it is much more serious than you think.

 

[Van]

Yes he did, he died for the sins of the whole world SNIP.

As predicted, we get Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. The nutters claim world refers to the elect. Thus a non-answer answer. Real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, and believe Jesus bought those heading for swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1) which means the actual meaning of world is all humanity, those to be saved and those never to be saved. This is really simple.

 

[Yeshua1]

I am a Baptist Fundamentalist and I say no.

What do the Baptist Fundamentalists who post here say, and why?

Depends on how one defines what being a Fundamentalist means, as my understanding is that they would hold with the essentials of the Faith, so answer would be yes!

 

[Yeshua1]

Would you agree these 5 doctrines are the fundementals:
Christianity[edit]
Main article: Christian fundamentalism
Christian fundamentalism has been defined by George Marsden as the demand for a strict adherence to certain theological doctrines, in reaction against Modernist theology.[12] The term was originally coined by its supporters to describe what they claimed were five specific classic theological beliefs of Christianity, and that developed into a Christian fundamentalist movement within the Protestant community of the United States in the early part of the 20th century.[13] Fundamentalism as a movement arose in the United States, starting among conservative Presbyterian theologians at Princeton Theological Seminary in the late 19th century. It soon spread to conservatives among the Baptists and other denominations around 1910 to 1920. The movement's purpose was to reaffirm key theological tenets and defend them against the challenges of liberal theology and higher criticism.[14]

The concept of "fundamentalism" has roots in the Niagara Bible Conferences that were held annually between 1878 and 1897. During those conferences, the tenets considered fundamental to Christian belief were identified.

"Fundamentalism" was prefigured by The Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth, a collection of twelve pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915, by brothers Milton and Lyman Stewart. It is widely considered to be the foundation of modern Christian fundamentalism.

In 1910, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church identified what became known as the five fundamentals:[15]

• Biblical inspiration and the infallibility of scripture as a result of this
• Virgin birth of Jesus
• Belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin
• Bodily resurrection of Jesus
• Historical reality of the miracles of Jesus

In 1920, the word "fundamentalist" was first used in print by Curtis Lee Laws, editor of "The Watchman Examiner," a Baptist newspaper.[16] Laws proposed that those Christians who were fighting for the fundamentals of the faith should be called "fundamentalists."[17]

Theological conservatives who rallied around the five fundamentals came to be known as "fundamentalists". They rejected the existence of commonalities with theologically related religious traditions, such as the grouping of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism into one Abrahamic family of religions.[3] By contrast, while Evangelical groups (such as the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association) typically agree with the "fundamentals" as they are expressed in The Fundamentals, they are often willing to participate in events with religious groups which do not hold to the essential doctrines.[18]

On those so called essentials of the Faith, Evangelical Arminians and Calvinist and Reformed all would say Amen!

 

[Yeshua1]

As predicted, we get Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. The nutters claim world refers to the elect. Thus a non-answer answer. Real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, and believe Jesus bought those heading for swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1) which means the actual meaning of world is all humanity, those to be saved and those never to be saved. This is really simple.

real Fundamentalists can be either arminian or calvinist Van, as their take is on the essentials of the faith all agree upon, not Sotierology proper!

 

[AustinC]

Those who perish do so by their own will, or lack of it. But salvation is open to all living as mortals on earth.

How do they perish by their lack of will?
The Bible tells us we all perish because we all have sinned. This is a legal issue. We broke the moral law of God and our damnation is just. It has nothing to do with willpower. It has everything to do with justice being served.
Question: Who is the Judge?
Question: Does the Judge have the authority to pardon someone and grant mercy?
Question: Is a ransom price required in order to make the Judges decision of mercy a just decision?
Question: Who has the authority to do this? Is it the sinner/criminal or is it the judge?

Question: How is it that you would dare put the ability to ransom oneself upon the choice of the sinner/criminal rather than upon the choice of the Judge?

 

[AustinC]

As predicted, we get Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. The nutters claim world refers to the elect. Thus a non-answer answer. Real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, and believe Jesus bought those heading for swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1) which means the actual meaning of world is all humanity, those to be saved and those never to be saved. This is really simple.

Let's ponder this.
You assert that Jesus has bought (I interpret bought as ransomed, paid the price in total) the sins of all humanity when he died on the cross and rose again.

Do you see the problem that you must resolve when you make this claim? There is a very significant problem, in case you cannot see it. Please resolve it for us, or admit you cannot see it and then I can show it to you.

 

[JD731]

As predicted, we get Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. The nutters claim world refers to the elect. Thus a non-answer answer. Real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, and believe Jesus bought those heading for swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1) which means the actual meaning of world is all humanity, those to be saved and those never to be saved. This is really simple.

Van, evidently you do not think TULIP is fundamental to Christianity and I thought you were a Calvinist. Sorry I posted to you as if you were.

But to clarify, when I say Christ died for the whole world, I mean he died for every man going forward from his resurrection and every justified man from the past. Your reasoning in your last post to me defies logic. What is wrong with you?

 

[Van]

real Fundamentalists can be either arminian or calvinist Van, as their take is on the essentials of the faith all agree upon, not Sotierology proper!

Yet another taint so post, denying that Fundamentalists believe in a literal interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1...

 

[Van]

Let's ponder this.
You assert that Jesus has bought (I interpret bought as ransomed, paid the price in total) the sins of all humanity when he died on the cross and rose again.

Do you see the problem that you must resolve when you make this claim? There is a very significant problem, in case you cannot see it. Please resolve it for us, or admit you cannot see it and then I can show it to you.

More tilting at windmills, more imaginary dragons...
1) Does scripture say Jesus "bought" those heading for swift destruction? Yes
2) Does scripture say Jesus laid down His life as a ransom for all? Yes
3) Paying the price to redeem anybody does not equate with choosing to redeem everybody.
4) Recall those not redeemed go to Hades, undergo the resurrection of the dead, face Judgment and go into the Lake of Fire in Gehenna. Thus they "pay" for their sins. Only the unstudied equate the right of redemption with the fact of redemption. If you own an oil lease, you can extract the oil of your choice.

 

[Van]

Van, evidently you do not think TULIP is fundamental to Christianity and I thought you were a Calvinist. Sorry I posted to you as if you were.

But to clarify, when I say Christ died for the whole world, I mean he died for every man going forward from his resurrection and every justified man from the past. Your reasoning in your last post to me defies logic. What is wrong with you?

As predicted, we get Jesus died for the sins of the whole world.
The nutters claim world refers to the elect.
Real fundamentalists reject Calvinism, and believe Jesus bought those heading for swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1) which means the actual meaning of world is all humanity, those to be saved and those never to be saved. This is really simple.

Some claim the above "defies logic."

 

[AustinC]

More tilting at windmills, more imaginary dragons...
1) Does scripture say Jesus "bought" those heading for swift destruction? Yes
2) Does scripture say Jesus laid down His life as a ransom for all? Yes
3) Paying the price to redeem anybody does not equate with choosing to redeem everybody.
4) Recall those not redeemed go to Hades, undergo the resurrection of the dead, face Judgment and go into the Lake of Fire in Gehenna. Thus they "pay" for their sins. Only the unstudied equate the right of redemption with the fact of redemption. If you own an oil lease, you can extract the oil of your choice.

You assert that Jesus has bought (I interpret bought as ransomed, paid the price in total) the You assert that Jesus has bought (I interpret bought as ransomed, paid the price in total) the sins of all humanity when he died on the cross and rose again.

Do you see the problem that you must resolve when you make this claim? There is a very significant problem, in case you cannot see it. of all humanity when he died on the cross and rose again.

Do you see the problem that you must resolve when you make this claim? There is a very significant problem, in case you cannot see it.

I can tell that you do not see the problem.

When you declare that Jesus purchased the sins of all humanity, you therefore declare that all sins are wiped away and no longer judged by God. Every sinner is justified by God, irregardless of having faith or not having faith. In your claim, all humanity is fully purchased.
Van, you can cry all you want, but that is the fact of your claim. In your claim you entirely remove faith being necessary since everyone has been fully paid for. You remove the necessity for evangelism because everyone has already been paid for.

The only possible meaning in scripture that is accurate must be that Jesus ransom is limited to those who believe not to those who don't believe. For ALL who believe, the ransom is completed.

If we hold your contention we make God unjust and one who didn't pay for all sin. Instead you ultimately say that God paid for almost all sins...except for the sin of not having faith (unbelief).

Van, this is a significant problem for you.

Finally, if you are going to reply, speak directly to me. I am the one debating with you. You are addressing me. Thank you for that courtesy.

 

[Van]

SNIPFinally, if you are going to reply, speak directly to me. I am the one debating with you. You are addressing me. Thank you for that courtesy.

You are not debating me! You change the subject and hoist insults.

1) Does scripture say Jesus "bought" those heading for swift destruction? Yes 2 Peter 2:1
2) Does scripture say Jesus laid down His life as a ransom for all? Yes 1 Timothy 2:6
3) Paying the price to redeem anybody does not equate with choosing to redeem everybody. 2 Peter 2:1
4) Recall those not redeemed go to Hades, undergo the resurrection of the dead, face Judgment and go into the Lake of Fire in Gehenna. Thus they "pay" for their sins. Only the unstudied equate the right of redemption with the fact of redemption. If you own an oil lease, you can extract the oil of your choice.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yet another taint so post, denying that Fundamentalists believe in a literal interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1...

Again, all limited the extent of the atonement, except for Universalist! Are you now in that camp?

 

[Yeshua1]

You are not debating me! You change the subject and hoist insults.

1) Does scripture say Jesus "bought" those heading for swift destruction? Yes 2 Peter 2:1
2) Does scripture say Jesus laid down His life as a ransom for all? Yes 1 Timothy 2:6
3) Paying the price to redeem anybody does not equate with choosing to redeem everybody. 2 Peter 2:1
4) Recall those not redeemed go to Hades, undergo the resurrection of the dead, face Judgment and go into the Lake of Fire in Gehenna. Thus they "pay" for their sins. Only the unstudied equate the right of redemption with the fact of redemption. If you own an oil lease, you can extract the oil of your choice.

Did God intend to have all lost sinners saved by the Cross of Chris then?

 

[Yeshua1]

You are not debating me! You change the subject and hoist insults.

1) Does scripture say Jesus "bought" those heading for swift destruction? Yes 2 Peter 2:1
2) Does scripture say Jesus laid down His life as a ransom for all? Yes 1 Timothy 2:6
3) Paying the price to redeem anybody does not equate with choosing to redeem everybody. 2 Peter 2:1
4) Recall those not redeemed go to Hades, undergo the resurrection of the dead, face Judgment and go into the Lake of Fire in Gehenna. Thus they "pay" for their sins. Only the unstudied equate the right of redemption with the fact of redemption. If you own an oil lease, you can extract the oil of your choice.

So God intended all sinners to get saved, but the creation can frustrate its creator?

 

[AustinC]

You are not debating me! You change the subject and hoist insults.

1) Does scripture say Jesus "bought" those heading for swift destruction? Yes 2 Peter 2:1

2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

The answer is no. Scripture does not say that Jesus bought those headed for swift destruction. I just quoted your reference and it does not make your claim.

2) Does scripture say Jesus laid down His life as a ransom for all? Yes 1 Timothy 2:6

Context is so very important here as Paul identifies how the word all is defined. Therefore we need to see the verses in front of verse 6.
1 Timothy 2:1-6 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.

All status groups are found in God's elective and Sovereign will.

3) Paying the price to redeem anybody does not equate with choosing to redeem everybody. 2 Peter 2:1

2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

Again, this verse simply doesn't support your assertion. Did you mean to reference something else?

4) Recall those not redeemed go to Hades, undergo the resurrection of the dead, face Judgment and go into the Lake of Fire in Gehenna. Thus they "pay" for their sins. Only the unstudied equate the right of redemption with the fact of redemption. If you own an oil lease, you can extract the oil of your choice.

Honestly, I have no idea what you are attempting to argue in this point.
I think you are admitting that Jesus didn't ransom people who go to hell and later to the lake of fire. Is that what you are admitting?
Or are you saying that Jesus payment wasn't enough?