from free-will to sovereign grace... a bad thing?

WD,said "I really don't see a difference." Don't you think these kind of statements are too me-centered?It's rather obvious.

 

Are you saying that those who don't believe in monergism are accursed?

 

Not when one realizes it is God that reaches out first.

 

Denying monergism ALONE does not equate to works based salvation, nor are works involved in salvation. That is a strawman.

 

He has basically questioned the salvation of those who don't agree with him. It is nothing new, though.

 

Pastoral ministry is definitely theological. However, the BB administration does not want theological discussions outside the theological discussion area.

I want to allow lattitude here because this started as being a way of integrating this theological struggle into pastoral life. Let's keep it there. Otherwise, we'll have KJVO in here, dispensationalism, etc.

Fair enough?

 

jbarner, I went back to the OP to refresh my memory. You mentioned that your move toward Calvinism had caused some "small" issues. Could you be more specific? Are you talking about a small number of people who've expressed concern? Could you evaluate the intensity of concern? How long has this transition been known to your congregation?

I raise these questions because the conventional wisdom is that Calvinism divides churches which are not majority Reformed. I doubt if this is universally true.

Reaction in my own church has been mixed over the years. I know of at least three previous pastors who were Calvinists. There were no problems.

I remember many years ago, I taught a Sunday evening Bible study from a Calvinist perspective. The wife of the interim pastor told her husband, who proceeded to correct me from the pulpit. But nothing further came of it. That was 30 years ago.

Currently, I would say that the majority of people in my church are non-Calvinist. The current pastor is not a Calvinist, as best I can determine. I count about a half-dozen who are avowed Calvinists. That includes the Choir Director (me), three deacons (including the chairman--me), and four who are currently teaching or have been teaching.

My guess is that individual churches react differently to this situation, and we ought to be careful not to characterize it as a universal problem.

 

j_barner, a couple more questions, please.

How did your congregation find out that you were making the transition to Calvinism? Did you tell them straight out? Did you start preaching Calvinism? Did your preaching change enough that your congregation noticed it?

I'm just curious as to how you told of your journey. One thing I have learned is that when one discovers the Doctrines of Grace, he wants to tell everybody he runs into. This can be off-putting. I'd like to hear you flesh out details or your journey, how you informed your congregation, and how you reacted when the light went on in your mind.

 

You may find help on the Founders site. Ernest C. Reisinger has these gems of wisdom for turning a Baptist church Reformed:

Establish spiritual credibility in the church before making your move.
Don't tackle the whole church, first just initiate a select group of men into the doctrines of grace; they will back you up later.
Avoid using the terms Calvinism, Reformed, etc. from the pulpit.
Introduce a carefully screened book table.
Stand behind old Calvinist creeds, etc, culled from your church's archives.

 

Ascol has spoken beautifully on this, too. Was it he who said to always keep two churches in your mind - the one you have now and the one you want it to be, and keep in mind the distance between the two, that it wasn't created overnight, and it won't be bridged overnight either. If he didn't say it, credit me with it :thumbs: Also, keep in mind that there are some things that you just have to work around (For instance, I've found many Reformed men who had problems with the "invitation / altar call" just had to work with it and straighten it out as best as possible. Some churches would rather burn their Bibles than get rid of the requisite stanzas of Just As I Am that concludes every service.)

 

TomVols, one of the Calvinist pastors I mentioned in an earlier post continued to give an invitation. But he framed it in much different language, basically inviting those to come forward who wished to publicly declare their salvation, or move their membership.

Enquirers who came were asked to stay after church or leave the auditorium with a counselor.

Nothinig long and drawn out, no begging, pleading or cajoling. No response? One verse and gone.

 

Thank you for your testimony. You mentioned altar calls. One night, my daughter, who belonged to another Baptist church, came to my church (where she grew up). When my Calvinist pastor closed the service without giving an invitation, she got upset.

"Daddy," she said, "how are people going to get saved if you don't give an invitation?"

Now, there's a teachable moment.

But I fear that her question reflects the mindset of non-Cals.

The answer I gave her is the one a Romanian pastor gave me when I asked him why Romanian Baptists do not give invitations after their two-hour-plus services.

He said, "we have found that when the Spirit of God stirs someone's heart, it is not necessary for us to create an atmosphere in which He can work. The Holy Spirit is sovereign. When he stirs a heart, it will respond. We cannot keep those people away." This pastor was not a Calvinist.

Even though I embraced the Doctrines of Grace in the early 1970s, it was not until 20 years later that I began to re-evaluate all that we Baptists do and say in presenting the gospel. It changed the very language and terminology I use. When one measures things against the Word of God, we'll junk a lot of what we do and say.

 

Contrived moment? Who are you to discourage or question the means God uses to bring sinners to Himself? What a pompous attitude to take!
Those of you who allow your soteriology dictate how you do the Great Commission have a flawed view of God's sovereignty. Inviting someone to give their life to Christ is never a "contrived moment" regardless of what reformer has told you such. God did the very same thing..."I have put before you life and death, choose life that you may live". This is what an altar call is.

 

I do altar calls (of a sort) when I preach, and I am very much reformed, soteriologically. I think the "method" is what is important. While I agree there is nothing wrong with giving altar calls, I DO think that the moody music, and "tactics" (such as counselors in the pews coming forward to "get the flow going"), are unbiblical, and in the case of the latter, sneaky and contrived.

 

Charles Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students:

"In our Master's name we must give the invitation, crying, "Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." Do not be deterred from this, my brethren, by those ultra-Calvinistic theologians who say, ''You may instruct and warn the ungodly, but you must not invite or entreat them."


"...those who never exhort sinners are seldom winners of souls to any great extent, but they maintain their churches by converts from other systems. I have even heard them say, "Oh, yes, the Methodists and Revivalists are beating the hedges, but we shall catch many of the birds." If I harbored such a mean thought I should be ashamed to express it. A system which cannot touch the outside world, but must leave arousing and converting work to others, whom it judges to be unsound, writes its own condemnation."

 

Spurgeon's idea of an altar call was not what we see in most churches today. I think J Barner's post above says much. Spurgeon would have fainted at what we see in some "churches" today, and the tactics they use to get "numbers"