Posted on 06/17/2013 6:59:32 AM PDT by marshmallow
Can’t we all just get along?
That was the question that Southern Baptists, torn between Calvinists and non-Calvinists, seemed to be asking as they opened their two-day annual meeting in Houston.
Frank Page, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Executive Committee, created a 19-member advisory committee that produced a report in time for the meeting called “Truth, Trust and Testimony.”
Southern Baptists have been divided over Calvinism since their denomination began in 1845, but Page said Monday (June 10) that disagreements had reached a tipping point.
“The truth is, I see an anti-Calvinism now that frightens me; it’s a vitriol that is nasty,” he said, adding he also has friends who were concerned about “extreme Calvinists.” ‘’So it was my opinion that we need to deal with this. . Trust is hitting a new low.”
Calvinism, based on the teachings of 16th-century Protestant Reformer John Calvin, differs from traditional Baptist theology in key aspects, particularly on the role of human free will and whether God chooses only the “elect” for salvation.
The 3,200-word report calls for mutual respect among the differing factions, saying opponents should talk to each other rather than about each other, especially on social media. Churches and would-be pastors also need to be honest about whether they embrace or shun Calvinism, it said.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.washingtonpost.com ...
Then why is the SBC spending time on addressing the problem of Calvinism within its ranks?
There are some Baptists who evidently think that Calvin's theology is true to the Bible and some who don't. My understanding of Baptist polity is that both (mutually exclusive) beliefs should be allowed.
But, this is only news since it involves the SBC. There are subsets of Baptists - Free Will and Primitive to name only two of many. They consider their differences serious enough to separate themselves.
Should have I think included “the Church and it’s people will save this nation...
That Yehova has chosen an election, a remnant, is strongly supported throughout the scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation. Is that what you mean by “Calvinism?”
When I read the headline, my first thought was how is this any different than it has always been. The SBC has always had its Calvinists. The reformed wing and the Arminian wing argue but at the end of the day walk away friends (or at least, not enemies).
You also bring up an important point. Someone doesn't have to accept all of Calvin's teachings to be a Calvinist. Calvinists come in many favors. Every human being on earth has some error in their theology including Calvin.
Discussion and dissent is surely expected. As is the hijack (a Catholic bash in post 6). It's a hijack because neither the article nor the OP's comment has anything to say about the Catholic Church.
Revolt is coming.
>> “I think I would pay for a ticket to see, because unless something changes dramatically, they will not all be able to agree in doctrine and so in some ways will never be able to come together, without of course that dramatic change.” <<
.
That all of the churches have, and will come together in the worship of man is the cornerstone of prophecy.
I will let the Calvinists (and the Arminians) define themselves. Using Scripture, of course. (I'll pop the corn.)
Amen brother,
Christ is the head of the Church, Christ established his doctrine 2,000 years ago and it has not changed since. All else is man’s interpretation, i.e. dogma.
The church (the real one) is not under the control of man. Yeshua, through the Holy Spirit/comforter rules over the church.
The Whore and her daughters are all in the control of man, and worship man.
But those who oppose the Christians in this country will in the end LOSE.
IOW, you have no idea what you mean?
I think this is a good time to dust this one off:
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, “Stop! Don’t do it!”
“Why shouldn’t I?” he said.
I said, “Well, there’s so much to live for!”
He said, “Like what?”
I said, “Well...are you religious or atheist?”
He said, “Religious.”
I said, “Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?”
He said, “Christian.”
I said, “Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?”
He said, “Protestant.”
I said, “Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?”
He said, “Baptist!”
I said,”Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of GOD or Baptist Church of the Lord?”
He said, “Baptist Church of GOD!”
I said, “Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of GOD, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of GOD?”
He said,”Reformed Baptist Church of GOD!”
I said, “Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of GOD, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of GOD, reformation of 1915?”
He said, “Reformed Baptist Church of GOD, reformation of 1915!”
I said, “Die, heretic scum”, and pushed him off.
— Emo Phillips
I am not an adherent to the Calvinist belief. Those who are can defend it, as they should.
But, if the discussion has any relevance to the OP, it needs defending against Arminianism.
“Is God a God of confusion, compromise or ambiguity? Is there more than one Church, one truth?
No, the ecclesial model here is mortally flawed.”
“The church (the real one) is not under the control of man.”
I would entirely agree with your comment, except, I don’t believe you can square your statement with the one above from marshmallow. Which begs the question, (the real one)?
So, Jimmah-- since you "personally feel" what scripture says-- then what church did you go to-- Unitarian Universalist, cause they don't have as many homo keyboard music ministers (him having a very homo son)? Hilarious, and more irrelevancy to the idiot. Yet more proof of a disorganized confused mind, with a driving harridan of a wife behind him.
Some time ago, the SBC met and formally "apologized for slavery", them being southern and all. The hierarchy of ownership and running the "peculiar institution" was not headed up by the Baptists— in no particular order but definitely in the main percentages, it was Methodists, Presbyterians and Episcopalians. This thread is sure to get some more discussion. "People call me Jesus, and people call collect. People try to please Us but sometimes they will neglect.... it's lonely being Jesus, knowing you wrote all the books." It is indeed a long road to Jesus with many quibbling mortals in the way. Deo Vindice.
That is Marshmallow’s problem, not mine.
The confusion comes from accepting man’s ‘church’ over God’s.
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Tim. 2:15. As is clearly stated here, God's truth must be rightly divided, if we desire to be approved workmen unto Him. NOT truth from a lie. But truth from truth. Which should tell you there ARE divisions and differences in the TRUTH He has given us, and HE desires we study His word, to understand those divisions HE has made. NOT man, God. The first truth that is easily answered in marshmallow's question is yes, there is more than one truth. 2 Tim. 2:15 shows you that...
Christ is the head of the Church, Christ established his doctrine 2,000 years ago and it has not changed since.
Gosh, that sounds like "an authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true." Which would make it . . .
No, that is rightly dividing the truth from the lie.
There is only one truth, Yehova’s Torah, as Yeshua declared to the Pharisees.
You either have Torah, or you lack it. That is where it all divides.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.