Posted on 10/29/2011 10:01:19 PM PDT by marshmallow
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (ABP) – A Southern Baptist Convention official says one of the top challenges facing the nation’s second largest faith group behind Roman Catholics is the increasing influence of Calvinism in churches.
“I think one of the issues which is a tremendous challenge for us is the theological divide of Calvinism and non-Calvinism,” Frank Page, CEO of the SBC Executive Committee said in a blog interview posted Oct. 18 at SBC Today.
“Everyone is aware of this, but few want to talk about this in public,” elaborated Page, who assumed the post of president and CEO of the SBC fiduciary and executive agency last year. “The reason is obvious. It is deeply divisive in many situations and is disconcerting in others. At some point we are going to see the challenges which are ensuing from this divide become even more problematic for us. I regularly receive communications from churches who are struggling over this issue.”
Page, a former South Carolina pastor who served as SBC president 2006-2008, authored an 80-page booklet in 2000 titled Trouble with the TULIP: A Closer Examination of the Five Points of Calvinism. In it he termed Calvinism a “man-made” doctrine not supported by Scripture and defended what he called "the true teachings of grace."
The book countered a common acronym for the five main points of Calvinism, a theological model named after Protestant reformer John Calvin. They are: Total depravity, Unmerited election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and Perseverance of the saints.
Page presented an alternative acronym of GRACE. “Given through Christ, Rejected through rebellion, Accepted through faith and Christ died for all” that summarized four points of a counter view of Calvinism called Arminianism. Page’s final “E” departed from Arminian thought with “everlasting life/security of the believer, a Calvinist doctrine held by most...........
(Excerpt) Read more at abpnews.com ...
ok
As usual, that's not true...
I take it that you’re infralapsarian?
That may be your perception.
To Calvinists, it is perceived as Knowing where you're going. Knowing why. and Living in accordance to this knowledge.
Personally I have all my faith in a Jewish Carpenter.
The first problem here is lumping all “Calvinists” in one bag. There are many degrees of Calvinism, the fatalistic perspective/anti-Israel perspective being on the fringe.
The Reformed Baptist churches are growing (they are Calvinists) while the SBC is shrinking, and they see this as a threat.
I have never been a part of any denomination and worked among believers of all stripes and colors, but spent more time amongst SBC than any single group. For them to call Calvinists arrogant is incredible, as I’ve found many SBC pastors to be most arrogant.
The problem is fairly simple: man’s mind cannot comprehend the apparently conflicting truth of scripture: God is sovereign, man is reponsible.
So to reconcile not being able to comprehend one aspect of God, His truth, man camps out on one side or the other.
Either side to an extreme is wrong. Period.
(How’s that for arrogance???????)
By the way, Charles Spurgeon boasted that he indeed was a Calvinist while the Baptists in England fought against what was referred to as ultra-Calvinism - the extreme......
We don't comment if your non-Christian cult wants to argue with others about whichever Hadiths or suras it likes.
and yet, technically, since Calvinism does not believe in free-will and that everything is predestined, shouldn't it technically read that you were predestined to have this pre-programmed faith in a Jewish Carpenter? Or, if later you change, then you were pre-destined and pre-programmed to do so?
authored an 80-page booklet in 2000 titled Trouble with the TULIP*: A Closer Examination of the Five Points of Calvinism.
Worth pointing out that the so-called "Five points 'o Calvinism!" come from the five heads of doctrine in the Canons of the Synod of Dordt in 1619, a full century after Brother Martin kicked over the apple cart. The synod was called to deal with errant teaching ("Arminianism") that had arisen in the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands, and the document it produced was a narrowly focused polemical document.
All of which is to say, there's more to "Calvinism!" than 5 caricatured points about soteriology.
Happy Reformation Sunday, y'all............
fröhliche!
*(TULIP isn't an acronym that works anywhere but English, and wasn't used until sometime early in the 20th century. Noone has quite tracked down where it was first used.)
Happy indeed. Much that is good would not have happened without it. Yet divisions within the church are never happy. That same Paul who brought us the challenges of Romans 9 et al, also warned us in the last chapter of that same book to mark those who stir up trouble and division among believers, and avoid them. The motive for such behavior is not love, but self-satisfaction. There is no upside to that. Wars over such doctrine are almost always "Islamic" in character, i.e., "if you don't like my position you are an infidel." A family member of mine was nearly destroyed by such a fight. I will never go there again. If you put your faith in the triune God and the resurrected Jesus, I take you to be family, though we may disagree on a multitude of issues. But I often find my love is not reciprocated, unrequited, as it were. I am one of those despised "Calvinists" and worse still a "Protestant," so I am deemed by those who should love me as an infidel, though we both labor at serving the same Master. This is tragedy, not comedy. Your tone is misplaced. Save your mockery for those who hate the Gospel, not those who love it.
Unfortunately to fully comprehend Calvinism, you need a stiff drink or two.
It's actually referred to as Hyper-Calvinism; and Spurgeon was no Hyper-Calvinist. He did not believe in predestination as applied to all people. He believed that God desires that all men be saved; and not that God predestined each particular individual to either Heaven or Hell.
One would never know that by listening to most of the Calvinists on FR.
Thank you for your post. If Christ is our focus, then what we have in common is more important than what divides us.
St. Augustine was overly influenced by his Manichaeanism. The Greek fathers were completely opposed to St. Augustine’s excessive rejection of free-will.
The Western Church suffered from an excessive reliance on St. Augustine rather than the broader view provided by the other Church fathers.
I'm not as certain as the typical Calvinist. For humans with our limited abilities and knowledge to claim absolute certainty in any area goes against all the evidence we have, not to mention basic logic, and is indeed a form of arrogance as has been stated by others on this thread.
Even if one limits one arguments in favor of a particular theology to the Bible, one has to admit that there are numerous conflicting interpretations of the text. To claim that one's particular interpretation is the correct one is the height of arrogance. To claim that one's reading of the Bible is not in fact an interpretation, but is the only clear straight reading of the text, is borderline delusional.
Currently I'm leaning to Molinism...
A question
Knowing where you're going:
Can you (Calvinists) be wrong?
I think that most sbcers don’t care one whit about calvinism vs arminianism. They are doctrines of man not docttrines of G+5.
Should read: They are doctrines of man, not doctrines of God.
My mother in law’s church was destroyed by this controversy; It no longer exists. The Calvinists gathered together and tried to carry the argument to another church. After a year of their demands the Pastor threatened to resign and the board told the Calvinists to leave. Some of the went to yet another church and started it up again and they were told to leave.
Their fruits were dissension and closed churches.
“Not really — Christianity arose in the East, technically in Asia and for centuries, in fact arguably for most of the first millenium, the “action” was in the East. The Assyrian Church converted people as far as Mongolia, while the Marthomites were busy in Southern India etc.
Christianity is not a “Western religion””
I must disagree. From the earliest days in the church, in New Testament writings, we find believers not only in Greece and Cyprus but also in Rome. Unless you consider Rome “the East,” Christianity was not exclusively eastern.
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.