Should the SBC divide over Calvinism/non-Calvinism?

Are you a Southern Baptist?

 

A Kibbitz question:

Who owns the church property in your parish? The bishop may have sold it.

All denominations are man-made. Jesus is still building His Church. Conventions, synods, etc. are man-made as well. What has all of this to do with the Bride of Christ, without spot, blemish or any such thing? These issues were settled once for all long before Jon Chauvin(Calvinistic) and Jacob Arminius(Arminian). Someone is back in the ditch. Could they both be wrong?

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Thanks for proving my point. Neither side believes the other has the Gospel. How can they fellowship? They should go their separate ways.

 

I just don't believe this is true.

 

That is the typical man made solution to all of our problems of disagreement. Tell me, once they split, who will have the more pure group? The one you think is correct??? In a year, will four point Calvinist split from the five point? This is the mindset that gives us our present day situation, hundreds upon hundreds of denominations, and they are all right, according to who you ask.

There is a mind set of exclusion in most all denominations. There are groups of Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Episcapalians that believe in closed communion, for example. Of course, the Catholic church and Church of Christ are all that way. They all have one thing in common. They think they are right, and everyone else is wrong, thus, to keep things pure, we exclude people. The only problem is, which one is right.

So with all you people who have this insatiable desire to seperate and exclude, what do you base the group you end up fellowshipping with, what you think the Bible says???? My guess is such arrogance makes it likely you are on the bottom of the chain of theological correctness.

 

The schism between believing in the free will of men and the Sovereignty of God in salvation is so deep and wide, so absolutely fundamental, that the only solution is the complete rejection of one in favor of the other. There is no compromise, even for those who sincerely wish for one.

All one has to do is watch how every debate on this board breaks down to a Calvinism vs Arminianism debate at the fundamental level to see that.

 

This is so far from the truth that you obviously have no clue what non cal's believe. It's not "black or white".

 

Some would say "NO!"

If I'm not mistaken, he's a member of a CBF church...

That group is far more likely to split from the SBC than the calvinists are....They're just trying to figure out how to take all the money with them.

 

Well, about time!

The anti-cals have been tilting at straw-men for years. 'Bout time we used their own tactics in response. :laugh:

 

First the SBC isn't in a mess. That is hyperbole intentional or otherwise. Second not all in fact not even most particular and general baptists think that the other side is completely without the gospel. In fact to think so may be a hypersensativity but most likely stems from immaturity.

Both sides believe Christ must be the source of our salvation. And it is only through his finished work on the cross that we can see eternity. Whether ot not man was forced into salvation or God simply has drawn him prior to salvation is a secondary issue.

When I share the gospel and that person accepts it and their life is changed I am not concerned with how God does it only that he does. In fact no where ins scripture does it tell us to be concerned for those issues when we evangelize but only to tell the good news. You tell it and let God worry about how he accomplishes it. That is where our energies should be spent.

 

I was researching another issue and came across this statement by Mark DeVine of MBTS. I think it touches on the issue here.

Amen. Calvinists and Arminians can have a surface and shallow fellowship, but anything that is deep and lasting between them is impossible.

 

Oh brother!

Maybe all of the angry calvinists (is that a redundant term?) should form their own denomination, then... so they can actually form REAL friendships!

 

That was a rediculous post...using a quote that may or may not have been intended to be used for the extreme side of your case.

 

Your spelling is ridiculous. The point of the quote was that a prerequisite for deep and abiding fellowship is a shared conviction. I used his words because he said it better than I can.

 

Rule 1: when confronted, attack spelling...the real substance of any post...

 

Thanks!! :thumbs:


Be carefull tho, you mite axidently miss-spell somthing tooo.

 

Okay, let's get to the point here. Clearly the burden of proof is on you. First of all, what do you think a "deep and lasting" relationship is...and why is it "impossible" for that to happen between a Calvinist and Arminian?

Oh, and by the way, I'm already losing count of people I know who are Calvinists that have what I think are "deep and lasting" relationships with non-Cal's.

 

I wouldn't describe it as a secondary issue. It directly drives how one does witnessing, evangelism and missions. It drives the content of preaching. It affects how one presents the gospel.

But I agree with you here, in part:

I wouldn't say we shouldn't be concerned with those issues. But I agree that as a general rule, our job is to do exactly as you say. Tell it, leave the results to God.

 

I absolutely agree Timothy.

As much as I disagree with the Calvinists on the BB, I would never think to shun them from fellowship over this issue. How God does things is never as important as the fact that He does offer us salvation through Christ.

 

You probably didn't mean to do this, but "offer us salvation" assumes free-willism. So you essentially said, "How God does things is never as important as the fact that free-willism is true."

:laugh: :laugh: