ROSES, a reasonable baptist position?

[quantumfaith]

Just came across this. Personally I have never heard of this "baptist position" in any official context. Interested in any reasonable and amicable commentary that may ensue.

R.O.S.E.S.

Radical Depravity -- Compared with total depravity, radical depravity agrees that every
aspect of our being was damaged through the Fall and we can do nothing to save ourselves,
but affirms that humans are not totally evil because we retain the image of God despite our
fallenness.
· Overcoming Grace – Compared with irresistible grace, overcoming grace (or effectual
calling) affirms that God accomplishes salvation, but differs in that rather than salvation
being a mechanical and deterministic process, it allows for even sinful, obstinate humans to
respond to God’s persistent wooing.

Sovereign Election -- In contrast to the double predestinarianism of unconditional election,
God sovereignly elects those whom He foreknows will respond to Him.

Eternal Life -- The phrase “perseverance of the saints” might suggest that although we are
saved by grace, we are kept by our good works. The phrase “Once saved, always saved”
could suggest that we could claim Christ as Savior without making Him Lord of our lives.
George prefers eternal life or eternal security to convey the scriptural truth of the assurance
of the believer.

Singular Redemption -- Finally, unlike limited atonement, singular redemption
communicates that Jesus’ death was sufficient to save everyone but is efficient only for those
who repent and believe.

While Calvinistic perspectives have a long history in Baptist life and Southern Baptists
have always tolerated five-point Calvinism as a legitimate position within Baptist life, I do not
believe that the majority of the Southern Baptist Convention will ever embrace or require five
point Calvinism. If most Baptists really are between two and three point Calvinists, there are
countervailing forces in the SBC which constitute a limit factor on Calvinism in the convention.

Timothy George, Amazing Grace: God’s Initiative – Our Response (Nashville:
LifeWay, 2000),

 

[Iconoclast]

The only problem with this philosophy is it is unbiblical.

Sovereign Election -- In contrast to the double predestinarianism of unconditional election,
God sovereignly elects those whom He foreknows will respond to Him.

This is an unbiblical view of foreknowledge. God never has to look forward and learn or respond to anything man does.

but differs in that rather than salvation
being a mechanical and deterministic process, it allows for even sinful, obstinate humans to respond to God’s persistent wooing.

This again is a man centered view attempting to redefine the very essence of Jesus saving sinners.

The phrase “perseverance of the saints” might suggest that although we are saved by grace, we are kept by our good works.

6Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Do not re-invent the wheel.

 

[quantumfaith]

The only problem with this philosophy is it is unbiblical.



This is an unbiblical view of foreknowledge. God never has to look forward and learn or respond to anything man does.



This again is a man centered view attempting to redefine the very essence of Jesus saving sinners.



6Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Do not re-invent the wheel.

Thank you for you input. But respectfully I disagree with your conclusion that it is not necessarily biblical. But again I do thank you for your commentary.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

Isn't this basically re-inventing Arminianism with a loophole for eternal security?

 

[quantumfaith]

Isn't this basically re-inventing Arminianism with a loophole for eternal security?

The preceding was "snipped" from a paper by Dr. Lemke of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. I am pretty confident, although only anecdotally, that the positions of ROSES, probably reflects the beliefs of the vast majority of SBC churches and membership.

 

[Jerome]

Reformed blogger extraordinaire Timmy Brister proclaims:

there [are] no substantive differences between [George's] ROSES and TULIP

[George's] ROSES is thoroughgoingly consistent with the Canons of Dort

 

[Rippon]

Lemke's version of ROSES and that of its originator -- Timothy George's are quite different. Lemkin and Peter Lumpkins run in the same circle.

I'm rather fond of Timothy George's ROSES --as he defines it -- not as Lemke's radically redefines it in a semi-Pelagian manner.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Thank you for you input. But respectfully I disagree with your conclusion that it is not necessarily biblical. But again I do thank you for your commentary.

Dave.....That thing you posted is totally man centered & I tell you that in complete sincerity.

 

[Aaron]

Just came across this. Personally I have never heard of this "baptist position" in any official context. Interested in any reasonable and amicable commentary that may ensue.

R.O.S.E.S.

Radical Depravity -- Compared with total depravity, radical depravity agrees that every
aspect of our being was damaged through the Fall and we can do nothing to save ourselves,
but affirms that humans are not totally evil because we retain the image of God despite our
fallenness.
· Overcoming Grace – Compared with irresistible grace, overcoming grace (or effectual
calling) affirms that God accomplishes salvation, but differs in that rather than salvation
being a mechanical and deterministic process, it allows for even sinful, obstinate humans to
respond to God’s persistent wooing.

Sovereign Election -- In contrast to the double predestinarianism of unconditional election,
God sovereignly elects those whom He foreknows will respond to Him.

Eternal Life -- The phrase “perseverance of the saints” might suggest that although we are
saved by grace, we are kept by our good works. The phrase “Once saved, always saved”
could suggest that we could claim Christ as Savior without making Him Lord of our lives.
George prefers eternal life or eternal security to convey the scriptural truth of the assurance
of the believer.

Singular Redemption -- Finally, unlike limited atonement, singular redemption
communicates that Jesus’ death was sufficient to save everyone but is efficient only for those
who repent and believe.

While Calvinistic perspectives have a long history in Baptist life and Southern Baptists
have always tolerated five-point Calvinism as a legitimate position within Baptist life, I do not
believe that the majority of the Southern Baptist Convention will ever embrace or require five
point Calvinism. If most Baptists really are between two and three point Calvinists, there are
countervailing forces in the SBC which constitute a limit factor on Calvinism in the convention.

Timothy George, Amazing Grace: God’s Initiative – Our Response (Nashville:
LifeWay, 2000),

This says that man has some good in him and is chosen on the basis of that good. Complete and utter hogwash, and if that's the position of the "vast majority" of the SBC, then a vast majority of the SBC is not hearing the Gospel.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

This says that man has some good in him and is chosen on the basis of that good. Complete and utter hogwash, and if that's the position of the "vast majority" of the SBC, then a vast majority of the SBC is not hearing the Gospel.

Does the SBC truly espouse those points? What do they do with the 30% coming out of their seminary's as Calvinists & how could they allow Al Mohler run Southern since he is a Calvinist?

 

[quantumfaith]

Does the SBC truly espouse those points? What do they do with the 30% coming out of their seminary's as Calvinists & how could they allow Al Mohler run Southern since he is a Calvinist?

Well, EWF, there is no shortage of pastors and leaders in the SBC which differ significantly with Mohler. The SBC is and always has been prone to swings and power struggles within it, and yes, my guess, anecdotally of course, that at least 70 percent of the SBC would be much more comfortable with ROSES rather than TULIP(s). A reading of the article that contained this was quite interesting with statistics.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What do they do with Particular or Reformed Baptists then.....throw rocks @ them? Guess you know Im not a southerner.

 

[quantumfaith]

Lemke's version of ROSES and that of its originator -- Timothy George's are quite different. Lemkin and Peter Lumpkins run in the same circle.

I'm rather fond of Timothy George's ROSES --as he defines it -- not as Lemke's radically redefines it in a semi-Pelagian manner.

Well, not being a theologian myself, I can say in ALL HONESTY, I am much more likely to count myself among the ROSES, rather than the TULIPS. A little more insight on your closing comment about Lemkin and Peter Lumpkins would be appreciated.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

so how do you make allowence for Mohler?

 

[quantumfaith]

This says that man has some good in him and is chosen on the basis of that good. Complete and utter hogwash, and if that's the position of the "vast majority" of the SBC, then a vast majority of the SBC is not hearing the Gospel.

With all due respect sir, I disagree in the strongest, but civil terms. Making the claim that someone, who holds to a solid but different theology than yourself, supported by numerous biblical scholars and Baptist leaders, is somehow someone not hearing the Gospel, is IMHO, inappropriate. There is long tradition of both streams of theology in baptist history.

 

[quantumfaith]

so how do you make allowence for Mohler?

Much like, in my town, some local churches can swing elections, by block voting of their constituent congregations. It may very well be that in the future you will see another split of the SBC, as happened some 25 years ago in the battle between the "conservatives" and "liberals", which led to the CBF. Something similar could occur again in the convention. I personally know of several churches who have split over the issue, myself being a "refugee" from one such split.

 

[quantumfaith]

Isn't this basically re-inventing Arminianism with a loophole for eternal security?

I think this is a reasonable claim. Not theologically savvy enough myself to know if you mean anything else.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Much like, in my town, some local churches can swing elections, by block voting of their constituent congregations. It may very well be that in the future you will see another split of the SBC, as happened some 25 years ago in the battle between the "conservatives" and "liberals", which led to the CBF. Something similar could occur again in the convention. I personally know of several churches who have split over the issue, myself being a "refugee" from one such split.

These splits are simply ridiculous that they would do that...I guess doctrine does divide. In that case, I better stay up here with the Catholics....at least here they aren't judging me & I can bring allot of them to the Lord without that other nonsense hanging over anyones head.

 

[quantumfaith]

What do they do with Particular or Reformed Baptists then.....throw rocks @ them? Guess you know Im not a southerner.

EWF. as far as I know, the SBC has no connection to either of these, other some shared "history" of baptists in general. I am sure historically, there was a bit more of a connection, but it has been some time since.

 

[quantumfaith]

These splits are simply ridiculous that they would do that...I guess doctrine does divide. In that case, I better stay up here with the Catholics....at least here they aren't judging me & I can bring allot of them to the Lord without that other nonsense hanging over anyones head.

Actually, it(that being a split over theology) is a step "up", as often splits in SBC churches can be over much less weighty issues, such as the color of carpet etc.