Particular
Well-Known Member
[emoji849]
-
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!
What is a "Traditionalist" Baptist...
- Thread starter Particular
- Start date
- Status
Maybe your an independent particular Baptist.
MB
IMHO Just about everything. One is the doctrine of Christ the other is the doctrine of men.
MB
Particular
Well-Known Member
Are Calvinists not Christians and not Baptists???
Is the 5 points of Calvinism not biblical?
Let me state that even heresy's are biblical. What I mean by this is that the persons expressing a viewpoint draw their perspective from the Bible. They are biblical.
However, the conclusions they draw from the text of scripture is poorly interpreted. The hermeneutics used to come to their conclusions are poor and thus refuted.
Therefore, Calvinists, Arminians, traditionalists/provisionalists, Mormons, Jehovah's Witness, Pelagians and Atheists can all be biblical. But, their interpretations can also be heretical and utterly false. This is why the Apostles taught us how to discern false teaching.
You may think Calvin was a heretic. That can be your opinion. But, Calvin was not unbiblical. Nor was Arminius.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Again, if you want me to associate with a denomination, it is Baptist (Reformed to be specific). But you wanted to know what I label myself as, that is a biblical Christian. Calvinist is a label that I do not like to associate myself with because people automatically attack saying you must follow everything Calvin said which is not true. TULIP did not start with Calvin. TULIP actually first came about in the 1930's. The 5 points embodied in Tulip came from the Canons of Dordt.
So yes, I am Baptist. Yes, you did tell me I wasn't. Yes, I follow Tulip and would fall into the Reformed Camp. No, I do not pledge allegience to Calvin, but to Scripture. And yes, everything I believe can be found in Scripture.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
We all love debate with emojis. True sign of maturity.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Some posts merit an emoji, however, yours did not.
That's good to know.
Here's hoping more and more churches follow suit.
You must not be able to read and comprehend very well. I never said you weren't a Baptist. This you imagined on your own I questioned your lable. It makes no difference if you believe in the tulip, you are a Calvinist as far as I'm concerned. Reformed is nothing more than a warmed over Catholic. A biblical Christian should at least be biblical and the tulip isn't biblical.
MB
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately I can't see youtube.
Only in your dreams.
MB
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Yes, actually, you said exactly that.
So either you have no idea what you said or you are just trying to lie about it. But you can't twist "You're not a Baptist" to mean anything other than you are saying I am not a Baptist.
Only in soteriology.
This is just an ignorant statement.
That is your opinion.
Particular
Well-Known Member
LOL
You need to understand that the Roman Catholic Church is synergistic. Roman Catholics are closer in theology to Arminians and "traditionalists" than they are to those who hold a Reformed theology (monergist). All synergists leave room for legalism to mix with grace. Reformed theology is grace alone.
I already explained how people are misusing the term biblical, so no need to rehash your false statement about a biblical Christian.
Augustine wrote your doctrine and it's not found in scripture. I'm not Arminian I only follow the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Arminians came out of Calvinism and I consider both to be heretical. It's more than obvious you simply don't know what you are talking about.
MB
Particular
Well-Known Member
No, Augustine didn't write the doctrine. The Bible writes doctrine. Humans attempt to interpret the Bible. Certainly Augustine understood salvation by grace and justification by faith, which Luther also came to understand as he read the Bible and interpreted the Bible. But it's quite silly of you to claim that Augustine wrote Reformed doctrine.
What I find interesting is your bitter gnashing against Augustine. Would you have backed Pelagius in that day?
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Oh i forgot
Dave G
Well-Known Member
To me, that's a common mis-conception.
Study today's Roman Catholic doctrine and I think that you will find that "Molinism" ( codified in roughly 1550 or so by Luis de Molina ) and "Semi-Pelagianism" / "Wesleyan Arminianism" walk hand in hand.
In other words, the RCC teaches "free will" doctrine...not "God's will" doctrine.
Then study today's "Traditionalism", and except for eternal security, I happen to believe that its core doctrines more resemble "Molinism" than not.
"Calvinism" is definitely not Roman Catholic, unless you link Augustine of Hippo ( an early church "father" that is claimed by them ) to John Calvin.
Then you'll have to answer the question of where Augustine derived his doctrines from, as many of his viewpoints were upheld in the 2nd Council of Carthage against the teachings of Pelagius.
So...
Many people agreed with much of what Augustine had to say back then, which presents the same ( or similar ) scenario that we now face right here on this board.
Another point of fact:
Most of "Calvinism's" doctrines were condemned as heresy at the Council of Trent in 1563, and pronounced as accursed.
How do you explain that if it was so close to being "Catholic"?
As for true "Reformed" theology, it includes quite a bit that many "Particular Baptists" do not hold to, such as infant baptism and a-millennialism. The true "Reformed" position, in its every doctrine, is best fitted to the Presbyterian churches today.
Dunno where you got the idea that individual election was ever Roman Catholic, unless you're referring to Augustine.
But then I've never read him, either...so please explain to those of us who read Scripture and see "Calvinism" in it, how we're getting it from the teachings of both John Calvin and the Roman Catholic Church, when they have historically taught things so far apart as to be nearly unrecognizable during the past 500 years.
Once again, I think you really should reason through the emotion in your responses, MB.
Catholic doctrine from the past 1,500 years is actually 180 degrees out from "Calvinism".
The only things that even look close are infant baptism and a-millennialism, which I understand the RCC teaches both.
May God look upon you with favor, sir.
Last edited:
- Status