• 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!

Should Arminians and Calvinists Attend the Same Church?

Scott Downey

Well-Known Member
@Steven Yeadon :
Another example, if I may...



Do you see what Barry has quoted?
To me he understands this passage as a "back-and-forth" between unbelieving Jews ( see verse 36 where the Lord identifies that they do not believe ) and Himself, as do I.
But the difference is,

I see Barry taking verse 29 as Jesus telling the Jews the answer to His question in verse 28...
That the only work that they might do ( that is pleasing to God ) is belief;

In other words, the work that God requires from unbelievers is to believe on Him whom He has sent.
I once saw this that way, until one day in my reading it occurred to me...

1) Jesus's words are not carnal, they are spiritual in nature ( see John 6:63 ).
Therefore, the Lord did not answer them according to their question, He answered them according to what He wanted to reveal to the reader.

2) Just as the example of the phrase "Saul of Tarsus", I see this describing a work "of" ( by or from, originating with ) God.

There fore, it could be read one of two ways...
Either the only work that an unbeliever can do to access God's grace is to believe...
Or, that even the sinner's belief is a work of God, in and of itself.

In other words, while God doesn't actually do the believing, God does the work that results in a man or woman placing their trust in Christ as Saviour.



To me, the first understanding leads to something a person can potentially boast about;
And further, it obligates God to save a person based on their performance of an act.

Example:
The Lord: "Why should I not cast you into Hell where you rightfully belong?"
Sinner: " Because I did the one thing that you required...I believed."


The second understanding completely strips the sinner of any means by which they can possibly gain God's favor by performing as act;
His obligation starts and ends with His mercy and kindness, and is dispensed as He sees fit per Romans 9:

Example:
The Lord: " Why should I not cast you into Hell where you rightfully belong?"
Sinner: " Because you chose me from the foundation of the world, caused me to approach you, and it was given to me to believe in the behalf of Christ."



Do you see the difference?

One understanding results in teaching a cooperative effort that we can potentially take credit for,
and one understanding results in teaching an operative effort that we as men can take zero credit for.

With competing teachings like this in a local body,
there would be no consistency in doctrine.



God's gracious work towards sinners,
and man's efforts at gaining God's favor,
would both be taught. :confused:
Absolutely God does the work as it is written

John 3 NKJV
20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been (wrought) done in God (God's power worked in them to bring about the truth so then the deeds).”

KJV
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

This is the way.
 

Parashah

Member
Should those holding to Calvinism and those holding to Arminianism commune together in the same local church, despite deep disagreements on Soteriology?

This is an honest question from me. Because it seems such deep disagreement would presage going to separate churches and approaching each other as holding to false doctrine in regards to salvation.

It just seems a bridge too far for Calvinists and Arminians to ignore our theological differences and act in such unity. Am I wrong?
I accept a person as a Christian based on their professed acceptance of the Gospel as outlined by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 and therefore would willingly fellowship with them.

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures"
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 (NIV)

The Apostle Paul lists this as being "of first importance". Theologians refer to the Gospel as of Primary Importance with all other teachings being of Secondary Importance.

Breaking fellowship with a brother or sister is a serious decision and one that should not be taken lightly.

I was taught that only issues of Primary Importance are considered geuine grounds for breaking fellowship.
 
Last edited:

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I accept a person as a Christian based on their professed acceptance of the Gospel as outlined by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 and therefore would willingly fellowship with them.

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures"
1 Corinthians 15:3-4 (NIV)

The Apostle Paul lists this as being "of first importance". Theologians refer to the Gospel as of Primary Importance with all other teachings being of Secondary Importance.

Breaking fellowship with a brother or sister is a serious decision and one that should not be taken lightly.

I was taught that only issues of Primary Importance are considered geuine grounds for breaking fellowship.
We can only break from each other when Primary truths are being affected, such as denying the Trinity, Denying Jesus is God, denying Second Coming, denying Physical resurrection of Christ, not due to say modes of baptism or bible version used!
 

MB

Well-Known Member
Should those holding to Calvinism and those holding to Arminianism commune together in the same local church, despite deep disagreements on Soteriology?

This is an honest question from me. Because it seems such deep disagreement would presage going to separate churches and approaching each other as holding to false doctrine in regards to salvation.

It just seems a bridge too far for Calvinists and Arminians to ignore our theological differences and act in such unity. Am I wrong?

Should Arminians and Calvinists Attend the Same Church?
In my opinion it would only cause absolute confusion.
MB
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
Generally in a church where Arminians and Calvinists both worship, it's the Calvinists who are persevering to try keep the Arminians from losing their salvation. [emoji2936][emoji2935] [emoji848][emoji57]
 
Top