Is Cal/Non-Cal important enough to divide?

[12strings]

I agree that SBC doctrine does mostly line up with Arminianism on most points, election, free will, ect.

But the point that really matters, eternal security, is the one that really seperates true Arminians from most SBC churches.

Just like election is the cornerstone of DoG, conditional salvation is the cornerstone of Arminianism, which leaves most SBC churches out.

John

What I am saying, (Which you will see if you follow the link on my edited post) is that Conditional Salvation (losing your salvation) is NOT the cornerstone of Arminianism.

 

[seekingthetruth]

Arminian or General Baptists don't believe that.

http://www.generalbaptist.com/#/identity/statements-of-faith

V. ASSURANCE AND ENDURANCE
We believe that those who abide in Christ have the assurance of salvation. However, we believe that the Christian retains his freedom of choice; therefore, it is possible for him to turn away from God and be finally lost.
(A) Assurance: Matt. 28:20; I Cor. 10:13; Heb. 5:9. (B) Endurance: Matt. 10:22; Lk. 9:62; Col. 1:23; Rev. 2:10-11; 3:3-5. (C) Warnings: Jn. 15:6; Rom. 11:20-23; Gal. 5:4; Heb. 3:12; 10:26-29; II Pet. 2:20-21. (D) Finally Lost: Jn. 15:6; I Cor. 9:27; Heb. 6:4-6.

Classical Arminians believe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminian

"Eternal security is also conditional: All believers have full assurance of salvation with the condition that they remain in Christ. Salvation is conditioned on faith, therefore perseverance is also conditioned.[20] Apostasy (turning from Christ) is only committed through a deliberate, willful rejection of Jesus and renunciation of saving faith. Such apostasy is irremediable"

In other words, if you lose your salvation, you can never get it back.

Wesleyan Arminians (which most modern day Arminian churches are) believe:

"Possibility of apostasy – Wesley fully accepted the Arminian view that genuine Christians could apostatize and lose their salvation, as his famous sermon "A Call to Backsliders" clearly demonstrates. Harper summarizes as follows: "the act of committing sin is not in itself ground for the loss of salvation...the loss of salvation is much more related to experiences that are profound and prolonged. Wesley sees two primary pathways that could result in a permanent fall from grace: unconfessed sin and the actual expression of apostasy." [25] Wesley disagrees with Arminius, however, in maintaining that such apostasy was not final. When talking about those who have made "shipwreck" of their faith (1 Tim 1:19), Wesley claims that "not one, or a hundred only, but I am persuaded, several thousands...innumerable are the instances...of those who had fallen but now stand upright."

They do indeed believe that a person can get saved and lost more than once.

John

 

[preacher4truth]

What I am saying, (Which you will see if you follow the link on my edited post) is that Conditional Salvation (losing your salvation) is NOT the cornerstone of Arminianism.

You're correct in a sense, as it is choice that is the cornerstone, which is one reason the possible loss of salvation remains in classic Arminianism, and why Arminian-ish theologies continue the trail of placing man as the determinative factor. Mans power of choice can override God in arminian/non-Calvinist theology. This is one of their glaring errors, and it permeates all of their theology making it errant and anthropocentric.

 

[seekingthetruth]

What I am saying, (Which you will see if you follow the link on my edited post) is that Conditional Salvation (losing your salvation) is NOT the cornerstone of Arminianism.

I disagree. The Arminian churches I have visited focused on a warning to believers to remain "Holy" so that they do not lose their salvation. They were stressing this more than anything else. Warning Christians not to return to being a sinner and losing their salvation.

John

 

[seekingthetruth]

You're correct in a sense, as it is choice that is the cornerstone, which is one reason the possible loss of salvation remains in classic Arminianism, and why Arminian-ish theologies continue the trail of placing man as the determinative factor. Mans power of choice can override God in arminian/non-Calvinist theology. This is one of their glaring errors, and it permeates all of their theology making it errant and anthropocentric.

Preacher, i do agree with part of what you said here. I believe that a lost man has a choice to accept salvation, but I don't believe God would ever let a saved person go. God would not break the seal of the HS or His promises no matter how much a Christian fails. I believe that God will chastise a fallen Christian until fellowship with God is restored, or in some cases, God just takes them home. In other words, "Chastises unto death" if they refuse to return to full fellowship with Him.

John

 

[JonC]

Arminians believe that every man has the free will to accept or reject salvation.

But they also believe that their salvation is conditional in that they can lose it. They have to mantain a christian life to remain saved. They believe that once saved that they have to continually "earn" their right to keep their salvation, or they will lose it.

What we would call "backsliden" they would call "lost" and in need of getting saved again.

So, no, I meant conditional salvation, not election.

John

Thank you for the clarification – I thought that you were correct in your view, but incorrect in the way you presented it. I stand corrected.

The possibility of Christian apostasy is not a definite doctrine of Arminianism (it is not original to the position and was left as a debatable matter within Arminianism, as the articles themselves testify). It is not correct to “tag” a system with a specific doctrine that is not inherent to that system. You are correct regarding many Arminians – but not Arminianism as a whole.

The separation was regarding election.

But, then again, using terms like Arminianism or Calvinism today really doesn’t sum up what any individual actually believes.

 

[preacher4truth]

Preacher, i do agree with part of what you said here. I believe that a lost man has a choice to accept salvation, but I don't believe God would ever let a saved person go. God would not break the seal of the HS or His promises no matter how much a Christian fails. I believe that God will chastise a fallen Christian until fellowship with God is restored, or in some cases, God just takes them home. In other words, "Chastises unto death" if they refuse to return to full fellowship with Him.

John

I also believe in OSAS. One problem I have with Arminianism/Non-Calvinist theology is the errant view of freewill and that we choose God, when in fact it is He who has chosen us. We think we chose Him, but that is not the entire truth.

Anyhow, Arminian theology was a reaction against the Sovereignty of God and His choosing, and sought to give man a higher place, higher than than what is Biblical, making man the determining factor in salvation. After this we have other errors that have crept in, such as man thinking himself good pre salvation, not accepting the indictment of God on all mankind according to Romans 3 &c. This is a rejection (and is quite telling) against the Holy Spirits work in convicting the world of sin, righteousness (not mans) and judgment.

Instead we have those who have climbed into the flock their own way, rejecting the truth that they were ungodly pre salvation, fighting for themselves that they were doing good, that they were seeking God among other errors. Such are false teachers.

Jesus died for the ungodly, the 'good' don't need a Physician.

 

[seekingthetruth]

What I am saying, (Which you will see if you follow the link on my edited post) is that Conditional Salvation (losing your salvation) is NOT the cornerstone of Arminianism.

From the website you posted:

http://evangelicalarminians.org/Outline.FACTS-of-Arminianism-vs-the-TULIP-of-Calvinism

"Security in Christ (Article 5)
• Since salvation comes through faith in Christ, the security of our salvation continues by faith in Christ.
• Just as the Holy Spirit empowered us to believe in Christ, so he empowers us to continue believing in Christ.
• God protects our faith relationship with him from any outside force irresistibly snatching us away from Christ or our faith, and he preserves us in salvation as long as we trust in Christ.
•Arminians have differing views of whether Scripture teaches that believers can forsake faith in Christ and so perish, or whether God irresistibly keeps believers from forsaking their faith and therefore entering into eternal condemnation (as unbelievers)."

http://evangelicalarminians.org/?q=sof

"7. We believe that God’s saving grace is resistible, that election unto salvation is conditional on faith in Christ, and that persevering in faith is necessary for final salvation."

In other words, they believe that salvation is not finished or completed until we have "perservered in faith" until death. Looks like conditional salvation to me.

John

 

[JonC]

I disagree. The Arminian churches I have visited focused on a warning to believers to remain "Holy" so that they do not lose their salvation. They were stressing this more than anything else. Warning Christians not to return to being a sinner and losing their salvation.

John

This is from a Calvinistic perspective (I know, “obviously”). But regarding classic Arminianism, it depends on which side the adherents fell on regarding Article V. Many held to conditional election, but apart from that would hold to perseverance (that election being based on a “final state,” the ones who would fall away were not actually elect and were not truly regenerate).

That’s because you are viewing the system based on what that church taught or what some Arminians believe. You would be correct to talk about that church (or perhaps some denominations, but not Arminianism in general and as a whole).

But, you are also implying that Calvinists do not believe in “conditional salvation.” This is unbiblical, and certainly not true to Calvinistic doctrine. You have to believe in order to be saved – in both systems. The difference is election.

 

[seekingthetruth]

I also believe in OSAS. One problem I have with Arminianism/Non-Calvinist theology is the errant view of freewill and that we choose God, when in fact it is He who has chosen us. We think we chose Him, but that is not the entire truth.

Anyhow, Arminian theology was a reaction against the Sovereignty of God and His choosing, and sought to give man a higher place, higher than than what is Biblical, making man the determining factor in salvation. After this we have other errors that have crept in, such as man thinking himself good pre salvation, not accepting the indictment of God on all mankind according to Romans 3 &c. This is a rejection (and is quite telling) against the Holy Spirits work in convicting the world of sin, righteousness (not mans) and judgment.

Instead we have those who have climbed into the flock their own way, rejecting the truth that they were ungodly pre salvation, fighting for themselves that they were doing good, that they were seeking God among other errors. Such are false teachers.

Jesus died for the ungodly, the 'good' don't need a Physician.

I have a close relative that believes that she was given faith, and granted Grace because she was a 'good person'. She thinks only good people can get saved.

Yep preacher, lots of folks take their freewill to an extreme and get all prideful and full of themselves because God picked them. Some Cals do the same thing though. BTW, she also believes that she must maintain a state of Holiness to retain her salvation....go figure

John

 

[seekingthetruth]

I also believe in OSAS. One problem I have with Arminianism/Non-Calvinist theology is the errant view of freewill and that we choose God, when in fact it is He who has chosen us. We think we chose Him, but that is not the entire truth.

I believe that God chooses everybody, but not everbody chooses God.

I reckon that it would appear that I chose God without His consent and on my own, but that is not the case. I merely responded to His call. I believe he calls everyone, but everyone does not choose to respond.

You are really talking about the meat of the issue between Cals and non-Cals.

Non cals think that Cals are arrogant because they believe that they are the "Chosen" or the "Elect"

And Cals think that non-cals are arrogant because they believe that they cn be saved by their own freewill.

I would submit to you that neither position is entirely right, and neither is entirely wrong.

John

 

[TCGreek]

What we need to remember is that theologizing is a human effort, liable to err here and there.

At any rate, the Lord knows those who are his.

 

[seekingthetruth]

Well, this thread turned out to be a decent and enlightening discussion, but bed time is here.

Good night

John

 

[JonC]

What we need to remember is that theologizing is a human effort, liable to err here and there.

At any rate, the Lord knows those who are his.

:thumbsup:

 

[12strings]

From the website you posted:

http://evangelicalarminians.org/Outline.FACTS-of-Arminianism-vs-the-TULIP-of-Calvinism

"Security in Christ (Article 5)
• Since salvation comes through faith in Christ, the security of our salvation continues by faith in Christ.
• Just as the Holy Spirit empowered us to believe in Christ, so he empowers us to continue believing in Christ.
• God protects our faith relationship with him from any outside force irresistibly snatching us away from Christ or our faith, and he preserves us in salvation as long as we trust in Christ.
•Arminians have differing views of whether Scripture teaches that believers can forsake faith in Christ and so perish, or whether God irresistibly keeps believers from forsaking their faith and therefore entering into eternal condemnation (as unbelievers)."

http://evangelicalarminians.org/?q=sof

"7. We believe that God’s saving grace is resistible, that election unto salvation is conditional on faith in Christ, and that persevering in faith is necessary for final salvation."

In other words, they believe that salvation is not finished or completed until we have "perservered in faith" until death. Looks like conditional salvation to me.

John

Yes, but that Perservering language is not unique to arminianism...It is also part of the teachings of calvinism, which also teaches you must perservere in the faith...Cals just believe God keeps you perservering.

 

[Iconoclast]

What did God himself say?

Amo 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

:applause::thumbsup: Winman.....i have to agree with you when i can:love2:

 

[Iconoclast]

If a gay person started coming to our church, I would favor welcoming them, but not letting them join as a member, which in effect would condone their beliefs. I would encourage them to keep coming so that they can absorb the truth of saving Grace available to all men that come.

It should be the same for Calvinists. I would strongly disagree with allowing a Calvinist join our church as a member, which in effect would condone their beliefs. But I would strongly encourage them to keep coming so that they can absorb the truth of saving Grace that is available to all men that come.

I would also say the same for people that believe in conditional salvation. If they don't believe that a saved person is sealed for eternity by the HS, and that salvation is based on faith plus works, then they need to absorb some truths before they join our church as a member.

John

WELL John,

At least this shows you are willing to stand by what your local church holds as a statement of faith:thumbsup:
In a calvinist church the members are to look over the confession of faith to see if they can submit to it in general.....if not why would they want to join.

Trust me John , I could visit your church...pray for any unsaved that are there the the word preached would convict them....but why would I want to go where people oppose the truth of God's absolute sovereignty?

 

[Iconoclast]

Teaching a false doctrine is a sin.

John

Opposing any revealed bible truth is a sin:type:

 

[Iconoclast]

Now your "thinking" (IE., assuming) instead of knowing.....brother, forgive me if I appear to criticize, but that is a textbook case of fostering an opinion. I'd rather you say unequivocally that you know something, or conversely that you do not. If there is a question about it then just don't say it.

For your own edification, Doctrines of Grace believers come in all walks of life, from regular folks to the well educated and all will agree that their faith is derived from what they read in the bible. We have hopefully demonstrated that to anyone in here (BB)who can read. Sadly, this is not the church's finest hour. We all live in an age of weak theology & casual Christian conduct. If you wish to marginalize , then look to those folks that enter the church with with secular, humanistic, relativistic, materialist & anti-intellectual agenda's who will corrupt & destroy; not the Calvinist wishing to Honor & Glorify God. In that regard, I am convinced that you are on the wrong path. True Christianity needs to be unifying.

Nice post EWF:applause::applause:

 

[Winman]

:applause::thumbsup: Winman.....i have to agree with you when i can:love2:

This has to be a first! :thumbsup:

Oh, I am sure we agree on many things. But I cannot agree that God does not give a man a choice to believe or not, this is where we part ways.

I do not see it as degrading to God to give man a choice. Who determined men would have a choice? God! God made the rules, not us.

If God had determined we would have to do good works to get to heaven, that would be the rules. God is calling the shots.

Thank God that is not how we are saved, because I know I would fail. I thank God that he provided his Son to die for all men (because that includes me), and that by simply placing trust in Jesus I can have my sins forgiven.

But man making the choice of believeing or not does not usurp God in any way whatsoever. If you submit to God and believe in Jesus you will be saved, if you reject Jesus you will be lost. God is in total control. If you get saved, you have to do it God's way.