Calvinism: more evangelistic?

Yep, he did. And here's a list of other Calvinists who share that belief:

John Gill

A. H. Strong

Jonathan Edwards

To sum up, man always acts freely within his nature.

Even if we see this question differently, we have a clear, unmistakable mandate to carry the gospel wherever we go, and wherever we can. When Jesus said "you shall be my witnesses, in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the uttermost parts of the earth," it was not just a mandate. It was an assumption that believers would be witnesses as a natural outgrowth of their faith.

 

So you're saying that Jonathan Edwards believed man has freewill?

 

Someone on this board recently said that if a person doesn't have a complete knowledge through much study and references on a subject that they should remain silent.

Maybe you should listen to your own preaching.

John

 

Famous Calvinist that were evangelistic.


Adoniram Judson – Famous Missionary
William Carey – Father of modern missions
John Bunyan – Pilgrim’s Progress
Charles Spurgeon – Famous Baptist Preacher “Prince of Preachers”
Luther Rice - - Missionary to India
John Newton – Hymn Writer “Amazing Grace”
Isaac Watts – Many hymns including “Alas! And Did My Savior Bleed?”
Jonathan Edwards – Missionary “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”
George Whitfield – Evangelist, big part of the Great Awakening
Augustus Toplady – Hymn Writer “Rock of Ages”
John Eliot – Missionary to American Indians
William Cowper – Hymn Writer “There is a Fountain filled with Blood”
Joseph Hart – Hymn Writer “Come, Ye Sinners”
Matthew Henry – Commentator
John Patton - Missionary
David Brainerd – Missionary
John Foxe – Foxe’s Book of Martyrs

 

As a former Calvinist myself, I will gladly concede the point that Calvinists are just as evangelistic as non-Calvinists, but I must take issue with this statement.

In 2010:
PCA reported 1455 churches with 346 thousand members
SBC has over 37,000 churches with over 16 million members

That stat in itself should tell you something about the evangelistic growth over the life span of these two denominations.

PCA reported 7935 baptisms in 2010 (2621 Adult baptisms and 5314 infant) (about 5.5 per church)
SBC reported 332,321 baptisms in 2010 (about 9 per church)

At last count the Southern Baptist Convention employed 4,857 "home" missionaries (in the United States, Puerto Rico, Canada, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands) and 4,137 foreign missionaries (in 130 nations), for a total of nearly nine thousand missionaries worldwide.

So, to claim the PCA is more evangelistic than the SBC is kind of like saying your local pee-wee football team likes playing football more than the Dallas Cowboys. I think we can both admit both teams like playing football and pointing out their game stats doesn't prove one of them likes it more.

 

The stat is a little deceptive. The SBC is over 150 years old. The PCA began in December of 1973. As well, the SBC began with a large number of churches as a result of great revivals in the 18th and 19th Century, many of which began with Calvinistic origins. The PCA began with a 260 churches who left the PC-USA. So, I think they have done fairly well.

As for Baptisms, that is distinctly a Baptist criterion. The fact is, most of the people SBCers baptized last year cannot be found.

 

Here's the quote again:

Did I quote him incorrectly?

 

That's cute Tom, I've already read it once. It's taken out of context.

The failure here is you've made an error not knowing that Edwards is simply defining what freewill would mean and can't mean in the early pages of his book. He also show errors of other theologies in their definitions.

Do I need to ask my question again?

 

He is not interested in the facts, he just wants to oppose that which he does not understand

 

No. Your point is valid. I did not excerpt the Edwards quote directly from his book, but from another writing which quoted him. So I went directly to Edwards writing, and found that you are correct. Thanks for helping put it in perspective.

In the meantime, I think the others I quoted are good examples of the point I was making.

 

Appreciated.

I think if you take a good long gander at Gill, he is saying mans will is in bondage, that a person can make choices in many things, but spiritually that man is in bondage to sinful desires, and without divine aid (which he does believe) will not spiritually make the right choice.

The will of Christ, glorified saints, angels: free. Gill clarifies this.

The freedom of "human actions" that he mentions is not spiritual freedom, it is merely human actions. He is comparing from one freedom to another, human actions to spiritual, to draw distinction. He then in his last statement that you've supplied, is comparing the wicked (lost) from the spiritual (saved.)

Jesus teaches us that we are not free, but in Him we will be free as per John 8.

Apologies for getting the OP off-track.

 

That's why I was careful to say that man operates freely within his nature. A lost man's will is truly in bondage to his sinful nature, and his choices will fall within that nature.

That's why I also hold that when the Holy Spirit regenerates and gives us a new nature, then we operate freely within our new nature.

 

Tom,

This is taken slightly out of context. I would have you read the entire "Freedom of the Will." It is a glorious exposition of Reformed Theology. Instead of going against "Bondage of the Will", the "Freedom of the Will" continues along the same line of thought.

 

Speaking of Baptism, I have a problem with a new Pastor. The guy wants me to be rebaptised....I think he needs a baptism quota to look good to his local church & RB Denom.

I think the ideas is absurd frankly. He was told I need instruction but this he never has the time to do however he can peddle Baptism (to me its cheap grace). Like he has baptised a known drug pusher who used it as a way to excuse his behavior (and this individual isnt a confirmed believer). I guess Im being a skeptic but I dont really trust this pastor. Im seriously considering leaving this church but the next closest church is another 25 miles away, more towards NYC

 

Please don't misunderstand my intent. I'm not attempting to deny how well the PCA has done, I'm only attempting to show how ridiculous the claim that it is "more evangelistic" than the SBC, when the facts just don't bare that out. My pointing out its size difference was in effort to show how they are apples and oranges (like the little league football team and Dallas Cowboys compare). Both groups clearly support and actively participate in evangelism despite their "success" rate and stats. (just as both teams like football)

Well, I could have used the Professions of Faith of the PCA but those numbers were actually lower than the number of baptisms and I was attempting to be a "fair" as possible in the comparison. Again, I don't believe the comparison of stats in this regard proves anything regarding either groups desire to reach the lost, but I think it disproves the contention that the PCA can be considered "more evangelistic" based on stats alone.

 

Then your argument goes to prove effectiveness in evangelism not motivation or desire for evangelism. I was only taking issue with your claim that one group is "more evangelistic" because of their theological perspective than the other.

One could argue that the decline in Baptisms and membership of the SBC is directly related to the current resurgence of Calvinism within the SBC, which has some parallels. I don't believe that to be the case personally, but, then again, I'm not the one attempting to use subjective growth stats to prove evangelistic fervor based upon one's soteriology.

 

OK so it's not 1,400, but just 600.

Now let's examine the other part of your claim:

"1400 missionaries on the field!!!"


The SBC number is referring "field personnel".


Is the PCA number likewise referring to "field personnel"? Notice that nearly 1/4 are listed as "other" (working in everything from "administration" to "nurture")


Perhaps someone conversant in denominational bureaucratic lingo could clarify, but it appears to me that this PCA "missionaries" figure is encompassing all kinds of support staff, while the SBC figure isn't?