Confessions and creeds

[saturneptune]

You're exactly right.

In my case, that is always the case.

There are few things as detestable as one who lacks the courage to systematize his theology and fly up a flag that can be criticised.

I will agree that ones beliefs should be clearly seen by all. There is nothing more detestable than a local Baptist church that is ashamed of its name. Baptist carries with it certain distinctives, as mirrored by Scripture.

It is sloppy and lazy and insulting to say, "I AM NOT A CALVINIST OR AN ARMINIAN- I BELIEVE THE BIBLE!!"

I believe everyone should know how one feels about Doctrines of Grace, and that they should mirror what is in Scripture. I have to agree with you that one should take a stand and defend it.

It is equally as spineless to call oneself a "non-cal"..

That is a valid point. It is like saying I voted for Romney because Obama is so bad. It is the same mindset as hiding the Baptist logo.

There may not be a more meaningless word in the world today.

Atheists are non-cals.

Satan worshipers are non-cals.

Everybody on earth not a Calvinist, every demon in hell is non-cal.

"Non-cal" is so broad it is UTTERLY meaningless.

It tells us NOTHING about what you are.

It just tells us what you are NOT.

It is like saying, "I am non-elephant."

You could be anything from a paramecium to a black-hole.

Nothing could be more cowardly than lacking the courage to say what you ARE.

Nothing could be more pusillanimous than identifying yourself simply by what you are not.

You end with a bang. Not to make this a DoG debate, as we agree, but one could equally say I am a non-Arminian, and be meaningless. It reminds me of the profile on this board. One says I live "somewhere in the USA." That is so lame. I live at in Lone Oak, KY. You know exactly where I live. I believe one says "along the edges of America." Since I was one for 25 years, I could say I am now a non-Presbyterian. If I did so, you might come to the conclusion I was an Arminian. By saying I am Baptist, reformed, it pinpoints the issue quite clear.

Sorry we do not agree about creeds and confessions. I lived with the chants and parroting for 25 years, and the often repeated "I believe in God the Father........" becomes meaningless babble that that no one is giving any thought to as to go through the creed.

Maybe we agree on this. A local church has the right to form a Constitution and by laws that set out a set of Biblically sound principles that binds each local member to the church.

Hope you and your family have a Merry Christmas.

 

[saturneptune]

From a Baptist Cathechism with commentary...by WR.Downing

That is actually a decent counterpoint. Sometimes I wonder where you come up with these amazing quotes. It is good to understand somone's background when talking to them. For example, one can only have respect for someone like you who is self taught and has attained the level of spiritual maturity that you have, without ever one class in seminary.

My adamant dislike of creeds and confessions, along with indoctrinations into church membership, is probably based mostly on my experience of being a conservative Presbyterian for 25 or so years. I became a Baptist because to me, the endless repeating confessions and creeds becomes as meaningless as memorizing Shakespeare in high school English and repeating it back to the class. It is certainly not a worship experience. Elder rule is also something that sticks in my craw. Here is a group of men deciding issues for the church, who were probably elected more on their social standing in the community than on spiritual maturity. For example, I would elect you elder long before many on this board who have been to seminary. When that mindset runs the church, Godly decisions do not follow. Elder rule becomes elder worship. A hierarchy is another aspect that makes my stomach turn. Not only does the local church have elders, the elders have elders and right on up to the top. Some call that a Pope. A local church has the right to call its own pastor, decide how to handles its own real property like buildings, and set its own budget.

Catholic churches are have a concept of a visible, universal church. Protestant churches have a concept of the invisible, universal church. Baptist churches believe that a local, autonomous church carries out God's work here on earth. That is a distinct difference. Again, the word Baptist carries its own defining parameters.

As I told Luke, I do believe each local church should form a set of by laws or a Constitution that clearly states what they believe from the Bible, being sure the principles set forth are Scripturally sound. They bind the church together in Jesus Christ.

Merry Christmas to you and your family.

 

[Bro. James]

Confessions, Creeds, Councils and such

Peter to Jesus: "Thou art The Christ, the Son of the Living God." That is all the confession necessary. This was not made by Pope Peter.

The writings of men are corrupted my man's depraved traditions. This goes back to baptismal regeneration which is taught by Rome and the daughters of Rome.

The followers of Jude 3 are still here. True Baptists are not pedobaptists they have never been part of Rome or any other apostate group. God has preserved a remnant in every generation, as promised. He is faithful even when we are not.

Beware of the wolves dressed like sheep.

Peace,

Bro. James

 

[Jerome]

every demon in hell is non-cal.

"'I never can hear a preacher,' this man will say, 'who is not sound. I can tell at once when there is a grain of free will in the sermon.' This is all very well; but he who boasts thus may be no better than the devil: nay, he may not be so good; for the devil believes and trembles, but these men believe and are too much hardened in their own conceit to think of trembling. Away with the idea that believing sound doctrine and chaining ourselves to a cast-iron creed is vital godliness and eternal life! Orthodox sinners will find that hell is hot, and that their knowledge of predestination will not yield a cooling drop to their parched tongues." —Charles Spurgeon, "Labor in Vain"

 

[Herald]

"Orthodox sinners." Leave it to Jerome to make a point opposite his intent. Spurgeon was writing about sinners who trusted in the rightness of their doctrine as a source of pride. Spurgeon was using "orthodox sinners" categorically to describe people who were unsaved.

 

[Jerome]

"There is an orthodox as well as a heterodox road to hell, and the devil knows how to handle Calvinists quite as well as Arminians. No pale of any Church can insure salvation, no form of doctrine can guarantee to us eternal life. "Ye must be born again"" —Charles Spurgeon, "Nothing But Leaves"

 

[Herald]

My adamant dislike of creeds and confessions, along with indoctrinations into church membership, is probably based mostly on my experience of being a conservative Presbyterian for 25 or so years.

Friend, I have no desire to become Presbyterian. While I have many dear Presbyterian friends, and I have profited much from the writings of great Presbyterian theologians, my theological differences are too pronounced for me to cross that bridge.

 

[Herald]

Reformed is a particular denomination. It is called Presbyterian. There is no debate about it there. Reformed Baptist comes real close to being two words that oppose themselves based on Baptist distinctives. The usual autonomous local Baptist church does not parrot and chant creeds and confessions weekly. Baptist churches usually do not subscribe to elder rule which usually turns into elder worship. Baptists can attempt to mimic Presbyterians all they want, but in the final analysis, will find the two do not mix very well.

Presbyterians certainly own the term Truly Reformed "TR"; but Baptists are also children of the Reformation (I reject Landmarkism and its "trail of blood"). The Particular Baptists of the 17th Century shared a lot in common with their Presbyterian brethren. They disagreed sharply on ecclesiology and baptism (and mildly on other issues). The 1644(46) and 1689 LBC's were written to state Particular Baptist beliefs against erroneous charges that were being made by Presbyterians. What were these confessions? They were statements of faith. Here is the preface to the 1689 LBC:

Preface to the Second London Baptist Confession, 1677

To The Judicial and Impartial Reader

Courteous Reader: It is now many years since divers of us (with other sober Christians then living, and walking in the way of the Lord, that we profess) did conceive ourselves to be under a necessity of publishing a Confession, of our Faith, for the information and satisfaction of those that did not thoroughly understand what our principles were, or had entertained prejudices against our profession, by reason of the strange representation of them by some men of note who had taken very wrong measures, and accordingly led others into misapprehension of us and them. And this was first put forth about the year 1643, in the name of seven congregations then gathered in London; since which time divers impressions thereof have been dispersed abroad, and our end proposed in good measure answered, inasmuch as many (and some of those men eminent both for piety and learning) were thereby satisfied that we were no way guilty of those heterodoxies and fundamental errors which had too frequently been charged upon us without ground or occasion given on our part.

And forasmuch as that Confession is not now commonly to be had, and also that many others have since embraced the same truth which is owned therein, it was judged necessary by us to join together in giving a testimony to the world of our firm adhering to those wholesome principles by the publication of this which is now in your hand. And forasmuch as our method and manner of expressing our sentiments in this doth vary from the former (although the substance of this matter is the same), we shall freely impart to you the reason and occasion thereof. One thing that greatly prevailed with us to undertake this work was (not only to give a full account of ourselves to those Christians that differ from us about the subject of baptism, but also) the profit that might from thence arise unto those that have any account of our labors in their instruction and establishment in the great truths of the Gospel, in the clear understanding and steady belief of which our comfortable walking with God, and fruitfulness before him in all our ways, is most nearly concerned; and therefore we did conclude it necessary to express ourselves the more fully and distinctly; and also to fix on such a method as might be most comprehensive of those things we designed to explain our sense and belief of; and finding no defect in this regard in that fixed on by the Assembly, and, after them by those of the congregational way, we did readily conclude it best to retain the same order in our present Confession; and also when we observed that those last mentioned did in their Confessions (for reasons which seemed of weight both to themselves and others) choose not only to express their mind in words concurrent with the former in sense concerning all those articles wherein they were agreed, but also for the most part without any variation of the terms, we did in like manner conclude it best to follow their example in making use of the very same words with them both in these articles (which are very many) wherein our faith and doctrine are the same with theirs; and this we did the more abundantly to manifest our consent with both in all the fundamental articles of the Christian religion, as also with many others whose orthodox Confessions have been published to the world on the behalf of the Protestant in diverse nations and cities. And also to convince all that we have no itch to clog religion with new words, but do readily acquiesce in that form of sound words which hath been, in consent with the Holy Scriptures, used by others before us; hereby declaring, before God, angels, and men, our hearty agreement with them in that wholesome Protestant doctrine which, with so clear evidence of Scriptures, they have asserted. Some things, indeed, are in some places added, some terms omitted, and some few changed; but these alterations are of that nature as that we need not doubt any charge or suspicion of unsoundness in the faith from any of our brethren upon the account of them.

In those things wherein we differ from others we have expressed ourselves with all candor and plainness, that none might entertain jealousy of aught secretly lodged in our breasts that we would not the world should be acquainted with; yet we hope we have also observed those rules of modesty and humility as will render our freedom in this respect inoffensive, even to those whose sentiments are different from ours.

We have also taken care to affix texts of Scripture at the bottom, for the confirmation of each article in our Confession; in which work we have studiously endeavored to select such as are most clear and pertinent for the proof of what is asserted by us; and our earnest desire is that all into whose hands this may come would follow that (never enough commended) example of the noble Bereans, who searched the Scriptures daily that they might find out whether the things preached to them were so or not.

There is one thing more which we sincerely profess and earnestly desire credence in - viz., that contention is most remote from our design in all that we have done in this matter; and we hope that the liberty of an ingenuous unfolding our principles and opening our hearts unto our brethren, with the Scripture grounds of our faith and practice will by none of them be either denied to us, or taken ill from us. Our whole design is accomplished if we may have attained that justice as to be measured in our principles and practice, and the judgment of both by others, according to what we have now published, which the Lord (whose eyes are as a flame of fire) knoweth to be the doctrine which with our hearts we most firmly believe and sincerely endeavor to conform our lives to. And O that, other contentions being laid asleep, the only care and contention of all upon whom the name of our blessed Redeemer is called might for the future be to walk humbly with their God in the exercise of all love and meekness toward each other, to perfect holiness in the fear of the Lord, each one endeavoring to have his conversation such as becometh the gospel; and also, suitable to his place and capacity, vigorously to promote in others the practice of true religion and undefiled in the sight of God our Father! And that in this backsliding day we might not spend our breath in fruitless complaints of the evils of others, but may every one begin at home, to reform in the first place our own hearts and ways, and then to quicken all that we may have influence upon to the some work, that if the will of God were so, none might deceive themselves by resting in and trusting to a form of godliness without the power of it, and inward experience of the efficacy of those truths that are professed by them.

And verily there is one spring and cause of the decay of religion in our day which we cannot but touch upon and earnestly urge a redress of, and that is the neglect of the worship of God in families by those to whom the charge and conduct of them is committed. May not the gross ignorance and instability of many, with the profaneness of others, be justly charged upon their parents and masters, who have not trained them up in the way wherein they ought to walk when they were young, but have neglected those frequent and solemn commands which the Lord hath laid upon them, so to catechise and instruct them that their tender years might be seasoned with the knowledge of the truth of God as revealed in the Scriptures; and also by their own omission of prayer and other duties of religion of their families, together with the ill example of their loose conversation, having, inured them first to a neglect and the contempt of all piety and religion? We know this will not excuse the blindness and wickedness of any, but certainly it will fall heavy upon those that have been thus the occasion thereof; they indeed die in their sins, but will not their blood be required of those under whose care they were, who yet permitted them to go on without warning - yea, led them into the paths of destruction? And will not the diligence of Christians with respect to the discharge of these duties in ages past rise up in judgment against and condemn many of those who would be esteemed such now?

Continued in following post...

 

[Herald]

continued from previous post...

We shall conclude with our earnest prayer that the God of all grace will pour out those measures of his Holy Spirit upon us, that the profession of truth may be accompanied with the sound belief and diligent practice of it by us, that his name may in all things be glorified through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

WE the MINISTERS and MESSENGERS of and concerned for upwards of one hundred baptized congregations in England and Wales (denying Arminianism), being met together in London, from the third of the seventh month to the eleventh of the same, 1689, to consider of some things that might be for the glory of God, and the good of these congregations, have thought meet (for the satisfaction of all other Christians that differ from us in the point of Baptism) to recommend to their perusal the confession of our faith, which confession we own, as containing the doctrine of our faith and practice, and do desire that the members of our churches respectively do furnish themselves therewith,

Their purpose was honorable. If you read the history of these Particular Baptists they were never known to teach the confession. They taught the word of God. The confession was statement of mutual agreement on specific Biblical doctrines. It is the same today among like-minded churches.

 

[Herald]

"There is an orthodox as well as a heterodox road to hell, and the devil knows how to handle Calvinists quite as well as Arminians. No pale of any Church can insure salvation, no form of doctrine can guarantee to us eternal life. "Ye must be born again"" —Charles Spurgeon, "Nothing But Leaves"

Absolutely! The key word in this quote is "heterodox." You can claim to be whatever you want to be, but that is not the test of being a Christian. The test of being a Christian is being born again; evidenced by works (Eph. 2:10)

 

[12strings]

Peter to Jesus: "Thou art The Christ, the Son of the Living God." That is all the confession necessary.

What about Confessing that "Jesus Christ is Lord.?" Don't we need that one too?

 

[12strings]

There is nothing more detestable than a local Baptist church that is ashamed of its name.

Really? NOTHING? Think Hard...I can think of a few...anchovies come to mind. :laugh:

 

[Tom Butler]

There may not be a more meaningless word in the world today.

Atheists are non-cals.

Satan worshipers are non-cals.

Everybody on earth not a Calvinist, every demon in hell is non-cal.

"Non-cal" is so broad it is UTTERLY meaningless.

I was one of the first ones on this board, if not the first, to use the term "non-Cal." Same with DoG. Let me defend their use.

Yes, non-Cal doesn't tell you much. But in the context of the discussions we have on the issue of Calvinism, rarely does anybody get confused about it. It is always quickly apparent where the non-Cal is coming from.

I also adopted the use of non-Cal and DoG with regard to Baptists specifically, since Arminian is also a deceptive term. I can lived with Reformed, but it still has a lot of association with the Presbys. I doubt if you will find a Southern Baptist or an IFB who will describe themselves as Arminian. In fact, they will deny it. So we had to come up with another way to describe them.

My intent is not to use meaningless terms. My intent is to provide a reasonably clear short-hand.

So, Brother Luke, I think you protest too much. If any atheist non-Cals, or Satan or demons show up on the Baptist Board, I think we'll recognize them quickly.

 

[Revmitchell]

I was one of the first ones on this board, if not the first, to use the term "non-Cal." Same with DoG. Let me defend their use.

Yes, non-Cal doesn't tell you much. But in the context of the discussions we have on the issue of Calvinism, rarely does anybody get confused about it. It is always quickly apparent where the non-Cal is coming from.

I also adopted the use of non-Cal and DoG with regard to Baptists specifically, since Arminian is also a deceptive term. I can lived with Reformed, but it still has a lot of association with the Presbys. I doubt if you will find a Southern Baptist or an IFB who will describe themselves as Arminian. In fact, they will deny it. So we had to come up with another way to describe them.

My intent is not to use meaningless terms. My intent is to provide a reasonably clear short-hand.

So, Brother Luke, I think you protest too much. If any atheist non-Cals, or Satan or demons show up on the Baptist Board, I think we'll recognize them quickly.

To add to what you have said here, to use anything else such as "arminian" will then become a distraction from any conversation because such terms are widely rejected by many, causing a change in the conversation from the original point to why they or we are not in that category.

Quite frankly such terms are seen as an attack and a pejorative rather than a description of ones beliefs. The term non-cal avoids all the baggage.

 

[Iconoclast]

saturneptune

That is actually a decent counterpoint. Sometimes I wonder where you come up with these amazing quotes.

The Pastor who wrote this Commentary, compiled this Catechism using more than 8 different ones.He has a vast library and a really good command of the books in it. He has taught both greek and hebrew in bible college,and can read from the greek text fluently
He has been forgiven by God of his former sins,and has never forgotten that fact. This Cathechism is one of the best books I have on my bookshelf and no one has come close to refuting anything in it....not even close. The reason for this seems to be a strict adherence to the scripture themselves and a total focus on Jesus person and work.
I have met this Pastor back in 1980...after hearing over 200 of his messages preached.I have learned the most from Him doctrinally speaking and he helped me discover other godly ministries[Al Martin,Geoff Thomas, etc] and recommend books and offered much scriptural instruction and correction. I have not met another person face to face that was any more filled with scripture and scriptural wisdom in my life.
If you buy the book and do not like it....I will buy it from you,no questions asked:thumbs:

http://www.sgbcsv.org/literature/

It is good to understand somone's background when talking to them.

To speak to someone face to face is the best:thumbsup:

My adamant dislike of creeds and confessions, along with indoctrinations into church membership, is probably based mostly on my experience of being a conservative Presbyterian for 25 or so years

.

I understand what you mean when you say this. For example ...on sermonaudio...there are some christian reformed men who will lecture /preach in a very mechanical way.....today we we look at LORDS DAY 48 and then they will recite from one of the "three forms of unity"...which by themselves are good study documents....but they lecture in a dry and lifeless way...almost without the Spirit being there ...I think you know what I mean.
All study tools..are just that...tools...to help us understand the God who has saved us,and given us His word. We do not exalt the tool above the word.If we do than that very good tool can become an idol.
I speak very highly of Pastor Downing,Martin,Thomas,or any other teacher.....not to exalt them who I do hold in very high honour

17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

18 For the scripture saith, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

....but because they have been the most biblically faithful to the scriptures and the God who gave the scriptures

I became a Baptist because to me, the endless repeating confessions and creeds becomes as meaningless as memorizing Shakespeare in high school English and repeating it back to the class. It is certainly not a worship experience.

I agree.....this kind of repetition is as useless as the "lets stand up now and interrupt the flow of the service with the shallow shake hands and say good morning to all the people who walked into the building this morning thing":laugh:

Elder rule is also something that sticks in my craw. Here is a group of men deciding issues for the church, who were probably elected more on their social standing in the community than on spiritual maturity. . Elder rule becomes elder worship. A hierarchy is another aspect that makes my stomach turn. .

These can be abused and often are. I do however believe the bible teaches a plurality of elders.

Catholic churches are have a concept of a visible, universal church. Protestant churches have a concept of the invisible, universal church. Baptist churches believe that a local, autonomous church carries out God's work here on earth. That is a distinct difference. Again, the word Baptist carries its own defining parameters.

I hold to a strong local church view. Not landmarkism...but close to it, without going over the edge.

As I told Luke, I do believe each local church should form a set of by laws or a Constitution that clearly states what they believe from the Bible, being sure the principles set forth are Scripturally sound. They bind the church together in Jesus Christ.

This I believe is the proper place and function of a confession of faith:thumbs:

From the Catechism with commentary:


QUESTION 1: Why use a catechism?
ANSWER: There are several reasons why churches, families and individuals
should make good use of a suitable catechism:
1. The use of a catechism is scriptural in principle and is based upon the
Divine mandate for biblical instruction in the Old Testament and also
the inspired example of the New Testament (Deut. 4:9–10; 6:4–9; Lk.
1:4; Gal. 6:6; Eph. 6:1–4). The question–and–answer format of
modern catechisms is incidental to the pervading scriptural principle
of catechizing, which evidently consisted of repetitive oral
instruction, commitment to memory and an oral response.

QUESTION 2: What are the necessary requirements for a catechism?
ANSWER: The necessary or essential requirements for a sound catechism are
at least four in number:
1. The catechism must be thoroughly scriptural in the formulation of its
answers.
2. The proof–texts should clearly teach the truth pertaining to the given
question and answer.
3. The doctrinal presuppositions of the catechism should be sound.
4. The questions and answers themselves must be suitable, i.e., of such a
nature that they are neither too involved nor complex to be
memorized nor too simple to be useful to those who are older. Certain
catechisms are better suited to little children; others are more suitable
for older children and adults.
QUESTION 3: What is the purpose of a catechism?
ANSWER: The purpose for the use of a catechism is at least nine–fold:
1. To instruct in the essentials of the Christian faith. The issue is truth—
Divine truth! We must do everything we can to impress this truth
upon the mind and heart of both the saved and unsaved, and
especially our children. There are two issues: first, every child and
new convert must be instructed in the basics or essentials of the
Christian faith as thoroughly as possible (3 Jn. 4). Second, every
Christian must seek to become both a Bible student and a theologian
(2 Tim. 3:16–17; Heb. 5:11–14; 2 Pet. 3:18).
2. To impress Divine truth upon the heart and mind. The conciseness of
the catechism as a series of clear doctrinal statements derived from
Scripture, is calculated to instill the truth into the thinking process
and impress it upon the mind and into the heart. Unless doctrinal truth
is carefully and scripturally contemplated, it is never truly and fully
grasped, adequately embraced or practically implemented in the life
(Psa. 119:11).
3. To evangelize the unconverted. Christian parents catechizing their
children is the very best means of truly evangelizing them in a
consistent and balanced way. Their minds must deal with truth and
their consciences may be probed in the context of the whole counsel
of God. In later years the truth may be brought home to the
conscience through the remembrance of such instruction (Eph. 6:1–4;
2 Tim. 3:15).
4. To prepare for the public ministry of the Word. The public preaching
of the Word of God must touch upon a variety of issues—the truth of
the Gospel, a Christian world–and–life view, the whole range of
Christian doctrine and its application to the life of the church and the
individual, the Christian family, the Christian’s relation to the
unregenerate society in which he lives and the varieties of Christian
experience. Catechizing necessarily prepares parents, children and
young converts for the ministry of the Word by instilling in them a
God–consciousness, enabling them to begin to think consistently
from the Scriptures, giving them a basic understanding of scriptural
and doctrinal truths, and acquainting them with doctrinal and
theological terminology (2 Tim. 1:13; 2:2)
5. To act as a preventative from error and heresy. The best preventative
from error and heresy is the Word of God rightly [correctly or
consistently] understood. The catechism is a concise and exact
statement of the Word of God in its doctrinal expression (Eph. 4:11–
16; 2 Tim. 4:1–5; 2 Pet. 3:16–18).
25
6. To act as a preventative from spiritual decay. The true knowledge of
the Scriptures is necessarily a consistent [and therefore non–
contradictory] knowledge of its doctrinal teaching. The use of a
catechism as a concise, logical, systematic approach to Divine truth
should refresh the mind and heart and quicken one’s zeal. There is a
necessary and immediate relation between truth and the conscience
and between truth and zeal—if the Spirit and grace of God are present
(Heb. 5:10–14; 2 Pet. 3:16–18).
7. To edify believers of all ages and levels of spiritual maturity.
Everyone without exception will profit from the use of a catechism.
Little children and new converts will be consistently instructed in the
faith, mature believers should be refreshed and quickened by the
reiteration of truth and aged believers should be sustained and
enlivened by the immutable truth set forth from the Scriptures.
8. To review the essence of Christian doctrine.
9. To provide a great and necessary help in defending the faith. The
conciseness of the catechism in expressing doctrinal truth, and the
memorization of the proof–texts, provide the essentials necessary for
defending the faith or explaining it to others clearly and scripturally
(2 Cor. 10:3–5; 1 Pet. 3:15; Jude 3).[/QUOTE]

 

[Herald]

To add to what you have said here, to use anything else such as "arminian" will then become a distraction from any conversation because such terms are widely rejected by many, causing a change in the conversation from the original point to why they or we are not in that category.

Quite frankly such terms are seen as an attack and a pejorative rather than a description of ones beliefs. The term non-cal avoids all the baggage.

Even the term "Calvinist" can be viewed as a pejorative since no DoG believer on this board holds to paedobaptism or Presbyterian ecclesiology.

 

[Iconoclast]

Even the term "Calvinist" can be viewed as a pejorative since no DoG believer on this board holds to paedobaptism or Presbyterian ecclesiology.

Many who would use the term calvinist in this way as a form of abusive speech do not understand the issues scriptually enough to think that far about it.I have found most baptists do not know why they are baptists ,much less why their ecclesiology differs from the padeo.

 

[Herald]

Many who would use the term calvinist in this way as a form of abusive speech do not understand the issues scriptually enough to think that far about it.I have found most baptists do not know why they are baptists ,much less why their ecclesiology differs from the padeo.

All the more reason to accurately define what the scripture teaches in response to the reactionary and misinformed people on this board. For those who do know better there is no adequate response to their mischaracterzations.

 

[Tom Butler]

Even the term "Calvinist" can be viewed as a pejorative since no DoG believer on this board holds to paedobaptism or Presbyterian ecclesiology.

This is a good point. That's why I looked for another way to describe what I believe about the doctrines of grace associated with Calvinism.
Non-Cal is a neutral way of doing it, and DoG is a lightyhearted, non-threatening way of saying it.

 

[Iconoclast]

All the more reason to accurately define what the scripture teaches in response to the reactionary and misinformed people on this board. For those who do know better there is no adequate response to their mischaracterzations.

agreed.....as time permits I like to ask a person what they mean by the term.Then when they mis-state it, I like to go right to scripture...perhaps jn 6 :37-44....and work through it together:thumbs: