was TULIP/Calanism EVER essential part Of baptist Theology?

Really....do you read?

http://www.reformedreader.org/

Start here:

http://www.reformedreader.org/history/pbh.htm

Then read this:

http://www.founders.org/library/reis1/reistoc2.html

Then let's talk.

 

The problem is that anyone can craft a statement of beliefs that sticks to God's word and can be interpreted as Calvinistic or non-Calvinistic. Thus a Calvinist who considers the church we see it is a calvinistic church, and a non-calvinist will agree with the statement too.

You will not find this statement in any statement of beliefs, "We believe you were saved or damned from all eternity, for all eternity, and nothing you do will alter that outcome for yourself or your loved ones." No, what you will see is we believe in the trinity, the deity of Christ, God's sovereignty, salvation by grace through faith, and the Bible as the final authority on doctrine. Who knew

 

Excerpt from the 1646 1st Lodon Baptist Confession.

Steve

 

Thanks for the reality check my brother:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

Distinctives of Southern Baptists

1. Only believers should be baptised.
2. Baptism should be by immersion.
3. Each congregation functions autonomously
4. Congregations should follow democratic procedures in governance
5. Congregations should cooperate with one another in carrying out the Great Commission
6. Belief in the separation of church and state
7. Baptists have no creed save for the Bible.

I am sure that some additions could be made, but this "typically" reflects the SBC church.

Summarized from: http://books.google.com/books?id=FQ...resnum=10&ved=0CEsQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Really thats it.....nothing about discipline, nothing about ruling bodies? Really!

 

Outdated Theology should be carefully studied

GOD hath decreed in Himself, before the world was, concerning all things, whether necessary, accidental or voluntary, with all the circumstances of them, to work, dispose, and bring about all things according to the counsel of His own will, to His glory: (Yet without being the author of sin, or having fellowship with anything therein) in which appears His wisdom in disposing all things, unchangeableness, power, and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree: And God hath before the foundation of the world, foreordained some men to eternal life, through Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of His grace; and leaving the rest in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His justice.

Isa.46:10; Eph.1:11; Rom.11:33; Ps.115:3, 135:6, 33:15; 1 Sam.10:9.26; Prov.21:6; Exod.21:13; Prov.16:33; Ps.144; Isa.45:7: Jer.14:22; Matt.6:28,30; Col.1:16, 17; Num.23:19.20 Rom.3:4; Jer.10:10; Eph.1:4,5. Jude 4.6; Prov.16:4.

There is no one like God, declaring the end from the beginning, and from the ancient times things, which have not been done; saying My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure. Isaiah 46:10

Notice at the time Isaiah wrote this, God was declaring so He did not decree everything before the world was.

Does Ephesians 1:11 say God brings about all things directly, exhaustive determinism? No it says God works all things after the counsel of His will. So if His will is to allow people to make autonomous choices that alter the outcome of our lives, those events would also be included in the statement, God works all things after the counsel of His will.

Next we have the paradoxical position that God exhaustive determines all things but is not the author of sin. If we look at Romans 11:33 which says God’s ways are beyond our understanding, does that support the idea that we should accept what makes no sense because it might be one of those things beyond our understanding. That view seems unsound to me.

On the other hand, if mankind makes autonomous choices then those making the choices would be the author of sin, because God does not tempt or test us with wickedness, but our corrupt flesh certainly does. An accurate statement is God created us with the capacity to sin, but even though we are predisposed to sin, we sin by our choice and therefore are the authors of the sins for which we are responsible. This view is certainly consistent with Psalm 115:3, which says God does as He pleases.

Did God really, before the foundation of the world, foreordain some men to eternal life, through Jesus Christ. Or was His plan to predestine those He spiritually puts in Christ to eternal life. Those whom He foreknew corporately, would be those whom Christ would redeem, and those whom Christ redeemed are predestined to eternal life. Ephesians 1:4 says God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, and Ephesians 1:5 says He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ. Thus anyone spiritually placed in Christ was chosen corporately before the foundation of the world and predestined corporately to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ. So what was foreordained was that redemption in Christ results in being predestined for adoption, our bodily resurrection.


God is certainly faithful to carry out, to fulfill what He declares. But when a lot is cast in the lap, its every decision is from the LORD. Some see this as saying God uses dice to convey His specific desire. But at a minimum, it says God allows the lot to come up randomly or He intervenes and causes a certain outcome. Either way it is from the LORD. This Proverb 16:33, does not support exhaustive determinism unless you add an inference to the text. The correct doctrine is God causes all things directly or indirectly.
God created everything and sustains everything, Colossians 1:16. God keeps His promises; He is not a liar.

 

EWF, it was only intended as skeletal outline of essentials. As I stated, there most certainly could be additions.

 

It became essential only when the reformed group of the time killed, threatened, or ran out other views. And while yes, that was time period where church and state operated together and things were done differently it does not excuse the fact either. Another important point to remember however that both the Reformed and Arminian theologies are systems of mens understanding as to what they understand from scripture speaking on God working and at work with His creation, not actually absolute truth.

Both are only a couple hundred years old in scope of church history. While one can find people through out church history varying degrees of those who held to certain aspects of each there was no such theological" system" in place until recently, relitively speaking. Both came about in close succession.. and both are historical views held and maintained in the church, and aspects of each have been the main stay of the church throughout church history.

 

Do you teach church history to your congregation Allan & are you SBC?

 

I'm SBC, Yes. And church history is a field of study of mine yes, which is why all that I said can be verified historically. Why?

 

That's pretty bare-bones. It has little doctrinal content. No major biblical teachings are spelled out. And that "no creed but the Bible" mentality is an indication of a lack of Bible clarity in reality.

 

Fascinating & also very illuminating. No Reformed Church could ever operate that way. Even when I started going to a Independent Baptist Church up north there was much more foundation, a constitution/ statement of faith if you will, to where I sat down with the Pastor & discussed it & what I can be held accountable....this is very illuminating.

 

I think what most people misunderstand is that there is no creed for Baptists specifically as a denomination, like say the Presbyterians and Lutherans do.

Therefore, while churches have creeds or statements of faith the denom itself does not. Baptists have never been identified as one group with one view or belief, thus the misconception of Baptists having no statement of faith/Creed is often propagated because it is often misunderstood. Specifically each does or at least should, but on the whole, no we do not.

 

Ive never stepped foot in an SBC so Im just wondering how a pastor controls it all. Different theologies, different traditions and all. How is it all pulled together? You cant please everyone. Everyone has a bias. I have 6 generations of Calvinists (with pastors) in my family & my wifes family was executed by English Anglicans in Scotland for being convenenters. I come into your Church & your teaching in your history class that Calvinists killed Arminians? Then you tell me what theologically? See I dont see how youd ever blend it personally. Better we should go up to the Reformed Baptist or PB church up the block....thats a fit.

 

Anyone who has an interest in early Baptist theology, specifically with the SBC, should read the writings of those who started the SBC. Here is a great resource online:

http://www.founders.org/library/founders.html

I recommend James P. Boyce's Abstract of Systematic Theology as a start. Boyce was a through and through Calvinist, as were most of the founders of the SBC.

http://www.founders.org/journal/fj19/article4.html

Other notables are Basil Manly, W.B. Johnson, RBC howell, Richard fuller.

I highly recommend the book "By His Grace and for His Glory" by Dr. Thomas Nettles. Dr. Nettles is a professor of historical theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is probably THE foremost Baptist historian in America.