The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Why is this looked down upon?

I've been thinking about this for a few days, and I just decided I'd ask. Maybe we can get some kind of discussion going on the topic. Here is my question and what I have been thinking about.

Why is being a moderate looked down upon in some areas? Let's take theology for example. If you go to too much of an extreme in Calvinism, and I know of people who this has happened to, and they go off the deep end. Grace becomes merely a philosophy and something to debate, they lose all care for sharing the gospel with the lost, they get complacent because God will do it if He wants to.

Then there are your extreme arminians who preach free will more than they preach the cross or they allow Muslims in their pulpits as a way to be inclusive and all the stuff that Arminians and Pelagians do.

Point is, the extremes are both wrong. You fall into error VERY easily when you are in a fringe group or on the extreme end of something like theology.

This being the case, what is wrong with being a moderate in regards to theology?

The two positions you put forth have little "moderate" ground. Too often 'moderate' means "unwilling to take a stand". Moderate can also be viewed as the middle ground, when we are suppose to take a stand specifically for truth. Perhaps you could offer an example of this moderate view? Both groups you offered as examples are incorrect. Hyper-calvinism and pelgianism are both wrong. However, in between those examples are many other positions, most of which are also wrong enough to discard them. There simply is no moderate position when you stand for truth. To moderate truth with what?


God bless,

william

I have to agree with William on this. I'm an active member in a church who are predominately free willed. So I attend Sunday school classes, committee meetings, small groups, bible studies and functions firm in my stance on Sovereign Grace. I don't see too many people that are very moderate on these two faith foundations. You're either in one camp or the other.


I would like to add something to this statement. I find myself forced to act moderately in many ways. I really have no other choice. I catch myself becoming too intolerant and having to settle for compromise. I find myself finding errancy and wanting to push for reform. I also am led to want to push for reformed classes and to push for reformed thinking in the ministries that I'm involved with.

But I pray about it and I realize that too much of a good thing can actually hinder progress. So I work my reformed ministry in my church slowly and in moderation.

Y.b.I.C,

Dave.

The problem with your question is that you haven't defined "moderate". Secondly, it all depends on where you draw the proverbial "line" to bifurcate the extremes. Most people would consider themselves to be standing upon the "line" and thus everyone else who stands on either side (i.e., those who disagree with them) are "extremists". <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratchchin.gif" alt="" />

In His Grace,

Honestly...I don't remember how I was defining moderate...

Using the term "moderate" is quite confusing because so many people mean different things by it.
However, I have heard people refer to themselves as "moderate Calvinists" meaning that they don't hold to all five points of TULIP.
A true Calvinist holds to all 5 points of TULIP, but they shouldn't be misunderstood with hyper-Calvinists who among other things don't believe in evangelism.
The proclamation of the Gospel is God's means of saving His elect. (Mark. 16:15; Rom. 1:16)

Tom

Kalled, you can be on one side or the other without being an extremist. Take, oh say Pilgrim here. He is a 5 point Calvinist. He is firm in his beliefs. He is certainly not a moderate, but he is also not an extremist or a nut-job.

I may have just opened the door for a few potshots at Pilgrim, but I will at least not enter. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />

William,
Defining terms is paramount when discussing points of theology. I consider myself to be a "Hyper Calvinist", because I take a "supralapsarian" position, yet, I believe in evangelism. Because, I believe we are God's instrument of the gospel, and those who have ears to hear will hear.
Come to think of it, I have never met a hyper Calvinist, that who was actually a Christian, that didn't believe in evangelism.
George

I have never personally met anybody like this either. However, there are groups like this. I was more attempting to make the point that moderate is subjective and we are suppose to stand for some things rather than remain neutral. Hope that clarified.


God bless,

william

George

You probably know this, but I thought I would mention it anyway.
Though all hyper-Calvinists are supralapsarian, not all supralapsarians are hyper-Calvinists.
Among the Calvinists that participated in the writing of the WCF, both Infras & Supras were represented, yet unless I am mistaken there were no hyper-Calvinists that took part.

Are you sure you want to be considered a hyper-Calvinist?

Tom

Tom,
Again, it depends on how you define the term. I have been called a hyper- Calvinist, by those in my home Bible Study, because I believe that we don’t co-labor with God in respect to works, anything we do of eternal value comes from God. And everything we do both good and bad happens by necessity, though as Luther said, “not by compulsion” in respect to the evil that man does. You are correct, that “Infra and Supra” were represented in the Westminister Confessions, but the “Infra’ view of election and reprobation, was the more palatable direction in the WCF for God’s high decree’s. After all, God being passive in man’s demise (leaving man in his sinful state) and passing him by, sounds a lot better than God being active in man’s reprobation as Proverbs 16:4 and Rev. 17:8 state and which “Supra’s” believe. And I have been called a hyper-Calvinist in this regard also.I would rather like to be called a man who honestly looks at Scripture, instead of hyper-Calvinist, yet, labeling does occur nonetheless.
George

Here is what I would think to be Paul's definition of "moderate":

Eph 4:15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ.

Man, I like this question! First, let’s look at the dictionary definitions of “moderate.”

1a: avoiding extremes of behavior or expression: observing reasonable limits <a moderate drinker> b : CALM, TEMPERATE
2a: tending toward the mean or average amount or dimension
b: having average or less than average quality : MEDIOCRE
3: professing or characterized by political or social beliefs that are not extreme
4: limited in scope or effect
5: not expensive: reasonable or low in price
6: of a color: of medium lightness and medium chroma

Next, consider “theology.”

1: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially: the study of God and of God's relation to the world
2a: a theological theory or system <Thomist theology> <a theology of atonement>
b: a distinctive body of theological opinion <Catholic theology>
3: a usually 4-year course of specialized religious training in a Roman Catholic major seminary

Going back to the original question, “What is wrong with being a moderate in regards to theology?” I would answer that there is nothing wrong with moderation in regards to the study of religious faith, practice and experience. Nor is there anything wrong with moderation in regards to theological theories, systems or bodies of theological opinion.

However, I would beg to differ in regards to the study of God and God’s relation to the world. I just don’t think you can get enough of that. For Biblical support, I refer you to Psalm 119:

v7 – “I will praise you with an upright heart, when I learn your righteous rules.”
v9-12 – “How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word. With my whole heart I seek you; let me not wander from your commandments! I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you. Blessed are you, O LORD; teach me your statutes!”
v14-16 – “In the way of your testimonies I delight as much as in all riches. I will meditate on your precepts and fix my eyes on your ways. I will delight in your statutes; I will not forget your word.”

I could go on and on.

In closing: Is not the Bible one of the greatest ways that God has chosen to reveal Himself to us? We must study Him via dutiful study of His Holy Word!

Thank you for posting this question. I enjoyed responding to it.

With Christ's love,
Ted

Whaddya mean he's not a moderate? Pilgrim moderates all the time! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bananas.gif" alt="" />