Can/should Calvinists & Non-cals cooperate?

Well I talk to atheists all day long, really they dont care....however the term "Enemy" would tick them off & you'd hear..."See these Christians who claim to operate off of love; what hypocrites they are" ! Think on that for a while.

 

I am currently a member of a very close knit local church and we have a wide range of beliefs between C and A, yet we have harmony and fellowship.

HankD

 

I did not say it was not possible Hank ....however if you look at some of the posts in BB you can clearly see divisions, agreed? I would like to hear how you would propose to mend these people together.

 

This is a debate board. Naturally there will appear to be a huge rift in the anonymity of cyber space. However, in real life, for the vast majority it would be different. Many would not talk to each other in real life as they do here. They would get a long in a church setting much better than they would here where they can hide behind the key board. I know because sadly I've hidden there a few times.

 

I think it depends on what you mean by "fellowship and cooperate." If you mean come to a singing, giving them a hug, eating together, or just hanging out yes. If you mean setting and each one saying what they believe on this issue then probably not.

 

Thanks for these comments. It saved me a lot of typing!

 

It is preordained that we will be "mended together" in Heaven.:smilewinkgrin:

 

That we can agree on. :applause::thumbsup:

 

Same here.

 

To answer the OP, we should all be given swords and spears and put into the valley of Megiddo to fight to the death.

If a calvinist, arminian, non-cal / non-arm cannot work together it is on the individual, not the doctrines.

 

Sounds a lot like the church I serve.

 

Absolutely they can partner and serve together. That said, I would practically draw a line at planting churches together.

 

Calvinists and Arminians can certainly work together.
When Dr. Lloyd-Jones first went to Westminster Chapel in 1938, he was co-Pastor with Campbell Morgan who was an Arminian. Loyd-Jones recalled that they got on together very well.

I could certainly work with an evangelical Arminian colleague. The only difference would be that I wouldn't tell unconverted folk that Christ died for them. What I will tell them is that Christ died for sinners just like them and that if they will come to Him, He will certainly not turn them away.

Steve

 

The Calvinist-Arminian thing is a red herring that, if pursued too much and fretted over too long will distract from the foundations of the Gospel.

I've planted churches with believers from across the theological spectrum (since it isn't just Calvinist or Arminian...there are many other options) and things have gone wonderfully.

Find Jesus loving people who are rich in the Spirit and exhibit grace.

Then plant as many churches as possible.

Lost people don't care about our dumb theological turf wars.

 

Interesting questions to say the least, but it's always amazing to me that we Jesus people will ignore certain things and focus like lasers on other. If you view my entire comment, which was never intended to be picked apart but simply be a general statement that responded to the OP, you will notice that I said that both Cals and Armins can ABSOLUTELY serve together. And since I need to be persnickety with my words, I will also indicate that from my perspective, that would include a local church.

If a church that contains cals and non-cals and armins can successfully plant a church, which at its core is essentially a process of reproduction, I see no issue with that per se, so long as the planting church has its soteriological "ducks" in order. I'm good with church folks being either or so long as they know why. Being calvinistic in my views and being a lead pastor, those things tend to shine through my preaching, teaching, and leadership within the body... i.e. the folks I serve can float down either river or blend as the HS leads them.

My statement comes from a "partnering" perspective. Would I intentionally plant a church with a church that was "solidly" not soteriologically sound? No. However, would I partner with them in other endeavors. Sure... absolutely.

And for the record, the SBC as an entity shouldn't be in the church planting business. It doesn't exist except for 3 days out of a calendar year. Churches are at the top of the food chain in Baptist life (may it always be) not the corporate entities the churches drive. That said, the SBC (read state and local associations) should be in the business of financially supporting both reformed and non-reformed plants. That isn't happening in all areas and its usually the reformed folks who are getting the short end of the stick... but not always.

This discussion is why Acts 29 is growing exponentially across the US. Interesting that you can be a SBC congregation and still be an Acts 29 plant/replant, but if a SBC church starts to lean reformed... yikes... they might get the boot.

BTW... what's a Calvinism issue?:laugh:

 

I dont hear anything back form the hardliners! My question is how do you stay away from hot theological issues that serve to divide......sounds like a sterile Church environment where everyone holds hands & sings Kumbaya. :laugh: Seriously Ive also been to Baptist churches where they invariably attempt to modify or change my belief convictions.....sometimes subtly sometimes not so subtly. After those experiences, I just made a decision its safer to not go to a "Blended" or Non -Calvinistic church. That way I protect the sanctity of my faith beliefs.