What Is A Biblicist?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by IveyLeaguer, Feb 15, 2005.

  1. IveyLeaguer

    IveyLeaguer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    666
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is a Biblicist? I have thought for some time 'Biblicist" was the most accurate way to describe what I believe. I first heard of it while reading one of the classics and it seemed to fit. To me, it means nothing is more important than the Truth, and God is the Truth. And the Holy Bible, rightly divided, is God's Word. I am a Truth Seeker, first and foremost, and it matters not what it is or in which doctrinal camp it falls, I just want to know the Truth. But Bauder makes it sound like there is something disingenuous about it, as if a Biblicist is someone who conceals, covers things up, or is in some way deceptive.

    I would very much appreciate your thoughts on what a Biblicist is.
     
  2. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have always heard folks refer to themselves as "Biblicist" when they did not want to attach a label to themselves such as Calvinist or Arminian.

    At some points, I think that is a good thing and agree with the term Biblicist. But at times, some people I think use it as a cop out for not wanting to take a stand on a certain issue.
     
  3. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I call my self a Biblicist because I don't fully agree with C or A. Most people in our church have never heard those terms and wouldn't know what TULIP meant.

    I believe in Free Will and OSAS. [​IMG] I think that should disqualify me from being C or A.
     
  4. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, I don't fully agree with C or A and also believe in Free Will and OSAS. I guess I would be a Biblicist. [​IMG]
     
  5. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Technically, Calvinists believe in free will. It's just that the unregenerate, by definition, has no will to come to Christ. Therefore he is free to do what he is inclined to do, which is to live apart from Christ.
     
  6. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Yes Jim, but they believe God chose him to perish. [​IMG] Pre-ordained him to hell, as it were.
     
  7. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    After being saved a good number of years ago, I got right into fundamental churches. That was a good thing, and I don't regret it.

    But, they dwelt on Dispensationalism, which is fine, but heavily implied or actually taught that anyone who is not a Disprnsationalist is not a bible-believing person. For years I thought that non-Dispensationalists were liberals, and that their salvation was questionable. Such teaching permeates not only churches, but Bible colleges and semitaries.

    Now I have come to highly resent the attitudes of otherwise good men who taught such a wrong idea...not Dispensationalism itself, but the twisted and biased presentataion that made all others look like they were not serious Christians.

    For that reason, I would be very cautious about using the term "biblicist" in the context of ideas on which genuine, bible-believing Christians differ.
     
  8. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, they do. But my point is that within their system even those people have free will. It sounds like it doesn't make sense, but if you look at it from their perspective there is logic to it.

    I'm not taking sides here on the free-will issue, just trying to fairly point out that many Calvinists will tell you, with merit, that their system does include free will.
     
  9. Greg Linscott

    Greg Linscott
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/7963.jpg>

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2004
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    0
    From "What's In A Name?" by Dr, George Houghton
    http://www.faith.edu/seminary/faithpulpit/1993/december1993.htm
    Dr. George here specifically is referring to using or dropping the name "Baptist." But the other labels that Dr. Bauder mentions are also carry with them the means to attract, repel, and define. When we fail to take a label, do we not, on one level, fail to take an identifiable stand?
     
  10. IveyLeaguer

    IveyLeaguer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    666
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I was a Biblicist before I even engaged C & A, which was a deep process. Turns out that I am neither, but something in between. But I can see why that is the distinguishing characteristic to some, as I don't know what to call people like us who are neither C nor A.

    Had I turned out to be A, or even C, I would still have thought of myself as a Biblicist. Well, maybe not C since that binds you into a system.

    And I certainly have no qualms about stating a position, in fact I consciously practice restraint. But I guess my idea of Biblicist had to do with loyalty to the Word first. I ascribe to doctrines since they are inevitable to the fundamentals of the faith. But my loyalty is not to any doctrine, or book for that matter, but the God of the Bible.

    In fact, I am willing to test any doctrine or belief and change it if it can be shown biblically that there is something wrong with it. And I have done that and probably will again, though I suspect my fundamentals have pretty much settled. But even they are available to the sword of the Lord. Tozer said, "if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I’d ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow him out and say, 'I’m awfully sorry, you don’t bring any references with you'." If Gabriel appeared to me with a message from God, I might not ask him to show me where it is in Bible, but it had sure better line up with scripture. [​IMG]
     
  11. 4His_glory

    4His_glory
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that Bauder's statement was a good one. Many do hide behind the term biblicist, out of fear usually because of what others might think if they openly aknowledge their beliefs. In most IFB circles if you say you believe in unconditional election because its biblical, then you are automatically labeled a Calvanist as if this is some sort of hex.

    I have found that many IFB pastors lean more towards a Calvanistic theology than they are willing to admit. Some dance around the tulips to avoid a lable that is taboo so they call themselves a biblicist. The same would go for thoes that lean towards Arminian theology as well.

    It is here that I think that Bauder's point is to be taken. As fundamentalists we must not be afraid to state what we believe, and do so "charitbly" as he said.
     
  12. 4His_glory

    4His_glory
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    No not all Calvinists believe this. They come in differnt flavors just like anybody else.
     
  13. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Biblicist. My definition would go something like this; Biblicist, one who takes the Bible as God's word over any denominational or theoligical view.If there is a difference between church doctrine or theology and the Bible ,it is the church that must make the adjustment not God's written Word. Let God be true and all men liars.
     
  14. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Come on Diane ... YOu have been around long enough to know that most Calvinist do not believe this. They believe that God simply passed over him. They are not double predestinationists. You know better ...

    To answer the question, Biblicist is a copout, plain and simple. It is an attempt to prejudice the issue by insinuating that those whose labels you rejedct are not biblicist. But the truth is that Calvinists and Arminians both claim the Bible. Biblicist, therefore, means nothing useful.

    Get off the fence ... Either you beleive God elected individuals without respect for anything excep[t his own purposes (Calvinist) or you don't (Arminian).

    In other areas, biblicist is equally useless. Everyone claims to believe the Bible. Let's dispense with the term and just say what we are.
     
  15. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    5,144
    Likes Received:
    25
    While a nice sounding term in itself, Biblicist lacks the clarity, specificity, and general recogniction to make it useful.
     
  16. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's not as black and white as being either Calvinist or Aminian. I believe there are both good and bad points from both circles, but I don't believe either is 100% correct in their doctrine.

    I believe that it's God's will for all to be saved, but that one must repent and turn from their sin and put their faith in Jesus Christ to recieve salvation, if they choose not to, then they reject God.

    I also believe that if a person truly repents and turns from their sin and puts the faith in Jesus Christ, making Him Lord of their life, then they recieve the Holy Spirit and become a Christian and there is nothing that anyone can do to take that salvation away from them. If someone makes a profession of faith, but never truly repents and continues to live their own life, they can't loose their salvation, they never had it to begin with.

    God's foreknowledge is too hard for the human mind to even start to comprehend, God knows who will and won't get saved, but that doesn't take away their free will to reject him.

    I believe that God knew Adam and Eve were going to sin, but they didn't have to, because God knew what would have happend if they choose not to sin. As I said, some things about God were never meant to be fully understood by our tiny human minds.
     
  17. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I agree with JGrubbs. Neither is 100% in line with what I believe the Bible says. There's more than 2 sets of beliefs. I don't understand why some Calvinists insists otherwise.

    My salvation does not depend on following mere man.
     
  18. IveyLeaguer

    IveyLeaguer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    666
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's a fair question, Greg, but I don't think so, necessarily. In that case we would fail to be identified with a particular label, but that's quite different from taking a clear stand, IMHO. To label is to put someone in a box, then ascribe to him the beliefs or characteristics of everyone else in the box. At any given time in history there are a relatively small, but ever-changing, number of boxes within orthodox Christianity to be put into. I wonder if Dr. Bauder isn't really trying to say "you shouldn't be afraid or ashamed to take on the label of 'fundamentalism', regardless of its reputation."

    I read his speech and have no problem with it on the whole. Where he's concerned about preserving fundamentalism, I am only concerned about preserving and spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ and the deep truths of God's Word. If that's called fundamentalism, then it's A-OK with me. I don't think the two positions, minus the label, are really different at all. But I just don't see how the lack of a label prevents you from taking a clear and identifiable stand. Maybe it takes 10 seconds to express what I believe to be fundamental to the faith, but I can't see where that is a disadvantage.

    But I think the present times have much to do with it as well. Time has a way of blurring the distinctions of any particular label. Confusion and deception abound in the Christian community. I know what I believe but I can't be certain under which label I best fit without doing a serious investigation into where the conservative labels presently stand, and I don't have time for that. And I have no idea at all which label would best represent what I believe to other Christians, much less the world. Which is why I half-heartedly adopted the term Biblicist.

    Let me ask an honest question to everyone: If you start from scratch with ZERO bias or prejudice (as much as humanly possible), take the Word of God and apply a literal (not literalistic), grammatical, historical, contextual hermenuetic, asking God to show you the truth and not caring where you end up, under what label will you fall?
     
  19. Greg Linscott

    Greg Linscott
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/7963.jpg>

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2004
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    0
    Honest Answer that everyone should be able to arrive at: Where I Am Right Now!
     
  20. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I can honestly answer that because I'd never heard of either camp until I began reading here! I'm STILL neither C nor A. I contend that one is not a 3 point, 4 point ....... if you don't support ALL of either camp, you're neither. I took someone's Are You a Calvinist type poll a few weeks ago and agreed with 3 of the points but not what I consider to be Calvin's biggest point.
     

Share This Page

Loading...