You should have said are, not is.
Semi-Calvinism
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by Revmitchell, Dec 8, 2016.
Page 2 of 9
-
-
If you can't spell it correctly you don't know what it means.
No, using the term Pelagian is not merely a pejorative. It is descriptive.
You are making category errors. A semi-Pelagian is not the same as a Pelagian. Most Baptists are semi-Pelagian though. It's just a fact. We don't mean to hurt your feelings. -
If you actually read The Institutes you would agree with the greater bulk of it.
And, of course, no Baptist had a hand in writing any of those Canons. -
Your post actually sounds like it could be used as the definition of a semi-Calvinist, if the term Calvinism was used to describe the entirety of his beliefs and not just the five points.
:) -
There is calvinism lite, which are the 5points of Grace, and the entire sytem of Covenant theology, which is full calvinism, as per Reformed!
-
To many Presby Christians, Calvinists are only Reformed who have accepted all Covenant Theology, while to Baptists, calvinists are those who accepted just 5 points of Grace!
-
You need to direct the schoolmarm scolding to Reformed aka Herald aka MorseOp aka... who coined that spelling here.
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
I believe I am a semi-calvinist
-
I have actually read the Institutes. Several times. And there is still much I disagree with.
No, the authors were, for the most part, Dutch Reformed. What is your point? They were writing on Soteriology. Had they been writing on baptism or church polity I would have had massive disagreements with them. -
In what points?
-
Which of the 5 doctrines do you accept?
-
I am like many Calvinist Baptists, in that fully accept Reformed view on Sotierology, wile still holding to Premil/Baptist views on church leadership and other Baptist distinctions...
-
"Much that I disagree with" is rather vague. Out of all the contents of The Institutes are you claiming you disagree with most of what he wrote? The adverb most is more specific. If you would claim that indeed you disagree with most of The Institutes then you wouldn't even be a Christian.
This issue is similar to Baptists who claim to not believe most of the Westminster Confession of Faith. I made a thread on this topic a few years ago on this board. One who actually claims to object to most of the content of that document is not a Christian. There is way too much material in that document that is solidly biblical --as is the vast majority of The Institutes.
Your "no" may be confusing to some. I said that none of the Canons were written by Baptists.
Do you disagree with anything in The Canons of Dort? -
Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known MemberSite SupporterTouche!
-
Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known MemberSite SupporterOh Oh......He's back!:rolleyes:
-
Or, more commonly : uh oh.
-
No means, uh, well, "no."
No, none of the canons were written by baptists. Understand now? :) -
Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known MemberSite Supportermine conveys great adulation while yours suggest 'oh No (not him again)'... see the subtlety?
-
Think tha he, along with me, disagree with Calvin on Covenant theology, especiall in regardsto israel/Church, infant baptism, and church leadership,,,
Everything else was acceptable! -
Can agree with Reform Sotierology, yet also diagree with Covent theology regrding Israel/Church, infant baptism!
Page 2 of 9