Question for BAPTISTS. ONLY BAPTISTS

theseed · Jun 22, 2004

Reformed Theology (Calvinism) does not teach that we have no free will. And it does not teach that God stops people from comming to Him.

However, you do agree with point 5, since you believe that we can't lose salvation--that is all point 5 says. Also though, I believe it to be inconsistant to accept OSAS (once saved/alwas saved) without accepting the other 4 points.

Here is a link that will help you with misconceptions that you may have about Calvinism.

http://www.christianforums.com/t695143

Bulldog · Jun 22, 2004

BT said:
please just answer the question

I'm not sure that I a considired Baptist-I attend a Presbytiran churhc but have "converted" to creedobaptism.

Anyways, I'm a 5 pointer.

Cright · Jun 22, 2004

0 point
Reluctant to believe in OSAS calvinism aside (there's another thread I just posted in called "No. You can not lose salvation. Sermon Notes" if anyone curious why.)

Carina

BT · Jun 22, 2004

theseed said:
Also though, I believe it to be inconsistant to accept OSAS (once saved/alwas saved) without accepting the other 4 points.

http://www.christianforums.com/t695143

Excellent observation (though not precisely stated "You can not believe in 1 point of calvinism without believing in all five, so you are a five-pointer or a 0-pointer").... and exactly why I am a 0 point calvinist... though I've said in a different post somewhere that calvinists actually do not believe in OSAS

theseed · Jun 22, 2004

I reject that Christ atonement is limited. By definition, atonement is not salvation. I believe that the potential of the atonement is unlimited while the application is limited.

So, I may be considered a 4 1/2 Calvinists.

http://www.christianforums.com/t103469

ksen · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
...though I've said in a different post somewhere that calvinists actually do not believe in OSAS

Really? Then will you tell me what I do believe since I must not know?

BT · Jun 23, 2004

ksen said:
Really? Then will you tell me what I do believe since I must not know?

Let me change the term since there seems to be a great deal of confusion...

Calvinism does not espouse Eternal Security, it does teach "Once Saved Always Saved" (if you are amongst the elect)..

does that make it more clear?

theseed · Jun 23, 2004

:repost:

theseed · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
Let me change the term since there seems to be a great deal of confusion...

Calvinism does not espouse Eternal Security, it does teach "Once Saved Always Saved" (if you are amongst the elect)..

does that make it more clear?

And it teaches that all believers are elect, and all elect desire salvation, love God, and fellowship with God and Christ.

BT, dod you believe that non elect people can be saved too?

You should read my Myths and Misconceptions about Calvinism thread in Christian Apologetics.

BT · Jun 23, 2004

theseed said:
And it teaches that all believers are elect, and all elect desire salvation, love God, and fellowship with God and Christ.

BT, dod you believe that non elect people can be saved too?

You should read my Myths and Misconceptions about Calvinism thread in Christian Apologetics.

I do not believe that the calvinist view of election is in line with the scriptural teaching of election, but that would be enough to give you a nervous breakdown, so I'll avoid that.

I've got the link. I just haven't had the time. I've read enough on calvinism to know what to expect. You should look up arguments to the book "What Love is This?" by Dave Hunt. There is a Uber calvinist John White (I think his name is) who goes through the whole thing. I am familiar with the arguments. I don't intend on debating calvinism.. it's been done for hundreds of years and will be done after we're both dead (should the Lord tarry).

Bulldog · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
I've got the link. I just haven't had the time. I've read enough on calvinism to know what to expect. You should look up arguments to the book "What Love is This?" by Dave Hunt. There is a Uber calvinist John White (I think his name is) who goes through the whole thing. I am familiar with the arguments. I don't intend on debating calvinism.. it's been done for hundreds of years and will be done after we're both dead (should the Lord tarry).

If by "Uber Calvinist" you mean Hyper-Calvinist, then you are wrong. James White is a normal Calivinist.

If you think that "What Love is This" had good arguments, I suggest you read Debating Calvinism between James White and Dave Hunt. Dave Hunt uses the same arguments, and James White points out His error.

BT · Jun 23, 2004

Bulldog said:
If by "Uber Calvinist" you mean Hyper-Calvinist, then you are wrong. James White is a normal Calivinist.

If you think that "What Love is This" had good arguments, I suggest you read Debating Calvinism between James White and Dave Hunt. Dave Hunt uses the same arguments, and James White points out His error.

Yeah I don't really know who James white is.. I meant he's well educated in calvinism.. like he knows the ins and outs...

I'm not interested in defending or agreeing with Dave Hunt, nor in getting involved with the debating between these two. I've read James' retort and I found it well written, if full of the same ol' same ol' , as well Dave Hunt's book goes over a bunch of the same arguments that have been going on for years (basically). I've done my own research....

ksen · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
Yeah I don't really know who James white is.. I meant he's well educated in calvinism.. like he knows the ins and outs...

I'm not interested in defending or agreeing with Dave Hunt, nor in getting involved with the debating between these two. I've read James' retort and I found it well written, if full of the same ol' same ol' , as well Dave Hunt's book goes over a bunch of the same arguments that have been going on for years (basically). I've done my own research....

Why do you keep bringing stuff up you don't want to debate about?

This is a discussion forum. If you bring stuff up people are going to want to discuss it.

ksen · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
Let me change the term since there seems to be a great deal of confusion...

Calvinism does not espouse Eternal Security, it does teach "Once Saved Always Saved" (if you are amongst the elect)..

does that make it more clear?

Not really.

I'm a Calvinist. I have faith in Christ therefore I'm saved. I believe that my salvation is eternally secure since it is founded on the work Christ did.

I think you are picking at nits.

BBAS 64 · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
Let me change the term since there seems to be a great deal of confusion...

Calvinism does not espouse Eternal Security, it does teach "Once Saved Always Saved" (if you are amongst the elect)..

does that make it more clear?

Good Day, BT

Would you please unpack the the meaning you give these 2 phases, how are they the same IYO, how and why are they different, in relation to your understanding of Calvinism.

Peace to u,

Bill

TwinCrier · Jun 23, 2004

I agree with points 1 & 5, but probably not in the way hyper-calvinists do.

theseed · Jun 23, 2004

TwinCrier said:
I agree with points 1 & 5, but probably not in the way hyper-calvinists do.

Hyper-Calvinists are a breed of thier own, and do not represent John Calvin, Calvinisim, or the bible.

BBAS 64 · Jun 23, 2004

BT said:
Yeah I don't really know who James white is.. I meant he's well educated in calvinism.. like he knows the ins and outs...

I'm not interested in defending or agreeing with Dave Hunt, nor in getting involved with the debating between these two. I've read James' retort and I found it well written, if full of the same ol' same ol' , as well Dave Hunt's book goes over a bunch of the same arguments that have been going on for years (basically). I've done my own research....

Good Day, BT

Just a little point here if I might as has been said over and over James White has publicly said on a numer of occasions that he is a Calvinist based on a critical exergesis of the Greek text. Remember that one theology is driven by the Scripture and your understanding of it, not the other way.

I have heard this from him in allmost every debate, I have seen those who are on the other side of this issue often fall flat in the Greek exergesis methods they employ with out reguard to the standards use for such work and deny the out come of their exergesis if applied to all of Scripture consistantly.

Now you may disagree with Mr. Whites conclusions, but on what basis is your disagreement? If your disagreement is based as it should be IMHO on the way or the means employed by Mr. White leading to a flaw in exergesis. Well than the ball is in your court to interact with those issues and Mr. White has a show on twice a week open to callers to disscuss issues like this.

Peace to u,

Bill

ksen · Jun 23, 2004

theseed said:
Hyper-Calvinists are a breed of thier own, and do not represent John Calvin, Calvinisim, or the bible.

To most non-Calvinists all Calvinists are hyper-.

BBAS 64 · Jun 23, 2004

TwinCrier said:
I agree with points 1 & 5, but probably not in the way hyper-calvinists do.

Good Day, Twin

How are these points viewed by an Hyper Calvinist as compared to a Calvinist "like Me"

Peace to u,

Bill

Question for BAPTISTS. ONLY BAPTISTS

Contributor

Don't Tread on Me

Veteran

Fanatic

Contributor

Wiki on Garth!

Fanatic

Contributor

Contributor

Fanatic

Don't Tread on Me

Fanatic

Wiki on Garth!

Wiki on Garth!

Contributor

Double Blessed and spreading the gospel

Contributor

Contributor

Wiki on Garth!

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency