I don't get bent out of shape. I specifically had in mind Arminians who don't like the moniker "Arminian". Actually the free will position held by most Baptists is semi-Pelagian, not Arminian, but Arminian has become synonymous for both positions. Arminian doesn't mean a person buys into all of Arminius' or the Remonstrants doctrine. It means they hold to his view of moral free agency. If they get bent out of shape about the term...well, they get bent out of shape about it. If they are that touchy then maybe they shouldn't be in a debate forum. Plus they don't have to accept the term. I reject the term "exhaustive determinist" but I don't get upset about it. I just dismiss it and mosey along.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
My personal search for answers
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
- Status
I don't get bent out of shape. I specifically had in mind Arminians who don't like the moniker "Arminian". Actually the free will position held by most Baptists is semi-Pelagian, not Arminian, but Arminian has become synonymous for both positions. Arminian doesn't mean a person buys into all of Arminius' or the Remonstrants doctrine. It means they hold to his view of moral free agency. If they get bent out of shape about the term...well, they get bent out of shape about it. If they are that touchy then maybe they shouldn't be in a debate forum. Plus they don't have to accept the term. I reject the term "exhaustive determinist" but I don't get upset about it. I just dismiss it and mosey along.
quantumfaith
Active Member
In regards to the OP, I thought at the very beginning you just might be honestly searching and seeking, but as I read, my "interpretation" is that you instead wanted to stir things up. I thought you might really be "seeking" answers (if so be careful or you will termed either emergent or seeker friendly, and to many here that is not a good thing). FTR, I personally am decidedly NOT calvinistic et al. But I do think equating those that do hold to such principles and interpretations as heretical analogous to "worshiping angels" or any other aspect of creation is a massive over reach and simply incorrect.
Sure.
There are more theological options than just Calvinism or Arminianism. When one begins to work in theology more deeply there are more than just two categories of theological belief. Now some examples I'll give are far our and shouldn't be accepted while are worth considering.
Some other options for theological belief include:
Neo-orthodoxy, molinism, existential, process, liberationist, historical baptist, analytical, continental, Thomist, etc.
The list can go on for a bit. However, the larger picture emerges that limiting our discussion to just Calvinist or Arminian neglects to realize there is a larger picture at play.
stilllearning
Active Member
Good evening Edward63
You asked.........
“If you will not ask a question, I will ask you one. in your OP your wrote:
"Now although the Bible does say that EVERYONE will be drawn(John 12:32),..."
What in the context makes you interpret the "all" as "EVERYONE", which I suppose you mean every individual bar none. Such words are used often in the NT without such unrestricted meaning. What in the context of John 12:32 makes you think it means "EVERYONE" without exception. I mean specifically in that context, not your reading into it.”
Here is the immediate context, that seems to be enough.....
John 12:31-33
V.31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
V.32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.
V.33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.
Here the Lord is clearly talking about the “universal atonement” that His death on the cross would accomplish.
As for proof that His atonement is universal, here is one.......
“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” (2 Peter 2:1)
Here God’s Word is talking about “false prophets”, having been “bought”!
The Lord’s atonement is so universal, that His Blood is even available to false prophets, if they exercise faith in Christ.
I guess that makes me a Biblicist doesn't it?
That is your opinion; your judgment. and I judge it as wrong.
And you are very far apart with other Calvinists are you not? I see no difference.
I practice Biblical theology--the theology of each book.
I practice systematic theology--that which I find most profitable of all.
If I go through all the doctrines myself, study them well, then I know what I believe and why I believe what I believe. I have not confined myself to another's system of thought. And why should I?
I don't accept either one, nor do I think Dave Hunt would.
I think his assessment of Calvinism is a good one.
I have read Dave Hunt and from my perspective his position is not built upon solid exegesis. Indeed, it is based upon some very sloppy handling of God's word. Yes, that is from my perspective. It has been some time ago when I read him and I would have to go back and review his book to present concrete examples for why I say this.
Actually Every thing the man wrote about Calvinism He proved from scripture I have a feeling you didn't bother to check on that because you love your Calvinism so much you just don't want to know the truth.
MB
Of course, that is the claim of every author who ever writes on a Biblical subject. I am a very careful reader and I in fact looked at his interpretations very closely. I think his book is about the best presentation for his view but I would take issue with several of his interpretations of scripture from purely an exegetical point of view. Now, if you choose to continue to judge my motives and call me a liar there is nothing I can do about that.
O please MB,give it up. Your hatred of what you think Calvinism is despite having been corrected numerous times is pathetic.
Back to Dave Hunt. Again,I knew the man. He was nice. A Christian --most certainly. I read most of his books from the 90's the early years of the 21 st century. He was as shallow as could be and not very well-read on the subject of Calvinism. Not much better than Norm Geisler who he probably took notes from. James white in dealing with him was much more scriptural and exegeted --something Hunt and geisler have rarely done.
Then you don't mind if I just call you a warmed over Catholic. After all it is what you are.
MB
I don't know about anyone else on this forum, but I make it a point to read the best books with the strongest arguments against any position I believe. I do that because if my position cannot stand up to that kind of assault then I need to change my position to one that can stand up to such assaults. A good majority of my library is composed of books by authors who attack the very positions I embrace as truth. I really believe that it is healthy to read the opposition as a Pastor or college professor because if you do not your members or students will and you are going to be embarrased.
Your first statement about correcting me maid me laugh so hard I nearly fell out of my Chair. It wasn't so much of what you said that made me laugh but that you are arrogant enough to have said it.
The Bottom paragraph is just another Joke a joke. I don't believe you ever spoke with Dave Hunt. Although I never have believed you in anything you've ever said. You're just not the believable type.
MB
- Status