Would Billy Graham/Charles Stanley be MOST Famous Arminian baptists today?

Free grace is as opposite of lordship salvation as one can get. The difference is huge.

It should also be noted free grace is not arminiansim, and lordship salvation is not calvinism. Points of all systems can be shared, but they are distinct.

 

This "almost word for word" could say a lot!

Until I see some proof, I will consider this to be untrue! Show proof, and I will sadly accept what you say.

 

Robert, in times past you implied you didn't like Swindoll because he's a Calvinist (Reformed). Now you have another agenda, and like him, and it will be sad to see it's true?

I think according to your past statement, you should gladly accept it:

Here: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1631584&highlight=Swindoll#post1631584

Post #72

- Peace

 

I've always liked Swindoll, Calvinists or not.

And, you said:

I am sure you have plenty of honor and all, but that's not good enough. Back up your claim or admit your slander toward Swindoll!

 

Simmer down Robert.

I've already given the evidence. Seek and ye shall find.

That, and I've quoted him word for word here.

 

I listened to the quote, and I still think you are may not be correct in what Swindoll means, but you did provide the link. Thanks!

 

It is not an either or proposition.

 

Sharing a view does not mean you are labeled that view. You share original sin with the catholics, does that mean you fall under catholicism? This whole labeling, branding, whatever is quite silly.

 

OK, PFT, now you are doing what you often correct others for doing to you, that being saying something that wasn't there. He did not say "in this statement" that he now LIKES Swindoll.

I did not know Swindoll was a calvinist, even if he is, I still enjoy the rare occasion that I hear him speak.

 

I can understand your misunderstanding.

You must understand my implication; in one thread it is OK to dismiss him in a sense, because of convenience. In now another thread, it is convenient to "sadly" dismiss him if whatever is said be found true, implying a deep sense of love ( I say this tongue-in-cheek, but you get the point), wherein in times past the convenience was to mark him off in a sense due to him being allegedly "reformed." See?

I still don't buy that he is a Calvinist. He attempted to come across as a restorer of Reformed "Sola Fide" in "The Grace Awakening."

He missed the mark since he denied within its pages the foundational truth that true faith has works.

Also, I've sought for evidence that he is Calvinisitic, and would ask for some proof from anyone either way.

- Peace

 

I would say like many DTS folks and their founder Lewis Sperry Chafer, he would be what many call 4 pointers.

 

Fair Enough. So do you listen only to those you know to be "calvinistic"? I read one book by RC Sproul. "Chosen But Free". And I like NT Wright quite a bit.