Nor do they burn people at the stake as Calvin and some others have done while searching for heresy and witches.
And the Servetus Card is played. The Servetus Card: because debate is hard.
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 ...
*sigh* Try again.....
Now that's funny right there.
Seems that having no dialogue on threads one posts constitutes *No Substance*.
Maybe wasted on me but these threads are read by numerous individuals.
Here's your big chance to enlighten them and actually address the substance of the article after three posts about me.
What do you have to say to the world about the Calvinist/non-Calvinist dispute withing the SBC and the "let's agree to disagree" approach to theology ?
Anything?
Any suggestions or solutions?
I'll play your game just this once. I have both Calvinist and non-Calvinist friends in my Southern Baptist church and we get along just fine. This dispute is a non-issue, the kind of thing Satan uses to distract us from the really important stuff. Luckily for him he has plenty of willing assistants to try and create controversy where there is none.
Absolutely. On the essential issue, both Calvinists and Arminians agree. As a Calvinist, I have no problem fellowshipping with my Arminian brothers and sisters. I avoid the bickering in which the militants on both sides obsess. I have a good Arminian friend and we always joke about how we know the other is saved, even though he doesn't understand why.
The body of Christ is an organism, not an organization. It’s all believers of the church age regardless of time and location and denominational affiliation.
Great observation. MM, you're on a roll today. The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 1 harshly condemned the spirit of tribalism which infests so much denominational thinking. Some of the worst offenders of this prohibition are the hard-core Calvinists who tolerate no deviation from what they have determined is truth.
Thanks, but the SBC doesn't seem to think so. I agree with them.
The theology of how we are saved would seem to go to the very heart of the Christian message.
There are multiple passages in the New Testament where the question is asked of either Jesus or Paul.... "what must I do to be saved?"
That means it's important I think.
We're not talking here about "getting along". We can all "get along". We're talking about an understanding of theological truth. There must be a way to rule on disputes such as this.
The answer lies in authority.
And hasn't this been the truth throughout all of church history?
From Augustine and his detractors to Aquinas and his. Up to the present day.
I'd be afraid if fighting for purity of doctrine WASN'T evident in the Church.
"Contend for the faith"...something that will happen until the end of time.
-— answer lies in authority. ——
Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7, for the Bible-only folks.
So why did a Catholic post an article about Southern Baptist theology and why don’t you respond on most threads you post? I’m honored that you deemed me worthy to reply to but why aren’t most people who try to engage you in conversation?
“In the absence of any divinely instituted human ecclesiastical authority with competence to rule in this matter, this is the inevitable result. Either this or a rupture.”
The assumption here is that the Pope and the Roman authorities are competent and actually have the truth, and, furthermore, that there is real unity in Catholicism on doctrine. Which, of course, none of this is actually historically true.
You say that the issue is at an “impasse,” but the truth is the reason why there is so much hostility to what they call ‘Calvinism’ is because there is a revival going on right now in scriptural teaching, especially in the seminaries, over the man-exalting and Roman conceptions of salvation.
You fight with many of these Protestants on whether or not a man earns his salvation with his works and faith, or if a man earns his salvation through his faith alone, but we say that a man does not earn his salvation at all, as both faith and works must bow to the grace of God which freely gives both faith and works.
“Strict calvanists of course beleive peopel don’t need to witness,”
What strict Calvinists are those? Surely not Spurgeon, Knox, all the reformers from Luther on up.
I believe that God looks upon the heart rather than the form of worship. But some sects appear to state beliefs that I can't find in the scriptures (not that I'm totally conversant with them).
Jesus loves you, unconditionally; but he hates your sin and was willing to die to cleanse you of it.
I said strict, I meant Hyper-Calvanists- I don’t beleive htsoe you mentioend were hyper calvanists?
Nor do they burn people at the stake as Calvin and some others have done while searching for heresy and witches.
And the Servetus Card is played. The Servetus Card: because debate is hard.
I bow my head. Amen to that.
Amen!
Well, you should read the FIRST comment posted by the poster of this thread and then see if you still think that way:
agree to disagree......the Protestant "authority problem" in a nutshell. In the absence of any divinely instituted human ecclesiastical authority with competence to rule in this matter, this is the inevitable result. Either this or a rupture. Both sides will claim the authority of Scripture. Yet they're stuck at an impasse. And where is truth to be found in all of this? Why, in Scripture of course. We simply have different understandings of its meaning so we'll "agree to disagree". Rinse and repeat as necessary. 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.
I don't think there was a "hijack" of the thread. I see this as yet another example of the provocation of all non-Catholic Christians some Catholics seem to thrive on. The intent is clearly shown by the OP's comment and those familiar with the background of these kinds of posters can see right through it.
Actually, the assumption is that without human ecclesiastical authority there is anarchy.
The respondents who stray away from Calvinism as the topic, obviously knowing that no non-Catholic church or authority is competent to be such an ecclesiastical authority, assume that ecclesiastical authority has to be the Catholic Church.
The fact that anarchy results is self-evident and yet rather than looking at alternative non-Catholic authorities that Protestant derived churches could agree on people instantly begin to decry the Catholic Church. That's quite an admission, really, since no one even volunteers their own church as being authoritative and an acceptable source of authority all Christians can agree with.
And it's that harsh, condemning attitude which is such a turn off to Calvinism.
I had enough of that when I was a Catholic. What comes across is that the way God is portrayed by Calvinism is not a whole lot different that the one portrayed by Catholicism.
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.