SBC- Hatfields vs McCoys?

[quantumfaith]

who cares what the founders thought? They can be wrong just as the writers of this article was/is wrong. As an Arminian, I agree with Luke. We in the SBC don't need this sort of devicivenss. Surely there are better things to do than attack one another on what is absolutely a non-essential. Most in the pew Baptists don't care how anyone thinks the the Lord accomplished His work. They are just glad He did!! As we should be.

I can argue against Calvinism all day long, but in the END, I expect I'll be arguing the same points in heaven with the same people until Christ sets us all straight! We take these discussions much, much too far when we apply them to the salvation or lack thereof of another. We ought to know better!

:applause::applause::applause::applause:

 

[preachinjesus]

Two quick points:

1. The founders of the SBC weren't exclusively Reformed.

2. It completely doesn't ever help to call the other side "apostates" as a retort to their proposition. All it actually does is show your intellectual shallowness.

(I do wish the administrators would do something about this terrible pattern of other committed, orthodox Christians pagans.)

 

[Benjamin]

Seems to me they’ve worn out their welcome in many ways. I say give those “apostates” yelling types, which continue to clearly reveal their nature of rebellious dissention toward those who oppose their doctrines and display their attitudes of shoving their beliefs down the throats of others which have brought it to the point of having to make a stand, some of their own kind of medicine for a change…burn em at the stake!

:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If some people press the issue in SBC it will emblazon a feud that will lead to the crippling or death of the SBC.

Page Patterson, Jerry Vines and other well respected brethren seem determined to turn up the heat on this feud that will likely kill us as a movement.

The document "A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation" is sure to hurt feelings unnecessarily and to incite a fight between Calvinists and non-Calvinists that the SBC cannot afford.

Let's face it- we NEED each OTHER.

Debating it on a site like this one is good and healthy if done properly. But turning it into a divisive issue in the denomination is a deadly move.

Let each side produce its own seminaries, churches and preachers. Let churches choose their pastors based on their ability to expound the Scriptures and further the Great Commission.

EVERYONE agrees that neither viewpoint is a missions killer.
EVERYONE acknowledges that people from both viewpoints build wonderful churches.

If the SBC folks of the more Arminian persuasion produce more preachers, more churches and more high quality seminaries- fine. If through their relentless pursuit of the Great Commission THEY inadvertantly eradicate Calvinism from the denomination- then so be it. Let God be God.

If the SBC folks of the more Calvinistic persuasion do the same- fine.

But let's stop dividing the denomination over it. Let's stop taking pot shots at one another.

BECAUSE I AM TELLING YOU THAT A WAR BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES IN THE DENOMINATION WILL END NO BETTER THAN IT DID FOR THE HATFIELDS AND MCCOYS.

The collateral damage in the wake of this feud is family members, loved ones, friends, and struggling churches already on the brink.

The immediate damage will be the loss of the SBC as an appreciable influence in this culture.

The results of THAT- are terrifying.

Be ye a Hatfield or be ye a McCoy....dont bother at all brother....fact is I welcome it! :laugh:

 

[glazer1972]

I just wish folks (not here) wouldn't call us "dirty" calvinists. Doesn't hurt my feelings but it isn't nice.

 

[Winman]

Seems to me they’ve worn out their welcome in many ways. I say give those “apostates” yelling types, which continue to clearly reveal their nature of rebellious dissention toward those who oppose their doctrines and display their attitudes of shoving their beliefs down the throats of others which have brought it to the point of having to make a stand, some of their own kind of medicine for a change…burn em at the stake!

:smilewinkgrin:

Yep, you don't have non-Cals going into Reformed churches trying to reform them. but you have plenty of Calvinists who sneak into non-Cal Baptist churches and try to change what folks have always believed.

If a Calvinist tried to come into my church and change what we believe, I not only would give him a map to the nearest Reformed church, I would give him $10 for gas too.

I don't blame these fellas for making a stand at all, it was WAY overdue.

You Calvinists may want the SBC, but they don't want you.

 

[SolaSaint]

Can anyone give specific examples of these so-called New Calvinists who have tried to take over the SBC? I've seen plenty of churches bend a knee to the seeker sensative, purpose driven theology to the point it could be called a take over. My old church was taken over by this Method. I didn't hear many of you who are now crying foul at Calvinists make any charges of a take over.

I have listened to about half of James White's response to this new document and I do agree with most of his points. I challenge everyone to listen to it. I will agree his method of stating his points is very lacking, I have always had that against him, but please try to listen w/o judging his harsh rhetoric.

Does anyone know if Al Mohler has replied yet? I think we will get a much more gentle reply. I hope.

 

[Amy.G]

Yep, you don't have non-Cals going into Reformed churches trying to reform them. but you have plenty of Calvinists who sneak into non-Cal Baptist churches and try to change what folks have always believed.

If a Calvinist tried to come into my church and change what we believe, I not only would give him a map to the nearest Reformed church, I would give him $10 for gas too.

Who are these people that sneak into churches and try to turn them into Calvinists? I've never seen that happen. Most people don't even what a Calvinist is. Sadly, most people in churches these days don't know their Bible well enough to even know what Baptist doctrine is, much less the Baptist Faith and Message.

I don't blame these fellas for making a stand at all, it was WAY overdue.

You Calvinists may want the SBC, but they don't want you.

This document did not come from the SBC. It was done by a group "within" the SBC.

 

[Winman]

Who are these people that sneak into churches and try to turn them into Calvinists? I've never seen that happen. Most people don't even what a Calvinist is. Sadly, most people in churches these days don't know their Bible well enough to even know what Baptist doctrine is, much less the Baptist Faith and Message.

Give me a break, it's been talked about on forums and blogs for years. I am not going to do research for you.

However, according to this report, based on an interview Frank Page, CEO of the SBC Executive Committee, gave to the blog SBC Today on October 18, the controversy is reaching a critical point. The flashpoint of the controversy seems to be that many newly minted graduates of SBC seminaries are flooding into SBC pulpits without fulling revealing their Calvinism and then, after becoming pastors, are attempting to impose Calvinism on the congregations. I know this to be true as I receive such reports from SBC people all over the South. Page is urging pastoral candidates to reveal their theologies to search committees and congregations before accepting their calls. And he is urging SBC churches to tell pastoral candidates what teachings they will tolerate and which they will not. The issue, then, is informed consent.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2011/10/controversy-over-calvinism-brewing-in-the-sbc/

Now, I don't know who this fellow is, or anything about him, I am just showing you the issue has been out there for a long time.

This document did not come from the SBC. It was done by a group "within" the SBC.

Yes, and it's a very impressive list, and I promise you it will get much bigger.

Let the Reformed start their own association.

 

[Winman]

Look what the same writer says,

I, for one, have no problem with Calvinist Baptist churches and Calvinist pastors in Baptist churches. There have always been some. The only time it becomes a problem is when Calvinists or Arminians sneak into pulpits hiding their theologies and then “come out of the closet” with them, surprising the congregation by attempting to enforce their distinctive view of God’s sovereignty on an unsuspecting and unprepared congregation. This is happening a lot these days. For the most part it is Calvinists doing it. I have heard no reports of Arminians sneaking into pulpits hiding their Arminianism and then attempting to enforce it on a largely Calvinist (or “Calminian”) congregation. So far as I know this never happens.

Olson says the problem is folks "sneaking" into churches and then surprising them by attempting to force their distinctive views on an unsuspecting congregation.

He says that this is done by Arminian and Calvinist Baptists, but then contradicts himself by saying he has heard no reports of Arminian Baptists sneaking into Calvinist churches.

It is these "stealth" tactics that has caused this problem.

 

[Tom Butler]

I have a request for those who accuse "stealth" Calvinists of sneaking into churches.

How about some names and churches?

 

[Tom Butler]

I have another question. If our current SBC confession of faith is good enough for the Calvinists, why is it not good enough for the non-Cals, who wrote most of it?

The Baptist Faith and Message deals with election and regeneration (Parts IV and V) in language I can live with. Why can't they?

Okay, that's two questions. Or one question asked two different ways.

 

[Iconoclast]

who cares what the founders thought? They can be wrong just as the writers of this article was/is wrong. As an Arminian, I agree with Luke. We in the SBC don't need this sort of devicivenss. Surely there are better things to do than attack one another on what is absolutely a non-essential. Most in the pew Baptists don't care how anyone thinks the the Lord accomplished His work. They are just glad He did!! As we should be.

QUOTE]

who cares what the founders thought

You belong to a group that you do not care what they thought?

Is that like a person joining the catholic church and saying who cares what the pope says??? Why did you join? You do not care what is believed?

Most in the pew Baptists don't care how anyone thinks the the Lord accomplished His work

This is why they church is messed up, and struggling.This is not a sound biblical attitude at all. Any group can say this! Even cults! Truth matters.

 

[Iconoclast]

Two quick points:

1. The founders of the SBC weren't exclusively Reformed.

2. It completely doesn't ever help to call the other side "apostates" as a retort to their proposition. All it actually does is show your intellectual shallowness.

(I do wish the administrators would do something about this terrible pattern of other committed, orthodox Christians pagans.)

The apostles did not consider it shallowness to warn against false teachers and apostates. Shallowness would be someone in the SBC not familiar with J.P Boyce, and J.L. Dagg.....
http://www.founders.org/library/dagg_vol1/all.html

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/toc.html

When the original charter of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary was adopted in 1858 it contained the following statement which continues as a part of the "fundamental laws." "Every professor of the institution shall be a member of a regular Baptist Church; and all persons accepting professorships in this Seminary shall be considered, by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down, a departure from which principles on his part shall be grounds for his resignation or removal by the Trustees."--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. The Scriptures.
The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were given by inspiration of God, and are the only sufficient, certain and authoritative rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience.
II. God.
There is but one God, the Maker, Preserver and Ruler of all things, having in and of himself, all perfections, and being infinite in them all; and to Him all creatures owe the highest love, reverence and obedience.
III. The Trinity.
God is revealed to us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit each with distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence or being.
IV. Providence.
God from eternity, decrees or permits all things that come to pass, and perpetually upholds, directs and governs all creatures and all events; yet so as not to destroy the free will and responsibility of intelligent creatures.
V. Election.
Election is God's eternal choice of some persons unto everlasting life -- not because of foreseen merit in them, but of his mere mercy in Christ -- in consequence of which choice they are called, justified and glorified.
VI. The Fall of Man.
God originally created man in His own image, and free from sin; but, through the temptation of Satan, he transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original holiness and righteousness; whereby his posterity inherit a nature corrupt and wholly opposed to God and His law, are under condemnation, and as soon as they are capable of moral action, become actual transgressors.
VII. The Mediator.
Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, is the divinely appointed mediator between God and man. Having taken upon Himself human nature, yet without sin, He perfectly fulfilled the Law, suffered and died upon the cross for the salvation of sinners. He was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended to His Father, at whose hand He ever liveth to make intercession for His people. He is the only Mediator, the Prophet, Priest and King of the Church, and Sovereign of the Universe.
VIII. Regeneration.
Regeneration is a change of heart, wrought by the Holy Spirit, who quickeneth the dead in trespasses and sins enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the Word of God, and renewing their whole nature, so that they love and practice holiness. It is a work of God's free and special grace alone.
IX. Repentance.
Repentance is an evangelical grace, wherein a person being, by the Holy Spirit, made sensible of the manifold evil of his sin, humbleth himself for it, with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrence, with a purpose and endeavor to walk before God so as to please Him in all things.
X. Faith.
Saving faith is the belief, on God's authority, of whatsoever is revealed in His Word concerning Christ; accepting and resting upon Him alone for justification and eternal life. It is wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and is accompanied by all other saving graces, and leads to a life of holiness.
XI. Justification.
Justification is God's gracious and full acquittal of sinners, who believe in Christ, from all sin, through the satisfaction that Christ has made; not for anything wrought in them or done by them; but on account of the obedience and satisfaction of Christ, they receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness by faith.
XII. Sanctification.
Those who have been regenerated are also sanctified, by God's word and Spirit dwelling in them. This sanctification is progressive through the supply of Divine strength, which all saints seek to obtain, pressing after a heavenly life in cordial obedience to all Christ's commands.
XIII. Perseverance of the Saints.
Those whom God hath accepted in the Beloved, and sanctified by His Spirit, will never totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere to the end; and though they may fall, through neglect and temptation, into sin, whereby they grieve the Spirit, impair their graces and comforts, bring reproach on the Church, and temporal judgments on themselves, yet they shall be renewed again unto repentance, and be kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.
XIV. The Church.
The Lord Jesus is the Head of the Church, which is composed of all his true disciples, and in Him is invested supremely all power for its government. According to his commandment, Christians are to associate themselves into particular societies or churches; and to each of these churches he hath given needful authority for administering that order, discipline and worship which he hath appointed. The regular officers of a Church are Bishops, or Elders, and Deacons.
XV. Baptism.
Baptism is an ordinance of the Lord Jesus, obligatory upon every believer, wherein he is immersed in water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, as a sign of his fellowship with the death and resurrection of Christ, of remission of sins, and of his giving himself up to God, to live and walk in newness of life. It is prerequisite to church fellowship, and to participation in the Lord's Supper.
XVI. The Lord's Supper.
The Lord's Supper is an ordinance of Jesus Christ, to be administered with the elements of bread and wine, and to be observed by his churches till the end of the world. It is in no sense a sacrifice, but is designed to commemorate his death, to confirm the faith and other graces of Christians, and to be a bond, pledge and renewal of their communion with him, and of their church fellowship.
XVII. The Lord's Day.
The Lord's Day is a Christian institution for regular observance, and should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private, resting from worldly employments and amusements, works of necessity and mercy only excepted.
XVIII. Liberty of Conscience.
God alone is Lord of the conscience; and He hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in anything contrary to His word, or not contained in it. Civil magistrates being ordained of God, subjection in all lawful things commanded by them ought to be yielded by us in the Lord, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
XIX. The Resurrection.
The bodies of men after death return to dust, but their spirits return immediately to God -- the righteous to rest with Him; the wicked to be reserved under darkness to the judgment. At the last day, the bodies of all the dead, both just and unjust, will be raised.
XX. The Judgment.
God hath appointed a day, wherein he will judge the world by Jesus Christ, when every one shall receive according to his deeds; the wicked shall go into everlasting punishment; the righteous, into everlasting life.

 

[SolaSaint]

If there would result from this squabble started by the non-cals a division or split between Cals and Non-cals, what would it look like and would it be good or bad.

By the way I like your last post Icon.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

AmyG's post was right on the money. If you look at the founders of the SBC as was posted in an earlier thread, you will see this letter is a falling away from the original intent of the founders. That is apostasy. denial of clear scripture is apostasy. Sorry you do not like it, but that is what it is.

Michael, you have gone off and started your own group-celtic-anabaptist-druid- communion. Whatever you call it. I am not sure you are being objective here. History is history. If these people want to leave as you have and invent their own group, let them go. For them to attack the Historic faith is not acceptable.
There is already reaction taking place nationwide. it is not a small controversy. It is small minded to think it is.
They made it public, now it is open for public scrutiny...including Dr.White, Al moehler, and any others who want to get involved.

Like here on the BB. as soon as someone takes a biblical stand, there are those who want to censor, or minimize the person rather than what was said.
Stick on point. Apostasy from the historic faith is real just like Korahs rebellion was real apostasy in real time.
Close your eyes if you want to. They went public, and now the response and correction are also public.:thumbs::thumbs:

The historic faith? Now that's laughable.

I thought you and I had come to an understanding and that we would treat each other as brothers and with civility. I intend to stick with that, even though you have not. To call my communion "druid" is a most despicable insult; I wouldn't have thought you would stoop to this again, but I guess you can't help it. I guess everything we said in PM is out the window, huh? Well, I won't get back down and wallow with you again; you are welcome to the mud.

 

[Bob Alkire]

I have a request for those who accuse "stealth" Calvinists of sneaking into churches.

How about some names and churches?

Tom at one time I had a list of a few, maybe 30 or so, but off hand I believe Jerry Vines old church in Al. was one and what little brain I have left isn't working to well right now to bring up any. Their are a few I know of down here but won't list them they are on their way to healing from their past splits.
The problem was pushed by,Founders leader, the late Ernest C. Reisinger, who employed and promoted in order to "reform" the Southern Baptist Convention one church at a time.
We have Dr. Hargrave right down the road, who I believe has one of the largest Calvinists Churches in the SBC and he is well like by both sides, he had Riverbend listed out front as a Reformed Church.

 

[Winman]

There has been one gross misrepresentation in this thread. If you were to go into any non-Cal (or should I now say "traditional") Baptist church and teach either Limited Atonement or Unconditional Election, every single person would know it is error. We believe that Jesus died for the sins of every person that has ever lived, and we believe the gospel is freely offered to every person. We do not believe that any person is so depraved that he cannot accept the gospel and be saved.

It is a REAL difference of belief and why we cannot walk together. And no amount of Calvinist double-talk is going to make us agree, non-Cals KNOW the difference.

Amo 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

Those who think Cals and non-Cals can walk together are foolish, it can't be done.

 

[Iconoclast]

There has been one gross misrepresentation in this thread. If you were to go into any non-Cal (or should I now say "traditional") Baptist church and teach either Limited Atonement or Unconditional Election, every single person would know it is error

They might think that ,unless the Spirit of God opened their eyes to welcome the truth:thumbs:

 

[Winman]

They might think that ,unless the Spirit of God opened their eyes to welcome the truth:thumbs:

You are a perfect example of why non-Cals and Cals could not get along in the SBC. You have fellows like yourself who say folks who do not agree with you are heretics, apostates, and do not know the truth. You think you are superior to non-Cal Baptists.