# "How to find out if any of your staff are Calvinists and



## awretchsavedbygrace (Mar 5, 2010)

how to get rid of them."

I went on Tom Ascol's blog Founders Ministries Blog and saw this recent article he wrote. Supposely there are 3 documents that are or were being handed out. The documents can be seen by clicking on the link. Some of the behavior to look for is " Use of a ESV Bible"(I was so close to post this at the entertainment and humor section of the board). Some others include a lack of "passion in calling sinners to repent" (certainly not this Calvinist). Anyway, check it out. Link is above.


----------



## Edward (Mar 5, 2010)

Looks like folks who have a systematic theology that is irrational will be safe in their jobs. Being opposed to church discipline also appears to be a career booster.


----------



## southern (Mar 5, 2010)

My friend was an interim at a church in Western Tn and they abruptly decided not to even vote on him. He was confused about their actions until he found out about a month ago why. This form was given to him by one of the members. So it is already _been_ used.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Mar 5, 2010)

southern said:


> My friend was an interim at a church in Western Tn and they abruptly decided not to even vote on him. He was confused about their actions until he found out about a month ago why. This form was given to him by one of the members. So it is already _been_ used.


 
Thats terrible.


----------



## Mushroom (Mar 5, 2010)

The tares have taken over the field.


----------



## the particular baptist (Mar 6, 2010)

It looks like the Arminian blasphemers in the SBC are sharpening their fangs.


----------



## fredtgreco (Mar 6, 2010)

My "favorite" item on the list is: Uses the ESV.


----------



## Grillsy (Mar 6, 2010)

The sad thing is, at first glance, it looked like a joke.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Mar 6, 2010)

fredtgreco said:


> My "favorite" item on the list is: Uses the ESV.


 
I guess that means I'm safe.


----------



## sastark (Mar 7, 2010)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > My "favorite" item on the list is: Uses the ESV.
> ...


 
Yeah, me too. Although, they'd eventually catch on to my 1599 Geneva.


----------



## DMcFadden (Mar 7, 2010)

You are all just trying to form a "theological swarm" like the first article said you would. Give me my good old NIV, old versions of the seminaries (pre Mohler) with their warmly accepting latitudinarianism, and the good 'ole days of counting dead people and those who have overtly left the faith as part of the "membership."

With the SBC being so large and institutionally sponsored surveys revealing that 1/3 of new pastors are 5 pointers, these folks may be doing a little too little a little too late.


----------



## lynnie (Mar 7, 2010)

I clicked on the list of Reformed red flags. I guess if I was more sanctified I would be grieved or sad or go to prayer, but my reaction is that this is one of the funniest things I have ever seen.


----------



## Christopher88 (Mar 7, 2010)

There not the first to go against Reformed Christians, its just of many who are against the truth of our Lord.


----------



## Rangerus (Mar 7, 2010)

Heard a respected Baptist preacher refer to Calvin as a "heretic" one time. Could not believe my ears.


----------



## smhbbag (Mar 7, 2010)

Like many things, I laughed at first.

And then I was saddened to remember the dismissal of my youth pastor 10 years ago, and a friend who teaches at a Christian school being in a lot of trouble at the moment.

As an aside, has anyone ever encountered a non-calvinist who was both able and willing to give an honest summary of the Doctrines of Grace?

Josh likes to chime in "Yes, I'm sure someone, somewhere, has encountered that." Well, I'm not sure anyone has. I've read a _lot_ on the subject, and not ONCE have I found a non-calvinist who is able to summarize calvinism accurately, and then lay out his objections. Come to think of it, Arminius himself was actually the best I've read at taking it on without purposefully distorting it.


----------



## DMcFadden (Mar 7, 2010)

In the original blog cited by the OP, Ascol sagely takes the high road and chooses to see it as a reason to reevaluate failures and faults within the reform movement toward soteriological Calvinism within the SBC.

I'm not sure I would be so mature if the SBC was my home.


----------



## Curt (Mar 7, 2010)

DMcFadden said:


> In the original blog cited by the OP, Ascol sagely takes the high road and chooses to see it as a reason to reevaluate failures and faults within the reform movement toward soteriological Calvinism within the SBC.
> 
> I'm not sure I would be so mature if the SBC was my home.


----------



## LawrenceU (Mar 7, 2010)

Folks I know this can appear funny, odd, or ignorant on the face of it. It is easy to point and say how little they really know about Calvinism. Underlying this is a very strong war for the heart and soul of the SBC. We shouldn't sit and watch. We should wade into the fray in prayer. It is far too easy to sit by and make jesting remarks about their Sunday School numbers, roll numbers v. attendance, altar callitis, etc. All of that is not laughable, but should make us morn. Here is a part of the body of Christ that is seriously wounded. We should pray and maybe even fast for them. Some of these well intentioned, misguided people could very well be Calvinists or even Reformed Baptists in a little while. Such were some of you most likely. At one point in my youth I would have agreed that Calvin was an heretic. Pray for the folks.


----------



## jfschultz (Mar 7, 2010)

sastark said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...


 
Naw, they would consider anything before 1611 was not a Bible. Didn't Paul write in King James English?


----------



## Pergamum (Mar 8, 2010)

These baptist churches ought to interview the majority of the baptist missionaries going to hard Mslm places. The number of believers in the sovereignty of God in this group would number much higher than the scant 1/3rd.


----------



## T.A.G. (Mar 8, 2010)

I am an especially sanctified version guy (esv)but why is it that a lot of calvinist use the esv besides the pop culture understanding of if your a calvinist you use the esv?


----------



## ubermadchen (Mar 8, 2010)

T.A.G. said:


> I am an especially sanctified version guy (esv)but why is it that a lot of calvinist use the esv besides the pop culture understanding of if your a calvinist you use the esv?


 
I use the NASB. Does that make me super reformed? (I hope so.)


----------



## T.A.G. (Mar 8, 2010)

NASB? HERSEY!


----------



## au5t1n (Mar 8, 2010)

ubermadchen said:


> T.A.G. said:
> 
> 
> > I am an *especially sanctified version* guy (esv)but why is it that a lot of calvinist use the esv besides the pop culture understanding of if your a calvinist you use the esv?
> ...


 
Does that stand for the Not-As-Sanctified Bible?  Just kidding, I use the NASB and the KJV.


----------



## T.A.G. (Mar 8, 2010)

yes just as the NET stands for not even the bible


----------



## ClayPot (Mar 9, 2010)

T.A.G. said:


> I am an especially sanctified version guy (esv)but why is it that a lot of calvinist use the esv besides the pop culture understanding of if your a calvinist you use the esv?


 
A number of well-known Christian pastors/speakers who hold to the doctrines of grace use/promote the ESV in their ministry, which I believe has influenced many people to use the ESV as well. Perhaps the most prominent is John Piper, but R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, Al Mohler, Kevin DeYoung, Mark Driscoll are also in this camp.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Mar 9, 2010)

This memo isn't shocking to me. I've seen and heard about various "get rid of the Calvinists" attempts throughout my time at Southern. So the reality that an ill-informed, obviously poorly educated (did you see the grammar in that document?) person from Western Tennessee would put this together doesn't surprise me.

On the contrary, what I find really lame is the "let's just press on and SHOW them by our example that we're not a threat, and that we can all just get along" mentality of the Calvinists in the SBC who naively think they'll ever be accepted.


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 9, 2010)

SolaScriptura said:


> On the contrary, what I find really lame is the "let's just press on and SHOW them by our example that we're not a threat, and that we can all just get along" mentality of the Calvinists in the SBC who naively think they'll ever be accepted.




What do you think would be a more proper response?


----------



## JML (Mar 9, 2010)

Rick Larson said:


> What do you think would be a more proper response?



Let them have the convention. But that is the separatist in me talking. As a former SBC pastor myself, Ben is right. The two will never co-exist together in the convention and I think it is naive to think otherwise. That is just my opinion, so please treat it as such.

The Founders in the convention are more often than not treated as heretics by the Arminians in the convention. That's from personal experience. I know the convention was founded by men who were of the Calvinistic mindset but that is no longer the case. Seeing what the convention has become, I say let them have it. I am perfectly happy being independent from them and their messed up theology (the Arminians, not the Founders).

Please do not take this as bashing the Founders. I respect what they are trying to do and I have friends who are Founders pastors but I still don't think it will work. Once again, my opinion.


----------



## T.A.G. (Mar 9, 2010)

Simply to display some hope (as I often feel as you do)
The Sbc was headed straight toward liberalism but that by God's grace he saved it from becoming liberal. Thus an example where men wanted to retreat out of the conservative battle and thought similar things but yet the conservatives reformed the convention.
Also lets remember, something like 90-95 percent of southerns graduates are 5 point calvinists, and in general I have heard as high as 80 percent of recent graduates from sbc seminaries would consider themselves to be Calvinists. The movement in young people for Calvinism is rapid and growing. These people here thought it was so much of a threat and danger to their convention that they had to come to this. I believe you are right when you say they can not co-exist, just as the liberals and conservatives could not co-exist. Call it a pipe dream but I do believe the Sbc could be reformed, I would not belong to it if I do not think other wise.


----------



## puritanhope (Mar 9, 2010)

We should examine this document, acknowledging the beam in our own eye.

How many times have you heard of young youth, turning to the Doctrines of Grace, causing upheaval in a small congregation? Who hasn’t heard of the minister, being deceptive of his views, forcing the doctrines of Calvinism on a local body in an arrogant way? Personally, I think this paper is well deserved. Until the necessity of humility, holiness, and adherence to God's Law is part of the "New Calvinism," expect more papers such as these. 

I couldn't help but read this document and see exactly what they are trying to guard against. Of course, their view of Calvinism is in error - but what they're attacking, we should attack as well. Okay, rant over.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Mar 9, 2010)

puritanhope said:


> Who hasn’t heard of the minister, being deceptive of his views, forcing the doctrines of Calvinism on a local body in an arrogant way?



Um, I haven't. Well, I've heard anti-Calvinists talking about it happening, but in every case I've actually explored it has merely been angry anti-Calvinists spreading fear and hate.



> Personally, I think this paper is well deserved.



What? Are you serious?

---------- Post added at 10:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 PM ----------




T.A.G. said:


> Simply to display some hope (as I often feel as you do)
> The Sbc was headed straight toward liberalism but that by God's grace he saved it from becoming liberal. Thus an example where men wanted to retreat out of the conservative battle and thought similar things but yet the conservatives reformed the convention.
> Also lets remember, something like 90-95 percent of southerns graduates are 5 point calvinists, and in general I have heard as high as 80 percent of recent graduates from sbc seminaries would consider themselves to be Calvinists. The movement in young people for Calvinism is rapid and growing. These people here thought it was so much of a threat and danger to their convention that they had to come to this. I believe you are right when you say they can not co-exist, just as the liberals and conservatives could not co-exist. Call it a pipe dream but I do believe the Sbc could be reformed, I would not belong to it if I do not think other wise.


 
The differences are significant. In the old "conservative resurgency," what you had was a situation in which the laity - which was essentially conservative - took back the reigns from the liberal elites in the positions of power in the institutions of the SBC. In the "Calvinist resurgency" what you've got is a general opposition to Calvinism on the part of the masses as well as from several "important" people in "leadership" positions.


----------



## Andres (Mar 9, 2010)

I have to say that while I can't say the paper is "well deserved", i do think I kind of see where Bryan in coming from. Many times people who oppose Christianity don't care a lick about the beliefs, but rather how Christians act/live/present themselves and their religion. In a similar way, I wonder if sometimes the problem people have with Calvinist's isn't neccessarily the doctrine, but rather how Calvinists can come across. Many times we are viewed as proud, overly-intellectual, know-it-alls who live to correct our non-Calvinist brethren. With this view of Calvinists, it's no wonder those who don't understand the doctrines of grace don't want calvinists in their church. Then when something like this comes out, reformed people read it and immediately respond with, "dumb!, foolishness!, I'm proud to read the ESV!" and it makes us seem like we enjoy being persecuted in this manner. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not advocating shying away from what we believe in any way, but maybe we can react better with compassion to these people.


----------



## ubermadchen (Mar 10, 2010)

If they really want to smoke out the Calvinists, they should have read my list on the characteristics of the Reformed Male: http://www.puritanboard.com/f52/reformed-males-48034/


----------



## puritanhope (Mar 10, 2010)

I stand by my statement that this paper is well-deserved. I am no anti-Calvinist, and I have seen it happen first hand. I do not think we serve ourselves well when the caricature the Arminian as villain. We hold our worst enemies within our own hearts.




Andres said:


> I have to say that while I can't say the paper is "well deserved", i do think I kind of see where Bryan in coming from. Many times people who oppose Christianity don't care a lick about the beliefs, but rather how Christians act/live/present themselves and their religion. In a similar way, I wonder if sometimes the problem people have with Calvinist's isn't neccessarily the doctrine, but rather how Calvinists can come across. Many times we are viewed as proud, overly-intellectual, know-it-alls who live to correct our non-Calvinist brethren. With this view of Calvinists, it's no wonder those who don't understand the doctrines of grace don't want calvinists in their church. Then when something like this comes out, reformed people read it and immediately respond with, "dumb!, foolishness!, I'm proud to read the ESV!" and it makes us seem like we enjoy being persecuted in this manner. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not advocating shying away from what we believe in any way, but maybe we can react better with compassion to these people.


 
I would add that the reason we come across as proud and overly-intellectual is because we are proud and overly intellectual. This is not to diminish theology, however, a theology that doesn't produce holiness produces arrogance. We would do well in crying against this sort of Calvinism in the churches. And it is quite prevalent, in my opinion.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 10, 2010)

puritanhope said:


> I stand by my statement that this paper is well-deserved. I am no anti-Calvinist, and I have seen it happen first hand. I do not think we serve ourselves well when the caricature the Arminian as villain. We hold our worst enemies within our own hearts....
> 
> I would add that the reason we come across as proud and overly-intellectual is because we are proud and overly intellectual. This is not to diminish theology, however, a theology that doesn't produce holiness produces arrogance. We would do well in crying against this sort of Calvinism in the churches. And it is quite prevalent, in my opinion.


 
Bryan,

You can't take your experience and state it as a normality even though you have found it quite prevailing in your experience. I have been in this camp since 1981. I for one have seen the doctrines of grace produce humility and solid discipleship which enriches ones personal piety and relationship with Christ and the people around him. In fact I have seen the doctrines of grace bring more sympathy for the unconverted person's plite. 

On another note I have seen pride and intellectual stuffiness in a lot of different kinds of denominations that aren't Calvinistic. I have seen in the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Independent Fundamentalist Baptist, Separate Baptist, Episcopalian, Nazerene, and Weslyan traditions also. I have also seen it produce a pride in their own intellectual abilities because they get it and shouldn't everyone else be able to by common sense and grace. 

In fact the first paper indicates that it is more about behaviour but I sense it is more about doctrine that leads to practice. Notice how it speaks of ecclesiology, Confessions and Church discipline. I also find the character true about altar calls (only in the sense that we might not have them) but it is distorted. I don't know a single Reformed or Calvinistic person who is not excited to see a person come under conviction, repent, and become a Christian. Obviously they know very little of Spurgeon, Piper, or others who desire to see the unconverted come to Christ. Orthodoxy does leads to orthopraxy. (Right doctrine leads to Right living)

The first paper is slanderous in my opinion and very distorted.


----------



## heartoflesh (Mar 10, 2010)

Couldn't have said it any better, Randy. These documents are targeting anyone who would be a Calvinist-- not one who may show unusual arrogance or propensity to cause divisions.


----------



## puritanhope (Mar 10, 2010)

Do I think the paper is off the wall? Certainly. But I could easily imagine a situation where such a paper is understandable. I think it behooves us to read this document as charitably as possible, especially when they're attacking _us_. Don't we want to understand WHY they write such things? Or do we just want to be right?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 10, 2010)

puritanhope said:


> Do I think the paper is off the wall? Certainly. But I could easily imagine a situation where such a paper is understandable. I think it behooves us to read this document as charitably as possible, especially when they're attacking _us_. Don't we want to understand WHY they write such things? Or do we just want to be right?


To imagine why is one thing. To know why is another. 

Believe me. I understand why they don't like Calvinism and it isn't what they are accusing us of for the most part in my opinion. I have been a member in two arminian denominations. I got along well in those denominations also. Deep down I have just about always seen it has been a problem with the fact that God isn't fair (according to our standards) and they didn't have the right to have a claim on God. BTW, I have many semi-pelagian friends and they will tell you that the Calvinists they know are gracious, kind, and humble. The reason for this is because of their understanding concerning the doctrines of Grace. 

This paper wasn't produced to teach the scriptures or help dialogue of understanding. It was produced to slander something that they don't understand or are willfully opposed to even though they might see it as biblical. Yes, I have seen this. I have seen the doctrines of Grace slandered, distorted, and maligned by those who knew they were doing that. 

I have a lot of time under my belt and can tell you that this paper is in no way helping anyone. The scriptures that show us the fruit of the Spirit would be a much better place to learn and gain character from.


----------



## Jeffriesw (Mar 29, 2010)

awretchsavedbygrace said:


> how to get rid of them."
> 
> I went on Tom Ascol's blog Founders Ministries Blog and saw this recent article he wrote. Supposely there are 3 documents that are or were being handed out. The documents can be seen by clicking on the link. Some of the behavior to look for is " Use of a ESV Bible"(I was so close to post this at the entertainment and humor section of the board). Some others include a lack of "passion in calling sinners to repent" (certainly not this Calvinist). Anyway, check it out. Link is above.


 
I've seen this thing before, Sadly some of these people are so misguided about what Calvinism really is. Most people I have met who have this type of mindset could no more give and accurate presentation of what calvinism is than fly to the moon. They have been sold a bill of goods by other misguided people who also couldn't explain it. All they know is what someone has told them about Calvinism/Reformed Theology and they hate it by proxy.

Honest prayerful speech and one on one discipling is the only answer to help some of them see the truth of Grace.

It is what worked for me...





T.A.G. said:


> Simply to display some hope (as I often feel as you do)
> The Sbc was headed straight toward liberalism but that by God's grace he saved it from becoming liberal. Thus an example where men wanted to retreat out of the conservative battle and thought similar things but yet the conservatives reformed the convention.
> Also lets remember, something like 90-95 percent of southerns graduates are 5 point calvinists, and in general I have heard as high as 80 percent of recent graduates from sbc seminaries would consider themselves to be Calvinists. The movement in young people for Calvinism is rapid and growing. These people here thought it was so much of a threat and danger to their convention that they had to come to this. I believe you are right when you say they can not co-exist, just as the liberals and conservatives could not co-exist. Call it a pipe dream but I do believe the Sbc could be reformed, I would not belong to it if I do not think other wise.




That'll Preach Brother


----------



## Andrew Gordon (Mar 29, 2010)

#13:"Tendency towards a highly logical systematic theology..."


----------



## Curt (Mar 29, 2010)

The last time I was accused of being a Calvinist, I invited the three accusers to the next elders meeting and gave them the floor. I asked "what are the problems you have with Calvinism as you understand it?" The first accusation pretty much ended things. Their ring leader said, "you don't believe in evangelism." I reminded them that the very first series that I preached in our evening services when I arrived here was a 20+ installment series on Evangelism. They didn't have much else. There was no theological discussion because all they knew of Calvinism or Reformed Theology was the caricatures they had been taught at Word of Life camps and schools.


----------



## Andres (Mar 29, 2010)

As poor as their reasoning is, I have to give some props to these people who defend their arminianism. When I try to talk to most of my friends from my old Pentecostal church, they have no clue what an arminian or a calvinist is.


----------



## JML (Mar 29, 2010)

Andres said:


> As poor as their reasoning is, I have to give some props to these people who defend their arminianism. When I try to talk to most of my friends from my old Pentecostal church, they have no clue what an arminian or a calvinist is.


 
*Romans 10:2*

"For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge."


----------



## sdesocio (Mar 29, 2010)

Thats such a shame..."come Lord Jesus"


----------

