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!
You will have to explain what you mean by hyper Calvinism. Like I don’t dunk babies, I don’t believe in total predestination, I don’t reference or study Calvin, my people have never persecuted or executed anyone. We also don’t sing our hymns and songs with instrumental accompaniment… strictly a capella. We are big into regeneration before conversion, Grace & Providence.
thats the Holy Spirits job
Yes and I will be joining them both soon… I wish to hold them both in heaven. This is an incredible desire of mine.
depends who wrote… the omission of thePB community must have been omitted in that history book. What a shame.
Main distinction to me of a real Hyper Calvinist is that they would support eternal justification, as in the very elect were already born in a saved state, and no need to have missions as the Lord well just save his own period
That’s me..LOL
Now here is the thing….who cares what you think? Are you looking for an argument ? What confession are you referrencing?
I care what he thinks. And you should too. This is a debate forum. That is a nice way of saying an argument forum. If he were to come visit your church and go around buttonholing all the members contrary to what is taught there you should throw him out. But on the Calvinism/Arminianism debate forum he should be welcome.
Nooo, I don’t care…or to quote Clark Gable , I don’t give a damn but he wants to take a apposing position, so be it. BTW, we do not hold to any confessions of faith but the gospel so forget about it. You go to your church and I will go to mine.
Yes. If they only mean that God, because he knows everything, had in mind specifically those who would eventually be saved and thus thought of them differently than the rest of the world then I don't have a problem with it. But if they mean that the atonement itself functionally left out millions of people then I agree and I don't accept that either.
To some extent that is true, that they want to have their cake and eat it too. But if scripture indicates both concepts that's what the truth is. Or at least that's as far as we can go in explaining it without making unscriptural errors. It is simple biblical fact that God has times set for salvation of massive groups of people who were previously left out, that God has times of revival and times of many being saved and times where everyone seems to grow cold and turn from God. How our wills work is largely a mystery even to ourselves in simple things, much less something as important as our salvation. People pray in scripture for more faith, to help their unbelief, or turn me and I shall be turned. Yet, I admit, to pray "turn me and I shall be turned" indicates a previous will to do so. In other words both are indeed true. You must have your cake and eat it too or you are not doing justice to all the scriptures and will ere on one side or the other.
The bible says Christ died for his sheep which I assume to be the elect. Where I do agree with you is that I do not think there was a functional difference in the atoning work of Christ whereby many were rendered impossible to be saved because they were not included in the atonement. Even in your system did not God know for sure who would believe in the future? Do you not agree that God would have been thinking of them specifically and in a different way than those who would not ever choose to believe?
Yes indeed. That is why the Calvinist Puritans like Edwards and Owen preached such powerful sermons warning us to respond now, if we hear the call of the gospel. I have said before, I read a couple of years worth of sermons of Calvinists before I knew anything about the theology. I am so glad I did.
No, they are never forced. That's what the confessions specifically deny.
What I mean by that is that many things determine our wills outside of ourselves. Girls become fascinating at a certain age as we grow up, we prefer our own country or sports team and so on. Even if you do determine to study something, like a political philosophy, you observe and evaluate - but still, at some point you say "you know what, by golly they are right". It just became apparent to you that that is your view. That's why we always get into those big discussions where I say that there is no higher form of freedom than you doing what you most want to do and you insist that you must be able to have done the other thing. My view is that while it is technically possible that you could have done the other thing it would not have been your true free will choice if you did the other thing instead of your choice. You do what you most want to do and there is no higher form of freedom for a creature. We can ask for, or do, no more that. Or have any more freedom than that.
I don't. But I would not have believed without the Holy Spirit's enlightening and influence. And I do not believe that God denies anyone the ability to respond to the gospel except I do believe that after repeated rejection there can be judicial hardening which makes it impossible to respond.
That's a fair question. My view is that Calvinist preaching does not match the explicit statements of the theology. The confessions are not designed to be exact theological statements as much as they are to set a framework for including some differing views. I don't care whether I am called a Calvinist or not and I go to a church now that although has it a high view of the Puritans, and the confessions it explicitly does not require the members to be Calvinists.
And I think the same regarding you. I have a list that Owen and the other Puritans compiled of things to adhere to in order to be able to have Christian fellowship with them. Interestingly, none of the things on the list included the TULIP and really nothing was explicitly Calvinistic.
The problem would be though that logically the Hyper Cal gospel rendered the Great Commission command of Yeshua to been made null and void now
No, no it does not. For example, John Gill fully supported George Whitfields ministry. PB churches support people going out with the word of god and my own group fully supports my endeavors in the North East. I also know a Filipino family who came to the USA, converted to PB from Catholism and are now back there spreading the gospel.
Just stating that if followed as held by Hyper calvinism, would be no great Missions movement, as all of the saved will get saved period by God.
