IMB's David Platt Disavows Calvinism and Low CP Giving

[Jerome]

Southern Baptist International Missions Board trustee:

After immense and intense investigation and intercession, the Lord has led me to fully support David Platt as the next president of the IMB.

http://www.thealabamabaptist.org/print-edition-article-detail.php?id_art=32332

Our primary concerns linked to David were Calvinism and a lack of Cooperative Program (CP) support

Platt satisfied the the committee he was "not a Calvinist" and

affirmed he will not lead the IMB to be a Calvinistic organization

Platt apologized for his church's low Cooperative Program giving [one quarter of one percent of total church budget] and

pledged to become a passionate advocate of the CP.

 

[evangelist6589]

These are some reason why Mac nor Washer would invite him to speak at one of their conferences. I like David, however not a dogmatic Calvinist.

But that Jay character. Why does he have women teachers?????

http://www.montgomeryfbc.org/our-staff

Southern Baptist International Missions Board trustee:



http://www.thealabamabaptist.org/print-edition-article-detail.php?id_art=32332



Platt satisfied the the committee he was "not a Calvinist" and



Platt apologized for his church's low Cooperative Program giving [one quarter of one percent of total church budget] and

 

[Jerome]

Huh? MacArthur just had Platt at this year's Truth and Life Conference:

http://www.masters.edu/truth-and-life-conference-jump-starts-tmc's-2014.aspx

 

[go2church]

Huh? Platt was pastor at Church of Brookhills in Brimingham not FBC Montgomery. Oh, you meant the guy making the comment.

 

[Jerome]

Yeah, the IMB trustee reporting on Platt's vetting is the pastor of First Baptist Montgomery.

 

[Thousand Hills]

Platt satisfied the the committee he was "not a Calvinist" and

As usual, the OP and Thread Title is misleading. I did not see where Platt said he did not believe in the doctrines of grace, and the statement about God's sovereignty and man's responsibility is one that any good Calvinist would agree with. It appears more likely that the writer of the article is convinced that Platt doesn't fit his "perception" of a mean nasty anti-missions Calvinist.

Regardless, I'm sure Platt will do well and I'm excited about all this, I hope that they selected him because of his true passion to see the gospel spread and his abilities/motivational skills, and there is no hidden agenda.

 

[JonC]

When you look at the SBC stance on Calvinism - “we sometimes disagree over certain theological issues that should not threaten our Great Commission Cooperation” (statement from the Calvinism advisory committee) - it does seem a bit hypocritical for Calvinism to be such an issue for the IMB. Funny, there are similarities between this and the division that created southern baptists in the first place (different issue, same tactic).

 

[Jerome]

[false accusation snipped] I did not see where Platt said he did not believe in the doctrines of grace, and the statement about God's sovereignty and man's responsibility is one that any good Calvinist would agree with. It appears more likely that the writer of the article is convinced that Platt doesn't fit his "perception" of a mean nasty anti-missions Calvinist.

I like David, however not a dogmatic Calvinist.

Does this mean he's not a Calvinist, or he is one but isn't obsessive about it?

 

[JamesL]

Does this mean he's not a Calvinist, or he is one but isn't obsessive about it?

I think Platt is just willing to mold himself into whatever he needs to, in order to keep himself moving up in the world. Oh, excuse me, I mean the church.

A few years ago, I think 2011, Platt spoke at a pasrot's conference and railed vehemently against the use of a sinner's prayer in evangelism. He said something to the effect that multitudes are being given a false hope, that the church has sold them a bill of goods.

He was my hero for about three weeks, until a backlash came. Then he backpeddled, saying that he's not against the use of such methods, blah blah blah.


That told me all I needed to know about him. He seems all too willing to compromise his position if it keeps him popular, or if it's politically advantageous.

It's like "Oh, I never implied that a sinner's prayer is a false gospel."
We know you didn't imply it, buddy. You stated it very matter-of-fact

Or like "Oh, I never claimed to be a Calvinist." Yet he's one of the leading Calvinist voices in the SBC

 

[JamesL]

Oh yeah. Almost forgot....

Now he's gonna start supporting the cooperative program. After all, he has a vested interest in it after they became interested in him.

I think someone really great said not to do our good works in order to be seen by men. Hmmm

 

[evangelist6589]

Oh yeah. Almost forgot....

Now he's gonna start supporting the cooperative program. After all, he has a vested interest in it after they became interested in him.

I think someone really great said not to do our good works in order to be seen by men. Hmmm

You need to read his books. He's a Godly man. Never-mind his view on Calvinism, the point is that he is far from perfect, but he loves Jesus.

 

[JonC]

I don’t see that Platt’s position has changed. His rejection of the “sinners prayer” was on the grounds that it would be misinterpreted/misused to lead people into a false belief. His acceptance when it is “crying out to the Lord” is no different from his earlier position. Also, just because one believes in God’s sovereignty in salvation does not make that person a Calvinist. But the issue of Calvinism seems to center around whether or not all can be saved (to my knowledge Platt has always held that all men can believe and be saved). I was always cautious because I felt that he came close (in Radical) to a strictly social gospel (although he dispelled that fear in one chapter…at least a bit).

 

[JamesL]

You need to read his books. He's a Godly man. Never-mind his view on Calvinism, the point is that he is far from perfect, but he loves Jesus.

I'm not interested in his books. He has a financial interest in telling you what he needs to, so you'll buy the next one.

Sorry, John. I've seen enough of him saying one thing here and something different there.

 

[RLBosley]

As usual, the OP and Thread Title is misleading. I did not see where Platt said he did not believe in the doctrines of grace, and the statement about God's sovereignty and man's responsibility is one that any good Calvinist would agree with. It appears more likely that the writer of the article is convinced that Platt doesn't fit his "perception" of a mean nasty anti-missions Calvinist.

Exactly. I think it's odd that this man makes such a statement without actually quoting anything Platt said about the Doctrines of Grace. All you need to do is pick up his books or listen to his sermons - he's definitely a Calvinist.

Regardless, I'm sure Platt will do well and I'm excited about all this, I hope that they selected him because of his true passion to see the gospel spread and his abilities/motivational skills, and there is no hidden agenda.

:thumbsup: Agreed. I'm excited to see what happens.

 

[Thousand Hills]

Thanks RLBosley.

Here is another perspective on Platt: http://www.pastorwell.com/blog/2014...w-president-of-the-imb-and-thats-a-good-thing

Many have taken to their blogs and social media to object to him based on two things: his Calvinistic soteriology and his church’s low giving to the Cooperative Program. Though many others will write a lot about Dr. Platt and about these two things that they find objectionable, I hope my perspective as a trustee might shed a little light and provide the rationale that the majority of other board members and I used in support of his election.

Furthermore, isn’t the most common objection to a high view of election that it undermines missions? Can anyone reasonably cast that stone at David Platt? The man breathes missions. No one I have ever known is more passionate or strategic about reaching the lost than he. Forgive my historical reference, but I say of his Calvinism what Lincoln said when Grant was accused of imbibing whiskey: “Find what he’s drinking and send it to the rest of my generals!” If Platt’s soteriology drives him to reach the nations with the gospel for the glory of Christ, then may we all get a dose of it! In all seriousness, whatever fear anyone might have about reformed theology undermining missions is laughable in Platt’s life. I don’t rejoice that a supposed Calvinist is president of the International Mission Board. I rejoice that a man who seethes and churns because the enemy keeps much of the world in darkness and who will stop at nothing to send them the light is president. I really don’t care if he’s a Calvinist or not, but rather that he is saturated with Christ and his gospel.

Going through this process has been healthy for David Platt. By his own admission he now sees the beauty and the usefulness of the Cooperative Program as a missions dynamo for a large denomination and would certainly do things differently. That’s not enough for some, but that is the truth. In his zeal to be intimately involved in going and giving, he led his church to give nearly one third of their budget to missions causes--most of them Southern Baptist causes--directly. This year their budget sends over $700,000 directly to the International Mission Board, for instance. Simply put, when we stand before Christ, he’s not going to question us about which fund we used, but about what we did to reach the world with the gospel for His glory. David Platt and his church can certainly answer for that more confidently than the majority of churches.

I love and will fight for the Cooperative Program, but I don’t idolize it or equate it with God Himself. While not supporting the CP significantly, David Platt and his church have clearly made Christ and His mission the priority, and that should not disqualify him from leading, not even an institution that is funded and fueled by the Cooperative Program. All analogies break down, I know, but if we were choosing the CEO of a big soft drink company in Atlanta (avoiding trademark issues here!), would our biggest concern be how much of the product a candidate drank or how much of it the candidate could lead the company to sell? I am convinced that no one will excite and energize a young generation for missions and, by extension, the Cooperative Program like David Platt. Perhaps instead of fussing and fuming about the young Southern Baptists who don't support the Cooperative Program we should ask why they aren't excited about it and have not bought into it. I do not mean to be unkind, but I can't help but notice that many of the ones whose recriminations ring loudest are the very ones who have presided over our precipitous decline in giving, missions, and baptisms. David Platt was 5 years old the last time Cooperative Program giving went up! Maybe it's time we allow some of the disenchanted, disaffected but deeply devoted young leaders to share the burden of leadership.

I’ve been in ministry all of my adult life. I’ve known Adrian Rogers, W. A. Criswell, Stephen Olford, John Stott, and many truly great men of God. I say this carefully and reverently: I have never met anyone on whom the anointing of God rests as powerfully and comfortably as David Platt. A few months or years from now, people will grow tired of talking about how much his church gave to the Cooperative Program, and his relentless drive to reach the nations will swamp and drown those driving the chariots of anti-Calvinism in a sea of irrelevance. The anointing of God on his life will be what matters. His ability to capture the imagination and harness the passion of new and succeeding generations for the Great Commission will still be relevant when all the current objections seem silly in our memories.

 

[RLBosley]

Thanks RLBosley.

Here is another perspective on Platt: http://www.pastorwell.com/blog/2014...w-president-of-the-imb-and-thats-a-good-thing

Good article.

 

[Thousand Hills]

A few more: http://www.jdgreear.com/my_weblog/2...-imb-presidency-signals-about-our-future.html

It’s not news that the younger generation of Southern Baptists struggle with denominational loyalty, expressed in CP giving. In fact, even the most optimistic analysts note that if nothing changes, we are headed for dark days. So, the question begs to be asked: Why are younger Southern Baptists less inclined to lead their churches to give? Isn’t it because they are bewildered at how CP funds are allocated? I have heard some people say, “The big problem is that the younger generation simply isn’t educated about CP.” That may be true for a small percentage of people, but the bigger problem is probably that they are educated about it. The more they find out about CP giving, the less they are motivated to give.

Here is the question that David’s presidency prompts for us: Are younger Southern Baptists more likely to give to the CP when they know the man at the helm of the IMB has proven his willingness to do whatever it takes to free up more money for the field, and who shares their concerns about CP money not getting to the field?

The best way to kill the CP is to go on tweaking the status quo. If you want to ensure its demise, keep gently encouraging it on the downward trajectory it is on. Thus, I suggest that the very thing that worries some people about David Platt is the very reason he should be our next President. The election of David Platt will lead to a renewed interest and confidence in the CP.

I am certain that the question of CP giving has been at the forefront of the mind of every trustee on that search committee. If they elected David as a candidate, we should rest assured that the question of his relationship to the CP has been adequately answered.

And from Dr. Moore:http://www.russellmoore.com/2014/08/27/why-im-glad-david-platt-is-the-new-imb-president/

Look at the latest Pew Research poll of Millennials. The primary problem there is a mistrust of institutions–from political parties to marriage to church membership and beyond. We cannot simply say, “Look, we have the greatest missionary organization in the history of the Christian church” (although I believe that to be true). We must speak to a generation wary of institutions of why cooperation together is part of the eternal purposes of God in Christ.

We need leaders radical enough to make changes, but radical in the right, biblical sense. We need a radical, not a revolutionary. Someone radical enough to build up, not radical in order to tear down. That’s precisely what David is.

We need leaders radical enough to work together, against the headwinds of a secularizing American culture and a global persecution of Christians that is, if anything, only just beginning.

I have friends who were concerned because David’s church, The Church at Brook Hills, though they heavily supported world missions, didn’t do so mostly through Cooperative Program channels. I understand that concern. If I didn’t know David, I might be just as concerned. I believe in the CP, and always have. As the president of an entity funded through the CP almost entirely, I would be insane to celebrate the election of someone I thought wasn’t committed to CP.

David believes in the importance of CP. He does not want the mess that we came out of before 1925: a missionary force having to spend inordinate time at home fundraising. The society model doesn’t work in reaching the world for Christ, and he knows that.

The CP will thrive and flourish in the future. I firmly believe that. And I believe that’s the case not because Southern Baptists will feel guilty if they don’t. I believe that because there is a new sense of energy, excitement, and focus. A new generation of Southern Baptists will give, and I think give sacrificially, to CP because we believe, together, in a common cause, despite all our differences.