Featured Calvinism and the SBC (a 2013 discussion between Hankings and Mohler)

In the paper he wrote about election:
"He has elected an eschatological people whom He has determined to have for Himself"

I've said before that election is an eschatological hope. But I think he's off the mark when he determined that election is corporate, not individual. It's both.

He later includes Israel's corporate election, and how it's individually realized, so it's hard to completely nail it down from that paper.

 

That's good stuff.
And what happens when people aren't acutely aware of their own intellectual frailties, is they become uncharitable toward the shortcomings of others.

I've been guilty of it, for sure.

But even worse is the prideful attitude some display toward "the god of" their opponents. I just ran into a guy who said he would abandon Christianity if Calvinism's god turned out to be the true version (paraphrased).

And I've seen that from every "side", and that mentality has grown roots with many seminarians.

For sure, I've never heard of a strategically designed infiltration and takeover such has been accused. I think guys in seminary are so anxious to get vocational that they're just not thinking about differences.

It's really sad. I think people join these committees and treat it like a bake sale committee.

In other words, you started leading before the gate opened

That would be ideal, imo.

For sure.

 

From what I've seen, a good many Southern Baptist Traditionalists are still framing their arguments about election from the Calvinist/Arminian paradigm (elected unto being saved from hell), and siding with Arminians.

Others are moving toward a view of election for service, thus still individual and not eschatological. I think they're really grasping at straws by taking a few biblical instances of people being "chosen" for a task or ministry, then transferring it into election passages.

 

Amen to that. I've said before that even if I agree with someone's doctrine, I have to respect how they got there.

 

It was interesting "debate" to listen to. It demonstrated the arrognce in our Calvinistic theologians. Even the opening prayer was arrogant. I also learned you can be a 3 or 4 point Calvinist. In my opinion, you can not be a 3 or 4 point Calvinist. Unless you hold all 5 points, you hold an indefensible position.you hold a house of falling cards.

 

Evidence please? Those with Doctorates, what you guys are berating, that is those who have actually STUDIED Scripture in Greek, Hebrew, have lived their lives studying and teaching, those are Calvinists, and they are not philosophical, Arminians are. I've yet to see a Calvinist/Arminian debate where the Calvinist drowns their opponent in scripture, and the Arminian responds with PHILOSOPHY "Well if that verse is true, then your God would be......".

Arminianism is a heresy, it's closer to Rome than to any Reformation Theology, it is learned with many envious of our study, and it's sad that human reason has taken over the Church. From the Reformation until the late 1800's, until German Higher Criticism caused many to doubt Holy Scripture, Reformed Theology WAS the Reformed Church, sure you had schisms, but God's sovereignty over all things was never questioned.

Today we have those who have never read the Reformers out teaching, preaching, and debating. We live in a post biblical world.

 

Here is a paper "Four implications of Calvinism"
Four Implications of Calvinism
Look at section 3 on Free Will. It's nothing but a philosophical argument. And that is exactly what I see coming from scholars. Seminary professors. Bible teachers.

And it's sad because there are other issues besides Free Will vs. Sovereignty which are treated this way. Original sin, Total Depravity and Age of Accountability are treated this way many times.

I never said DEBATE, I said ARGUMENT

Ummm...
I'm not sure why you have a beef with saying philosophy has pervaded scholarly argumentation, when you're saying human reasoning has taken over the Church..?
Are there no scholars making up this "Church" ??

ok..?

Can you reword or clarify?
It seems you're saying that because men aren't reading men, the bible has been jettisoned

 

Here's an interesting read, too.

http://ancientbaptist.com/vance_calvinism_and_the_baptists.pdf

 

I have never seen a post more full of garbage as this one. The pure arrogance and obnoxiousness is so over whelming it sticks clean through the computer screen. This is what calvinism does, it make one believe they are above others and more special. I have news for ya, when it take arrogance to make one be convinced of a doctrine then the foundation is not biblical.

Now this response is not full of scripture. In fact it is exactly what it is responding to. No scripture, lots of personal reason, and a whole lot of venom. The difference is my post is not hypocritical. I did not claim that those who disagree with me do not use scripture and then fail to use scripture. But I am sure you can live with that in your overwhelming arrogance.

 

This is one of those issues I see as damaging to the SBC. Jesus made The Gospel simple. "Follow Me."
The issue will split the SBC if it continues. To get a job preaching in a church around here, a Calvinist would have to lie. A couple did. They got fired when found out.

 

Or you might have someone's personal interpretation

 

That's a sad comment. No one should have to misrepresent the Bible in order to preach in a church. If a church will not hire someone who takes God's sovereignty as being true, what kind of churches do you have in your area? I can't imagine they find the church at Berea admirable.

 

As JonC pointed out...
The problem comes from a philosophical misunderstanding that God's sovereignty and human freedom must be reconciled in full.

Scripture presents both, and makes no attempt to lay them one on top of the other.

So in the minds of most, one must be at least partly jettisoned for the other to be so

That's the whole issue - less philosophy, more scripture

 

Well, here where I live at, there isn't a Reformed church within miles. Guess what? These churches that hold to free will ain't flourishing. My F-I-L church has 15 members on their books, and several times they have only enough there to have a few songs and prayer and then they leave. There's a Separate Baptist church that I have a monthly appointment, and many times I have preached to less than 9 ppl. Then there's a church about 1 minute from me who had a pastor fleece them. Then I work with a guy who stepped down from asst. pastor of a FWB because he was having an affair. I reckon he was restored to fellowship, but he's no longer asst-pastor. Then there's a FWB church about 30 minutes from my house that is looking for their 3rd pastor in 3-4 years. My home church, which is a free will Missionary Baptist has between 30-45 every Sunday.

Also, sin is running rampant here. Drugs out the yin-yang, ppl stealing to feed their drug addiction, phone scams seem like an almost every day occurrence here, too. So, don't focus solely on us Calvinists. You guys have even more problems with church growth than others.

 

I'd like to send you a PM. Can you enable it so I can? Thanks in advance.