# Is the SBC at war with Calvinism?



## J. Dean (Jun 22, 2012)

Southern Baptists cracking down on Calvinism

I certainly hope that Calvinism isn't being labeled as heresy. Even most of my personal Arminian acquaintances haven't gone to that sharp an extreme!


----------



## cajunhillbilly53 (Jun 22, 2012)

Which is a joke in light of Spurgeon, who was staunchly Calvinistic and saw Arminianism as watering down the Gospel. And the same Arminians who attack Calvinism love Spurgeon.


----------



## TylerRay (Jun 22, 2012)

At the core of this article is the statement that was linked to a couple of weeks ago in the thread "SBC and Calvinism."

An Introduction to

The statement is strong, but it never uses the word "heresy." Interestingly, the statement itself runs dangerously close to heresy when it says "We deny that Adam’s sin ... rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned."


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Jun 22, 2012)

The "statement" is either VERY theologically sloppy, or semi-pelagian on the question of original sin. Unless of course, you are a signatory to the statement. At that point, anyone who points out the theological sloppiness or the semi-pelagian nature of this document, is suddenly a dreaded "hyper-calvinist." I guess that means Roger Olson just went "hyper." 

This is an interesting article, which gets at WHY the old guard of the SBC feel threatened in their power structure:

Between The Times

Note the comments section. Who knew that Calvinists were the "preppy somewhat intellegent kids."


----------



## Marrow Man (Jun 22, 2012)

cajunhillbilly53 said:


> Which is a joke in light of Spurgeon, who was staunchly Calvinistic and saw Arminianism as watering down the Gospel. And the same Arminians who attack Calvinism love Spurgeon.



I've actually heard some of them say, "But Spurgeon _preached_ like an Arminian," whatever that means.


----------



## NB3K (Jun 22, 2012)

Maybe it would be wise if the Reformed brother's and sister's in Christ separate themselves from the apostate SBC and reorganize.


----------



## Jake (Jun 22, 2012)

NB3K said:


> Maybe it would be wise if the Reformed brother's and sister's in Christ separate themselves from the apostate SBC and reorganize.



Even the article says that a study shows equal numbers of congregations in the SBC identify as Calvinist as Arminian (30% for each). There are several good seminaries in the denomination which many reformed people find themselves comfortable in, most notably Southern. There are a great number of faithful men in the denomination from across the theological spectrum. The SBC is just more wide than a Presbyterian denomination, as the statement of faith is much more compact. I think this makes sense, as the SBC is not a denomination, but a number of churches partnering together for related causes, such as missions. Many churches even have multiple "affiliations," as a church can be in the SBC and in ARBCA, ABA, CBA, or whichever.


----------



## NB3K (Jun 22, 2012)

Calvinist's alongside Arminians is crazy. One proclaims the Biblical Truth, while the other holds it down in unrighteousness. The Reformers would have never tolerated that.


----------



## Rufus (Jun 22, 2012)

TylerRay said:


> At the core of this article is the statement that was linked to a couple of weeks ago in the thread "SBC and Calvinism."
> 
> An Introduction to
> 
> The statement is strong, but it never uses the word "heresy." Interestingly, the statement itself runs dangerously close to heresy when it says "We deny that Adam’s sin ... rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned."



That's straight up denying original sin right there.


----------



## NB3K (Jun 22, 2012)

Rufus said:


> That's straight up denying original sin right there.



The whole document is a refutation to the Protestan Reformation. I know the intent wasn't there to refute the reformation, but if you read the articles, you will see every Reformation doctrine be4ing attacked.


----------



## arapahoepark (Jun 22, 2012)

Wow if Olson says it's semi-Pelagian, it's probably Pelagian.

Joking, yes, it is quite sad that the SBC feels it has to do bizarre stuff because the Gospel offends the world.


----------



## Supersillymanable (Jun 22, 2012)

The sad thing is, I reckon many of the pastors in the "between the times" link posted, aren't entirely sure as to what Calvinism actually is. Just looking down the comments, people clearly have no idea what Calvinism actually is. Others point out that they think that possibly many of the pastors possibly don't actually know what each camp believes. 

In terms of the original post, is that a Lutheran blog? Is it just me, or do Lutherans often feel to many on this board, like they're trying to hold a compromise between biblical truth and error, and end up sounding confused...


----------



## gordo (Jun 22, 2012)

Marrow Man said:


> cajunhillbilly53 said:
> 
> 
> > Which is a joke in light of Spurgeon, who was staunchly Calvinistic and saw Arminianism as watering down the Gospel. And the same Arminians who attack Calvinism love Spurgeon.
> ...



It's because Spurgeon preached in a way that people could relate to. He understood and believed and taught the sovereignty of God, but he preached it as humans could grasp and relate to. Read Around the Wicket Gate by Spurgeon and he sounds like he is preaching free will, but the more you get down to it, he is preaching God's sovereignty and it works really well together.


----------



## TylerRay (Jun 22, 2012)

Supersillymanable said:


> The sad thing is, I reckon many of the pastors in the "between the times" link posted, aren't entirely sure as to what Calvinism actually is. Just looking down the comments, people clearly have no idea what Calvinism actually is.



I think that this is very true. When I was newly a Calvinist, and still in the Southern Baptist church, I told my pastor that I was a Calvinist, and his response was, "you're not a hyper-Calvinist, are you?"

On another occasion, I was talking with an SBC minister about what I believe, and he said, "now, I understand that not all Calvinists are five-point Calvinists," implying that five-point Calvinism is way off in left field. When I explained to him that I believe in the necessity of faith and repentance for salvation, etc., he was much more at ease. He didn't agree with me, but he saw that I what I held to was at least _Christian._

Most SBC ministers don't know what Calvinism is. That is no excuse, of course. I looked around in my former Pastor's office once, and he had all of three books in the room that he spends all day in. They don't see their ignorance as bad stewardship.

Qualification: I also know very good Calvinistic ministers in the SBC, who do plenty of reading and studying.


----------



## Philip (Jun 22, 2012)

NB3K said:


> Maybe it would be wise if the Reformed brother's and sister's in Christ separate themselves from the apostate SBC and reorganize.



In which case they would be schismatics, not reformed in ecclesiology. So long as they can, in good conscience, proclaim the true Gospel in the SBC, they should stay. Remember that the goal is to reform the church, not to split it.


----------



## TylerRay (Jun 22, 2012)

I think should pull out to keep their lumps from getting leavened, and start a Baptist denomination with presbyterial government, so that (at the very least) they'll have real accountability.


----------



## gordo (Jun 22, 2012)

edited after some further reading.


----------



## Herald (Jun 22, 2012)

This whole SBC mess is actually a _good _thing. It will bring to a head the differences between Calvinism and semi-Pelagianism in Baptist ranks. The only reason it's even news is that Calvinism is making serious inroads within SBC churches specifically and Baptist churches in general. 

I've long believed that Founders-type churches will eventually leave the SBC. That, too, will be a good thing In my humble opinion.


----------



## Rich Koster (Jun 22, 2012)

The Old School SBC was from Calvinist roots. Then they got bit by the Dispensational bug. It would be a good thing to part on "friendly terms" and that way people will not have to tip-toe around certain doctrines to keep from starting a ruckus. Superficial unity is a cruel joke.


----------



## arielann81 (Jun 22, 2012)

I came to this forum today looking for a discussion on just this issue so I was pleased when I saw one already started. I've read all your comments and I'm a relatively new Calvinist myself as of summer of 2011 but I tend to agree with those that say Arminian's water down the gospel and even though most my church "siblings" have mixed theology or lean more towards Arminian theology I don't think this helps. I was raised Arminian and would have defended that because I didn't know any better... I had never been taught another view. Once I became reformed I found that true growth happened and I have actually witnessed transformation in my life and those that I know who are reformed. In my limited experience I see most Arminian lack growth. Why should we support something that doesn't show fruit or doesn't inspire growth in others? Personally I think this an issue in churches today and worry that we have become too apathetic to attacks on the Gospel.

Yes love should be our main goal, but should we love evil? No! Well what about counterfeits of the truth? Is that not how those governed by evil work? Its not the heresy outside the church that hurts us but the false doctrines within the church. It's one thing to love my erring "brother" but quite another to allow him to instruct someone that doesn't know anything of the gospel with half truths or mixed theology and say I'm ok with that. Then when someone has a counterfeit and doesn't see growth and leaves the church because it "didn't work for them" which I have encountered in the Seattle area quite a bit then I wonder if what they were given was truth at all. I start to question whether or not I have part responsibility because I say nothing? 

Just getting under my skin more and more lately.


----------



## kappazei (Jun 22, 2012)

Have any of the Reformed denominations officially expressed concern to the SBC over that document?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 22, 2012)

Jason,

You know me and we have talked a bit. I would caution you to slow down and consider what the scriptures say concerning who is a Child of God. I John speaks quite a bit concerning this topic. 


> (1Jn 3:1) Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
> (1Jn 3:2) Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
> (1Jn 3:3) And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.





> (1Jn 5:10) He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
> (1Jn 5:11) And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
> (1Jn 5:12) He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
> (1Jn 5:13) These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.



I have never read a passage of scripture that states if one doesn't believe in the doctrines of the Synod of Dort they aren't saved or Regenerate (Born Again). I have read John 5:24 which states....



> (Joh 5:24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.



I am one of the few people who came to Christ knowing I was chosen because of the testimony of Scripture that I read. Not many people do that. I know many people who honestly know God and don't grasp the Sovereignty of God as I do. They have hearts that are filled with His Spirit and they walk much more closer to him than I have or do. They know their God. And their God is the Triune Holy One who is the Most High. I do believe that it is important to know certain things and they are musts but I do not believe that Arminians are not our brothers. Jacob Arminius was actually a Semi-Pelagian and not a Pelagian. There all kinds of different levels of understanding and faith. God gives them to us as we fill up the body of Christ. I love Romans 12:3. It has kept me in line many times through the years. 



> (Rom 12:3) For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, *not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.*
> (Rom 12:4) For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:
> (Rom 12:5) So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
> (Rom 12:6) Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;
> ...



The real measuring stick of knowing God according to the scripture in many places is how we love each other and our enemies. It is how we love not the world and how we care for those who are less fortunate. That is how we know who the brethren are. By the fruit of their lives and the doctrine of who Christ is. Is having the right Jesus Christ important? You bet ya. Doctrine is important. Shunning Idolatry is also. 

Anyways, I fully count my semi-pelagian Christian friends as my brothers. The ones I know do not trust in their works or life to deserve heaven or Christ's love. They fully trust lean upon the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as they trust Him and His work on their behalf. They know my Shepherd and they are fully my brothers if they know Him the way I wish I did.


----------

