1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Should the SBC divide over Calvinism/non-Calvinism?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by reformedbeliever, Oct 24, 2007.

  1. dan e.

    dan e. New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is starting to get laughable.
     
  2. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Whitfield and Wesley actually parted ways, though they maintained a great respect for one another. They couldn't work together, and their correspondence revealed their acknowledgement that they were not of the same mind, though they prayed God to make them of the same mind.

    What separated them? Calvinism and Arminianism. They are divinding doctrines. Only those who are lukewarm can bide them both.
     
  3. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    What was that about taking a residence in a home made of glass? :laugh:
     
  4. dan e.

    dan e. New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    YEE-HAW!! I knew it was coming!! :laugh:
     
  5. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    He violated rule #2... if you call someone out on their spelling, NEVER make a spelling mistake yourself! :D
     
  6. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    How does one divinde a doctrine?
     
  7. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    One may use a divinding rod.:laugh:
     
  8. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    What? God doesn't offer salvation to Calvinists? :confused: :p :laugh:
     
  9. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    I would assume that cals and non-cals have always existed together in the SBC. What is different now?
     
  10. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    You forgot this one -----> :eek:
     
  11. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    "Offer" salvation implies that He leaves it up to us whether or not to accept salvation. That's a free-will premise. Election doesn't work that way. He SAVES the elect. There's no "offer" involved. All the Father gives Jesus WILL come to Him -- not "MAY" come to Him if they happen to accept the offer.
     
  12. Timsings

    Timsings Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    585
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, I am, or at least I used to be before the fundamentalists changed what it means to be a Southern Baptist.

    Tim Reynolds
     
  13. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    2
    Amy, I think it is that it is perceived that Calvinists are growing in number in the SBC.

    Why is that? For one, the rise of the SBC Founders Organization, which has as its goal to pursuade Baptists to return to their Calvinist roots.

    Two, At least one SBC seminary is Calvinist-friendly--Southern at Louisville, whose president, Albert Mohler, is one. Dr. Tom Nettles, a professor at Southern is a prolific and influential writer as well.

    Those Southern grads are now pastoring churches and preaching the Doctines of Grace; some are organizing avowedly Calvinist churches.

    Three, the internet has been a real force in communicating information from both Calvinists and non-Cals.

    Four, attacks on Calvinism by several prominent SBC preachers and leaders have proliferated and intensified. Responses from well-known Calvinists have also escalated. Then there was the Mohler-Patterson debate at the SBC convention. They've helped put this on a front burner.

    Until 20 years, Calvinism was a small blip on the radar for the SBC. Even though Calvinists are still a small minority, the number is growing, and non-Cals no longer can flick them off their shoulder like a little pesky gnat. They are seen as a threat to their doctrinal dominance and to their political dominance--a threat which must be headed off.

    Those are some of the things, Amy, which are different now. Will they produce a split? Gee, I hope not.

    I'm all for robust debate over Calvinism. My hope is that it will be both robust and civil at the same time.
     
  14. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    This is incorrect. You contend on the thread "Why do Pastors do this" that "It's this imprecise language that I hear so often" which you dislike. And it is THIS phrase above which drives me :BangHead:
    The SBC DID NOT begin nor was it created by Calvinists, as if to say it was orginally all Calvinists. It consisted of both and both worked side by side. It had many Calvinistic leaders but not ALL were Calvinistic. To literally return to our roots is NOT to be Calvinist but both :) .

    Most are not Calvinistically (is that a word?) friendly because of the intense push to remove one one view totally for the other. The two men you mention above are not for total removal of one view for another but a working in and with both. They are avid Calvinists but niether abosolutists. I have actually met and spoken with Al Mohler before (though it was for a short time) but he is NOT in favor of changing the SBC into a Calvinistic organizations with only Calvinists schools.

    Yes, many have but not all nor most. I praise God for all of them but they went as the Lord lend them, some toward Calvinism and some not. :thumbs:

    I would agree. But I would also agree that the Calvinists have and are using technology much more than the Non is, and it has helped in peoples understanding of and coming to the Soveriegn doctrines. It was and IS a very smart move.

    This is a misreprentation, though it does have SOME truth in it. Yes, there have been attacks made by both sides, and it has escalated to A FEW of the more prominant or known people on both sides.

    And since I was at the Mohler-Paerson debate I will say this. They did more praising of the other as to being a man of God, a faithful steward and diligent student of the Word, who is deeply in love with the Lord, than they did actaully debating. As a matter of Fact, the extremists of both sides were upset that they both gave their views of scripture and a basic why they don't hold some of the other's views and did not have the blood bath which is supposed to happen when Cal's and non-cal debate the Word. Actaully many have even accused that it was more a firendly discussion of one another rather than the debated 'hoped' for by some.

    Now THIS is a sad case of martyr syndrome. Let me ask YOU something if I may be so bold.

    If the roles were reversed in the SBC regarding C/A, and the non-cals were gaining influence and numbers - what would you or the other Calvinists do? Unfortunately, the EXACT SAME THING. One of the problems right now with many of the Calvinistic pastors who are trying to bring this to a boil is that they want to be allowed to preach in churches and meeting but WILL NOT ALLOW an non-cal to preach in their churches or meetings. They are asking for a double standard. It is this kind of mentality which the extremists of both sides opt for but both are wrong.

    I do not agree with SOME in the SBC leadership nor in the Calvinist camp of leadership for absolutism or doctrinal purity (which is much akin to Nazi'ism) but to maintain a balance of both. It has been and always should be.

    It will, but only for those who wish an abosolutists view of doctrine. And it will be they (them?) who split (as in leave) but the SBC will not split over it.
    Actaully I think it WILL come to a head/boiling point by those who are pressing for it. But once it pops I think many will see we are not so different and believe very much the the same things with some differences and that there is no need to split at all.
     
    #94 Allan, Oct 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2007
  15. youngmom4

    youngmom4 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok, I feel really stupid...and that's an odd feeling for me :p . What is the difference between Calvinists and non-Calvinists or Arminians, or whatever you want to call it. I don't understand...I thought if you were Baptist, you were Baptist...now you're telling me that even Baptists can't agree on their doctrine! :tear: :BangHead: :tonofbricks:
     
  16. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    Thanks Tom. I didn't know that Calvinism was part of Baptist roots. I should do some study on Baptist history. Someone else had mentioned the internet being an influence. I can understand that with all the information at our fingertips.
    I hope it doesn't cause a split either.
    I wonder why this subject causes so much anger.
    Lot's of good info. Thanks. :thumbs:
     
    #96 Amy.G, Oct 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2007
  17. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    The simple version:

    On one side, people believe that God is totally in control over who gets saved and who doesn't. He chose some people before the foundation of the world, and those people WILL be saved, no ifs, ands, or buts. People call this Calvinism, even if it departs from Calvinism on many points.

    On the other side, people believe that mankind has the FINAL say whether or not they will be saved. God provides the possibility of salvation, but it's up to man to either accept or reject of their own free will. People refer to this as Arminianism, even though it departs from Arminianism on many points.
     
  18. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    In other words; No.

    You used to be, but are not disgruntled.

    That is ALL I wanted to know.
     
  19. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well, they should have had their debate on the BB! :laugh:

    Then they would have their "blood bath".
     
  20. youngmom4

    youngmom4 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, if I believe that God offers salvation to all but we have to repent and accept Christ in order to get it...but I also believe that God already knows who will and who won't accept Christ...what does that make me? I mean, I totally disagree that only certain people can be saved; I do believe that only certain people will be saved, though. Am I a hybrid or what? This is too confusing! :BangHead:
     
Loading...