SBC Abstract and Calvinism

You are intentionally asking a loaded question . . .

No, calvin was not and never could be a southern baptist.

Yes, calvin would have had you put in stocks or killed for being a southern baptist.

Do you want to be a calvinist? Or, do you want to be a baptist (particularly a southern baptist)?

 

Insufficient interest.

 

I stopped reading at the 5th paragraph (Election) and voted no. I've had similar dealings with IFB's concerning some IFB churches' Statements of Faith which are clearly calvinistic and yet those sames churches vehemently condemn calvinism.

 

Martin, you're pointing to the elephant in the room that no one wants to look at.

 

There are too many Baptists who are not followers of Jesus Christ.

I am a Christian--a follower of Jesus Christ.

 

Must someone accept the ideas of Calvinism in its most common form? What I'm trying to say is that my views are similar to the ways that "calvinism" puts it. However, I think Calvinism has become one of the most foolish systematic ways of teaching the Bible. Not necessarily because of its content, but because of its form and how proponents require others to accept it. For example....I find "total depravity" nowhere in Scripture. I do, however, read that Paul proclaims to believers that before Jesus they were certainly "dead" in their sins. He also says that they lived to "carry out the desires of the body", and were by nature "children of wrath". I see no need to accept some system or structured way to explain this, especially with lingo that has come to make many cringe as opposed to learn what the Bible says. They cringe, by the way, because of the methods of the calvinists, not because of the Holy Spirit. I definitely understand this in the way a calvinist may understand it. I think, however, that calvinism has become too dangerous because it's language and methods are not Biblical. I want nothing to do with John Calvin. I am not a follower of his. I know many of you would say the same, however, your actions would contradict you. I don't want to go on and on through the entire stupid flower to keep explaining myself. I think you get it. But, maybe to place my vote, I'll do the opposite of everyone else and keep myself away from the John Calvin label. :thumbs:

 

Well you've done a great job of bashing a very important figure in Christian theology. Have you read any of Calvin's institutes? I'm sure your theology books are much superior! Exactly how many books on theology have you writen?

 

Does that really matter? All you need is one Book.

 

Lol..... what can I say to such logic? :laugh:

 

You see, that kind of illustrates my point right here. My intention was in no way to bash anyone. In fact, I've got to wonder what John Calvin would think of the lovely TULIP that was created and associated with his name. The point is not how much I know, how well I write, how much I've read, etc. In fact, you don't even really know me, but you are questioning me based on standards that are pretty worldly. The amount of knowledge I have? My success, or lack of, as a writer? You are doing this because you dislike that my allegiance is not to TULIP. Thanks for proving my point.

 

Oh, and by the way, the Apostle Paul's writings are much more superior than the Institutes. I sure hope and pray you don't think otherwise. I trust you don't.

 

Solid theological knowledge is worldly?

 

Of course they are. At least we agree on something. :wavey:

 

No, but you are defining "solid theological knowledge" as having read the Institutes according to your post. Not only having read them, but agreeing with it. I think I would define what you call "solid theological knowledge" a little differently than you. Again, are you really saying this because of my lack of allegiance to TULIP?

 

Romans 3:10. as it is written, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;
11. THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;
12. ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE."
13. "THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING," "THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS";
14. "WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS";
15. "THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD,
16. DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS,
17. AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN."
18. "THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES."

 

Way to take a quote of mine out of context. I still do not see that phrase in there. You've missed my point. You also forgot to quote what I said after that, but it looks like your intent was to make me sound like I didn't agree with the Bible, so why would you quote that part of my post?

 

Are there any who see my point? Particularly someone who may even disagree with me? I think you see I am not advocating any unbiblical approach, but questioning an approach that has become popular to take among reformed believers. I find it humorous that the one person who has disagreed with me has proven my point by suggesting that I don't have "solid theological knowledge" because I don't explain my views by the TULIP. I think that is a problem.