Would you consider this person an evangelical?

[Bono]

Is he an arminian? Does he attend revivalist concerts worship services?
If so, than he is. If not, he probabily isn't.

[Bono]

Ilikeverin, what you smoking? It's not an insulting term, or shouldn't be. It's like Socialism, or Fascism, Republican, or Democrat. Just a word that, while having emotionally charged nuance to some, needn't be an insulting word to anyone.

While I never said that right out, congrats, you got my [not-so-]subtle undertone

Yes, I think evangelicalism (I doubt that's a word ) is a bad thing, because, to me, it suggests that you think your religion is out-and-out superior to another, not just different.

We are called to preach God's word.
Romans 10: 14-15
 14   How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15   And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

1 Corinthians 1:21
 21   For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

[Bono]

Sure, we can preach, but it seems to me that most evangelicals, while saying how good Christianity is, also say how bad the person's current religion is.  Or how they're atheist and are thus going to Hell.  Or some such.

(Anyway, I'm with Dibble on this one)

Christiananity, or at least the true form os Christianity, which we call Calvinism(EDIT: ), teaches salvation by faith alone. That means that everyone who does not become regenerate through God's grace in Jesus Christ does not have possibility of salvation. Why are we bad because we preach that in which we believe?

[Bono]

Yeah, but you gotta realize the manifestations of Calvinism in this country (e.g., Southern Baptist Convention, BMAA, etc.)

Baptists aren't Calvinists, Presbyterians and the Reformed Chuch are.

Yup, and some Congregationalists also(not UCC congregationalits, I even have trouble calling that a 'church', but NACCC congregationalists and independent ones). Also some Baptists, whom mostly call themselves Primitive Baptists Some Baptists in the SBC are actually Calvinists too, but Calvinism is not on teh denomination's statement of faith.

[Bono]

Hmmm.  Seems I'm in over my head.  I find Religion, like economics and politics, a fascinating subject, but I always manage to humiliate myself when I get around religious (or economic or political) scholars.  At the risk of further embarassment, I thought that, since they seemed to agree on predestination, the main point of contention between Luther and Calvin was simply a controversy about the Last Supper, and a general disdain, by the latter, of scholasticism.  In this sense, aren't SBC and BMAA churches somewhat calvinistic?

Baptism derivated from Anabaptism, which is the branch that the Amish and Mennonnite Churches, and the Quakers belong to. The anabaptist movement was target of both Luther and Calvin's condemnation. Altough, the Baptist doctrine this days is much more Calvinis-friendly, most Baptists espouse Arminianism, or Weslseianism.
Actually, the difference between Luther and Calvin themselves was not that great, altough Calvin was much more intransigent. The real breakaway between Lutheransn and Calvinism happened when Melanchton removed double predestination from Lutheranism. And besides, Luther never focused as much n predestination as Calvin did. Also, they differed in matters of Church governance, and on limited attonement.

[Bono]

so you call Calvin the true Reformer?  and calvinism the true christianity?  you dismiss other forms of protestantism as bastardized in some way?  And where does that leave Mormons, Copts, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Christians?  That is, does your brand of Christianity put them with the Muslims, Jews, Hindu, atheists and various other infidels?  At least in terms of lacking grace or salvation?

I forgot to add a semi-sarcastic smirk when i wrote that about Calvinism being the only true form of Christianity. It is the most true, but I don't ay other Christians won't get saved. If God predestined someone to believe in Christ, it does not matter what denomination he belongs to, as long he has faith, he belongs to the Invisible Church. this obviously rules out all those non-Christians who haven't been regenerated by God's grace. Of course, we can be sure of no salvation besides our own, so we have to preach the Word and treat all respectfully. Let the Glory of God show through us, however imperfectly we may reflect it.

[Bono]

Geez, smiley ommission is really a serious offense.

[Bono]

Geez, smiley ommission is really a serious offense.

Well, I'm sorry, but the truth is that all of Calvanism is based on one word that was added to the bible simply because Luther thought that it should be there:

Man is saved by faith alone

The word "alone" appears nowhere in any of the original texts that exist today.

Have you ever read Romans 3? Even if we take out the 28, the works alone still stands.
And what about Romans 3: 1-5
 1   What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
2   For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3   For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4   Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5   But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

[Bono]

Personally, I think both the Protestants and the Catholics/Orthodox(group of which I am a member) are guilty of partisanship on this issue.

Actually, most of protestand denominations stopped carng about Sola Fide long ago, to embrace a kind of legalism. The Fight for Sola Fide

[Bono]

Geez, smiley ommission is really a serious offense.

Well, I'm sorry, but the truth is that all of Calvanism is based on one word that was added to the bible simply because Luther thought that it should be there:

Man is saved by faith alone

The word "alone" appears nowhere in any of the original texts that exist today.

Have you ever read Romans 3? Even if we take out the 28, the works alone still stands.
And what about Romans 3: 1-5
 1   What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
2   For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3   For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4   Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5   But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Oh, dear Lord.  King James?  Come back to me when you have a real translation of the Bible.  This is how that passage read in the original text:

1
1 What advantage is there then in being a Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?
2
Much, in every respect. (For) in the first place, they were entrusted with the utterances of God.
3
What if some were unfaithful? Will their infidelity nullify the fidelity of God?
4
Of course not! God must be true, though every human being is a liar, as it is written: "That you may be justified in your words, and conquer when you are judged."
5
But if our wickedness provides proof of God's righteousness, what can we say? Is God unjust, humanly speaking, to inflict his wrath?

Ever read James 2: 14-26?


14
6 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
15
If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day,
16
and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well," but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?
17
So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18
Indeed someone might say, "You have faith and I have works." Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works.
19
You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.
20
Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?
21
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
22
You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works.
23
Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called "the friend of God."
24
See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25
And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by a different route?
26
For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.


This, of course, comes from the book that both Luther and Calvin wanted removed, simply because they knew that it disagreed with their message.

If you are going to believe in Sola Scriptura, the least you can do is get a decent bible that goes back to what was acctually said in the earliest known texts.
 

Ok, I'll use Young's Literal Translation AND American Standart Version(anything but the NIV)

YLT

Romans 3: 27-28
 27   Where then [is] the boasting? it was excluded; by what law? of works? no, but by a law of faith:
28   therefore do we reckon a man to be declared righteous by faith, apart from works of law.

ASV
Romans 3: 27-28
 27 Where then is the glorying? It is excluded. By what manner of law? of works? Nay: but by a law of faith.
28 We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.

YLT
Romans 4:1-5
 1   What, then, shall we say Abraham our father, to have found, according to flesh?
2   for if Abraham by works was declared righteous, he hath to boast -- but not before god;
3   for what doth the writing say? `And Abraham did believe God, and it was reckoned to him -- to righteousness;'
4   and to him who is working, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt;
5   and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous the impious, his faith is reckoned -- to righteousness:

ASV
Romans 4:1-5
 1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, hath found according to the flesh?
2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not toward God.
3 For what saith the scripture? And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness.

Also,

YLT
Ephesians 2:8, 9
 8   for by grace ye are having been saved, through faith, and this not of you -- of God the gift,
9   not of works, that no one may boast;
ASV
Ephesians 2:8, 9
 for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not of works, that no man should glory.

Calvin's comments on James 2: 17
17. Is dead, being alone. He says that faith is dead, being by itself, that is, when destitute of good works. We hence conclude that it is indeed no faith, for when dead, it does not properly retain the name. The Sophists plead this expression and say, that some sort of faith is found by itself; but this frivolous caviling is easily refuted; for it is sufficiently evident that the Apostle reasons from what is impossible, as Paul calls an angel anathema, if he attempted to subvert the gospel. See Galatians 1: 8
On 18-19
18. Yea, a man may say. Erasmus introduces here two persons as speakers; one of whom boasts of faith without works, and the other of works without faith; and he thinks that both are at length confuted by the Apostle. But this view seems to me too forced. He thinks it strange, that this should be said by James, Thou hast faith, who acknowledges no faith without works. But in this he is much mistaken, that he does not acknowledge an irony in these words. Then ajlla< I take for "nay rather;" and ti<v for "any one;" for the design of James was to expose the foolish boasting of those who imagined that they had faith when by their life they shewed that they were unbelievers; for he intimates that it would be easy for all the godly who led a holy life to strip hypocrites of that boasting with which they were inflated.1

Shew me. Though the more received reading is, "by works," yet the old Latin is more suitable, and the reading is also found in some Greek copies. I therefore hesitated not to adopt it. Then he bids to shew faith without works, and thus reasons from what is impossible, to prove what does not exist. So he speaks ironically. But if any one prefers the other reading, it comes to the same thing, "Shew me by works thy faith;" for since it is not an idle thing, it must necessarily be proved by works. The meaning then is, "Unless thy faith brings forth fruits, I deny that thou hast any faith."2

But it may be asked, whether the outward uprightness of life is a sure evidence of faith? For James says, "I will shew thee my faith by my works." To this I reply, that the unbelieving sometimes excel in specious virtues, and lead an honorable life free from every crime; and hence works apparently excellent may exist apart from faith. Nor indeed does James maintain that every one who seems good possesses faith. This only he means, that faith, without the evidence of good works, is vainly pretended, because fruit ever comes from the living root of a good tree.

19. Thou believest that there is one God. From this one sentence it appears evident that the whole dispute is not about faith, but of the common knowledge of God, which can no more connect man with God, than the sight of the sun carry him up to heaven; but it is certain that by faith we come nigh to God. Besides, it would be ridiculous were any one to say, that the devils have faith; and James prefers them in this respect to hypocrites. The devil trembles, he says, at the mention of God's name, because when he acknowledges his own judge he is filled with the fear of him. He then who despises an acknowledged God is much worse.

Thou doest well, is put down for the purpose of extenuating, as though he had said, "It is, forsooth! a great thing to sink down below the devils." 3

[Bono]

And On 20-26
 

20. But wilt thou know. We must understand the state of the question, for the dispute here is not respecting the cause of justification, but only what avails a profession of faith without works, and what opinion we are to form of it. Absurdly then do they act who strive to prove by this passage that man is justified by works, because James meant no such thing, for the proofs which he subjoins refer to this declaration, that no faith, or only a dead faith, is without works. No one will ever understand what is said, nor judge wisely of words, except he who keeps in view the design of the writer.

21. Was not Abraham. The Sophists lay hold on the word justified, and then they cry out as being victorious, that justification is partly by works. But we ought to seek out a right interpretation according to the general drift of the whole passage. We have already said that James does not speak here of the cause of justification, or of the manner how men obtain righteousness, and this is plain to every one; but that his object was only to shew that good works are always connected with faith; and, therefore, since he declares that Abraham was justified by works, he is speaking of the proof he gave of his justification.

When, therefore, the Sophists set up James against Paul, they go astray through the ambiguous meaning of a term. When Paul says that we are justified by faith, he means no other thing than that by faith we are counted righteous before God. But James has quite another thing in view, even to shew that he who professes that he has faith, must prove the reality of his faith by his works. Doubtless James did not mean to teach us here the ground on which our hope of salvation ought to rest; and it is this alone that Paul dwells upon.1

That we may not then fall into that false reasoning which has deceived the Sophists, we must take notice of the two fold meaning, of the word justified. Paul means by it the gratuitous imputation of righteousness before the tribunal of God; and James, the manifestation of righteousness by the conduct, and that before men, as we may gather from the preceding words, "Shew to me thy faith," etc. In this sense we fully allow that man is justified by works, as when any one says that a man is enriched by the purchase of a large and valuable chest, because his riches, before hid, shut up in a chest, were thus made known.

22. By works was faith made perfect.2 By this he again shews, that the question here is not respecting the cause of our salvation, but whether works necessarily accompany faith; for in this sense it is said to have been perfected by works, because it was not idle. It is said to have been perfected by works, not because it received thence its own perfection, but because it was thus proved to be true. For the futile distinction which the Sophists draw from these words, between formed and unformed faith, needs no labored refutation; for the faith of Abram was formed and therefore perfected before he sacrificed his son. And this work was not as it were the finishing, or last work. Formerly things afterwards followed by which Abraham proved the increase of his faith. Hence this was not the perfection of his faith, nor did it then for the first time put on its form. James then understood no other thing, than that the integrity of his faith then appeared, because it brought forth that remarkable fruit of obedience.

23. And the Scripture was fulfilled. They who seek to prove from this passage of James that the works of Abraham were imputed for righteousness, must necessarily confess that Scripture is perverted by him; for however they may turn and twist, they can never make the effect to be its own cause. The passage is quoted from Moses. (Genesis 15:6.) The imputation of righteousness which Moses mentions, preceded more than thirty years the work by which they would have Abraham to have been justified. Since faith was imputed to Abraham fifteen years before the birth of Isaac, this could not surely have been done through the work of sacrificing him. I consider that all those are bound fast by an indissoluble knot, who imagine that righteousness was imputed to Abraham before God, because he sacrificed his son Isaac, who was not yet born when the Holy Spirit declared that Abraham was justified. It hence necessarily follows that something posterior is pointed out here.

Why then does James say that it was fulfilled? Even because he intended to shew what sort of faith that was which justified Abraham; that is, that it was not idle or evanescent, but rendered him obedient to God, as also we find in Hebrews 11:8. The conclusion, which is immediately added, as it depends on this, has no other meaning. Man is not justified by faith alone, that is, by a bare and empty knowledge of God; he is justified by works, that is, his righteousness is known and proved by its fruits.

25. Likewise also was not Rahab. It seems strange that he connected together those who were so unlike. Why did he not rather choose some one from so large a number of illustrious fathers, and join him to Abraham? Why did he prefer a harlot to all others? he designedly put together two persons so different in their character, in order more clearly to shew, that no one, whatever may have been his or her condition, nation, or class in society, has ever been counted righteous without good works. He had named the patriarch, by far the most eminent of all; he now includes under the person of a harlot, all those who, being aliens, were joined to the Church. Whosoever, then, seeks to be counted righteous, though he may even be among the lowest, must yet shew that he is such by good works.

James, according to his manner of speaking, declares that Rahab was justified by works; and the Sophists hence conclude that we obtain righteousness by the merits of works. But he deny that the dispute here is concerning the mode of obtaining righteousness. We, indeed, allow that good works are required for righteousness; we only take away from them the power of conferring righteousness, because they cannot stand before the tribunal of God.3

[Bono]

you're thinking quite a bit about lions lately

screw it, I say Steve, or George, fits every definition I've seen of 'evangelical' including NHpolitico's.  but I am generally in a slim minority on this thread.  not unusual. 

By the way NHpolitico, I believe Clinton was the only Southern Baptist president we have had.  As far as I know, Bush is not.

I think I read that Reagan was the first candidate to use the phrase "born again."  And he did so effectively against Walter Mondale, who would not claim to be "born again" in a debate in 1984.  I have not read that the current president uses the phrase.  Still, he fits the descriptions you outline in 2-4, and in the Webster's definition I presented earlier.  And, from a cursory glance of a modern english version of the third chapter of the Gospel according to Saint John, he fits that too, if you consider the post-40th birthday party hangover a 'revelation'

Reagan was a Presbyterian. It's higly unlikely that he would use those words, altough it's allways possible.

[Bono]

Geez, smiley ommission is really a serious offense.

Well, I'm sorry, but the truth is that all of Calvanism is based on one word that was added to the bible simply because Luther thought that it should be there:

Man is saved by faith alone

The word "alone" appears nowhere in any of the original texts that exist today.

Have you ever read Romans 3? Even if we take out the 28, the works alone still stands.
And what about Romans 3: 1-5
 1   What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
2   For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3   For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4   Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5   But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Oh, dear Lord.  King James?  Come back to me when you have a real translation of the Bible.  This is how that passage read in the original text:

1
1 What advantage is there then in being a Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?
2
Much, in every respect. (For) in the first place, they were entrusted with the utterances of God.
3
What if some were unfaithful? Will their infidelity nullify the fidelity of God?
4
Of course not! God must be true, though every human being is a liar, as it is written: "That you may be justified in your words, and conquer when you are judged."
5
But if our wickedness provides proof of God's righteousness, what can we say? Is God unjust, humanly speaking, to inflict his wrath?

Ever read James 2: 14-26?


14
6 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
15
If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day,
16
and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well," but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?
17
So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18
Indeed someone might say, "You have faith and I have works." Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works.
19
You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.
20
Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?
21
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
22
You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works.
23
Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called "the friend of God."
24
See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25
And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by a different route?
26
For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.


This, of course, comes from the book that both Luther and Calvin wanted removed, simply because they knew that it disagreed with their message.

If you are going to believe in Sola Scriptura, the least you can do is get a decent bible that goes back to what was acctually said in the earliest known texts.
 

Ok, I'll use Young's Literal Translation AND American Standart Version(anything but the NIV)

YLT

Romans 3: 27-28
 27   Where then [is] the boasting? it was excluded; by what law? of works? no, but by a law of faith:
28   therefore do we reckon a man to be declared righteous by faith, apart from works of law.

ASV
Romans 3: 27-28
 27 Where then is the glorying? It is excluded. By what manner of law? of works? Nay: but by a law of faith.
28 We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.

YLT
Romans 4:1-5
 1   What, then, shall we say Abraham our father, to have found, according to flesh?
2   for if Abraham by works was declared righteous, he hath to boast -- but not before god;
3   for what doth the writing say? `And Abraham did believe God, and it was reckoned to him -- to righteousness;'
4   and to him who is working, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt;
5   and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous the impious, his faith is reckoned -- to righteousness:

ASV
Romans 4:1-5
 1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, hath found according to the flesh?
2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not toward God.
3 For what saith the scripture? And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness.

I have no time to discuss this right now, only to say that you originally quoted the wrong verse and that was the sourse of the confusion.  I will get back to you on this.

Yes, I noticed it later. I'm sorry, my bad.