very few calvinist

There is more then you may think. Many do not take up the c/a debate, for its the same old thing over and over. It use to be a good tool to learn from both sides...but things do go to far at times.

Maybe some others will know. I do know there have been a few polls. But you can take another. My guess is that your have many that vote...but not saying thing..because we have a few "calvin haters"..but only a small few...that lable you and follow you around if you do. Most just do not agree with the 5 points and do not make it a life mission to attack Calvinist. so...because of those few...its just not worth it for some. But..i bet they will vote yes or no in a poll.

 

To make the poll meaningful, I suggest you clearly define what a Calvinist is. I was discussing Calvinism with a friend recently. When he was young, he was trained as a Calvinist. He claims he still is a Calvinist. However, when I went over the TULIP with him, he had changed his belief on 4 of the 5 points, but he still considered himself a Calvinist. He said he interprets the points differently than he used to.

I consider him a one pointer since the only orginial point he still agreed with was Perserverence of the Saints. However, I think he would list himself as a Calvinist.

 

The points of the TULIP stand or fall together and mutually support each other!
I dont mind the 'hate' of anti-calvinists. Christ also experienced the same for His pure doctrine by those who were quite 'religious'.
As you've guessed by now, I am definitely a proponent of the doctrines of grace/Calvinism and am so thankful that the Lord opened my blind eyes! Soli deo gloria!

 

I would say that is not the case. The calvinists seem to post the most on here.

I agree. I don't believe there is such a thing as a 3 or 4 pointer. If you are, you are not a calvinist. Same rings true with arminianism.

 

How many people at your church are truly saved? Is it even possible to create a poll that can uncover the truth about this?

I know this may seem like an unrelated question, but it's not. And I'm not implying that only Calvinists are saved, so that's not my point.

 

Since the poll will not have bearing on who enters the pearly white gates, I see no harm in asking who here is a 5 point Calvinist? or who holds to the 5 solas? or who here holds to reformed theology?

 

I would like to know how one can be a 3 or 4 pointer...and still consider themselves a calvinist. All 5 points fall if one falls.

 

Because they have been lead to believe the are Calvinists by an Arminian...

Keep in mind the 3 and 4 pointers catch it from both sides... LOL

 

I, like you, have heard both calvinists and arminians say this. I disagree with that even though I am a full 5-pointer, and even slightly hyper. I would say that T, U, I, and 1/2 of P (the preservation part) must be altogether true or altogether false. The L, as far as I'm concerned, is not necessarily interconnected with the rest. However, we must remember that while a calvinist (4 point or amyrauldian) can reject the L, the converse is not true - an arminian will never accept the L (although I think they could if they made a distinction between their concept of universal love and the legal aspect of the atonement which in their system could be the actual purchase of salvation for those that will believe).

 

I see no harm in it, either. I am wondering why you ask, though. And I'm also wondering what difference it would make if we discovered that the majority of people here are free-willers or Calvinists. For the record, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that the vast majority of BB members are free-willers. That's the predominant view in Baptist churches as far as I can tell, so that's what people are being taught. And if your church is anything like the ones I have attended, most of the members tend to just believe what they're taught without actually searching the scriptures to find out if it's true.

That last statement is not meant to be a slam against free-willers. If the predominant view was Calvinism, I believe most church members would simply believe it because they were taught it, not because they searched the scriptures to find out if it was true. I'm just saying that if it's dominant, it's probably dominant because that's what you get from the pulpit.

 

And why is that mostly what they get from the pulpit?

I don't pretend to know, except to repeat the old saw from the church historian Timothy Smith that revivalism bred Arminianism. When it started looking like the penitents also got to vote in the election, a kinder and gentler Calvinism was necessary to justify the new practice of calling sinners to walk the aisle. Thus was born New England Theology. But it was internally incoherent and eventually crumbled into various pieces, one of which is today's typical Baptist theology.

I've seen a number of preacher boys get Calvinized in college and stick with it on into their adult lives. But I've seen more of them who get Calvinized, then grow out of it sometime before entering the pastorate.

Being a Calvinist is a tough job, but I guess somebody's gotta do it.

 

My guess? Today's churches are all about numbers and raising enough money for the new bigger and better building, etc. Free-will appeals to more paying customers. Do I think the pastors and leaders think it through that way? No, probably not. It comes naturally.

 

You know how it is. You enter the pastorate, you're unconsciously thinking of nummmbberrrrrrsss, dude. People like to pay lip service to 'trusting God to add unto His church', but I think when one gets down to it, the real concern is : will I, me, mine, be able to sustain the growth of this church in numbers ? Old, fallen, human nature.

Hey, it's not a monopoly of Calvinists.

Some of today's Primitive Baptists have fallen to it, too.
Strong PB doctrine while here in the States - "let God supply our needs when He calls us to the field" and all that ragamajazz.

Well, guess what ?

They "get called", leastways that's how they put it, most PB doctrines get watered down, and up comes something foreign called "essentials and non-essentials", and in that folder, under "non essentials" is an Arminian doctrine - tithes - from which of course all "needs" of the church, including a pastor's salaries, may be taken.

 

Matt 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
KJV

:tear:

 

I don't know who Timothy Smith is, and I wouldn't question his credentials if Pipedude quotes him, but it sure seems more likely to me that he has it backwards. Arminianism preceded and bred revivalism. Finney was the one that basically invented revivalism, and he was known by his hatred of the Westminster confession (calvinism). Would it be more accurate to say that rather than revivalism breeding arminianism, revivalism POPULARIZED arminianism?

 

I just wished I had of saved all of the posts of the Calvinists doctrine trying to get around the "babies in hell" doctrine I have seen since I have been on BB. You want to talk about being "watered down" they all run from that one.:smilewinkgrin:

 

One that I won't run from.... expound or rather start a thread and I'm ready........:thumbs:

 

The avatar change is not to gross anyone out. It is my xray from May 2005. I go for a followup appontment at the cancer center today. We're anxious to see what God is up to....

 

raying: Yes, I'm in raying: