If my pastor is a Calvinist and I'm not, should I change churches?

[webdog]

The revelation of nature does not have power to save. Only the Gospel is the "power of God unto salvation".

...which is not the "Gospel in the stars".

 

[Hardsheller]

Since I consider Calvinism to be an aberrant doctrine I would either leave or seek the removal of the pastor. We are called not only to know the truth but to live the truth. Since Calvinists reject that God has given us a choice in matters of salvation or condemnation that particular teaching is a Biblical Heresy. Calvinists want to claim they believe in the sovereignty of God but reject that God can be sovereign and still give us a choice. The actual teaching of Scripture is that God is so sovereign that in His wisdom and love He gives us the opportunity to choose to worship Him or reject. We cannot and should not make the mistake of believing that foreknowledge is foreordination. In the end God is a just God and always makes righteous judgements. A God that foreordained people just to send them to Hell is neither a just God nor a God that is revealed to us in nature, in scripture, in Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit.

So Steve are you planning on leaving the SBC? You do realize that we have Calvinists in the SBC and that your offerings every Sunday help support Southern Seminary which is led by a 5-Point Calvinist?

Are you going to lead the charge against Calvinists in the Missouri Baptist Convention?

Please let me know since I will need to prepare for the coming battle if that's the case.

 

[stevewm]

I have spent some time thinking about how to reply to a couple of individuals who have attacked me and done nothing at all with what was written. I find that very sad, but not unexpected. I promise I will not attack you. I will attack heresy one person at atime. It is incredibly sad that Baptists have, in many cases, adopted an unjust God position. I am sorry that some are so stringently offended as to choose only a personal attack. I will bow out of this discussion but I will continue to teach truth one person at a time.
Jesus is Lord.
steve

 

[reformedbeliever]

I have spent some time thinking about how to reply to a couple of individuals who have attacked me and done nothing at all with what was written. I find that very sad, but not unexpected. I promise I will not attack you. I will attack heresy one person at atime. It is incredibly sad that Baptists have, in many cases, adopted an unjust God position. I am sorry that some are so stringently offended as to choose only a personal attack. I will bow out of this discussion but I will continue to teach truth one person at a time.
Jesus is Lord.
steve

I'm not attacking you, I sincerely want an answer. I just looked through this complete thread and the only attack I found was yours. Where are the attacks against you?

Since I consider Calvinism to be an aberrant doctrine

Do you consider Calvinism to be a heresy?

I will attack heresy one person at atime.

Are those who hold to Calvinist doctrine heretics?

By the way, welcome to the BB.:wavey:

 

[Pipedude]

I have spent some time thinking about how to reply to a couple of individuals who have attacked me and done nothing at all with what was written.

Steve, the objections you've offered are so well known, and the Calvinist replies are so thoroughly documented, no one has any reason to reply to your objections. It's all been said before, thousands of times since Calvinism was formulated, and quite a few hundred times right here on the BB.

There was a time when I myself would get all in a tizzy because somebody was purveying predestinarianism. Eventually I figured out that, like hangnails and people who talk on the cell phone while driving, its just the way the world is and I'd might as well settle on down and get used to it.

:1_grouphug: Try it.

 

[webdog]

Eventually I figured out that, like hangnails and people who talk on the cell phone while driving, its just the way the world is and I'd might as well settle on down and get used to it.

:1_grouphug: Try it.

If we did that, we would be muslim, catholic, darwinistic, atheistic and / or lovers of self and the dark.

 

[willowdee]

I've heard it said that any doctrine beyond the basics of Christian faith is simply man's feeble attempt to explain something that is beyond human comprehension. A point to ponder.

Dee

 

[Dr. L.T. Ketchum]

“But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves” (James 1:22).

Orthopraxy naturally flows from orthodoxy.

If your pastor gives invitations for people to receive Christ by faith, if he preaches messages intent upon persuading people to make decisions, if he hands out Bible tracts, goes Soul Winning, or if he prays and expects his prayer life to actually impact the heart and actions of God upon the human predicament, he does not believe in the doctrines of Sovereign Grace (predeterminism, more commonly referred to as Predestination).

I can make that statement unequivocally because his practices contradict his doctrine (beliefs). In other words, he may say he believes in Sovereign Grace (predeterminism), but his practices reveal he has deceived himself. Do not be concerned about him saying he is a Calvinist.

However, if he does not do any of the things listed, you are in the wrong church (or at least under the authoritative teaching of the wrong man).

 

[russell55]

If your pastor gives invitations for people to receive Christ by faith, if he preaches messages intent upon persuading people to make decisions, if he hands out Bible tracts, goes Soul Winning, or if he prays and expects his prayer life to actually impact the heart and actions of God upon the human predicament, he does not believe in the doctrines of Sovereign Grace (predeterminism, more commonly referred to as Predestination).

It seems to me you are confusing the doctrines of Sovereign Grace with fatalism. They aren't, at least as commonly held, fatalistic. They are a form of compatibalism (or soft determinism).

As such, giving invitations, attempting to persuade people to believe, handing out tracts, expecting God to respond to prayers by intervening in the lives of those for whom we pray, etc., fits perfectly well with a belief in the doctrines of grace.

 

[Pipedude]

If we did that, we would be muslim, catholic, darwinistic, atheistic and / or lovers of self and the dark.

Nah. There's a middle way between ignoring others and getting in a tizzy over their errors.

Why do you think I take pot shots at Calvinism here every other month or so? I'm just offering whatever help I can to folks who might be inclined to agree with me. But at the same time, I understand that Christendom has a small percentage of Calvinists running loose and I could sputter and fulminate until the secret rapture and hardly any of them are coming over to my side in response.

All I advocate to Stevewm -- and everyone, really, is to see things as they are and to respond appropriately.

 

[Rippon]

Nah. There's a middle way between ignoring others and getting in a tizzy over their errors.

Why do you think I take pot shots at Calvinism here every other month or so? I'm just offering whatever help I can to folks who might be inclined to agree with me. But at the same time, I understand that Christendom has a small percentage of Calvinists running loose and I could sputter and fulminate until the secret rapture and hardly any of them are coming over to my side in response.

All I advocate to Stevewm -- and everyone, really, is to see things as they are and to respond appropriately.

Pipedude , you are all over the place with your views of Calvinism and Calvinists . I have read a number of your posts for the last several months and you swing wildly from one side to the next . In this posts you speak disparagingly with your "potshots" and "Calvinists running loose" remarks .

You have said that you can't recommend Calvinism to everyone . Then you have said that you have a great love for Calvinism . You describe yourself as a "rabid anticalvinist" . Yet your favorite theologians are Calvinists . You've said that "Calvinists recommend that you repent and believe the gospel anyway -- just in case ." You have learned much from Calvinism -- it's been an immeasurable benefit to you . And you've said that you have "no difficulty being in the midst of a completely Calvinistic setting ."

Man , you are conflicted . I say this with some humor mixed with truth -- are you schizoid ?

 

[Pipedude]

I have read a number of your posts for the last several months

I am flattered beyond words.

Man, you are conflicted . I say this with some humor mixed with truth -- are you schizoid ?

If your mother were crazy, you'd still love her even while committing her to the asylum, wouldn't you?

I'm not conflicted; I just don't fit the mold you're used to. I've been to too many places, known too many people, read too many books, and seen too many things. Ignore me.

 

[mcdirector]

We are all schizoid to some extent because we are human and fallen and incapable of being perfectly consistent, so in our inconsistencies, we appear schizoid . . .

 

[PreachTREE]

For people like me, who have been Baptists for 20, 30, 40+ years, are we to assume that what we've been taught since we were children was in error? If so, what assurance do we have that this sudden change in doctrinal thought is correct? If that is so, we would therefore need to discard a lifetime of teaching by others who came before, people we trusted to be our spiritual leaders. Are today's spiritual leaders more qualified than those who came before them?

Can you see why I'm confused?

Sometimes we do have to discard a lifetime of teaching. My family's heritage is catholic. My mom grew up trusting priests with their doctrines. Once Christ saved us, we discarded what was believed for 400 years by my ancestors. Search the Word yourself and do not follow blindly.

 

[Rippon]

I'm not conflicted; I just don't fit the mold you're used to. I've been to too many places, known too many people, read too many books, and seen too many things. Ignore me.

A "rabid anticalvinist" such as yourself should want nothing to do with Calvinists of any stripe . So you make derogatory comments at every opportunity but couch your feelings by saying that you love the works of Calvinists and you would find no difficulty being amongst them in a completely Calvinistic setting . I just don't get it .

According to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 10th Edition the word 'rabid' means "a) extremely violent :furious b) going to extreme lengths or pursuing a feeling , interest , or opinion ."

If that captures the essence of your on-again-off-again feelings of antipathy toward Calvinism and Calvinists -- Why in the world would you want to be in the middle of a strongly Calvinistic setting ?

It doesn't make any sense . In politics I am certainly against the policies and personal characteristics of Ms.Clinton . I could never imagine myself being comfortable at a Hillary rally . And yet I wouldn't describe myself as rabidly anti-Hillary .

So I just don't get it . What in particular fascinates/repels you about Calvinists/Calvinism ?

 

[Pipedude]

Okay, okay, I guess you deserve something approaching a decent answer.

A "rabid anticalvinist" such as yourself should want nothing to do with Calvinists of any stripe.

"Rabid" is a hyperbole which is used to brighten up my otherwise colorless style. And "anticalvinist" does not mean I am against people, it means I am against Calvinism. I have a great time with some Calvinists, while others distress me woefully.

So you make derogatory comments at every opportunity but couch your feelings by saying that you love the works of Calvinists and you would find no difficulty being amongst them in a completely Calvinistic setting . I just don't get it.

I can see the good in Calvinism while still considering it flawed. It's that simple.

Why in the world would you want to be in the middle of a strongly Calvinistic setting ?

I don't, really. They're easily found and I don't frequent them these days. But you wonder how I could be happy in one if I did find myself there? I'd eat the fish and spit out the bones, just like I do everywhere.

What in particular fascinates/repels you about Calvinists/Calvinism ?

Skipping the fascination part (since I'm not really fascinated) and skipping the "Calvinists" part (since I responded to that already), I reject Calvinism because I believe Arminianism. And I'll go ahead and add something I've mentioned a couple of times somewhere in the past 930 posts I've made here: Calvinists commonly talk as though they were the only game in town and everyone else is just a knave or fool; and when that characteristic surfaces once again (as I seen it a hundred times in the past thirty years), I find within myself an uncontrollable urge to grab a bunch of adjectives and open fire. :saint:

 

[Armchair Scholar]

There are goofballs in every theological camp. I have the same opinion of them as you do, but we have to learn that great traditions didn't become that way by being made up of goofballs. Therefore, we know before we even investigate that the goofballs must be aberrant, and not normal.

Think of a few great names that fall into the Calvinist category: Martin Luther and C. H. Spurgeon draw pretty good reviews in church history. Most of the foundation of the Southern Baptist Convention was Calvinist. D. James Kennedy and R. C. Sproul have good reputations. (Has anybody accused Kennedy of not being interested in evangelism?) You could add thousands to the list.

I would not recommend Calvinism to anyone; but I can recommend plenty of Calvinists. Do a little more reading and try to fine a good Calvinist nearby whom you can discuss questions with. Hopefully you won't be converted, but you will get a balanced view of just what's going on out there in Predestinaria.

Thank you, Pipedude and Amy. I guess one thing that sticks in my mind from having that experience years ago at church is that we were also taught that if a person does not have the same "sense" of having been predestined and elected before the foundations of the world then they cannot be saved and are not meant to go to heaven. The experience with "Calvinism" that my family and I had made us feel that anyone who does not adhere to all 5 points of Calvinism is not saved.

I guess my question here is, does anyone here who is Calvinist to any degree believe that the person who does not embrace Calvinism is not saved and that if that person should die never having embraced Calvinism, even though they confess Christ as their Savior and have been "born again", will God send them to hell? I only ask because I want to learn what others have to say on this subject, since my only real experience with it has been what I have already explained. This man at my church believed that because I did not embrace the 5 points of Calvinism as he did that I could not be a Christian.

To the other poster, I can't remember your screen name, with the albino peacock picture:

You skipped part of what I explained about the man at my church. I said that he believed that because he came to a realization that he had been elected by God before he was born that he did not have to "believe and ask" as the Bible clearly states one must do to be saved. Paul said as much to the jailer's question about what he must do to be saved; Paul told him to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved...and your house. We all know that "believing on the Lord Jesus Christ" means believing that we are lost in our sin, without hope, and that Jesus Christ took the penalty of our sin upon Him on the cross to fulfill the will of the Father and restore all those that are and will be saved. The Bible states a "believing in one's heart and confessing with the mouth" and also says that "whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." This man stated that none of these applied to him because he had been chosen before he was born, predestined. I know that the Bible says "before the foundations of the world..." God, who knows all and can see all eternally, past, present, and future, knew who would be believe and ask for the gift of what Christ did on the cross. The Bible also says that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the whole world, although we know that not all--most--will receive that gift and because they will refuse God's only way they will perish. Jesus said the way is very narrow and few will find it but that many find and follow the broad way and enter in at the wide gate. I cling to those verses too. Jesus Christ died for every sinner born because He is righteous and good and it is a way of showing how fair and good God really is. Those who refuse the gift of His salvation will never be able to blame Him for not having done the ultimate for them. They will be responsible for their going to hell, because they did not accept what He did for them. God said that He is not willing that anyone should perish but that ALL should come to repentance. This is His will but it is not the will of all sinners and therefore many of them will perish. I do not wish to debate you, so please excuse me if I do not reply to future posts on this topic. Thank you.

 

[Tom Butler]

I guess one thing that sticks in my mind from having that experience years ago at church is that we were also taught that if a person does not have the same "sense" of having been predestined and elected before the foundations of the world then they cannot be saved and are not meant to go to heaven. The experience with "Calvinism" that my family and I had made us feel that anyone who does not adhere to all 5 points of Calvinism is not saved.

I guess my question here is, does anyone here who is Calvinist to any degree believe that the person who does not embrace Calvinism is not saved and that if that person should die never having embraced Calvinism, even though they confess Christ as their Savior and have been "born again", will God send them to hell? I only ask because I want to learn what others have to say on this subject, since my only real experience with it has been what I have already explained. This man at my church believed that because I did not embrace the 5 points of Calvinism as he did that I could not be a Christian.

I would venture to say that a huge majority of new believers don't even have a clue about election and predestination, much less have a sense that they've been elected. All they know is that they came under conviction, repented and confessed Christ as Lord and Savior. The Lord saved me at age nine. What did I know about that stuff?

I do not know of a single Calvinist who holds that non-Calvinists cannot be saved if they reject Calvinism. The gospel message has never been repent and believe in Calvinism. Anyone who claims that it is, is preaching another gospel.

BTW, there are several Primitive Baptists on the board and they will hold to a different view, but I don't think any of them will condemn you to hell for not believing in election.

 

[Andy T.]

I guess my question here is, does anyone here who is Calvinist to any degree believe that the person who does not embrace Calvinism is not saved and that if that person should die never having embraced Calvinism, even though they confess Christ as their Savior and have been "born again", will God send them to hell? I only ask because I want to learn what others have to say on this subject, since my only real experience with it has been what I have already explained. This man at my church believed that because I did not embrace the 5 points of Calvinism as he did that I could not be a Christian.

I guess you can call me a Calvinist (though I really don't like the term - but it is fine to use it as shorthand), and no, I do not believe that a person needs to believe in Calvinism in order to be saved. What you encountered was a brand of hyper-Calvinism. I know very few Calvinists who would take such an unbiblical stance.