Why even care if another is Calvinistic, Arminian or Whatever?

[Alive]

1 minute ago, Marathoner said:

I have found great value in Calvin's commentaries as you might recall (it's been a long time since those topics where we discussed that). It's a reading project I intend upon resuming soon, I hope. From the theological perspective I'm in agreement with him.

I haven't had much exposure to Spurgeon apart from quotes other members share on the forum from time to time, so I don't know enough about the man. Many aspects of life others take for granted were absent where I'm concerned; for example, a library of my own is one. Having been homeless for so long and losing everything over and over again, I could only keep what I could carry.

I should look into Spurgeon sometime soon. 

Charles was a man of God who was used as a member to great affect. What we, myself include of course, is an inabilty to ignore the flesh and the true battle, to have an ear toward what the Spirit is saying to us at any given time. Scripture is never compromised, but its application is subject to man’s point of view. We need discernment and our Lord’s help each moment.

Lord, help us to look to you.

[TheBlade]

Oh man for me way to many *ism. You know everything each one us believes can fall into some *ism. I do read allot how some will ask others will just say "oh your a Calv". Truth we all have that bible so if WE won't listen to the sweet holy Spirit speaking by His word then anything you say here will go no where. If we wont listen to Christ we will never listen to man. 

You know this makes me think of this preacher I just started to listen to again. Oh hes been gone for so long.. there were so many things God did through Him.. wonders. He had been around the world and if I said his name I believe not one would know him. But he was talking about healing for the inner man.....that was part of his ministry things I don't hear taught much any more. HAHA but man he talked about how WE think of each other how we talk about each other. At the end of haha this one tape...yeah thats all there was he said its a choice he chooses to have only good thoughts about every one of you. How speical each one of you are. One was about we tend to think every thought we have its all us yet (I have known this) its self like when to eat sleep.. then the enemy and then God.

How we don't take captive every thought... think if we did.. if we only spoke life with each other.. some day

[Marilyn C]

5 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

Based upon a few discussions on here lately, I felt compelled to share this.  In the local ekklesia I fellowship with consistently, we have those who hold various beliefs or practices including:

·        Armenianism

·        Calvinism

·        Dispensationalism

·        Amillennialism

·        Tongue speakers

·        Non-tongue speakers

·        New earthers

·        Old earthers

·        Pre-trib

·        Post-trib

·        Mid-trib

·        Multiple raptures

However, when we get together we purpose to just make our focus to be Christ and sola scriptura and not particular views or systematized theology.  I am pleased to say we are learning (through much trial and error) that we are never truly one in various teachings and practices - our oneness is only in Christ and the one Spirit we share.

I must admit I sometimes am tempted to show others I fellowship with why my stance on something is correct and theirs is off.  The flesh is ever ready to judge another!  But, thankfully, the inner Anointing usually constrains me from doing that. "Behold how good and pleasant it is, when brethren dwell together in unity!" (Psalm 133:1)

I think it's good to remind ourselves that all of these things listed above are non-essentials of the faith (at least in my estimation).  The essentials are:   Do we believe Christ lived, died and rose again and will return soon? Does He live in each of us? Do we allow His Spirit to operate in and through us?  Do we love one another with the love He has given us, being patient, kind and long-suffering with them (regardless of the non-essential views each might hold)?

So this is pretty much the same on this forum, right?  There is nothing wrong with sharing our different views of scripture and theology - iron does sharpen iron.  But I think it's helpful to put things in perspective --> by our responses to one another, may we not get all wrapped up in teachings and always be conscious "of the one for whom Christ died."  (Rom 14:15)  They will know us by our love (John 13:35), not our supposed unity in teachings and practices!

Do you think this is a edifying word?

PS: Putting labels on one another simply divides and is what Paul warns us about in 1st Corinthians 3.  It is often the basis for accusations and the devil loves to categorize as a means to separate us from one another.

Hi VA,

Very good topic, thanks.

I see from God`s word that we are in unity by the Holy Spirit, (Eph. 4: 3) which it behooves us to keep, (with our attitude as you said). Then there is the unity of the faith which the Holy Spirit is bringing us to, (over the centuries). (Eph. 4: 13)

To contend for the faith then is right, however there is a time and place for that. Remembering that many people died or were ostracized, for the truths we have today. 

Good to remember what Paul said - `Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you.` (Phil. 3: 15)

Marilyn.

[Marathoner]

4 minutes ago, Alive said:

Charles was a man of God who was used as a member to great affect. What we, myself include of course, is an inabilty to ignore the flesh and the true battle, to have an ear toward what the Spirit is saying to us at any given time. Scripture is never compromised, but its application is subject to man’s point of view. We need discernment and our Lord’s help each moment.

Lord, help us to look to you.

Amen. 

There are many whom I have wronged, and precious few I'm able to reach due to circumstances out of my control. I trust in the Lord that matters will be rectified when it's out of my control, but there is one matter which I can address right now... it's not too late yet.

@Arial, I owe you an apology. I treated you wrongly, being both inconsiderate and careless with my words, and there's no excuse nor justification for that. It's only fitting that I apologize to you publicly since I did that to you in a public manner. 

I know better than to do things like that. The Lord bless you richly, my friend. 

[Neighbor]

Regarding the side note on Rev. Charles H. Spurgeon. I read his messages and morning and evening devotions often, near daily. 

My absolute favorite sermon is "The Wordless Book".

 

[Arial]

29 minutes ago, Marathoner said:

Amen. 

There are many whom I have wronged, and precious few I'm able to reach due to circumstances out of my control. I trust in the Lord that matters will be rectified when it's out of my control, but there is one matter which I can address right now... it's not too late yet.

@Arial, I owe you an apology. I treated you wrongly, being both inconsiderate and careless with my words, and there's no excuse nor justification for that. It's only fitting that I apologize to you publicly since I did that to you in a public manner. 

I know better than to do things like that. The Lord bless you richly, my friend. 

Thank you. Apology accepted, wrong forgotten. I apologize for answering in kind.

[Arial]

1 hour ago, AnOrangeCat said:

Somewhat. I think that the terms are potentially useful for quick identification of people's basic beliefs, but like I pointed out in another thread that has since been deleted sometimes there's so much division within a particular subset these days that the terms aren't even useful for that anymore. I'm convinced that no one denomination is 100% correct on every little particular thing, but we're not expected to either.

That said there's definitely a need to police the unity at least a little in the name of protecting and preserving the core tenets of Christianity. Throughout history and into the present there have been some really out there beliefs that have entered the picture. Things so far removed from actual Christianity that they need to be denounced as false teachings and a clear line needs to be drawn between the church and those who practice those things.

The Bible tells us there is to be unity in the church and that refers to unity of doctrine. It was the apostles who were appointed by Jesus to lay the foundation of His church. It's foundation is its doctrine---it teachings.

Some things are doctrine and some things are not. We don't have to agree on those things that are not as long as the true doctrines remain intact. And we need to know the difference. A lot of the isms are often referred to as doctrines and considered doctrines but they are not doctrines ---though if they are truly Christian, contain those doctrines of Christianity. But they are not doctrines, they are theologies. End times teachings are not doctrines.

It is unfortunate that we even developed classifying things as isms for they rarely contain the whole picture but a very tiny portion of it and it is the very small portions that then become the source of divisive behaviors and attitudes.

[Vine Abider]

2 minutes ago, Arial said:

The Bible tells us there is to be unity in the church and that refers to unity of doctrine. It was the apostles who were appointed by Jesus to lay the foundation of His church. It's foundation is its doctrine---it teachings.

Some things are doctrine and some things are not. We don't have to agree on those things that are not as long as the true doctrines remain intact. And we need to know the difference. A lot of the isms are often referred to as doctrines and considered doctrines but they are not doctrines ---though if they are truly Christian, contain those doctrines of Christianity. But they are not doctrines, they are theologies. End times teachings are not doctrines.

It is unfortunate that we even developed classifying things as isms for they rarely contain the whole picture but a very tiny portion of it and it is the very small portions that then become the source of divisive behaviors and attitudes.

What I think you are talking about is being solid in the essentials of the faith, and holding the non-essentials more loosely - is that correct?

[Arial]

2 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

What I think you are talking about is being solid in the essentials of the faith, and holding the non-essentials more loosely - is that correct?

It could be stated that way, depending on what you mean by the essentials of the faith and the non essentials. (I both hate words and love words! They can be so precise and also so ambiguous.)

There are a number of doctrines that are essential in Christianity and some unique to it. The Trinity, person and work of Christ in His sinless, substitutionary atonement, imputation of righteousness, virgin birth---off the top of my head. Heck---read the Epistles, it's all in there including the imperatives of  Christian morals and behavior.  It is too much for me to parse at the moment, it is getting late.

In a nutshell what is clear is important. Where the Bible seems purposely not clear as in say Rev, unity of interpretation is not necessary and I don't think expected. But it shouldn't become divisive in a way that violates the imperatives. The same with Calvinism or Arminianism. Each side thinks their view is clear. Both are Christians. It can be discussed but shouldn't divide.

[com7fy8]

12 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

Yes, it does say one Lord, one faith, one Spirit, but NOT one theology . . . 

(I'm waiting for someone to bring up, "Yeah, but what about Paul saying, 'Be like-minded' in Philippians 2:2?"

And > 

"that you all speak the same thing" (in 1 Corinthians 1:10).