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!

Featured cal and non-cal agreement

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by agedman, Jun 17, 2013.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 5
  1. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    You are correct. Some of the soteriology expressed here on the BB recently is short on the 'soter' part. Can one indeed save themselves?
     
    #21 Mexdeaf, Jun 18, 2013
  2. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks for the reminder, I will mind my keyboard..
     
    #22 quantumfaith, Jun 18, 2013
  3. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    Oops, you are correct. Thanks.
     
    #23 Mexdeaf, Jun 18, 2013
  4. JohnDeereFan

    JohnDeereFan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    134
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The Finneyists certainly believe so.
     
    #24 JohnDeereFan, Jun 18, 2013
  5. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    Yes it is about that but the things stated in the OP are in fact straw man arguments there is no agreement on some of those things -- far from it. That's my point.

    Here's a better suggestion:

    We agree upon the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, the Atoning Blood, Christ the only way to the Father, that God's Word is truth, That Christ is Perfect in all His being &c.

    - Blessings
     
    #25 preacher4truth, Jun 18, 2013
  6. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    1
    :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
     
    #26 quantumfaith, Jun 18, 2013
  7. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Brother I appreciate your attempt here. It is a shame one or two will not allow for it. It seems they would turn the Lord's return into something negative.
     
    #27 Revmitchell, Jun 18, 2013
  8. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    As observed:
    Not an appeal to any other authority (e.g. Catechism, Calvin, etc.)
    Not an appeal to Scripture.
    Only an appeal to yourself as your own authority.

    Stop attacking others, and put and end to the offensive posts.
    Post something useful and beneficial and directed at the OP, not at others.
     
    #28 DHK, Jun 18, 2013
  9. agedman

    agedman Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    11,023
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Faith:
    Baptist
    On the first view you discussed, I agree with you that (IF my mind doesn't fail in recall) that there were a few posts that disparage the depravity as total and promote that there must be some spark of "free - (whatever)" involved that every man innately has.

    However, In following a great deal of threads on the discussion(s) and some in which I contested within, I noticed that even those who disagreed with me on "total" depravity did so with the concept that unless the Holy Spirit works through the Word - that person cannot be saved. In that, some may reject the term but hold to a semblance of the same in regards to state of the heathen unregenerate.

    They may not hold to the degree of depravity (if there is in fact degrees) but generally all would relate that no person can come to the Father unless the Spirit draws them.


    In the second discussion, again you are correct (although I don't recon as many as you have seen - I haven't been here as long as you).

    The problem seems to come from a view that involves some "cooperate or corporate" salvation election in which I just don't see as Scriptural until the millennium. But that is for a different thread.

    However, when it comes to election in the purest sense, it does seem all sides agree that no attainment to station of living or precondition status of a person draws God's favor. It is that God elects as He chooses irregardless of humankind.

    As you so very well point out, where there is strong disagreement seems to be in the ability or lack there of of the heathen to have some innate capability to respond by actually "accepting or rejecting" salvation. That is troubling to me. But does not diminish the original statement that in some manner all have a hold on some form of unconditional election.

    I have no problem with reproving error. As you have possibly noticed, I also have "crossed swords" on occasion with most on the BB over some matter I viewed as portrayed incorrectly.

    What I am attempting to accomplish is to see if most of the board will agree on at least some very basic ground.
     
    #29 agedman, Jun 18, 2013
  10. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    24,988
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Great post! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
     
    #30 InTheLight, Jun 18, 2013
  11. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    Sort of, but not quite.

    My response (which you quoted) was to one who stated my post was nonsense. Said post didn't appeal to Scripture whatsoever but to ones 'own authority'. Said post got a pass.

    Wonder why?

    Thus there was no appeal to Scripture needed, as Scripture was not the context. My appeal was to the history of comments on the BB.

    When posts are about Scripture, then I use Scripture. When posts are concerning held beliefs on BB then I appeal to the held beliefs of others.

    - Blessings
     
    #31 preacher4truth, Jun 18, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 18, 2013
  12. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    This is a wonderful thread, because, it foucses on a positive, agreement. If this were made the normal routine, the Calvin-free will threads would be near zero, and ten to twelve posters I can think of would be out of business.
     
    #32 saturneptune, Jun 18, 2013
  13. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    agedman,

    Thanks for your reply.

    The thing that I am getting at is that in your quote of 'all here' agreeing on said points, that such reasonings fall well short of what is true and of what does actually take place on BB.

    Anything other is pure romanticism and such does not reflect a tangible reality here.

    - Blessings
     
    #33 preacher4truth, Jun 18, 2013
  14. agedman

    agedman Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    11,023
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The agreement statements do "fall well short of what is true (of some held views) and what does actually take place on the BB." I'm not much of a romantic, but would like to see at least one thread in which folks can make statements that are agreeable.

    How curious it is that I don't yet recall reading a post from a "non-cal" on this thread. It would seem that there would actually be a great thrill in finding and showing a certain agreement.

    Perhaps there will be those who are non-cal in view that can see some agreement with the statements and contribute those points of agreement. If they disagree, then why not state how the statements could be modified to show agreement?

    I did very much like the post that included the "deity of Christ, the virgin birth, the resurrection, substitutionary atonement, His imminent return et. al." That was good!
     
    #34 agedman, Jun 18, 2013
  15. Winman

    Winman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't believe non-Cals like myself desire to be in agreement with Calvinists. I have no desire whatsoever to be in agreement with Calvinism, as I consider it utterly false doctrine. It is NOT what the scriptures say.

    That said, I have no desire to be in agreement with Catholics, or Mormons, or JWs... The scriptures say CONTEND for the faith, not compromise.

    Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

    Contend means to fight for the truth, not compromise and hold hands with those who teach falsehood.

    I could go over each point, but it is a little late, maybe tomorrow I will post how I disagree with your views.

    If you would rather not hear why I disagree, that is fine, I have posted my views many hundreds of times here at BB.
     
    #35 Winman, Jun 18, 2013
  16. agedman

    agedman Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    11,023
    Likes Received:
    1,108
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Please do post, Winman.

    I would encourage you to take the OP and separate each point and show how if it were modified it would be in agreement with your views (if only in a minor way).

    Just as the strong Cal's would contend the OP isn't in total agreement with what they hold, yet can agree somewhat on the statements, I look to see how you can also show a level of disagreement, yet also demonstrate how the statements do show some level of agreement with your view.

    Of course, you could also add to the list started by Herald; "deity of Christ, the virgin birth, the resurrection, substitutionary atonement, His imminent return et. al."
     
    #36 agedman, Jun 18, 2013
  17. convicted1

    convicted1 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    28
    I agree that we are depraved. However, I don't agree that we are born depraved, but in a state of grace until we come to understand the true consequences of sin. To know to doeth go, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

    I see more of a corporate view of election, and that election is Christ centered, and not man-centered. We are chosen in Him, and not outside of Him.


    The atonement was made for all, but only those who accpet it are the ones who are saved. The others rejected it and are left to their own peril(s).

    We are saved by grace through faith. Without faith, there's no grace. So we aren't saved by grace alone, but by grace through faith. No faith=no grace=no salvation.

    Agreed with here. :thumbs:


    I pray that I have presented my view in a christian like manner and that you can at least understand what I tried to convey. Sometimes what I type and what I mean are "polar opposites" of each other.
     
    #37 convicted1, Jun 19, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 19, 2013
  18. Herald

    Herald New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2011
    Messages:
    1,600
    Likes Received:
    27
    The verse you quoted (Jas. 4:17) is in the context of hypocritical behavior that is occurring in the church. In other words there was already an existing problem and James was addressing it. It is not a proof-text that an infant is born without sin.

    There seems to be a disconnect in your statement, "I agree that we are depraved" and then qualifying your statement by stating, "[we are depraved], but in a state of grace until we come to understand [sic] sin". What you are really saying is that infants are born without sin. The consequences of that are that it denies we have a sin nature and provides the possibility, however minuscule, that an infant can grow up and live a sinless life and thus not need the atoning work of Christ. I am not saying that you believe that, but that is where your view of the infants relation to sin can lead.
     
    #38 Herald, Jun 19, 2013
  19. InTheLight

    InTheLight Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    24,988
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    Faith:
    Baptist
    #39 InTheLight, Jun 19, 2013
  20. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What in the world is wrong with you? Maybe you should go back and reread this thread before speaking like this.
     
    #40 Revmitchell, Jun 19, 2013
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 5
Loading...