This is kind of an off shoot of the thread i made on the primitive baptists. Some of the posters in that thread mentioned that the PBs had a tendency to be characterised by hypercalvinism.
I went to a PB site posted www.pb.org and looked at one of their documents on salvation, and noted that they subscribe to preservation of the saints as opposed to perseverance. I have actually seen this modified version of tulip exposed by
certain other sites.
Anyhow, would those who hold to this be classified as hypercalvinists? Is there something very wrong with this position?
Just an initial thought, just because a doctrine can be easily abused by people who want to take it as an excuse for antinomianism, does not by itself make that doctrine wrong, right? otherwise we might as well throw out the whole doctrines of grace and revert back to the kind of thinking were you loose salvation with each sin.
any thoughts?
I went to a PB site posted www.pb.org and looked at one of their documents on salvation, and noted that they subscribe to preservation of the saints as opposed to perseverance. I have actually seen this modified version of tulip exposed by
certain other sites.
Anyhow, would those who hold to this be classified as hypercalvinists? Is there something very wrong with this position?
Just an initial thought, just because a doctrine can be easily abused by people who want to take it as an excuse for antinomianism, does not by itself make that doctrine wrong, right? otherwise we might as well throw out the whole doctrines of grace and revert back to the kind of thinking were you loose salvation with each sin.
any thoughts?
The perseverance is the inevitable fruit and confirmation of its root, the preservation.
