I didn't leave the baptist church for doctrinal reasons. I would say it was more of cultural reasons. The church I've ended up at is not Charismatic. As a matter of fact it took me a while to figure out that they teach reformed theology very much in the mold of the Gospel Coalition. We are part of the Acts 29 church planting network.
I'm not really familiar with that group. Do they lean towards Mid-Acts Dispensationalism?
I had never really considered myself a Calvinist and still don't. I watched an interview of John Piper talking to Rick Warren. I know agreeing with Rick Warren on anything these days might get me a public scolding but I agreed with Rick Warren when he said when the Bible says "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified" he believes it. And when it says " This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." he believes that as well.
I think that most on both sides of the aisle would heartily confirm their belief in Paul's statement, as I cannot recall hearing anyone Arminian denying the passage.
My two cents on the Calv/Arm debate is that both are in error.
Calvinists believe that God regenerates men that they can understand the Gospel (or anything pertaining to the spiritual things of God);
Arminians believe that natural men have the ability (granted provided by God) to hear the Gospel and "make a choice."
The simple solution, that we do not violate Scripture with regenerative faith (bring into conflict with itself) and create a platform for loss of salvation (because if God regenerates men to know the truth then we must determine men who have turned away from the truth as being regenerate and losing their salvation when they turn away), and we do not violate Scripture by asserting something plainly stated (natural man cannot receive nor understand the spiritual things of God), is this: God enlightens men within His Convicting Ministry (the Ministry of the Comforter, a Ministry distinct to this Age), and within that ministry men either yield to the truth and turn to Christ, or they reject the truth. It is true that this Ministry is not always instantaneous, and men can "almost be persuaded," and even "play church" for years. Continuance is a great evidence of genuine conversion, but not necessarily something we should dogmatically conclude.
John 16:7-9 makes it clear that when the Comforter comes, He will convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment, and the conviction of sin centers on His statement "Because they believe not on me."
A very simple solution, indisputable, yet no-one wants to acknowledge it.
If we understand (as I would think you would, being Southern Baptist), that the ministries of the Spirit differ from Age to Age, then we can understand the significance of Christ's teaching in John 14-16 concerning the Ministry which began at Pentecost.
Part of the issue with my son is that he is away at college (Auburn, War Eagle!) and hasn't really found a spiritual support system. We have implored him to find a church or at least a ministry on campus to get involved with. I even drove the 3 1/2 hours to Auburn every Sunday for a month to visit churches with him, hoping to help him find a place where he fits in. Once his girlfriend (who has been his gf since the 8th grade) started attending Auburn he started going to Mass with her.
Your a good dad. Makes me think of my friend John, who also goes the extra mile where his sons are concerned.
I think he became disillusioned while in high school because a lot of the kids that attended our large Southern Baptist church would act all spiritual at church and go "party" the rest of the time. Hence part of the church culture reference above.
Don't take this the wrong way, but that is no excuse for departing from a group. That is not what I would really call Church Culture, its more a matter of kids usually rebel. A harsh, but simple fact of life. Especially, in my view, if they have grown up in the church, for they become complacent (and it happens to all of us, I think).
While the other kids may have partied, that is not tied to the Doctrine of that fellowship, or any other. Bad Practice does not mean bad Doctrine.
I've told him that if he does convert to Catholicism it should be because he believes and accepts what they teach and not because girl friend wants him to.
And there it is...Doctrine.
You give great advice.
It is good that you have been fellowshipping with Catholics, as it can help you to understand Catholicism at "street level," rather than at a leadership/doctrinal level.
Just as the kids in your own fellowship behaved in a way I doubt seriously the ministry there should have concluded in, even so I have found among Catholics those who are in large part ignorant of what we would perceive as error in their official doctrine. And some of the disputed doctrines are understood by some of them in very conservative ways, such as the "worship of Mary," which numerous Catholics I have spoken with simply view as giving the woman the respect she deserves as one of the most singular characters of Redemptive History.
But unless someone misunderstand me, I do not endorse membership in the Catholic Church, because of the Doctrinal Error. It is my view every Christian has a responsibility to read and study the Word of God, and to place themselves and the families they are responsible for in a Christian Community where sound doctrine and practice can be found. So it may be that by understanding the errors of Catholicism, you may have an impact on your son's actions, and hopefully try to impress that we have a responsibility to understand Scripture properly, and that for him, in regards to a woman he may have ideas of marrying, he is going to be the spiritual head of the household and it is he that God is going to hold accountable.
As for the last question, I would say that all this study I've been doing has helped grow my personal faith and has helped me understand how to relate the Gospel to Catholics. I've read a couple of what I would call Catholic propaganda books and some books by Protestant theologians on Catholicism, including a book by R.C. Spoul.
My tag may be a little misleading, as while I love RC Sproul, and listen to his program every chance I get, I am in disagreement with a number of positions he takes. Doesn't mean we can't learn from him, as there are areas where he does a great job explaining things to people.
I will say, Ian, that I think this forum can help you with your studies, for as I said, Doctrinal Discussion and Debate is a great way to accelerate study and we can benefit from not just the perspectives and insights we receive from brothers and sisters here, but, also through the objections that are raised to our own positions on any given doctrinal issue. I have found that it has been the objections that have been raised that have, by far, pushed me into the Word of God to "see if these things be true."
So again, welcome to the forum, and my prayers are with you in regards to your son, as I can understand how this would be a matter of extreme importance to you. But remember, that God has demanded of you that you raise your child up in the way he should go, and it sounds to me that this is not just likely in your case, but probable, because it sounds to me that you have sincerely tried to do what has been requested of you of God. So now, it is His turn, and I think it also probable that your son will not depart from that way. Your son's chances greatly improve as you are edified as his Father, that you can advise in a godly manner with wisdom.
And remember, if our Heavenly Father demands of you that you raise him up in the way he should go, how much more will He raise us up.
Sorry for the length, didn't mean to go on so long, lol.
God bless.
