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 ...
[[Both sides will claim the authority of Scripture. Yet they’re stuck at an impasse.]]
Yes, but basically, both sides agre on many parts of the bible, but dissagree soem on other parts that really don’t undermine the key issues of the bible- Strict calvanists of course beleive peopel don’t need to witness, because everyoen who is ‘suppsoed to be saved will be saved’ as determined by election/destiny- Baptists beleive we have a mandate to witness, that we are the vessels that God chooses to use to spread His word to effect Hi Salvation in people- even if they were predestined to be saved
There are swoem other minor dissagreements- but htis really is the ‘biggie’ disagreement.
A clavanist I lsitened to made his point htat it is God who saves, not the witnessing of man, by sayign he heard a revival meeting’s message once, didn’t go in, but the Holy spirit moved Him to seek salvation, He took up the Word of God, and became saved accordign to scripture-
I heard another Calvanist explain how he got saved- but don’t remember the specifics- but basically it was how hte spirit moved him-
Then you have the baptists saying the ethiopian i nthe bible wanted to be saved, so God supernaturally sent an apostle runnign to meet the person to tell him how to be saved-
And of course we have Jesus Himself tellign Nicodemus how to be saved
Don’t know hwere I stand on the issue- I lean towards predestination and think God does save thsoe whom He will as He will whenever He wishes- I beleive primitive natives who ‘have a feeling’ thjat hteir pagan practices are wrong, wnd who seek God’s face, bnot really knowign anyhtign about Him, and who primitively determien in their hearts to stop their pagan waysi n honor of God may possibly be saved even htough they don’t know how to ‘give hteirl ife to Christ’ i nthe proper baptist manner at salvation
I’ve read pink’s book on the soveriengty of God, and he does make some pretty compelling and frightening points about people beign created specifically for damnation (even though they had the same choice of free wil las everyoen else- God knew they woudl never accept Him, but allowed them to be born anyways)- The book frightened me- and made me realize how little in control we really are- but it opened my etyes soem too- I’m not sayign I agree with everything- but it did shed soem light- the book is available free online- I think his name was albert pink- but just ‘pink soveriegnty of god’ will find it
it’s a hard read as it’s written in old language- but it’s a sobering look into hte soveriegnty of God- personally I think perhaps the ‘truth’ lvies soemwhere inbetween the baptists and hte calvanists, and probably woudl have to settle on beign a hybrid betyween baptist and calvanist myself-
No. Please read 2 Tim. 2:15 again. It says nothing about dividing “truth from a lie”. It says “rightly dividing the WORD OF TRUTH.” There are no lies in God’s word of truth. It would cease to be the word of TRUTH, if there were lies in it.
Calvinism and Arminianism are creations of men, chosing portions of Yehova’s word, rather than the whole word.
Here is a link to an article on hyper-Calvinism written by a Calvinists. FR Calvinists don’t like this being posted because many of them are hyper-Calvinists.
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm
You are imagining a division in the word, and it is not there.
Southern Baptists have long stood for freedom of thought within the denomination. We view the imposition of authority on a local congregation, whether heavy-handed or benign, as intrusive, unwelcome, and anti-Scriptural. The Catholic model has produced wars, a divided church (or what is two Popes about?), and an inquisition that was cruel beyond measure. We Southern Baptists will have our own sins and victories to account for before the Lord one Day. But we won’t have to account for following human leaders who have produced some of the worst living conditions on the planet.
[[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?”]]
Not sure what they meant- but it’s deeper than that- soem woudl stop there- callign anyoen who beleives in predestination a calvanist- but the strict calvanists beleive noone needs to witness because God is theop ne doign hte saving- Strict calvanists almsot state that man has no choice i nwhether or not they go to hell or heaven (although in my understandign, they draw the line right at the point of stating man has no choice- they try to reconcile their ‘almost no choice’ claim with free will somehow- pink I beleive was sort of able to do so- it was al ong tiome ago i looked into any of htis -s o I may be a bit fuzzy-
I’m guessign htis might be what they meant by calvanism?
Here is Charles Spurgeon’s sermon regarding predestination. He clearly does not accept the notion that God preselects those to be saved and those to be damned to hell.
http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/1516.htm
One of the most highly regarded Calvinists of the 20th century, Edwin Palmer (a wonderful man of God, who led the effort that resulted in the NIV Bible) wrote a book titled “The Five Points of Calvinism” stated very clearly that if even one of the points of TULIP were wrong, all of them must be wrong. Edwin Palmer also believed that God does predestined individuals to either heaven or hell and that no man can make a decision as to his destiny.
Spurgeon’s got it right, and Palme rwas clearly in error. Read the Spurgeon’s sermon linked above and decide for yourself.
There is only one truth
Exactly!
“But, if the discussion has any relevance to the OP, it needs defending against Arminianism.”
One must be careful to distinguish Arminius from what is claimed about Arminianism, just as one should distinguish Calvin from what some claim about Calvinism.
[[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.]]
That, and salvation through Christ alone, is the central issue- all else is syimply symantics- Remember, Jesus talked kindly with BOTH mary and Martha- who BOTH differed on what it emant ot ‘be a servant’- Martha complaiend about mary- Jesus kindly answered her- but BOTH were worshippping Him this of ocurse isn’t to say that ‘there are many ways to heaven’ as does our dear leader- because we know from God’s wor,d there is only one way man can enter through the gates I(contrary to dear leader’s bold unbilical declaration)- but it is to say that diffrerent doctrinal beleifs outside of the salvation theme do not mean that thsoe different churches aren’t servign God as well-
I once felt very strongly abotu not attendign different churches, and felt that they were unbiblical and that htey didn’t preach salvation, and had a woman who was a true born again CHristian attendign the church, but kidn of ‘doign her own thing’ within the church, teachign directly from God’s word (which was a no no i nthat church) but hten it was explained to me that the ‘Spirit Listeth where it will” and that peopel were gettign saved after many years of beign i nthe church under a leader that was NOT preachign God’s word of salvation- (There may have been a few genuinely saved peopel i nthere before, but they certainyl were not beign fed God’s word as strongly as they woudl have been in another church denomination)
It was a humbling experience to learn my bias agaisnt said church and anyoen belonging to said church was aN unblical bias on my part- I was not aware of hte verse statign the ‘spirit listeth where it will’ and it was an eye opener to me to learn that yep- He can even save in churches that were not preachign God’s word
I’m not sayign you do so, but We as a collective whole- have to be very careful about ‘church snobbery’ lest the church itself become a god to us- Christ chastized the pharisees and Sadducees tiem and tiem again for their ‘church snobbery”- and their showey ‘religiosity’- and He made special note of the humble widow who meekly and revwerentyl gave her last coins quietly- while hte pharisses made a great show of their ‘giving’ of tithes- their religiosity had becoem their god- and Christ tiem and again made that clear-
With all due respect, God says there is. And He says that without rightly dividing His word of truth, or not dividing it at all, men will be unapproved workers for Him, no matter how hard they strive. A simple example of this would be those who, now, are striving to bring the Kingdom Gospel to fruition and establish this Kingdom on earth for Him, instead of striving to preach the Gospel of the Grace of God, during this age of the grace of God. Both of these are truths, but only one is truth for this age we are living in, in God’s plan for mankind. Both of these are for our understanding and study, but they are not both for duty to fulfill today. To be striving to bring men into a Kingdom that only Christ, the Messiah, can and will establish at His return, is to try in vain to turn that program into a program that is based not only opposed to the program for today (”For BY GRACE are ye saved through faith, and that NOT OF YOURSELVES, it is the GIFT OF GOD, NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast.”), but turns grace into a lie. And God’s word of truth for today into a confusing lie. (Hence the ongoing argument between Paul and James). Hence the Catholic Church and her works, belief system, traditions, and performance-based salvation that is built on a lie that she and she alone can establish God’s Kingdom on earth for Christ. She has taken God’s truth for Israel, tried to hijack it, make it her own and the result is, she had turned God’s truth for Israel into a lie for the Body of Christ.
But then, despite all this theology stuff, Baptist, Catholic, double-damn predestin-pedestrian, Calvinist, Non-Calvinist, whatever, we still have the same core convictions, the same Good News! Which is:
.
.
.
. "Jesus Loves You, Maybe."
.
.
.
./s/
...maybe
I know an older gentleman who used to say, “ I was born and raised in the (very Calvinistic denomination), but praise God, I got saved.”
True story. He had never heard a gospel message preached in that denomination.
“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.”
Christ’s doctrine goes back much farther than 2,000 years. I would say if his doctrine is based in eternal truth, then God only knows in time, how far back that might be.
I guess we’ll get into that BASIC thing (Brothers And Sisters In Christ) when we’re all in the DHS prisons together in adjoining cells. Staring around in bewilderment saying, “Whoa. What happened?”
I think I tried to make that point in number 20. Maybe not so well stated as in mentioning the DHS prisons.
[[True story. He had never heard a gospel message preached in that denomination.]]
I’ve been a few times, and foudn the messsaages to be spot on and edifying- perhaps the church he attended had strayed? I’ve ehard from, and read books by, a few calvanists who definately are saved- they just beleived a bit differently abotu certain issues- And, then again, there are different ‘branches’ of Calvanism too- so perhaps the ones I’ve attended weren’t hardline strict calvanists too- who knows-
Yes...could not help but to have noticed that when the Tea Party announced a protest at IRS headquarters in downtown St. Louis, MO...the DHS showed up with about as many agents as there were protestors.
BTW...the protestors were mostly sixty years old or older...gramps and grandmas protesting against the IRS because of the scandal...or, I mean “controversy”...see, it’s only a “scandal” if Republicans do it...ask CNN.
Yeah...the DHS types showed up with an armored vehicle. Against a couple dozen people in their sixties. I’m not kidding.
that shoudl have beren filmed and posted to the Youtube- with a title like “DHS bravely defends homeland agaisnt evil CHristian elderly folks”
Any old fashioned HARDSHELL BAPTISTS out there? I’ve heard they are very Calvinist in their beliefs.
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.