Calvinistic Percentage

Irony is that a thread asking for restraint win the whole Calvinist debate has become a debate about calvinism.

With regards to the OP, I think it is high time to consider limiting the numbers of threads concerning/attacking the whole Calvinist/non-calvinist thing. These last several weeks have been terrible in this forum. There is only so much ground that can be covered in these things.

Most of the recent threads have been broken records at some point. In this forum I'm looking for issues about biblical theology and such.

 

It does wear thin to have Baptist history thrown in one's face when he or she doesn't agree with Calvinism. And, it's true that most founders were but that doesn't necessarily set precedence for me or for a lot of modern Baptists today. History is not a deal sealer nor should it be used as precedence setter. Personally, I'll stick to what I believe the Bible says and that pre-dates any Southern Baptist founder by years and years.

 

Is this necessary? Very
Why it's necessary is we all need to sharpen our swords
Is this enlightening? Very
Yes I've learned more from the Bible in forums like this one than anywhere else
Is this edifying? Very
If learning isn't building I'd like to know what is.
Let's see if we can change the subject around here? Why? what could be more important than knowing the truth ?
What we all learn here.
How to communicate Christ to others.
How to argue a point with out fighting.
The truth and the deceptions that face us all.
Truth is, there are other doctrines out there, and in this forum, we can learn how to defend our beliefs and also how to admit when we ourselves are wrong.
You aren't suggesting we should just accept what others believe and leave it alone, are you? Isn't giving up, giving in to a doctrine you do not believe in, just for peace. Sounds familiar.
MB
　

 

...and moved closer to the truth.

 

Post of the day award :thumbs:

 

Correction

I shouldn't do early-morning pre-coffee posting. I meant to write "who does not know his history."

 

If baptist churches were Calvinistic hundreds of years ago, I would say they were wrong hundreds of years ago.

 

You just cannot help being full of yourself, can you? You just love to show your supposed superiority. I see that I misspelled verses, I overlooked the error, I should have posted "versed" instead of "verses."

I also see that Baptist should be capitalized. Thank you for the lession in English. Too bad you aren't as well versed in realizing that Calvinism is a false doctrine, although it should always be capitalized also.

 

To quote rsr from the thread in History section - Calvinist or Arminian:

The fact is by the mid 17th century there were basically two groups of baptists - Particulars and Generals. These came about at close to the same time however it is a historical fact that Generals pre-dated them only somewhat.

Understand however that whoever was first does not make then right by virtue of chronological order.

 

Have you seen this one.

Have you seen or heard of what this say's and what do you think about it?

http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0573.htm

 

The old boy's credibility is somewhat questioned from the beginning of his paper when he states that he can trace his baptist heritage all the way back to John the Baptist.