Replies

Answering a question to someone else: I attend a Baptist church, and I am fairly happy with their doctrine. Baptists have generally considered themselves neither arminian or calvinist. Remember, it wasn't their 'denomination' this "debate" came out of in the first place, anyway. There was a great deal of Calvinism in early Baptist history. Let me just name two: John Gill and Charles Spurgeon. This strain of Baptist was known as a Particular Baptist as opposed to a General Baptist. The doctrine was what a classic Calvinist calls Limited Atonement. A Particular Baptist believed in Particular Atonement, a General Baptist believed in a General Atonement.

Marxists have always made a lot of use out of the dieletical method. Set up two sides, and argue from both. You must be either on one side or the other. This is a logical fallacy that has caused a lot of harm. It has no place in the True Church of Chist.

Well, comrade, there are a lot of people who like to believe that they are "just Bible-believers". In fact, one finds that, inasmuch as they have internally consistent views on historically problematic scripture, that Bible-believers separate pretty readily into Calvinist and Arminian camps.

The basic issue is: is man totally depraved or is he born with some mearsure of grace, does God predestine man or does man choose salvation, did Christ die for all men or only for His own, is God's grace irresistible or can a man refuse, is a saved person eternally secure in his salvation or can he lose it. This is the TULIP. Of the five doctrines, one can say that Limited Atonement is perhaps not a necessary item to include in TULIP for a discussion of the issue of sovereignty. This is why one sees a great many 4-point Calvinist churches among Baptists and have taken the Amyrauldian position of General Atonement. A true five-point Calvinist is often known as a Reformed Baptist.

You'll find people who are strongly Calvinist or Arminian who never have heard these terms. However, almost anyone with formal training like ftD or any diligent Bible student (like you I suspect) is going to know these terms and they will also know themselves to stand in either one camp or the other.

The key criteria by which we can separate the Calvinists from the Arminians is this: does man play any role in securing salvation? If you believe that man plays any role whatsoever, then you are some variety of Arminian. It's that simple.

You stated above that I'm being Marxist for suggesting that there are only two views on this matter. I'm afraid there are actually only two views. Either the final decision is God's or it is man's. Perhaps you could explain who else might make the significant choice in salvation if you have another candidate. If you are a Bible believer, the only other candidates are: angels, demons, Lucifer. And no scripture supports any of these possible candidates.

If you still think there is a third choice, then please explain.