"Our sermons should never smack of parties - Anglican, Calvinist, Amillennial - rather our sermons should be obviously Biblical....avoiding labels, sticking with the text....so the powerful attraction becomes not membership in your party, but faithfulness to God's Word and its truth."
One can understand the advice to tone down the Calvinism and the Amillennialism (it's SBTS after all) but...the Anglicanism?
Why would that be an issue for Baptist seminarians?
Wait a minute. Isn't "Chapel" a label? Shouldn't we say "that big room with a lot of chairs were we sit and try to stay awake while a guy (ooops, that's a label too) I mean, uh, well, whoever, rants (ooos, anothe label) regarding his pet peeve or doctrine?"
Wait a minute. Strike all of that. Words are just labels for expressing thoughts. If we do away with labels we do away with communication!
But isn't that our job? To communicate the Gospel. (And "Gospel" is a label too!)
Of course. You asked for evidence that Monergism and Synergism were used in Systematic Theology by saying "According to who" [SIC]. When confronted by that evidence you turn tail and run again.
I did not ask for evidence. You said "Monergism and Synergism are historic and well respected theological catagories of two theories of soteriology." Not the same thing. I would also state that two book sources do not prove your point.
"turn tail and run again" So what exact behavior have I done that can be characterized this way? Am i obligated to continue and unending back and forth on this board until a cavlinist decides we are done so that I an not accused of turn tail and run? or is there some other measure or standard (in your calvinist/reformed/particular mind) that I am held to?
Who decides this standard? Does accusing someone of turn tail and run help our conversation? What purpose does it serve? How does using such a term promote peaceful conversations?
You claim not to be a Synergist yet you refuse to tells us why you are not and what you believe that differs from theological Synergism. So all you post is childish one-liners.
Uh no you posted in a manner to lead one to believe this is a widely accepted and normal use of those terms. My point was that they are not used much at all except maybe in reformed,Calvinist, particular circles. That being the case they have no real value except to those who like to use them to win debates.
I have never refused. I have never been asked. Please re-post the post I made where I refused.
They may be common among Calvinists, Reformed. Particular folks. However, outside of that arena they are unheard of, by and large. It certainly doesn't mean others have to be held to it.