Calvinist churches targeted by Florida Baptist Convention

[gb93433]

http://www.abpnews.com/www/2455.article

Calvinist churches targeted by Florida Baptist Convention
By Greg Warner
Published June 8, 2007

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (ABP) -- Some Baptists in this state say the Florida Baptist Convention is intimidating and demonizing churches that believe in Calvinism -- and doing it with the churches' own money.

Convention executive director John Sullivan last week sent recordings of sermons by Sullivan's former pastor Jerry Vines to every church in the state, apparently at convention expense, that identify Calvinism as a threat to Baptist life.

 

[Joseph M. Smith]

Interesting. Is the "conservative resurgence" going to devour itself, as some of us predicted would eventually happen?

 

[saturneptune]

http://www.abpnews.com/www/2455.article

Calvinist churches targeted by Florida Baptist Convention
By Greg Warner
Published June 8, 2007

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (ABP) -- Some Baptists in this state say the Florida Baptist Convention is intimidating and demonizing churches that believe in Calvinism -- and doing it with the churches' own money.

Convention executive director John Sullivan last week sent recordings of sermons by Sullivan's former pastor Jerry Vines to every church in the state, apparently at convention expense, that identify Calvinism as a threat to Baptist life.

You just will not stop, will you?

As has been stated to you numerous times in the past, each SBC is autonomous. Each church determines its own destiny. If the churches in Florida do not like what the state organization is doing, they can stop funding them. Each church has a right to set up its own by-laws, Constitution, and covenant. The church may choose or not choose to include free will vs. soverignty.

We have had pastors that adhere to Calvinism, and those that have not. There does not seem to be a problem, nor with the churches that surround us in this community. While in my mind there is no doubt about the soverignty of God, there is also no conflict between this and missions or evangelism.

But then again, all that was said above are well known facts. That is not your purpose. Your purpose is just like the thread you just posted a few hours ago, to look for opportunities to demean and belittle the SBC. What do you do, go to your search engine several times a day looking for articles that point out division within the Convention? Pesonally, I dont think you care about the sovereignty of God or free will. Its like the prayer language. It is an opportunity for you to document dissention.

 

[Baptist Believer]

You just will not stop, will you?

He gave no comment... he's just reporting the news.

And this is a very timely article... especially as it comes just before the Convention.

As has been stated to you numerous times in the past, each SBC is autonomous. Each church determines its own destiny. If the churches in Florida do not like what the state organization is doing, they can stop funding them. Each church has a right to set up its own by-laws, Constitution, and covenant. The church may choose or not choose to include free will vs. soverignty.

I'm certain he knows this... But isn't it foolish that the Florida leadership thinks it is a good idea to bash the beliefs of a significant number of its own supporters because the "old guard" is losing their tight control on the hearts and minds of the average SBCer? In days past, the old guard got away with demonizing those who had ethical and theological issues with Paige Patterson's crusades (they generally called them "liberals", even though most were not).

We have had pastors that adhere to Calvinism, and those that have not. There does not seem to be a problem, nor with the churches that surround us in this community. While in my mind there is no doubt about the soverignty of God, there is also no conflict between this and missions or evangelism.

Yet the Florida convention and the "old guard" seem to think there is, and will use convention resources to spread their views.

But then again, all that was said above are well known facts. That is not your purpose. Your purpose is just like the thread you just posted a few hours ago, to look for opportunities to demean and belittle the SBC.

Watch it! You're judging motives.

What do you do, go to your search engine several times a day looking for articles that point out division within the Convention?

I doubt it. Most likely he subscribes to the ABP e-mail news feed because this story hit my mail box less than an hour ago and I almost posted it myself.

Pesonally, I dont think you care about the sovereignty of God or free will. Its like the prayer language. It is an opportunity for you to document dissention.

Again... you're judging motives, and I'm guessing you're judging falsely.

 

[gb93433]

But then again, all that was said above are well known facts.

Do you have any facts to support the "well known facts?" If they are so well known then you could easily document them and give theri sources.

Personally, I dont think you care about the sovereignty of God or free will. Its like the prayer language.

When was the last time you asked me about my theology on the sovereignty of God or free will?

It is an opportunity for you to document dissention.

You have never asked how I got the information. Instead of making such erroneous assumptions and then posting them, instead you could have asked one simple question first. If you had at least taken the time to go to the home page and then click on subscribe at the bottom you could get the same news I get.

Apparently you have not read anything other stories I provided awhile back which were very positive.

So you believe I documented and wrote the article?

Who wrote the article?

What is the source of information?

Is the article full of truth or lies?

When was the last time you had enough integrity to ask me first before you posted such exaggerations and accusations?

 

[saturneptune]

Do you have any facts to support the "well known facts?" If they are so well known then you could easily document them and give theri sources.



When was the last time you asked me about my theology on the sovereignty of God or free will?



You have never asked how I got the information. Instead of making such erroneous assumptions and then posting them, instead you could have asked one simple question first. If you had at least taken the time to go to the home page and then click on subscribe at the bottom you could get the same news I get.

Apparently you have not read anything other stories I provided awhile back which were very positive.

So you believe I documented and wrote the article?

Who wrote the article?

What is the source of information?

Is the article full of truth or lies?

When was the last time you had enough integrity to ask me first before you posted such exaggerations and accusations?

There is no doubt that the articles you are using have some element of truth in them. That is not the point. In fact, that statement is a strawman. The point is, the purpose for which you use the articles. The accuracy of the sources and articles is not the issue, your agenda is.

 

[Martin]

http://www.abpnews.com/www/2455.article

Calvinist churches targeted by Florida Baptist Convention
By Greg Warner
Published June 8, 2007

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (ABP) -- Some Baptists in this state say the Florida Baptist Convention is intimidating and demonizing churches that believe in Calvinism -- and doing it with the churches' own money.

Convention executive director John Sullivan last week sent recordings of sermons by Sullivan's former pastor Jerry Vines to every church in the state, apparently at convention expense, that identify Calvinism as a threat to Baptist life.

==Look, it maybe that at some point in the future Calvinist Baptist Churches will be forced out of the Southern Baptist Convention. The Southern Baptist Convention seems to be heading in a popular, and not Biblical, direction. Want proof? Look at their BaptistPress website. Most of the "news" articles on there in recent months are fluff. I would also point to the election of Bobby Welch and Jack Graham as president of the Southern Baptist Convention. As for Jerry Vines, anyone who considers "Calvinism...a threat to Baptist life" is ignorant of Baptist history and does not deserve a place of leadership in any Baptist church.

 

[saturneptune]

Martin,
I highly respect your opinions and insights. It is obvious that there are problems with the SBC. Thank God we do not have a hirarchy. The work of the SBC is done with the local church.

It is up to the local churches to change the leadership. Regardless of the problems, much good has done for the Gospel through the SBC.

The difference between your post and the originator of this thread is that your thoughts are reasoned out and rational. The other is nothing but bashing the entire denomination in thread after thread. I wouldnt dare make a hobby of demeaning another faith in Christ, as I have no idea how God is using them in His plan.

 

[gb93433]

There is no doubt that the articles you are using have some element of truth in them. That is not the point. In fact, that statement is a strawman. The point is, the purpose for which you use the articles. The accuracy of the sources and articles is not the issue, your agenda is.

When was the last time you have enough integrity to come right out and ask me instead of casting judgment and writing lies?

You did not answer one question. Why not? Do you not have enough integrity and honesty to answer them directly?

1. Do you have any facts to support the "well known facts?" If they are so well known then you could easily document them and give their sources.

2. When was the last time you asked me about my theology on the sovereignty of God or free will?

3. So you believe I documented and wrote the article?

4. Who wrote the article?

5. What is the source of information?

6. Is the article full of truth or lies?

7. When was the last time you had enough integrity to ask me first before you posted such exaggerations and accusations?

I gave you a chance to humble yourself but in your arrogance did not.

You said that what I posted was half truths. In your research what did you document to be half truths? If you have no documentation then quit lying and libeling the author.

Apparently in your agenda you never read a few past articles I posted which were positive of the SBC.

 

[saturneptune]

When was the last time you have enough integrity to come right out and ask me instead of casting judgment and writing lies?

You did not answer one question. Why not? Do you not have enough integrity and honesty to answer them directly?

1. Do you have any facts to support the "well known facts?" If they are so well known then you could easily document them and give their sources.

2. When was the last time you asked me about my theology on the sovereignty of God or free will?

3. So you believe I documented and wrote the article?

4. Who wrote the article?

5. What is the source of information?

6. Is the article full of truth or lies?

7. When was the last time you had enough integrity to ask me first before you posted such exaggerations and accusations?

I gave you a chance to humble yourself but in your arrogance did not. Apparently you do not have enough integrity to answer the questions but instead give excuses, exaggerations and lies.

You said that what I posted was half truths. In your research what did you document to be half truths? If you have no documentation then quit lying and libeling the author.

Apparently in your arrogance and agenda you never read a few past articles I posted which were positive of the SBC.

The articles stand on their own merit. Your agenda does not.

 

[gb93433]

I have more integrity in my little fingernail at this moment than you have accumulated in a lifetime.

Thanks for explaining the abundance of your integrity, humility, and judgment. You have made it quite clear.

In your post did you forget what the Bible says in Prov. 27:2? "Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips."

Did you forget to apply James 1:22, "But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves."

Did you ever read post #4?

 

[canadyjd]

I thought the article was well written. It identified the Executive director and one of his associates as using intimidation and misrepresentations of Calvinism to promote an agenda and to cause disruption in the convention.

He may have also inappropriately used convention money. He certainly appears to have been less than candid about how the money would be spent when it was requested.

The folks who are claiming Calvinists are dishonest, divisive, and prideful have demonstrated by their actions that they are all the things they claimed the Calvinists to be.

The Calvinists have demonstrated themselves to be thoughtful and longsuffering and humble when confronted with the mean-spiritedness of those who have targeted them.

peace to youraying:

 

[saturneptune]

The article is well written, and in all likelihood true. However, I would bet it was not the intent of the author of the article to bring about an indictment of the entire SBC, including the local churches.

It is one thing to point out problems, maybe to offer solutions. It is quite another to make a hobby of negative comments towards a faith, multiply the problems, and offer no solutions.

By the way, I put myself in the Calvinist camp. The point here is not how calvinists are being handled at the convention level (although that needs addressing), the point here is about an agenda.

 

[canadyjd]

It is one thing to point out problems, maybe to offer solutions. It is quite another to make a hobby of negative comments towards a faith, multiply the problems, and offer no solutions.

There are some folks here who must speak out of their frustrations. When they post enough, they eventually reveal their bias and never-ending contradictions. Don't fall into the trap of assuming you know other people's motives.

That's free advice and it's only worth about 1/2 of what you have paid for it.:smilewinkgrin:

peace to youraying:

 

[saturneptune]

There are some folks here who must speak out of their frustrations. When they post enough, they eventually reveal their bias and never-ending contradictions. Don't fall into the trap of assuming you know other people's motives.

That's free advice and it's only worth about 1/2 of what you have paid for it.:smilewinkgrin:

peace to youraying:

Your point is well taken. Most Christians working at the local church level are trying to spread the Gospel, help others, and show the love of God throughout the community. I doubt 99% of people involved in ministries take note of the nonsense at the convention level. Like I said, our denomination is unique. Each church is autonomous. If a local church does not like what is going on, work to change the leadership. If enough churches stop sending support, things will change. Along with pointing out problems, solutions must be offered. Since God saved myself, wife, and two children through SBC ministries, I see nothing positive of creating multiple threads to tell how bad the SBC is. I dont do that to other faiths, and expect the same.

 

[TCGreek]

==Look, it maybe that at some point in the future Calvinist Baptist Churches will be forced out of the Southern Baptist Convention. The Southern Baptist Convention seems to be heading in a popular, and not Biblical, direction. Want proof? Look at their BaptistPress website. Most of the "news" articles on there in recent months are fluff. I would also point to the election of Bobby Welch and Jack Graham as president of the Southern Baptist Convention. As for Jerry Vines, anyone who considers "Calvinism...a threat to Baptist life" is ignorant of Baptist history and does not deserve a place of leadership in any Baptist church.

Well stated. The problem is a lack of history. A fellow pastor of mine is also SBC and he a consistent calvinist.

Spurgeon's Down Grade Controversy should teach us all a lesson. By the way, I am a proud calvinist, and according to Spurgeon it is just a nickname for what is in the Scripture.

At any rate, each church is autonomous.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I thought the article was well written. It identified the Executive director and one of his associates as using intimidation and misrepresentations of Calvinism to promote an agenda and to cause disruption in the convention.

He may have also inappropriately used convention money. He certainly appears to have been less than candid about how the money would be spent when it was requested.

The folks who are claiming Calvinists are dishonest, divisive, and prideful have demonstrated by their actions that they are all the things they claimed the Calvinists to be.

The Calvinists have demonstrated themselves to be thoughtful and longsuffering and humble when confronted with the mean-spiritedness of those who have targeted them.

I have to agree. While I have no love for hard-line five-point Calvinism, this kind of attack is just plain wrong.

There is more right with Calvinism than there is wrong, and, in any case, it is one of the two historic strands of Baptist life that joined to create the SBC. If Patterson's old guard is going to try to demonize and drive out Calvinists in the same way that they did to non-fundamentalists (that is, theological moderates, non-fundamental conservatives, and a handful of real liberals), somebody needs to communicate that.

Thirty years ago, the internet did not exist in its present form and it was hard to communicate with those who were accused. Just think what Wade Burleson's reputation would be like if he didn't have a platform to respond to all of the false accusations made against him! The old guard may finally learn that the regular people in the SBC won't beleive lies anymore since they have access to both sides of the story. And it won't be a day too soon. :applause:

 

[preachinjesus]

This article is important b/c it tells of an underlying facism in the SBC leadership culture. "If you're not for us you're against us" is the mentality, and is not to be the mentality for the church. Calvinism isn't my cup of tea, but it is one of the most biblically sound arguments for theology out there.

My pastor and I were talking about this topic the other day and while we both differ on our particular views of the more sublime issues, the one thing remains true about this entire issue. Regardless of your theology, is your theology standing as a reason to go out and make disciples or does it stand in the way of your making disciples? Calvinism, at least what is mostly practiced in the SBC, is inherently evangelistic and awfully credible imho. This is another example of facism in the SBC.

The articles stand on their own merit. Your agenda does not. I have more integrity in my little fingernail at this moment than you have accumulated in a lifetime.

probably one of the poorest points I've ever read around here, and there are a lot of very poor points.

 

[Baptist Believer]

This article is important b/c it tells of an underlying facism in the SBC leadership culture. "If you're not for us you're against us" is the mentality, and is not to be the mentality for the church.

This is an excellent point. Back in the day (mid to late 1980s) when I was fully in support of the takeover movement, the people who were guiding me in the movement would repreatedly emphasize that Jesus said, "If you are not for me, you are against me" and (of course) would place the theological and political movement in the SBC as personifying the work of Jesus. Those who did not go along with everything that Paige Patterson and company were advocating were enemies of Jesus and were fair game for attack and castigation.

 

[gb93433]

I see nothing positive of creating multiple threads to tell how bad the SBC is. I dont do that to other faiths, and expect the same.

Do you think it was wrong for the media to report the corruption of pedophilia in the RCC or would it have been better for the RCC to clean up its own house first?Apparently there was a lot of effort to keep it quiet but do nothin about the real problem. The RCC was aware of improper actons in a report they did in the 1930s.

If an organization is corrupt its gets worse and worse until something drastically happens. Many times things are so corrupt that there are efforts to cover up the truth until the media gets ahold of it and exposes it to the world.


If 99% of the people do not know what is going on and do not care that says a lot about the complacency and wisdom of the supporters. Complacent people will watch evil come in the front door and say and do nothing.

When is the last time you read anything about corruption in the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association? If there is no corruption and the organization makes every effort to provide full disclosure then it prevents itself from corruption and promotes trust among its supporters. Can you think of anytime that the BGEA did not seek to have the finest men as leaders possible?

Most likely an informed people will make an informed decision that is the right decision.

Many who have been in the SBC a long time see efforts to cover up problems and keep people quiet. When that happens people will speak out against what they see as an efort to hide something. That is what is happening today.