• 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!

SBC Abstract and Calvinism

Can a person, who is not a Calvinist, honestly sign that statement?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 13.0%
  • No

    Votes: 18 78.3%
  • I Don't Know

    Votes: 2 8.7%

  • Total voters
    23
  • Poll closed .

El_Guero

New Member
No, we haven't, but evidently you have. Who is ergun caner?

So, you want a biblical mandate for calvinism, but you do not want a biblical mandate for baptism?

How do you place calvinism ahead of baptism for importance among baptists?

I have never known 'calvinism' to be labeled a baptist distinctive, but I have always known baptism to be a distinctive.


Martin said:
==Been listening to Ergun Caner have we? :laugh:

Baptists have been both Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic. There is no "one" definition of a Baptist when it comes to this issue. So I don't know how to take the assertion that "Baptists have been...Baptists".


==Again this is not about John Calvin, this is about a system of theology that has (rightly or wrongly) been labeled with his name (ie...Calvinism). This system of theology was around before John Calvin and it would be here if Calvin had never been born. This is about the Baptist Church and that system of theology that is labeled with Calvin's name (Calvinism).


==I am not talking about baptism, church government, or church/state issues. I am talking about the points of Calvinism that have been agreed upon by many who were/are Baptists (see the abstracts).


==The "five points" of "Calvinism" are Biblically based. That is one reason why they were around before Calvin, why they would be around if Calvin had not been born, and that is why many Baptists have adopted those theological positions.
 

MB

Well-Known Member
Hi Jim;
God was very particular in the Old Testament. Of all the nations of the world, He chose Israel to carry forth the way of redemption. In the New Testament, He carried on with the church, the new Israel of God, as the burden bearer of the gospel of grace. He called us out to be a peculiar people unto Him. No doubt God is partial, and as a sovereign God, He as that right.
While it's true God is Sovereign I have no doubt of it and certainly He has a right to do what ever He wishes to do. It's His Sovereign right to choose all men for Salvation if that's His desire. It's also His right to do what we would disagree with. We can't limit possibilities, because all things are possible with God.
I don't deny that God chose the Jews to be a peculiar people but gentiles are adopted. We've been grafted into that which we were not originally a part of. Gentiles were added in after and because of the rejection of Christ. His plan no doubt from the beginning.
If Christ indeed died for the whole world then the whole world has been chosen to and for Salvation. As I said before this doesn't mean the whole world will be saved but that the whole world might be saved John 3:17
God loves all the world enough to allow the sacrifice of His own Son so that who ever believes can have eternal life. John 3:16 these two verses show that God's focus was on the whole world and not just some of the world.
I haven't a clue where this idea of particular election came from except maybe Augustine or one of the reformers. I don't pretend to fully understand it but what I do understand of it I do not believe in. I've never seen it explained in scripture. If you have please show me. I cannot accept what isn't in scripture. This below is in scripture.
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

This says Christ died for all men as a ransom. Certainly this ransom is worthy of all men, just as this passage says. His choosing to die paying this ransom is most certainly our choosing for Salvation. All that's left is our belief and submission to Him. Our belief is a result of His work not ours and our submission is a result of our willingness to submit because of what we have come to believe.
MB
 

Martin

Active Member
El_Guero said:
So, you want a biblical mandate for calvinism, but you do not want a biblical mandate for baptism?

==Where did you get that idea? I never said that.

El_Guero said:
How do you place calvinism ahead of baptism for importance among baptists?

==I don't know that I am placing Calvinism ahead of baptism and I am not sure what this has to do with the Abstract.



El_Guero said:
No, we haven't, but evidently you have. Who is ergun caner?

==Who is Ergun Caner?
 

bound

New Member
dan e. said:
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.

YES! :tongue3:
 
Top