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

[JonC]

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.

But that's just it - no one here (we are speaking of "Calvinism and non-Calvinism/Traditionalists" doctrine within the SBC) has denied God's sovereignty. This is the issue Hankins brings up - people misrepresent doctrines with which they hold disagreement (I believe often intentionally) simply because they disagree with the other's interpretations. The most I can say about the non-Calvinistic view here is that it is inconsistent and I believe this inconsistency carries over into their conclusions (I think this true of some Calvinists as well).

To extend this outside of the SBC, however - man who can read the works of people like D.L. Moody, A.W. Tozer, and John Wesley and walk away thinking these men deny God's sovereignty as being true is a man who simply cannot read.

 

[Reynolds]

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.

You will not find a Calvinist SBC Church in this area.

 

[Reynolds]

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.

The closest Calvinist churches I know of, two counties over, are drying up and withering. The fast growing SBC churches are not Calvinist. Problem is you throw labels on them and accuse them of being shallow and corrupt in doctrine.

 

[Reynolds]

But that's just it - no one here (we are speaking of "Calvinism and non-Calvinism/Traditionalists" doctrine within the SBC) has denied God's sovereignty. This is the issue Hankins brings up - people misrepresent doctrines with which they hold disagreement (I believe often intentionally) simply because they disagree with the other's interpretations. The most I can say about the non-Calvinistic view here is that it is inconsistent and I believe this inconsistency carries over into their conclusions (I think this true of some Calvinists as well).

To extend this outside of the SBC, however - man who can read the works of people like D.L. Moody, A.W. Tozer, and John Wesley and walk away thinking these men deny God's sovereignty as being true is a man who simply cannot read.

I think many times men fail to really think about what sovereign means. The sovereign Pharoah turned leadership of the kingdom over to Joseph. The Pharoah was still sovereign and still in charge. He could step in when he wanted to and he drew limits of Joseph's authority.

God can be sovereign without being a micro manager.

 

[rlvaughn]

My home church, which is a free will Missionary Baptist has between 30-45 every Sunday.

By this do you mean a Missionary Baptist Church that holds to free will in salvation? Do they hold eternally security or falling from grace?

Thanks!

 

[MennoSota]

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

If you want more scripture and less philosophy then you see all the scripture where God chooses and predestines. You see all the scripture that tells us man does not seek God, not even one person. You see that the term and idea of free will is not spoken in the Bible. You see that free-will is entirely philosophical and not biblical.

If a person is not going to start with a presupposition, but instead is going to start with observation of scripture, then that person will observe what Calvin observed regarding salvation.

That is how it worked for me. That is how it worked for a number of people I have met. They started out being told they had freely chosen God by people in their church. Then, as they read the Bible, they kept seeing God choosing and God's predestination. The observation made it clear that in regard to salvation God chose whom to adopt. The Bible was the definitive answer on the subject.

 

[JamesL]

If you want more scripture and less philosophy then you see all the scripture where God chooses and predestines. You see all the scripture that tells us man does not seek God, not even one person.

I don't disagree. From a man's vantage point, prior to faith, it looks as though he is seeking God. But if he's honest, he should acknowledge the sovereignty of God through the scriptures.

In fact, scripture portrays all of history as being preordained and intricately designed by God

You see that the term and idea of free will is not spoken in the Bible.

That's not entirely true.
In regard to seeking God, very true. I believe part of the problem is in thinking that belief is a matter of the will, which a wholly philosophical position in almost every camp.

But in regard to a believer's obedience and disobedience, giving, and other issues of action, scripture paints a portrait of men acting on their own accord.

You see that free-will is entirely philosophical and not biblical.

Not entirely true. The common free-will positions stack free will on top of God's sovereignty, whereas their opposition stack them visa versa. Both are error

If a person is not going to start with a presupposition, but instead is going to start with observation of scripture, then that person will observe what Calvin observed regarding salvation.

That's not true, either. Calvin started with two warped presuppositions:
1) that "salvation" in its most basic sense is saved from hell and going to heaven.
2) that works are an integral aspect of being saved from hell.

He brought those from Rome

That is how it worked for me. That is how it worked for a number of people I have met. They started out being told they had freely chosen God by people in their church. Then, as they read the Bible, they kept seeing God choosing and God's predestination. The observation made it clear that in regard to salvation God chose whom to adopt. The Bible was the definitive answer on the subject.

The Church of Christ points to experiential confirmation, too. They believe that since people from all over the world, who never met, saw the same things from the bible, it must be true. Never mind common presuppositions.

That's an erroneous position to hold, and is unsustainable

 

[Greektim]

I think many times men fail to really think about what sovereign means. The sovereign Pharoah turned leadership of the kingdom over to Joseph. The Pharoah was still sovereign and still in charge. He could step in when he wanted to and he drew limits of Joseph's authority.

God can be sovereign without being a micro manager.

Can you show 1 place in Scripture that speaks of God's sovereign authority without also his direct action and providential control? God's sovereignty is often veiled in terms of having authority. But Scripture always includes with it the active use of that authority.

PS--I shudder when I consider starting to post here again after a long hiatus.

"Should I stay or should I go?"

 

[Revmitchell]

-I shudder when I consider starting to post here again after a long hiatus.

We do as well.

 

[Reynolds]

Can you show 1 place in Scripture that speaks of God's sovereign authority without also his direct action and providential control? God's sovereignty is often veiled in terms of having authority. But Scripture always includes with it the active use of that authority.

PS--I shudder when I consider starting to post here again after a long hiatus.

"Should I stay or should I go?"

Adam and eve.

 

[JamesL]

But that's just it - no one here (we are speaking of "Calvinism and non-Calvinism/Traditionalists" doctrine within the SBC) has denied God's sovereignty.

This is the issue Hankins brings up - people misrepresent doctrines with which they hold disagreement (I believe often intentionally) simply because they disagree with the other's interpretations.

I believe pride causes people to refuse to acknowledge when they've assessed someone wrong, and they'll double down.

But also, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, every systematic theology runs into problems, biblically. It happens to all of us. But instead of recognizing our shortcomings, it's easier to try to make the other guy look worse.

The most I can say about the non-Calvinistic view here is that it is inconsistent and I believe this inconsistency carries over into their conclusions (I think this true of some Calvinists as well).

I agree, the SBC Trad position is inconsistent. This comes out in issues like Traducianism vs. Creationism, with most believing the inner man comes from God, alongside the belief that there's some inherent flaw in our inner man coming from Adam.

To extend this outside of the SBC, however - man who can read the works of people like D.L. Moody, A.W. Tozer, and John Wesley and walk away thinking these men deny God's sovereignty as being true is a man who simply cannot read.

 

[Greektim]

Adam and eve.

If you mean through inference (b/c God's sovereignty is not mentioned there) that God has his dominion mediated through his vice-regents, I will readily acknowledge this mediation. But that was not my point nor is this a place that teaches directly God's sovereignty. And even if you wanted to argue that it was, this is not passive authority but God's active sovereignty in creation as well giving natural law as well as positive laws to A&E, and then promising them deliverance when they fail in their mediatorial role. Not to mention that Gen. 1-3 is where God's eternal and sovereign decrees are initiated. You can't get much more active sovereignty than that.

Now, I was thinking more of passages that actually mention the attribute of God's sovereignty, such as Isaiah 46:10-11:

10 I declare the end from the beginning,
and from long ago what is not yet done,
saying: My plan will take place,
and I will do all My will.
11 I call a bird of prey from the east,
a man for My purpose from a far country.
Yes, I have spoken; so I will also bring it about.
I have planned it; I will also do it.

Notice both having authority and exerting that authority. It is never the former without the latter.

 

[Greektim]

We do as well.

Trembling in fear? This DoG doesn't bite too hard.

I personally am trembling that my forehead is going to be constantly red from all of the face-palming I will do here

 

[Revmitchell]

Trembling in fear? This DoG doesn't bite too hard.

I personally am trembling that my forehead is going to be constantly red from all of the face-palming I will do here

So this guy goes to the doctor and says "Doc, every time I slap my forehead it gets read and hurts." So the doctor replies......wait for it.............


"Don't do that!"

 

[Greektim]

So this guy goes to the doctor and says "Doc, every time I slap my forehead it gets read [sic] and hurts." So the doctor replies......wait for it.............


"Don't do that!"

As in put you on ignore?

 

[MennoSota]

I consider the concept of free-will to be one where the person believes that humans can act entirely out of God's permissive will so that God is unable to act against the will of any human. This would truly represent freedom. I reject such a notion. Instead I note that our will is only free in so much as it fits within God's ordained plan. Thus, God allows us to choose our foods or the route we drive to work, but if God wills us to have a conversation with someone as a vessel of His grace, we will not be able to go against His sovereign will.
Where all Christans would hopefully find agreement is in the fact that this function of God's will is a mystery to our tiny minds.

 

[JamesL]

I consider the concept of free-will to be one where the person believes that humans can act entirely out of God's permissive will so that God is unable to act against the will of any human. This would truly represent freedom. I reject such a notion. Instead I note that our will is only free in so much as it fits within God's ordained plan. Thus, God allows us to choose our foods or the route we drive to work, but if God wills us to have a conversation with someone as a vessel of His grace, we will not be able to go against His sovereign will.
Where all Christans would hopefully find agreement is in the fact that this function of God's will is a mystery to our tiny minds.

That's just about the whole issue, right there.

Scripture nowhere speaks of a so-called permissive will of God. It's a philosophical contrivance.

What you're doing, whether you know it or not, is making some scripture more authoritative than other. Just like free will advocates do.

You're stacking one on top of the other, where scripture doesn't.

 

[Revmitchell]

As in put you on ignore?

Uh what?

 

[MennoSota]

That's just about the whole issue, right there.

Scripture nowhere speaks of a so-called permissive will of God. It's a philosophical contrivance.

What you're doing, whether you know it or not, is making some scripture more authoritative than other. Just like free will advocates do.

You're stacking one on top of the other, where scripture doesn't.

Perhaps, however, God's will is never thwarted. Never do we find God declaring that His will is subservient to humans. Instead we read "thus sayeth the Lord" throughout scripture.
What you are attempting to do is ride a fence and thus you make God weaker in your position. How so, you may ask. You make God weaker by refusing to acknowledge God as being absolutely Sovereign in every facet. Your lack of being able to determine God's Sovereignty forces you to have a weak view of God.
As for the permissive will of God, we see this throughout the Scripture in God's dealing with Israel and with the characters spoken of in the Bible. This is a obvious observation in Scripture even if you don't read the words "permissive will" in the Bible.
But, you can ignore these observations if that is your want.

 

[SovereignGrace]

By this do you mean a Missionary Baptist Church that holds to free will in salvation? Do they hold eternally security or falling from grace?

Thanks!

Eternal security. They hold to total depravity and eternal security. Also, they hold to original sin.