so, who is the majority here

The Primitive Baptists are Calvinistic in their view of salvation, but they are not exactly Calvinists because of their view of the role of the Gospel. Primitive Baptists contend that not all the elect will hear and/or believe the Gospel. In this way we differ from our Calvinist brethren. Obviously, then, we do not believe in regeneration by means of the preaching of the Gospel. However, most would label Primitive Baptists as "Calvinists."

 

I voted for number 2... Not a full blown Calvinist for the reasons that Primitive Baptist brought up... Lean towards Calvinism and are probably the only brethren on here that are not Calvinist or Arminian... As you are one or the other!... Primitive Baptist Brethren are not!... Brother Glen Of The Primitive Baptist Brethren

 

Sorry I did not mean to offend the inbetweeners... There is hope for us yet! ... Brother Glen

 

I really fall between 2 and 3. I believe firmly in predestination and election, but I do think that we fail to fully understand all that's going on, which means things could appear to be paradoxical to us that aren't paradoxical to God.

 

I actually voted #4. The more I have been thinking, it seems that my beliefs are really not all that different from what the single-predestinarians have been saying. My problem with them is that they use the same proof-texts that the double-predestinarians use, which point inevitably to double-predestination if used that way, yet they deny double predestination.
So I would say there is some truth in what the Calvinists say and I don't use the non-calvinists arguments for "limited sovereignty" and "election purely by foreknowledge". I confess not to know exactly how those areas work.

 

Then you might be more Calvinistic than you gave yourself credit for. Calvinism embraces the paradoxes and does not seek to get rid of logical tension. For instance:

We choose because God chooses us; but we really do choose.

Everything we decide somehow brings about God's sovereign will; yet we do make real decisions for which we are responsible.

God elects people to salvation; but those who go to hell don't go because God didn't choose them, but because of their own sin.

We believe these paradoxes because we think that both sides of the statements are supported by scripture. Those who seek to get rid of all logical tension lead themselves quickly away from true calvinism and over toward hypercalvinism.

(BTW, the word PARADOX means something that appears to be contradictory, but really isn't, so I think it is a perfect word to use for what you describe--things that appear contradictory from our limited viewpoint, but aren't contradictory to our infinite God.)

 

Ahh...something we should all be more willing to admit.

 

Calvinism? Arminianism? I don't know.

I came out of that holiness-Arminian church
declaring myself Calvinist, because in that
church, they taught that believers never sin,
but their lives and my own had proven this
untrue. I thought then that Calvinists were
the only ones who admitted that believers sin.

Since then, I learned this is not so. In the last
sermon I heard in my husband's Nazarene
church, I learned very specifically, undeniably,
that they believe believers sin.

I really don't get it, then--that difference between
C'ism and A'ism. The line looks awfully blurred
to me.

 

I do not believe you can be an "inbetweener." There is a doctrine called semi-pelagianism
but it can be argueed that it is pure plaggeian and one of the sources of the points of arminianism. I have heard some deny some of the points of calvinism over the issue of age of accountability but to say salvation is different for some humans than others would deny Gods immutability and deny humans are born sinfulness which would not be calvinism at all. One doctrine promotes a low view of God and a high view of man. The other promotes a high view of God and a low view of man. The five points of calvinism are in complete contrast to the five points of arminianism. One can not logically agree with one point but disagree on another because they build on each other. Having both doctrines next to each other demonstrates how opposite they really are. Visit the following site if you want to see the points compared to each other in a table layout. It also has some history of the doctrine that is referred to as calvinism.

As far as paradoxes go the main paradox in question is God sovereignty and human responsibility.
The scriptures teach (will add verses later) that God in His sovereignty and because of His love for His creation prepared a way of salvation, choose those that will be saved, draws, and gives people the ability and desires but we/humans are still responsible to respond in time and space to the calling by confessing the Lord Jesus and repenting. If you deny any of the first part you will most likely be an arminian. If you deny the last part you would be considered a hyper-calvinist.

On another note has anyone here read Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion?

Arminianism vs. Calvinism (table layout/history)
http://www.whosaves.com/5pts/

 

Okay I am curious... Give me the definition of four-point and three-point Calvinists and OTOH ... No full blown Calvinists or Armenians?... Brother Glen Of The Primitive Baptist Brethren

 

I'm an Ar-Vinist. Or is it Calv-inian??

 

Of course you can; many -- if not most -- are. Baptist life is full of four-point and three-point Calvinists. </font>[/QUOTE]I think you're mistaken, at least in Southern Baptist Circles. I would say that most are four-point Arminians. They believe Christ died for all men and that all men have the choice to "come." They don't believe a person can lose their salvation, and their idea of depravity fits in a little better with the Arminian side than the Calvinist side.

I would maintain that Southern Baptists tend to be much more Arminian than Calvinists.

 

I agree with Scott E.'s assessment. I think something should be pointed out, however, because while most Southern Baptists consider themselves to hold to the 'P' in "Calvinism" ('Perseverance / Preservation of the Saints') - it is along the lines of "easy believism." That is, they "say the prayer" and have "fire insurance" (holding to "once saved always saved") whereas the doctrine of perseverance / preservation teaches that God transforms Christians so that they live lives of holiness. They are preserved by His grace (otherwise they would "fall away") and therefore persevere in the faith. There is a vast difference between these two positions.

 

Having been lurking around this part of the board since the end of August I think it is about time I throw my 2¢ in...

I have been (deleted), however of late have been studying the (deleted) view deeper.

I can now say, that beyond any doubt...

...

I have a big headache

But anyway, my thanks to all the posters in this part of the board, both the (deleted) and the (deleted) views, for all the food for thought.

I shall now go back to lurking for a while

Pete

[ December 13, 2002, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: Titus2_1 ]

 

Hi Everyone;

I don't like lables either.I am a inbetweener. I don't believe fully in either following... Calvin or Arminius were not perfect. No one has a perfect doctrine. Although Jesus Christ Did, but He is perfect.He is God.To say that no one can be inbetween two different views of men is mistaken.For instance.I do not want to be called Calvinist or Arminian because neither one of these men are God.I want and strive to be a follower of Christ and do not want to hold to another mans Gospel, but to Christ's only.Men make mistakes as I'm sure these men did.Just like you and I and everyone else. We all make mistakes. So to approach doctrine from someone elses views says that we accept there views as our own.This to me is following the man and not following Christ.Because my views are simular to Arminian does not make me a follower of Armininus or that because I have simular beliefs of Calvin does not make me a Calvinist.These two men I'm sure were both following Christ but, just in case I want to follow Christ on my own and don't want or need anyone to tell me what to believe. I'll let the Holy Spirit Guide me and take my following where He desires me to go.
May we all follow Christ;
Romanbear
Peace

 

As you can see on this board - both Calvinists and Armininas believe that the saints do sin. (though I am sure you could find small groups some place that would not accept that).

The main difference is that Arminians believe that our Sovereign God chose to "so love the World that He Gave His only Son" where "World" in that context is NOT defined as "The Arbitrarily select FEW of Matt 7".

5 pt Calvinists DO limit the term "world" in John 3:16 to - just the FEW of MAtt 7 - arbitrarily select by Sovereign God.

In Christ,

Bob

[ December 15, 2002, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]