The Sharp Divide: How to deal with it

[Herald]

So your saying that they knowingly relinquish their existing belief system for reformed beliefs.....at least they know that going in.

Well, to be fair, most people have little to no idea about what they believe in the FW vs. DoG debate. Not everyone participates on Internet message boards or reads up on the topics of the day. Many, and I mean many, people who have visited our church have no idea what the whole debate is about. Some hold to the FW position because it's what they've been taught, but they've never taken a critical look at the it. The same can be said of those raised in a DoG church and family.

 

[Van]

So if you have a church of 200 people, 100 of which believe that the church should be congregationally led and only baptize believers after conversion...and 100 who believe the church should be elder led and baptize infants...should they stay in the same church or form 2 different churches?

1) Do two wrongs make a right? Nope.

2) Is a congregational church not lead by elders concerning the day to day operation of the church. The actual idea is that the Elder board reports to the congregation, and the Pastor is a member of the Elder board. So church polity is made pretty clear in the bible, and those who disagree are again on a power trip.

3) The premise that the Bible does not present a view we can all agree on is questionable, but you cannot alter the view of some whose mind is made up, and thus simply an prideful partisan. The problem with divisive people within the body goes deeper than doctrine, and demonstrates an inability to consider others more important than themselves. We could have this same discussion over contemporary music, or KJV over NASB, or all the other hot button issues constantly recycled but never resolved on this board.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You're right, I am not as committed to being a reformed believer as I am being a BELIEVER.

I would rather be in a real church that preaches the Gospel that I disagree with on those issues (not denying them, btw), than be in a staunchly reformed church that lifted calvin higher than Jesus (I'm not saying I've encountered such churches...quite the opposite)...but if that were the situation, I believe the need for Chrsitian ommunity outweighs the need for doctrinal purity on this issue. And unlike some reformed folks, I don't believe arminianism is a different Gospel.

If the choice is Gospel-preaching church vs non-gospel-preaching church vs. no church, I believe my choice is clear.

I am one of those who believe that they do indeed teach a different Gospel so we will always disagree. But you have taught me something though....I will have to add this to my list of questions to prospective pastors as to their beliefs before selecting a church. I would not want my family deluding themselves to believe that people of your ilk are really reformed when your just (well what you are)....sorry for being so blatant but we are strong in our way of practicing our faith & we sincerely believe it to be right. Human beings face the choice either to submit to the will of God or to pursue their own will & this choice has implications for everything else we think or do. You have blatantly ..... ah, forget it! Thats your choice.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Delete! Delete!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I suppose a person(s) can attend a church that teaches differently than what they believe and be happy there. But the when pulpit preaches, week in and week out the polar opposite of what you believe, it can be trying. That's what happened at our church. Since the pastor and elders all held to the DoG, the DoG was the prevailing doctrinal position. Those who believed otherwise could not abide by it, so they left for churches that believed what they believed. Had the shoe been on the other foot I would have done the same.

Herald, I recently attended a Lutheran church out of a desire to be in fellowhip with other believers only to realize that, even though these Lutherans considered themselves orthodox Christians, that they taught a completely different gospel. They are Universal Atonement believers who are sacrimental ( they believe baptism saves) yada yada. I finally had to call the pastor & inform him I would no longer attend. His response is that he would sit down with me and show me how the gospel proofs his faith position. I had to decline....it has taken me 56 years to really be solid in what I believe, so now Im going to reverse myself & turn my back on what I believe....I dont think so. I also asked him if he could contemplate taking his wife & kids to a Reformed Baptist Church & exposing them to that belief system.....he could never do it...... so why then would I? What,LOL, for fellowship.... it really isnt though is it if your not confident of what the other guys teachin, you gotta feel at home.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I can think of a lot of reasons. Chief among them is the fact that it may be the only church in the area that preaches the Word. Not everyone lives in a city or large suburban area. A person may live in the sticks and their choices are few. Also, some people are providentially hindered. They may be in poor health and can't drive far or at all.

Come on....a Reformed person going to a Free Will Baptist church? Please!!!! You'd be better served listening to Sermon Audio. And if your a confirmed Free Willer.... then you'd have to compromise their pursuit of their own free will in favor of submitting to the will of God? Anyway the choice of one or the other has serious implications for everything we think & do. I cant see any serious believer in Free Will ever compromising their own faith beliefs (unless they are not confident in what they believe).

For a DoG person, you'd have to change your entire prospective from a theocentric perspective to a anthropocentric one. Thats quite a leap.

 

[Herald]

Come on....a Reformed person going to a Free Will Baptist church? Please!!!! You'd be better served listening to Sermon Audio.

Besides you'd have to change your entire prospective from a theocentric perspective to a anthropocentric one. Thats quite a leap.

There are degrees. Let's say I lived in an area where the only Baptist church was your standard garden variety Baptist church, and I was providentially hindered from traveling. I'm not referring to an official Free Will Baptist church, just a mainline independent Baptist church. If that's the only church in town I would probably attend (not join). However, if it truly was a Free Will Baptist church, with an aggressive stand on it's view of election/predestination, then I would not be able to attend. That would be a grievous thing because the means of grace received through the preached Word, fellowship, and the Lord's Supper would be withheld from me. I pray that I am never placed in that situation.

 

[Iconoclast]

There are degrees. Let's say I lived in an area where the only Baptist church was your standard garden variety Baptist church, and I was providentially hindered from traveling. I'm not referring to an official Free Will Baptist church, just a mainline independent Baptist church. If that's the only church in town I would probably attend (not join). However, if it truly was a Free Will Baptist church, with an aggressive stand on it's view of election/predestination, then I would not be able to attend. That would be a grievous thing because the means of grace received through the preached Word, fellowship, and the Lord's Supper would be withheld from me. I pray that I am never placed in that situation.[/QUOTE]

Yes...for sure there are degrees. If a church remains stable on the foundational issues, preaching salvation by Christ alone,and the blood of the cross....that is half the battle.

The stand against truth would be to much,Short term ...visit and help as much as was possible...yes.

I have been in three situations

1] mixed work many not knowing what was at issue.conservative baptist

2] mixed work in transistion from conservative baptist, to reformed baptist

3]reformed baptist church 1689 confession.

#3 was the best of the three, although 2 worked after those not like minded left:type::thumbsup:

 

[jonathan.borland]

Human beings face the choice either to submit to the will of God or to pursue their own will & this choice has implications for everything else we think or do.

Doggone that's good! Glad to know we're all on the same page then.

 

[saturneptune]

There are degrees. Let's say I lived in an area where the only Baptist church was your standard garden variety Baptist church, and I was providentially hindered from traveling. I'm not referring to an official Free Will Baptist church, just a mainline independent Baptist church. If that's the only church in town I would probably attend (not join). However, if it truly was a Free Will Baptist church, with an aggressive stand on it's view of election/predestination, then I would not be able to attend. That would be a grievous thing because the means of grace received through the preached Word, fellowship, and the Lord's Supper would be withheld from me. I pray that I am never placed in that situation.[/QUOTE]

Yes...for sure there are degrees. If a church remains stable on the foundational issues, preaching salvation by Christ alone,and the blood of the cross....that is half the battle.

The stand against truth would be to much,Short term ...visit and help as much as was possible...yes.

I have been in three situations

1] mixed work many not knowing what was at issue.conservative baptist

2] mixed work in transistion from conservative baptist, to reformed baptist

3]reformed baptist church 1689 confession.

#3 was the best of the three, although 2 worked after those not like minded left:type::thumbsup:

As far as traveling and finding a church, not to join, I can picture attending a conservative Presbyterian before some stripes of Baptist.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

As far as traveling and finding a church, not to join, I can picture attending a conservative Presbyterian before some stripes of Baptist.

You do realize however that the Presbyterians will tell you that because your dead child wasn't baptised prior to it's death that the child is in hell and that you are the sinner that put him there. Unless of course you and the mother were members of their special covenant, then there is a reprieve ...but if not, that kid is skrewed...destined to spend eternity in hell & you sinner put him there.

No not me...never again will I set foot in a Calvinist church of that ilk.

 

[Iconoclast]

Well, to be fair, most people have little to no idea about what they believe in the FW vs. DoG debate. Not everyone participates on Internet message boards or reads up on the topics of the day. Many, and I mean many, people who have visited our church have no idea what the whole debate is about. Some hold to the FW position because it's what they've been taught, but they've never taken a critical look at the it. The same can be said of those raised in a DoG church and family.

This is troubling in several ways. Unless a christian remains isolated almost to a point of world flight,as you interact with unbelievers concerning the gospel, this issue comes into play in conversation about spiritual things.

In some churches doctrine is on the back burner.Are people obeying the new testament commands for living the christian life as far as advance and growth of the Kingdom. To obey all the "one another" commands would dictate that these issues be discussed.

In churches where the people are naive concerning these issues....many times a group within the church starts to see how these truths are central to what we believe. They begin to grow...some nice and steady....some cage stage types.....
As the demographic swings over those disgruntled persons who do not want anything to change speak of a "church takeover".
Then comes the caricatures, emotional protests and griping.

The cage stagers counterattack....the others become talebearers.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Herald.......This thread, I think, will, by default, prove the notion that there should be peaceable dis-association.

Committed Calvinists WILL NOT agree with the likes of myself, and others who believe in LFW.

Similarly, those who are committed to LFW...simply WILL NOT agree with those who teach otherwise....

That is NOT WRONG!!!! I am glad this particular discussion is brought up.

I would not attend a "Reformed" Church....and similarly, I would NOT support a missionary whom I knew to be "Reformed" in their Theology. I also would simply not begrudge YOU, if you also admitted as much.
This has become the question of our era............
And in our era......I hope for the best of Calvinist brethren, and also believe I cannot, in good conscience, support their teaching.
I also would not expect them to support MINE.

If I were a missionary, I would NOT expect yours or Old Regulars, or Icon's Church to give me support......
But, I would similarly not offer my support to them...........

There does not have to be an assumption of ill-will to our fellow-Christians, as I know my Calvinist brethren ideed are.........but merely a belief that it is most appropriate for separation of effort....We should part ways peaceably....

I hope the SBC will address this, and allow it to occur......

These two "camps" in which you and I find ourselves, are not going to "play nice".......we WON'T agree, and I would not respect you, if you compromised for the sake of "Unity"........nor would I think you would respect me if I compromised merely for the sake of "Unity"....

We ARE "Unified"......in the noble ideal of preaching to the lost the need for repentance and the confession of Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord for Salvation. In THAT respect, we are brethren, and we shall find out that we were ALL missing the point entirely when God explains our own stupidity to us in Glory....
But, for now, we accept, and appreciate, and hope the best for one another for the furtherance of the kingdom.

I would like to think that Calvinists weren't flourishing under the tutelage of Arminian Churches......but, IMO, they are.

I don't think "Reformed" Churches are propogating themselves.........I think "Reformed" people are "taking-over" Arminian work..........
I also think that "Reformed" folks are tired of hearing that.....

Therefore.....my proposition:

Dis-associate peaceably.........and cede to the "Reformed" crowd....every SBC Seminary along with all of their deeds and titles.....and wealth and what-not. You guys can have ALL of it, for all I care. And simply let them propogate themselves from now on.

Please, then, split the SBC........and let the Arminian faction NEVER accept a confessionally confirmed Calvist again.........and in 30 years........Calvinism will be a dying minority, and Arminianism will have propogated itself..........and Calvinists will AGAIN attempt to ressurect themselves upon the back of Arminian Churches and Seminaries, and the nasty and vicious cycle will continue.

Do your OWN "dirty work"..........and leave Arminian institutions ALONE....That is my hope.

 

[Tom Butler]

I doubt if it's possible to ever bridge the divide between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. Neither side is going over to the other, just for the sake of unity.

Notice, I used the term non-Calvinist, instead of Arminian. I don't know any Southern Baptists who could be classified as Arminian.

So the question is not how to bridge the divide, but how to co-exist with each other. We have been able to do it in the congregation saturneptune and I serve.

One way is to concentrate on our shared beliefs instead of our differences.

For instance:
We all believe in a sovereign God.
We all believe in salvation by grace through repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
We all believe that the Holy Spirit must operate in the process.
We all believe that the Holy Spirit illuminates darkened minds and hearts; convicts of sin; draws men and women through the preaching of the gospel.
We all believe that Christ died for sinners.
We all believe that works do not save.
We all believe that Christ is able to keep those who are committed to him--and will lose none of them.

This does not mean we ignore differences in the process. It means we acknowledge those differences, but do not make them a test of fellowship.

In most SBC churches, DoGs will be in the minority, as it is in my church. My pastor is not a Calvinist. I will never publicly or privately seek to undermine his preaching and teaching. The church called him to be pastor, not me.

I will answer truthfully about my soteriology if I'm asked, but there will be no crusade to convert others to my way of thinking. I will not divide the church over this issue. And if you've ever been through a church fight, you won't either--unless it's about heresy.

 

[Herald]

Therefore.....my proposition:

Dis-associate peaceably.........and cede to the "Reformed" crowd....every SBC Seminary along with all of their deeds and titles.....and wealth and what-not. You guys can have ALL of it, for all I care. And simply let them propogate themselves from now on.

Please, then, split the SBC........and let the Arminian faction NEVER accept a confessionally confirmed Calvist again.........and in 30 years........Calvinism will be a dying minority, and Arminianism will have propogated itself..........and Calvinists will AGAIN attempt to ressurect themselves upon the back of Arminian Churches and Seminaries, and the nasty and vicious cycle will continue.

Do your OWN "dirty work"..........and leave Arminian institutions ALONE....That is my hope.

I'm not making suggestions as to how FW'ers and DoG'ers should go about separating. That's for each church to decide. My church is not in the SBC, nor does it want to be. But the fact is that the SBC has substantial investments in property and institutions of higher learning. For that reason alone I doubt that denomination will force one or the other out. Individual SBC churches will have to make their own decision as to their continued association.

As far as the DoG being a "dying minority"; that is not the historical record. Apart from the hubris of saying it goes back to the Apostle Paul, it has existed as a theological system since Augustine of Hippo. It has gone from minority to majority many times; but it has never been a "dying" majority.

 

[Herald]

I doubt if it's possible to ever bridge the divide between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. Neither side is going over to the other, just for the sake of unity.

Notice, I used the term non-Calvinist, instead of Arminian. I don't know any Southern Baptists who could be classified as Arminian.

So the question is not how to bridge the divide, but how to co-exist with each other. We have been able to do it in the congregation saturneptune and I serve.

One way is to concentrate on our shared beliefs instead of our differences.

For instance:
We all believe in a sovereign God.
We all believe in salvation by grace through repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
We all believe that the Holy Spirit must operate in the process.
We all believe that the Holy Spirit illuminates darkened minds and hearts; convicts of sin; draws men and women through the preaching of the gospel.
We all believe that Christ died for sinners.
We all believe that works do not save.
We all believe that Christ is able to keep those who are committed to him--and will lose none of them.

This does not mean we ignore differences in the process. It means we acknowledge those differences, but do not make them a test of fellowship.

In most SBC churches, DoGs will be in the minority, as it is in my church. My pastor is not a Calvinist. I will never publicly or privately seek to undermine his preaching and teaching. The church called him to be pastor, not me.

I will answer truthfully about my soteriology if I'm asked, but there will be no crusade to convert others to my way of thinking. I will not divide the church over this issue. And if you've ever been through a church fight, you won't either--unless it's about heresy.

Tom, what is the dominant theological position taught from you pulpit when it comes to DoG or non-DoG?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I'm not making suggestions as to how FW'ers and DoG'ers should go about separating.

FINE.........But, I did, in MY post......and my suggestion was.....I am perfectly willing to cede EVERYTHING to you guys, if you will leave our Churches and Institutions ALONE....and not attempt to infiltrate them...Is That FAIR?
If not, Why not????


T

hat's for each church to decide. My church is not in the SBC, nor does it want to be.

But, it was created by obvious Arminians......hence my desire, for the Calvinists to GO AWAY, and start their own churches, and leave us "heretics" alone..................

We ARE "HERETICS"........So, start your own churches, please, and leave us alone......

But the fact is that the SBC has substantial investments in property and institutions of higher learning.

And my suggestion is, and I already stated it was, very simple........
If we could guarantee that the Calvinist sorts would GO AWAY.........and leave us alone.....than, I would be willing to legally cede every square inch of property.....and every penny of support......

YOU MAY HAVE THE INSTITUTIONS, SIR.......I don't WANT 'em...........

Nor do I want another Arminian penny supporting Calvinist "Theologians" poisoning the minds of decent Arminian Pastors hearing your Deterministic drivel......

Take the Institutions.....Take their money, Take their Real Estate.....Take them for all they're worth......and then GO AWAY.....and leave Arminian Churches and Institutions ALONE........

For that reason alone I doubt that denomination will force one or the other out.

It has been the habit of Calvinists, to force Arminians out.......It has NEVER been the habit of Arminians to force Calvinists out..............and Therein, they have erred. It is time for Arminians to "force" Calvinists out.....but, you don't REALLY WANT to leave do you????
You want the support Arminians always offer in Christ-like "Unity".......but, you seek to also undermine them with Theological teaching by taking advantage of their good-will.................
IF I were the un-questioned dictator of the SBC......and I said to you:
"Take EVERY Institution.....take every penny of value, take all the real estate....and NEVER.......infiltrate an Arminian Church AGAIN......You would turn it down.

That makes me worse than sick.......
It is Arminianism which keeps Calvinism alive today...

Individual SBC churches will have to make their own decision as to their continued association.

As far as the DoG being a "dying minority"; that is not the historical record. Apart from the hubris of saying it goes back to the Apostle Paul, it has existed as a theological system since Augustine of Hippo. It has gone from minority to majority many times; but it has never been a "dying" majority.

No......It has been Arminians who have kept the foundation alive for too long which has allowed Calvinism to continue to exist.......Calvinists are parasites...Your OWN CHURCH is a PARASITE borne upon the backs of Arminians, as you have freely admitted..........

Start your own CHURCHES...........and then let them decide.

 

[Herald]

FINE.........But, I did, in MY post......and my suggestion was.....I am perfectly willing to cede EVERYTHING to you guys, if you will leave our Churches and Institutions ALONE....and not attempt to infiltrate them...Is That FAIR?
If not, Why not????


T
But, it was created by obvious Arminians......hence my desire, for the Calvinists to GO AWAY, and start their own churches, and leave us "heretics" alone..................

We ARE "HERETICS"........So, start your own churches, please, and leave us alone......

And my suggestion is, and I already stated it was, very simple........
If we could guarantee that the Calvinist sorts would GO AWAY.........and leave us alone.....than, I would be willing to legally cede every square inch of property.....and every penny of support......

YOU MAY HAVE THE INSTITUTIONS, SIR.......I don't WANT 'em...........

Nor do I want another Arminian penny supporting Calvinist "Theologians" poisoning the minds of decent Arminian Pastors hearing your Deterministic drivel......

Take the Institutions.....Take their money, Take their Real Estate.....Take them for all they're worth......and then GO AWAY.....and leave Arminian Churches and Institutions ALONE........

It has been the habit of Calvinists, to force Arminians out.......It has NEVER been the habit of Arminians to force Calvinists out..............and Therein, they have erred. It is time for Arminians to "force" Calvinists out.....but, you don't REALLY WANT to leave do you????
You want the support Arminians always offer in Christ-like "Unity".......but, you seek to also undermine them with Theological teaching by taking advantage of their good-will.................
IF I were the un-questioned dictator of the SBC......and I said to you:
"Take EVERY Institution.....take every penny of value, take all the real estate....and NEVER.......infiltrate an Arminian Church AGAIN......You would turn it down.

That makes me worse than sick.......
It is Arminianism which keeps Calvinism alive today...

Individual SBC churches will have to make their own decision as to their continued association.



No......It has been Arminians who have kept the foundation alive for too long which has allowed Calvinism to continue to exist.......Calvinists are parasites...Your OWN CHURCH is a PARASITE borne upon the backs of Arminians, as you have freely admitted..........

Start your own CHURCHES...........and then let them decide.

You really shouldn't drink and post.

 

[Jerome]

Eventually we found ourselves in a situation where the DoG'ers came out of the woodwork

Interesting choice of idiom.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/26/messages/197.html

 

[Tom Butler]

Tom, what is the dominant theological position taught from you pulpit when it comes to DoG or non-DoG?

My pastor, to my recollection, has never dealt with the subject from the pulpit. However, my guess is, he would teach a non-DoG view. When and if it does come up, that'll be fine with me. It's his pulpit.

We have had two DoG pastors in the past. I don't recall that they ever dealt with it from the pulpit either. But their views were no secret.

Co-existence can work if both sides want it to work. Every DoG in my church is involved in the life of the church. saturneptune is a deacon and Sunday School Director. He is quite faithful in outreach and evangelism. Another DoG is one of our best Sunday School teachers. and is faithfully involved in ourtreach. He also chairs our Finance Committee. I am chairman of the deacons and choir director.

I remember when I first embraced DoG forty years ago. I thought it was so great that I wanted to talk about it with anybody who would listen. I actually made a nuisance of myself. I soon learned that non-DoGs will not receive it well from a zealot. They must come to it on their own after much study. The Spirit of truth guides into truth.

I am happy to share my view with anyone who wants to hear it. But I do not crusade for it, and I will not divide my church over it.