I have been down many of the roads you speak of and today I find myself just beliving in the Word of God, period.

I do not consider myself an arminian or a calvinist, nor will I ever call myself a follower of anyone other than Christ (I am a Christian). Though I don’t mind giving people a statement of faith.

In addition, I see errors in both camps. Each of them travel off into areas of weak Scriptural support.

If it isn’t the Word of God, it has no authority as far as I’m concerned.

It is very easy to go headlong into “reformed” teachings coming from an arminian standpoint only to find yourself in the very same place you started. This is an easy trap to get into as much of the arminian positions are extremely weak Scripturally and strong in “logical conclusions”. However, many of the reformed teachings are just as weak once you get into them. Out of the “reformed” camp you will get teachings that Jesus has already returned, Spiritual gifts are done away with, etc etc… These teachings have very weak, if any, Scriptural support and some are downright dangerous IMO.

Solo Scriptura will probably leave you in the middle of it all. I just pray that you don’t have to go to the extremes of each side to find that out (as I did), hence my comment. I have quite a few Christian brothers & sisters who have gone too far out on the edge of either side and have not returned yet. Unfortunately, some of their beliefs are now border line heretical.

AMDG

Interstingly, I too find myself completely different. Even from three years ago. Three years ago, I was extremely liberal, overly grace oriented, licscentious, and just plain ODD. Now I am really quite conservative, value tradition and new things, and deeply interested in theology, practical and otherwise.

Meg

I think I also just believe the Bible, period. Creeds, confessions, labels, books, etc., have no value _except_ by helping us _understand_ what the Bible teaches. I think it’s the Baptist Faith and Message that starts with the disclaimer (somewhere) that says creeds and confessions have no authority in themselves, but are only useful as guides in interpretation.

Solo Scriptura will probably leave you in the middle of it all

This is not necessarily true. We don’t necessarily get closer to the truth by coming to some middle ground between two opposite positions.

One of the earliest controversies the church faced was the Arian heresy, which denied the full deity of Christ. Opposed to this was the doctrine of Trinitarianism. They are diametrically opposed and there can be no common ground regarding the nature of Jesus.

Now, the truth is not to be found by being a little bit Trinitarian and a little bit Arian. The truth is firmly planted in the Trinitarian camp. The Bible doesn’t leave us somewhere in the middle.

If you want to contend that Calvinism, or whatever, is not entirely _Biblical_ then that’s good and worthy of debate. You’ll be wrong :-) but still it’s the right approach. But to say “These two groups disagree, so the truth must be somewhere in between” is unwarranted. It’s entirely possible that one of the “extreme camps” is squarely on the Bible, as was the case with Trinitarianism vs Arianism.

Instead of arguing for the “middle ground” (Dick Armey says nothing is the middle of the road except dead skunks), I think you probably have a theological position that partially agrees with both Calvinism and Arminianism. You should probably explain and then defend your position.

Either God is God, or He is not. There is no middle ground.

Thanks for your thought-provoking post.

Meg

I did leave trackbacks turned on, and I’m being discussed (and derided) on at least one other blog, but there’s not anything I can do (or wish to do) about that. But I’m not responding to that either.

I’m sorry for the frustration; I know there might also be much positive, or constructive negative, feedback. But I know that there will be a non-negligible amount of unhelpful negative feedback, and I just don’t want to bother with it.

Anyone can always email me with comments, or like I mentioned before, do a trackback ping and write about it on your blog. I just don’t want the hassle of Church Inc folks here telling me how I don’t love the lost like they do.

“…have no value except by helping us understand what the Bible teaches”

Books are also very good at leading people astray. Many like to use single and out of context verses as well.

“This is not necessarily true. We don?t necessarily get closer to the truth by coming to some middle ground between two opposite positions.”

I never said that we get to the truth by going to the middle, nor did I mean that in any way. However, in the case of arminians vs calvinists there is truth in both camps and 100% truth is in neither. (context my brother, context).

“If you want to contend that Calvinism…is not entirely Biblical…You?ll be wrong…But to say ?These two groups disagree, so the truth must be somewhere in between? is unwarranted. It?s entirely possible that one of the ?extreme camps? is squarely on the Bible, as was the case with Trinitarianism vs Arianism.”

I should say TULIP, associated with calvinism, is not entirely Biblical. Limited atonement is never taught in the Scripture, only assumed. John Calvin himself did not believe in limited atonement. Again, I did not say the truth is in the middle because the two disagree. In fact, I find the quote there rather interesting as I made no such claim whatsoever. In addition, It is highly unlikely that one of these extreme camps is square on since they don’t have Scripture to support all their claims.

Something to always keep in mind, is that the Scripture is inerrant and it cannot always be fully comprehended. Case in point, just because the Scripture tells you to choose, does not mean you have the ability to choose. It is incorrect to assume that you have the ability to choose because the Scripture tells you to choose. Scripture must only be interpreted by Scripture.

“Instead of arguing for the ?middle ground?…I think you probably have a theological position that partially agrees with both Calvinism and Arminianism. You should probably explain and then defend your position.”

Again, I am not arguing for middle ground. Perhaps you misunderstood me. I definitely did not state some of the things you quoted. I typically don’t go into great detail on comments…I reserve detail for blog entries and trackbacks.

Anyway, good blogging brother.

AMDG