If you're SBC & not a Calvinist...

I'm confused. I just hadn't seen evidence for such a "resurgence" within our Baptist churches. I still haven't seen data to support such a claim. Sorry. I'm not being mean or trying to hijack anything - it is just that people often claim things without providing any proof, and this seems that it is something that people throw around without any evidence to support it.

 

SBC,

You said:

Which "Type" of Calvinism were you refering to, specifically?

You also said (as printed above): Southern itself should not have a Calvinism with which to be proud. It should represent the larger beliefs within the convention.

This is a bit troubling. Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly. However, I do not think a seminary should take the people of a denomination as its theological rule. The institution should take the Word of God as its rule.

An seminary should be about theological fidelity, not a popular rule.

Please continue to clarify. I am enjoying the discussion.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

The type of Calvinism that isolates. The type of Calvinism that considers less "spiritual" or "right" those who are less Calvinistic in their thought. The type of Calvinism that criticizes those who employ different methods to communicate the gospel (eg, I have heard of The Four Spiritual Laws tract being attacked in a theology class at SBTS as well as great men such as Warren). The type of Calvinism that evolves into a "my way is the only right way" mentality.

BTW, I write these things as someone who loves Southern (I am completing a PhD there now and have been there for over 7 years) & as someone who is very God-centered theologically.

Your words contradict the motive behind the resurgence. The whole resurgence was a return to the grassroots beliefs of the people. Your line of reasoning was/is often utilized by mods/libs to justify the leftward drift of the institutions.

My whole point is that SBTS should not be a Calvinistic institution. Neither should it be an Arminian school. Southern should represent differing beliefs on the evangelical spectrum (David Dockery was a master at presenting the various views within the larger evangelical circle). If Southern becomes strictly a Calvinistic school, she is shooting herself in the foot (IMHO). There has to be room for diversity in the world of the mysterious (I am thinking particularly of the divine sovereignty/human freedom mystery).

Theological fidelity is not the issue at Southern now. The issue is whether the insitute will reflect the theological diversity within the SBC orthodox circle as a whole or whether it will represent a minority.

B/c of how the SBC functions, in the end the people do have the final say on the direction of a seminary. This is obviously one of the potential disadvantages of being a denominational school (or in the case of the resurgence, it is one of the great advantages).