Is Cal/Non-Cal important enough to divide?

[Iconoclast]

Which is where you put it on your list. Some Cals would place it first and make it a serious point of contention and then judge anyone who does not hold to the same thing by suggesting non cals do not preach the gospel because they do not hold to the same false view of election.

yes some cals put it first...like the apostle Paul;

Ephesians 1

1Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

2Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

After Eph1 paul gives eph 2:8-9 as a consequence....mandy....was he being contentious or just praising God for His grace and mercy???


Then when some of the jews suggested a synergistic gospel in galatians ...he did severly go after them...thank You very much.

 

[Iconoclast]

One of my best friends is a Cal. We meet regularly and pray with and for each other. We share our difficulties and vent as well as rejoice in God's move in both our churches as well as work together in the community. But at no time does he take the antagonistic attitude we see on this board by some Cals.

We had one couple who was a Cal visit for a while but he would not stay because he could not deal with the fact that Calvinism doesn't get preached.

mandym.......as if we do not see you posting calvinsm is error:laugh:

I think if you will look....you will see a direct correlation....non cal attempts to attack cal.......cal reacts with scripture...non cal makes a snide remark...and flees...

In this thread You posted the idea that cals do not have the correct teaching on election.....which is laughable.

We had one couple who was a Cal visit for a while but he would not stay because he could not deal with the fact that Calvinism doesn't get preached.

Sure they left...they wanted to hear the whole gospel, according to the scriptures....not one that the pastor has taken a scissor to.

 

[Iconoclast]

In my previous post (#42) I may have left the impression that the views held by Calvinists and non-Calvinists are not important.

In fact, they are not inconsequential. The differing views held by each side may directly affect how we carry out the Great Commission.

But each church must determine for itself whether it wants to fight over these issues.

Let me tell you our church does not.

Thirty years ago, our church voted to relocate from the south side of Paducah to a tract of land on an interstate interchange. The majority approved, but it was not unanimous. When we finally moved in 1986, a significant number of members did not go with us. They "relocated" to other churches.

And although the exodus left our church united and of one mind (which has basically continued to this day), it left pain and scars. Many of us vowed we'd never go through another church fight unless it involved fighting heresy.

Unity in a church is precious. When you have it you'll work hard to keep it.

Our church is unified. I won't be part of any effort to divide it over Calvinism. Now you know why.

Tom sounds as if your church has mature believers in it ....so it can work.
They have taken the time to understand what others believe..instead of false caricatures.....that is half the battle.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Iconoclast]

Funny thing is, I fully believe in the biblical doctrine of grace, and will never bow my knee to the manmade and socalled "Doctrines of Grace." Pity those who fall into that maze of human philosophy ungrounded by the Word, and what other human philosophies and man made traditions must they be susceptible to! Pity them indeed!

JB...
We have not seen you offer much in the way of correction.....but would welcome any biblical based correction. I do not think you can do it but time will tell:type:

 

[Iconoclast]

Brother Iconoclast,

It's posts like yours that ignites the flames that will devour a church in a case such as the OP speaks about. Your post comes across as DoG=spiritual maturity, and anything else=spiritual immaturity. It's like the "strong meat" is Calvinism, and the sincere milk is anything else. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but that is the way your post came across to me.

I used to work with a woman who was the pen-ultimate WoF/charismatic you'd ever dread meeting. She made the same sort of came that your post implies, only she used the "name it claim it, blab it grab it". She stated that once you got the that level of "spiritualality" she had(paraphrasing what she stated), you'll never want to go back. It's seems that is what you were implying. However, I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. If I am wrong, please accept my sincerest apology.

Hello Willis.
Keep in mind that I left the first church so as not to cause a split Willis!
there were about ten of us who left when we saw the others were going in a different direction. The Pastor did not want to see us go....but we were too young and fired up to stay. we could not be content with mushy generic sermonettes that danced around the clear truth.

Willis.....I believe that when anyone keeps studying the bible and sees these truths....it is very difficult to remain in a place that is committed to avoid truth.......seekingtruth says they would not want any cal's to be members......no right minded cal would want to be around that kind of church for many reasons.....no election, predestination, answered prayer{ which presupposes God has ordained believing prayer as a good work.}
covenant, providence.....not much left except the little awana program,and maybe a gospel puppet show,or gospel clown to tell jokes.

I was just answering 12strings willis.....not inflaming anything.
Willis ...I am old enough i see problems in many churches...cal. or non.
I was in the second church for about two years before some of the members even knew the pastor was teaching the DoG. We will have that breakfast sometime Willis.....I can tell you some stories that will make your hair curl up like a poodle:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Your post comes across as DoG=spiritual maturity, and anything else=spiritual immaturity. It's like the "strong meat" is Calvinism, and the sincere milk is anything else. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but that is the way your post came across to me.

Well Willis.....It is not a secret that I believe that calvinism is the truth of scripture. I do not think it is milk...but meat.
Several attack it as if it is"man made"...but they error here Willis. Willis.....I do not think it is two even views...take your pick.
I believe it like we believe in the trinity.....it is not like trinity/ no trinity is a toss up.
Some of those who oppose it now...will in time come to hold it. Some are believers who need to study more, some think they have studied it enough...so they do not even look at it anymore. Some who attack it will wind up in hell. All things are still on the table Willis.

Hey Willis....in the .....what about his holiness thread....did you answer my post #43?????

 

[Tom Butler]

How do you address this, Yes or No is preferred... Is salvation by grace alone?

I didn't fail to answer earlier. I've been away and just found the question.

If I am forced to answer with only one word, it is Yes.

But if I'm allowed to explain, my answer is Ephesians 2:8-10

 

[Tom Butler]

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.
John

There may be some prideful Calvinists out there, but I've never met one. I have been a believer for 65 years and a DoG for 40 years. I've never known of a prideful Calvinist.

That would negate a basic premise of Calvinism and Baptist doctrine--which is, that none of us is deserving of God's grace.

In my view, prideful Calvinist is an oxymoron. So is prideful Baptist. So is prideful Christian.

Or it should be.

 

[convicted1]

Well Well Willis....the man is telling you what he believes & that offends you in some way does it? I happen to agree with the brother. I have had similar experiences, people who sit in churches without absorbing the bible. pastors avoiding clear teaching of scripture so as not to offend anyone ....even had a pastor asking me why I wanted to pursue the orthodox historical Christianity ....he meant DoG. And yes Ive had to leave & I admonished a brother for wanting to stay there. Therefore I do not go to blended churches. In summation, you go to your church & I will go to mine.Thats religious liberty, right.

Brother, I have no problem with him telling me how he believes things. We all come to our conclusions the same way; through prayer and study. The problem I have is that there is a sense of superiority in being a Calvinist. It is not his post, but the manner in which is was posted. Just because I am anti-Calvinist, doesn't make me feel superior to those who are Calvinists. It is the "eliteist" attitude that bother me. It is like some feel they have a better "line of communication" with the Father than the rest of do.

 

[convicted1]

In my previous post (#42) I may have left the impression that the views held by Calvinists and non-Calvinists are not important.

In fact, they are not inconsequential. The differing views held by each side may directly affect how we carry out the Great Commission.

But each church must determine for itself whether it wants to fight over these issues.

Let me tell you our church does not.

Thirty years ago, our church voted to relocate from the south side of Paducah to a tract of land on an interstate interchange. The majority approved, but it was not unanimous. When we finally moved in 1986, a significant number of members did not go with us. They "relocated" to other churches.

And although the exodus left our church united and of one mind (which has basically continued to this day), it left pain and scars. Many of us vowed we'd never go through another church fight unless it involved fighting heresy.

Unity in a church is precious. When you have it you'll work hard to keep it.

Our church is unified. I won't be part of any effort to divide it over Calvinism. Now you know why.

Brother, what a wonderful, precious post!! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Luke2427]

Perhaps much to some people's surprise I'll have to say that it is not that important.

By "that important" I mean so much so that we cannot work and worship together in the Kingdom as cals and non-cals.

It only becomes that important when either position is taken to the extreme. When the Arminian so wishes to defend free will that he redefines God's attributes or when the Calvinist so wishes to defend God's omniscience and sovereignty that he accuses God of evil or rejects very agressive evangelistic efforts- then we cannot work together or worship together.

I can worship and work without problem with an Arminian or non-cal who believes God knew the world would fall before he made the world.

I cannot worship and work with a Calvinist who is in any way anti-evangelistic or makes God out to be evil.

So I can work and worship with either a Calvinist or a non-calvinist who does not push his/her theology to either extreme but I can work with NEITHER who does push either theology to the extreme.

 

[convicted1]

Perhaps much to some people's surprise I'll have to say that it is not that important.

By "that important" I mean so much so that we cannot work and worship together in the Kingdom as cals and non-cals.

It only becomes that important when either position is taken to the extreme. When the Arminian so wishes to defend free will that he redefines God's attributes or when the Calvinist so wishes to defend God's omniscience and sovereignty that he accuses God of evil or rejects very agressive evangelistic efforts- then we cannot work together or worship together.

I can worship and work without problem with an Arminian or non-cal who believes God knew the world would fall before he made the world.

I cannot worship and work with a Calvinist who is in any way anti-evangelistic or makes God out to be evil.

So I can work and worship with either a Calvinist or a non-calvinist who does not push his/her theology to either extreme but I can work with NEITHER who does push either theology to the extreme.

Thank you for this very clear post. This is what I was trying to say, but failed in doing so. You took the words right out of my mouth....err, keyboard....

 

[jonathan.borland]

Does God will that everyone should repent and that none should perish? If that is his will, what prevents it from being accomplished?

 

[Michael Wrenn]

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

That is not what I was referring to. The post in question didn't say merely more than once, but many times.

Also, look at your General Baptist reference again. "Finally lost" does not imply or mean being saved and lost innumerable times, but rather turning away without coming back.

I will not comment on Wesley here; I was talking about the General Baptists who predate Wesley.

 

[seekingthetruth]

That is not what I was referring to. The post in question didn't say merely more than once, but many times.

Also, look at your General Baptist reference again. "Finally lost" does not imply or mean being saved and lost innumerable times, but rather turning away without coming back.

I will not comment on Wesley here; I was talking about the General Baptists who predate Wesley.

You said:

Arminian or General Baptists don't believe that.

Arminian or? I apologise if General Baptist follow Classical Arminiamism and not Wesleyan Arminianism (which is way more common in modern churches)

But your post included Arminians in general, that's why i posted the difference between the two in my posts.

Looks like we both made mistakes, and i apologise for mine.

But either way, the point of my original post was that SBC nor me are Arminian, and the only Baptists that I know of that are Arminian are the General Baptist and the Freewill Baptist. And no matter if they believe in only one shot at salvation or many, if they believe that salvation can be lost then they are wrong.

Not every Christian is an Arminian or Calvinist!

Some of us are just regular.

John

 

[Michael Wrenn]

You said:



Arminian or? I apologise if General Baptist follow Classical Arminiamism and not Wesleyan Arminianism (which is way more common in modern churches)

But your post included Arminians in general, that's why i posted the difference between the two in my posts.

Looks like we both made mistakes, and i apologise for mine.

But either way, the point of my original post was that SBC nor me are Arminian, and the only Baptists that I know of that are Arminian are the General Baptist and the Freewill Baptist. And no matter if they believe in only one shot at salvation or many, if they believe that salvation can be lost then they are wrong.

Not every Christian is an Arminian or Calvinist!

Some of us are just regular.

John

Only in your opinion.

 

[mandym]

Only in your opinion.

No its a fact.

 

[quantumfaith]

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?

Icon, you had me until here.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Brother, I have no problem with him telling me how he believes things. We all come to our conclusions the same way; through prayer and study. The problem I have is that there is a sense of superiority in being a Calvinist. It is not his post, but the manner in which is was posted. Just because I am anti-Calvinist, doesn't make me feel superior to those who are Calvinists. It is the "eliteist" attitude that bother me. It is like some feel they have a better "line of communication" with the Father than the rest of do.

Lets be honest Willis, you are going to find elitist attitudes across the board & with every group. I was watching an old rerun of the movie, "A River Runs Through It" Where the Character of a Presbyterian Pastor is talking to his two sons on a fishing trip & the conversation turns to the oldest sons girlfriend. The father asks the son if the girl is a Christian & the son shyly admits that she is a Methodist.......Tom Skerret (the father & Presby Pastor) commentary is " Oh Methodist....they are Baptists with Shoes." :laugh: Get my point? When I was a Catholic we thought protestants were inferior; when I became a Presbyterian, then Catholics became inferior & as a Baptist & a DoG Believer, I get flack from multiple sides. Guess it goes with the territory. In summation, I still have to go back to my catholic roots to recall Francis of Assisi & his prayer,

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love.
Where there is injury, pardon.
Where there is doubt, faith.
Where there is despair, hope.
Where there is darkness, light.
Where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,
grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled, as to console;
to be understood, as to understand;
to be loved, as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive.
It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.

Amen. :godisgood:

 

[jonathan.borland]

Good prayer, and with that attitude the answer to the OP should be no.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Good prayer, and with that attitude the answer to the OP should be no.

Of course, providing that people have that attitude to begin with. What about SBC churches that close their doors to Calvinists?