Reformed Church Thats Not Calvinist?

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,796.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
A very thin veneer of scholarship, once again...

Actually the six principle Arminian Baptists influenced the formation of modern Baptists.

This in no way minimizes the work PREVIOUSLY completed by Particular Baptists as I have already posted. It was the Particular Baptist that held all of the marks of the modern Baptist church. The Arminians adopted PB theology limiting the atonement in power instead of scoop.

The six principal Baptists formed the first Baptist conference in America.
Yes, in 1652. The foundations, the theological heavy lifting had been done by the Calvinists in the 1620's, 30's and 40's who added rigor to their biblical exegesis by providing apologetics contra the baby sprinklers including the fuzzy free will Baptists. The Arminians simply borrowed from the PB's abandoning their former positions on mode of Baptism.

They put Bible first and confessions second.
^_^

The Free Will Baptists used Particular Baptists works to support their biblical view of full immersion. The Bible is always first for Particular Baptist. As Carl Trueman notes:

“All Christians engage in confessional synthesis; the difference is simply whether one adheres to a public confession, subject to public scrutiny, or to a private confession that is, by its very nature, immune to such examination.”

“I do want to make the point here that Christians are not divided between those who have creeds and confessions and those who do not; rather, they are divided between those who have public creeds and confessions that are written down and exist as public documents, subject to public scrutiny, evaluation, and critique, and those who have private creeds and confessions that are often improvised, unwritten, and thus not open to public scrutiny, not susceptible to evaluation and, crucially and ironically, not, therefore, subject to testing by Scripture to see whether they are true.”

The modern church in general has failed on this point. We have borrowed from Post Modern society in abandoning confessionalism.

The particular Baptists copied them even amending their 1742 confession to become more like the Arminians.
Ahhhh, not quite. You are engaging in fact twisting.

The PB's amended their Confession to include a doctrine for the sake of unity, that did not touch on the atonement or the idea of libertarian free will, but was believed by PB's from the beginning. To claim they did so to "become more like the Arminians" is a loose play on facts. The Confession was amended and not changed to include the laying on of hands.

The first Baptist confession was Arminian,the second Calvinist,the third Arminian,the fourth Calvinist. It is a fact that Baptists have been 50/50 since the beginning.
7th, my Christian seeker friend, is repeating unsupported statements...again. I'll repeat my reply for those just tuning in.

Thomas Helwys (author of the 1611 Confession) and John Smyth (who is often claimed to be a Baptist was really Anabaptist) were baptistic but did not believe in immersion. They poured or sprinkled. The Particular or "Reformed" Baptists rejected Helwys/Smyth's beliefs about Arminianism and baptism by 1630's, going as far as to demand the Free Will Baptists adhere to immersion and get properly baptized. (see Hercules Collins, 1691 and Did They Dip? and Baptist History Vindicated by John Christian) It can be demonstrated from history to any willing student that Helwys' theology, and that of his 1611 Confession, was in flux and Smyth was not a Baptist.

The "split" wasn't 50/50.

The split was between Arminian baby sprinklers and Particular Baptists. PB's had all of the elements that make up the Baptist church today and the Free Willer's did not.

I don't see why this is a big deal. Both have contributed to Baptist history.
I think accuracy in these matters are important. You cannot throw out a bunch of unrelated historical facts with your opinions added and claim them as truth.

The Arminians contributed to holiness,revival,and inerrancy of scripture.
If you mean by "holiness" unscriptural piety, yes. By "revival" you mean unscriptural methods of Finneyism, ok.

How can we have inerrant scriptures if God doesn't override the libertarian free will of man in writing and copying the scriptures? ;) The fruit of free will thinking can easily been seen in the mainline Protestant denominations who abandoned Reformation soteriology.

The Calvinists gave us some great theologians and preachers.
Just "some?"

Baptists are the middle ground between Presbyterians and Pentecostals.
Explain? Demonstrate how this statement is true please.

At the very least could you supply me with some book titles, articles, etc. that you found this information from? I work in a library and could find most of them using our resources.

Thank you.

jm
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
In a way Baptists are just reflecting church history. You have Augustine and John Cassian both great theologians working from different angles. In the writings of Justin Martyr you can see him debating free will vs predestination and that is second century.

This is a debate that goes on and on. The traditional Anglicans combine both streams of thought and that is what the SBC has been doing.

I love Wesley but I also love Johnathan Edwards. I have been struggling with this for a while but maybe I am not meant to pick one or the other as both are great Christians.
R C Sproul as a Calvinist wrote:
In the perennial debate between so-called Calvinism and Arminianism, the estranged parties have frequently misrepresented each other. They construct straw men, then brandish the swords of polemics against caricatures, not unlike collective Don Quixotes tilting at windmills (Sproul 1997:125).
Sproul regards the Calvinists and Arminians as 'estranged parties'.

Works consulted

Sproul, R C 1997. Willing to believe: The controversy over free will. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
If you mean by "holiness" unscriptural piety, yes. By "revival" you mean unscriptural methods of Finneyism, ok.
And you ignore the revival led by the Arminian, John Wesley!

You have given us a biased sample logical fallacy.
As Carl Trueman notes:

“All Christians engage in confessional synthesis; the difference is simply whether one adheres to a public confession, subject to public scrutiny, or to a private confession that is, by its very nature, immune to such examination.”

“I do want to make the point here that Christians are not divided between those who have creeds and confessions and those who do not; rather, they are divided between those who have public creeds and confessions that are written down and exist as public documents, subject to public scrutiny, evaluation, and critique, and those who have private creeds and confessions that are often improvised, unwritten, and thus not open to public scrutiny, not susceptible to evaluation and, crucially and ironically, not, therefore, subject to testing by Scripture to see whether they are true.”
Would you please give bibliographic references, whether in print or online, so I don't have to go searching the www to find your source?
 
Upvote 0
S

SeventhValley

Guest
7th, my Christian seeker friend, is repeating unsupported statements...again. I'll repeat my reply for those just tuning in.

Thomas Helwys (author of the 1611 Confession) and John Smyth (who is often claimed to be a Baptist was really Anabaptist) were baptistic but did not believe in immersion. They poured or sprinkled. The Particular or "Reformed" Baptists rejected Helwys/Smyth's beliefs about Arminianism and baptism by 1630's, going as far as to demand the Free Will Baptists adhere to immersion and get properly baptized. (see Hercules Collins, 1691 and Did They Dip? and Baptist History Vindicated by John Christian) It can be demonstrated from history to any willing student that Helwys' theology, and that of his 1611 Confession, was in flux and Smyth was not a Baptist.

You fall into legalism. That is what the Baptist were trying to get away from by leaving the Puritans.

Many people think that the single most important characteristic of Baptists is the way they baptize—by immersion. However, when Baptists began in the early seventeenth century, they were first concerned with WHOM rather than HOW they baptized. Baptists wanted churches made up of people who sincerely, deliberately, and freely affirmed Christ as the Lord of their lives. They wanted a Believers’ Church. -Walter B. Shurden

The first Baptists (Arminian's) lead the way with believers Baptism. This is historical fact and not contested. Also all Arminian Baptist once away from the Puritans agreed with the Calvinist brethren(who followed the Arminian's out of Puritanism to start doing believers Baptism) that immersion was the way to go. But to claim a Baptism has to follow a certain form is pharisaical legalism. Next you will be claiming that a man in a hospital bed baptized with pouring is not saved.

"Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ-- 1 Peter 3:21"

Also what you are claiming is like saying Calvin was not Reformed because he did not come up with TULIP. It is a straw man with nothing to back it up.

"Apart from Baptist life, most all religious historians also accept the 1609 theory of Baptist origins. However, in recent years as modern Calvinists Baptists strive to lay primary claim to Baptist history and identity, some Calvinist Southern Baptist historians have utilized the 1638 Particular Baptist recovery of immersion as a springboard to position Calvinism/covenant theology as the foundation of true Baptist origins and identity, in the process largely dismissing the formative influences of the 1609 Arminianist Smyth/Helwys spiritual lineage.-by Bruce Gourley, Executive Director, Baptist History & Heritage Society"
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
S

SeventhValley

Guest
For people to look at themselves :)

From:List of Baptist confessions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1611 Thomas Helwys Declaration of Faith
1644 First London Baptist Confession - revised in 1646
1651 The Faith and Practice of Thirty Congregations
1654 The True Gospel-Faith Declared According to the Scriptures
1656 The Somerset Confession of Faith
1655 Midland Confession of Faith
1660 The Standard Confession
1678 The Orthodox Creed
1689 Second London Baptist Confession - originally written in 1677
1691 A Short Confession or a Brief Narrative of Faith
 
Upvote 0

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,796.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
And you ignore the revival led by the Arminian, John Wesley!

You have given us a biased sample logical fallacy.

:doh: Oz, what do you believe? Once you answer the question you have demonstrated the point Trueman makes.

I would never ignore Wesley. He seems to be the first and only great Arminian-ish (he did add a dash of pietism, leading to Perfectionism that traditional Arminians reject) styled preacher anyone can name or remember. Folks like Knox, Whitefield, Edwards, Spurgeon, etc. are more recognizable.

The whole reason for this thread is not to debate Baptist origins but to find an Arminian preacher, besides the WOF and Osteen, that preach the Gospel with power and conviction. The op hasn't been answered.

Would you please give bibliographic references, whether in print or online, so I don't have to go searching the www to find your source?
You can find all the information you need to order or download the work (at a cost) here: The Creedal Imperative: Carl R. Trueman: 9781433521904: Amazon.com: Books

You may also visit your local library to see if they have offer interlibrary loan which allows you to borrow books, etc. from other libraries. Most ILL systems include seminaries. Some charge a nominal fee others work on a reciprocal borrowing system.

You fall into legalism. That is what the Baptist were trying to get away from by leaving the Puritans.
The Baptists were essentially Puritans! The label is often given only to infant baptists reserving the term Separatists to Baptists and other non-conformers.

It seems you do not understand the use of the term legalism.

le·gal·ism (lē′gə-lĭz′əm)
n.1. Strict, literal adherence to the law or to a particular code, as of religion or morality.
2. A legal word, expression, or rule.

In theology:

Quote: It is a term Christians use to describe a doctrinal position emphasizing a system of rules and regulations for achieving both salvation and spiritual growth. Legalists believe in and demand a strict literal adherence to rules and regulations. Doctrinally, it is a position essentially opposed to grace.

Read more: What does the Bible say about legalism? How can a Christian avoid falling into the trap of legalism?

The first Baptists (Arminian's) lead the way with believers Baptism.
I offered two in print sources that disagree with your opinion. Could you offer the forum one?

Next you will be claiming that a man in a hospital bed baptized with pouring is not saved.
You are a Christian Seeker according to your icon and this may be the reason why you misunderstand what salvation and the Gospel is all about. If you would like someone to explain it to you I'm sure Oz, considering your dislike of Calvinism and me in particular, will be happy to proclaim the Gospel to you.
seventh.gif

Baptism does not save you in and of itself.

most all religious historians also accept the 1609 theory of Baptist origins.
Oz was most helpful with this one. ;)

You have given us a biased sample logical fallacy.


Quote: An interesting note at this point that should be brought to bear is that the mode of baptism used was that of pouring, for immersion would not become the standard for another generation. Before his death, as seems characteristic of Smyth, he abandoned his Baptist views and began trying to bring his flock into the Mennonite church. Although he died before this happened, most of his congregation did join themselves with the Mennonite church after his death.


Now we turn our attention to Thomas Helwys. He had a somewhat rocky relationship with Smyth, but after Smyth began moving away from the General Baptist belief, Helwys carried on the Baptist beginnings. Helwys led his small group to England in 1611 and this was considered to be the first Baptist Church on English soil. This group held to believer's baptism, they rejected Calvinism for a free will position (which included falling from grace), and they allowed each church to elect its officers, both elders and deacons.[6] By 1624, there were five known General Baptist churches and by 1650 they numbered at least 47.[7] Even though some might see the modern-day Baptist movement in this group, we must understand that the beliefs of this group are far from the reformed heritage that shaped modern-day Baptist belief. Source: A Primer on Baptist History


Quote: The first Baptist church in America is thought to be the church at Providence founded by Roger Williams (1603-1684) in 1639. This church was founded on Particular Baptist doctrine, but in mid-1650 fell away to a more General Baptist position. However, this church did return to its Particular Baptist beliefs in the 1700's under the leadership of James Manning. Source: A Primer on Baptist History


While I am a big fan of Johnathan Edwards and John Piper. The thing that kept me away from embracing the Reformed side more is people like JM.
Tradition prevents you from accepting scripture. Not me. Do you believe in Jesus Christ? Maybe you should start there and not jump into debates about history and doctrine. Believe on the Son of God and you shall be saved.

UFC time! Gotta run.

jm
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private


:doh: Oz, what do you believe? Once you answer the question you have demonstrated the point Trueman makes.

I would never ignore Wesley. He seems to be the first and only great Arminian-ish (he did add a dash of pietism, leading to Perfectionism that traditional Arminians reject) styled preacher anyone can name or remember. Folks like Knox, Whitefield, Edwards, Spurgeon, etc. are more recognizable.

The whole reason for this thread is not to debate Baptist origins but to find an Arminian preacher, besides the WOF and Osteen, that preach the Gospel with power and conviction. The op hasn't been answered.
Haven't you heard of leading defender of the faith in the USA and around the world - a foremost Christian apologist - William Lane Craig who is an Arminian? See some links to Bill Craig's Arminian theology HERE.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
PS; I'm not subscribed to this thread. I may come back, I may not...I ask those reading to check the sources I provided against 7th's opinions and spinets of disconnected facts.
Can I presume that JM made a decision to unsubscribe from this thread?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Keachian

On Sabbatical
Feb 3, 2010
7,096
330
34
Horse-lie-down
Visit site
✟16,342.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Haven't you heard of leading defender of the faith in the USA and around the world - a foremost Christian apologist - William Lane Craig who is an Arminian? See some links to Bill Craig's Arminian theology HERE.

His Molinism is certainly nowhere near Arminian theology, they only similarity they have is that they are both synergistic, there is absolutely no Scriptural basis to claim Molinism. Even if you were to talk about his Molinism the way that he has constructed it is so different to classical Molinism that one has to ask whether WLC's Yahweh is truly deity or whether it is this "middle-knowledge" creature which is dealing to Yahweh the cards.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
His Molinism is certainly nowhere near Arminian theology, they only similarity they have is that they are both synergistic, there is absolutely no Scriptural basis to claim Molinism. Even if you were to talk about his Molinism the way that he has constructed it is so different to classical Molinism that one has to ask whether WLC's Yahweh is truly deity or whether it is this "middle-knowledge" creature which is dealing to Yahweh the cards.
I gave a link to his Arminianism. Didn't you read the content of the link I posted?

I did not provide links to all of Craig's theology, but he is certainly Arminian in some of his views and I provided links to that content.

He expounds on some of these views in Craig, W L 1987. The only wise God: The compatibility of divine foreknowledge and human freedom. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House.
 
Upvote 0
A

Awaken4Christ

Guest
Thank you to those who have contributed to this thread. Baptist history on this matter is quite interesting. Truth be known, I just want to find a church that's near to me that loves God and exalts his Son, keeping him in the center of its preaching. There are genuine people who wish to accurately convey the will of God in both reformed and non-reformed camps. It is however hard in these times to find a church near to you that isn't strife with controversy or that doesn't preach a 1 hr sermon that hardly touches the gospel. I want the genuine article brothers. And if the Calvinists think they are the only ones then they are in the wrong.

My theology tends to be more reformed in general, however, if I am to choose between a spiritually dead reformed church and an alive Arminian church I will choose the Arminian one as long as they preach the Word with care and spirit.
 
Upvote 0

nccountryboy

Junior Member
Feb 4, 2014
34
1
Somewhere in North Carolina.
✟15,161.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hi all,

How do you find those Staunch Bible Believing Churches or Online Sermons That Teach and Preach The WHOLE Gospel and Praise and Confirm God's Sovereignty. Every time I try to find Some sort of niche on youtube or through google this is what happens

1. I Run into pure calvinist websites or youtube videos where they are holding a conference and its all calvinists.

2. I find videos or websites where the preachers sermon talks about golf, food, worldy stuff like 80 percent or more of the sermon. Not enough preaching from the bible.

I am looking for a Baptist type church that isn't calvinist but preaches and takes God's word and makes Christ so important that never does it seem like just a secular community meeting. I hear to often in sermons a self-help seminar message.

Basically if I can simplify it I am looking for a Non- Calvinist or Arminian version of Paul Washer lol. If someone can direct me to some audio, video, or way to find local churches, I would greatly appreciate it. I am not trolling or trying to start a debate I am truly seeking for what I described.

Its North Hills Bible Church in York, P.A. You will have to google them and then go to resources and then to literature. Once there look for a article called "Calvinism right or wrong?". Its a interesting take that is not your usual calvinist nor arminian view.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Unix

Hebr incl Sirach&epigraph, Hermeneut,Ptolemy,Samar
Supporter
Nov 29, 2003
2,567
84
42
ECC,Torah:ModeCommenta,OTL,AY BC&RL,Seow a ICC Job
Visit site
✟139,217.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Legionwrex

Newbie
Jul 9, 2013
192
3
USA
✟15,333.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
His Molinism is certainly nowhere near Arminian theology, they only similarity they have is that they are both synergistic, there is absolutely no Scriptural basis to claim Molinism. Even if you were to talk about his Molinism the way that he has constructed it is so different to classical Molinism that one has to ask whether WLC's Yahweh is truly deity or whether it is this "middle-knowledge" creature which is dealing to Yahweh the cards.

I'm sorry I just have to ask, are you implying WLC is a heretic? Because if so that is absolute nonsense.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums