• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The rise of Calvinism?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
The 2 main attempts to reform Calvinism, NCT and the so called new Calvinists have not gone that well!
I disagree. The movement has grown quite a bit over the last 60 years. What has gained most ground, IMHO, is the ideas extending from Torrance as many of the "neo" movements seem hollow to me.

That said, I suspect perhaps Calvinism and its Arminian cousins may have reached their zenith. We are living in a time when different questions are being asked and more than not these theologies seem unable to address the needs of its adherents. Theology has to remain current (it has to address current theological issues). Otherwise it will die or morph into a new thing. This is how Calvinism (expressed as Tulip) came about (during Calvin's time no one was asking about the "scope" of the Atonement and the distinction centered on communion).
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
there has been a long history of particular Baptists here in USA, all the way back to our founding times, and there are really no moderate Calvinists, as all "real ones" hold to 5 points of Grace !
many think like Dr Geilser, who claimed to be a moderate Calvinist, but was really a 3 point arminist in theology!
I agree that Calvinism should be all 5 points or nothing. It is a very simple theology and the points depend on one another.

If that is the case, then SBC leadership was not Calvinist at all.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I disagree. The movement has grown quite a bit over the last 60 years. What has gained most ground, IMHO, is the ideas extending from Torrance as many of the "neo" movements seem hollow to me.

That said, I suspect perhaps Calvinism and its Arminian cousins may have reached their zenith. We are living in a time when different questions are being asked and more than not these theologies seem unable to address the needs of its adherents. Theology has to remain current (it has to address current theological issues). Otherwise it will die or morph into a new thing. This is how Calvinism (expressed as Tulip) came about (during Calvin's time no one was asking about the "scope" of the Atonement and the distinction centered on communion).
Guess a lot of this depends on wither one is reformed or just Calvinist!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I agree that Calvinism should be all 5 points or nothing. It is a very simple theology and the points depend on one another.

If that is the case, then SBC leadership was not Calvinist at all.
Many early Baptists were though here in the States!
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I guess I must be an oddball then, because I came to Reformed Theology after years of denying it.
I moved away from it toward Classical Arminianism. I had problems with Calvinists, and those problems led me to reexamine the doctrine. The main problem I saw was people using a Calvinistic view of "pragmatism" as an excuse to justify their laziness and ineffectiveness. On on the other hand, I saw Calvinists who I admired and who had successful ministries, teaching Calvinism but acting very Arminian in the way they did ministry.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Calvinist Baptists much more into accepting NCT and new Calvinism then Reformed Baptists are!
I take it NCT means "New Covenant Theology".

I guess my question is how we can call "Dispensationalists" and "NCT" people less than Reformed since both originated from Reformed theologians. I am not sure I get your distinction. I always considered "Reformed" to relate more to Presbyterian and Calvinism to relate to the Doctrines of Grace....but I have to admit that the terms are historically identical ("Reformed" was Calvin's preferred title for "Calvinism").
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I take it NCT means "New Covenant Theology".

I guess my question is how we can call "Dispensationalists" and "NCT" people less than Reformed since both originated from Reformed theologians. I am not sure I get your distinction. I always considered "Reformed" to relate more to Presbyterian and Calvinism to relate to the Doctrines of Grace....but I have to admit that the terms are historically identical ("Reformed" was Calvin's preferred title for "Calvinism").
All would be equally saved by the Grace of God, but Calvinists tend to be more into just sotierology salvation outlined in 5 points of Grace, while Reformed buy into all of Covenant theology.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
All would be equally saved by the Grace of God, but Calvinists tend to be more into just sotierology salvation outlined in 5 points of Grace, while Reformed buy into all of Covenant theology.
Covenant Theology to include baptism into the covenant relationship of the church and community (infant baptism)?
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I take it NCT means "New Covenant Theology".

I guess my question is how we can call "Dispensationalists" and "NCT" people less than Reformed since both originated from Reformed theologians. I am not sure I get your distinction. I always considered "Reformed" to relate more to Presbyterian and Calvinism to relate to the Doctrines of Grace....but I have to admit that the terms are historically identical ("Reformed" was Calvin's preferred title for "Calvinism").

The term "Reformed" is often associated with Reformed Presbyterians. Baptists did not take on the moniker until the 1960s when the Reformed Baptist movement started at Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Prior to that, the term was rarely used. Particular Baptist was the forerunner of the American Reformed Baptist movement. The term "Reformed" among Baptists was adopted to recognize both the covenantal and confessional nature of English Particular Baptists. In this sense, American Particular Baptists share many similarities to their Reformed Presbyterian brethren. There are many Presbyterians who bristle at Baptists using the Reformed title. Baptists practice believers-only baptism. Presbyterians believe that paedo (infant) baptism is part and parcel with Reformed theology, which disqualifies Baptists from being Reformed. It is interesting that the 17th century Particular Baptists did not refer to themselves as Reformed.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
The term "Reformed" is often associated with Reformed Presbyterians. Baptists did not take on the moniker until the 1960s when the Reformed Baptist movement started at Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Prior to that, the term was rarely used. Particular Baptist was the forerunner of the American Reformed Baptist movement. The term "Reformed" among Baptists was adopted to recognize both the covenantal and confessional nature of English Particular Baptists. In this sense, American Particular Baptists share many similarities to their Reformed Presbyterian brethren. There are many Presbyterians who bristle at Baptists using the Reformed title. Baptists practice believers-only baptism. Presbyterians believe that paedo (infant) baptism is part and parcel with Reformed theology, which disqualifies Baptists from being Reformed. It is interesting that the 17th century Particular Baptists did not refer to themselves as Reformed.
Thank you, @Reformed.

When I was a Calvinist I considered myself a "Particular Baptist" (based on Particular Atonement".... and, to be honest, my great appreciation for Spurgeon).

Would it be fair to compare "Reformed Baptists" with Presbyterians who have adopted a Baptist theology and "Calvinist" as persons who simply affirm the "doctrines of grace" yet maintain a greater distinction between their doctrine and Presbyterians?
 

Reformed

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Thank you, @Reformed.
Would it be fair to compare "Reformed Baptists" with Presbyterians who have adopted a Baptist theology and "Calvinist" as persons who simply affirm the "doctrines of grace" yet maintain a greater distinction between their doctrine and Presbyterians?

I think it would be appropriate to do so, although Reformed Baptists often refer to themselves as Calvinists when discussing the doctrines of grace. Also, there still remains substantial differences with Reformed Presbyterian on matters of baptism, ecclesiology, and the nature/scope of the New Covenant. Over the past few years, there has been an attempt by confessional Baptists to rediscover their Particular Baptist roots. It is called Baptist Federalism. You can learn about it by visiting 1689federalism.com. Baptist Federalism is a distinctive Baptist covenant theology that is completely unlike New Covenant Theology. Baptist Federalism's genesis goes back to the early 16th century.
 

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The term "Reformed" is often associated with Reformed Presbyterians. Baptists did not take on the moniker until the 1960s when the Reformed Baptist movement started at Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Prior to that, the term was rarely used. Particular Baptist was the forerunner of the American Reformed Baptist movement. The term "Reformed" among Baptists was adopted to recognize both the covenantal and confessional nature of English Particular Baptists. In this sense, American Particular Baptists share many similarities to their Reformed Presbyterian brethren. There are many Presbyterians who bristle at Baptists using the Reformed title. Baptists practice believers-only baptism. Presbyterians believe that paedo (infant) baptism is part and parcel with Reformed theology, which disqualifies Baptists from being Reformed. It is interesting that the 17th century Particular Baptists did not refer to themselves as Reformed.

Thankfully a post that actually understands some of the history in recent times.
There is no great movement to reform Calvinism. It is doing just fine.
These ideas more often than not are from those who think they see something everyone else has missed.
Without fail each of these fall by the wayside,as it is more of a fleshly prideful thing.

JonC commented;
We are living in a time when different questions are being asked and more than not these theologies seem unable to address the needs of its adherents. Theology has to remain current (it has to address current theological issues).

I disagree in that Calvinism, correctly preached, taught, believed, and lived deals with every area of life.
There is nothing new under the sun. The word of God is totally sufficient to speak to any need or situation that arises.

The SBC was virtually completely Calvinivstic in it's origins.
Some today attempt to re-write that history to no avail.
This new traditionalist movement is such a misguided attempt as I see it. Some SBC historians have documented these truths.
 

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dockery: Calvinism has roots in SBC history


Dockery located the beginning of Baptist life with the rise of English
Separatism in England. As Baptist life developed in England in the 1600s, Baptists divided between "General Baptists," with individuals like John Smyth as their leader, and "Particular Baptists." The Particular Baptists represented a more Calvinistic understanding of salvation, while General Baptists held to, as the name suggests, a more "general" understanding
of the atonement.

At the founding of the Southern Baptist Convention in May 1845, it would have been difficult to find leaders who were not Calvinistic in their theology, Dockery said. He distinguished between a Calvinistic denominational leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention and its less Calvinist laity. At that time, however, the question over Calvinism was not plaguing the newly formed denomination. Dockery drew attention to the Calvinistic leanings of the Abstract of Principles, a document written by James P. Boyce that would serve as a doctrinal weathervane for Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, which was founded in 1859 in Greenville, S.C., before it moved to Louisville, Ky. Boyce was president of Southern Seminary from 1859 to 1888.
the atonement

As Southern Baptists became more programmatic in the mid-20th century, Dockery said, "the SBC re-envisioned itself, largely ignoring the 19th Century roots."

It was during this time that Southern Baptist theologians like Herschel Hobbs began moving Southern Baptist theology "toward a modified understanding of predestination and foreknowledge. He [Hobbs] believed that God affirmed every free human choice in such a way that the choices are not predetermined." The "modified Arminianism" of Hobbs and famed pastor Adrian Rogers, Dockery said, stands in stark contrast to the 19th century Calvinism of Boyce, Broadus and Manly.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I think it would be appropriate to do so, although Reformed Baptists often refer to themselves as Calvinists when discussing the doctrines of grace. Also, there still remains substantial differences with Reformed Presbyterian on matters of baptism, ecclesiology, and the nature/scope of the New Covenant. Over the past few years, there has been an attempt by confessional Baptists to rediscover their Particular Baptist roots. It is called Baptist Federalism. You can learn about it by visiting 1689federalism.com. Baptist Federalism is a distinctive Baptist covenant theology that is completely unlike New Covenant Theology. Baptist Federalism's genesis goes back to the early 16th century.
Makes me want a drink :Laugh. I miss the idea that Calvinists simply affirmed Calvinism (as a whole) and Particular Baptists were Baptists who affirmed a Calvinistic soteriology. Gone are the days of simple terms, I fear.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Dockery: Calvinism has roots in SBC history


Dockery located the beginning of Baptist life with the rise of English
Separatism in England. As Baptist life developed in England in the 1600s, Baptists divided between "General Baptists," with individuals like John Smyth as their leader, and "Particular Baptists." The Particular Baptists represented a more Calvinistic understanding of salvation, while General Baptists held to, as the name suggests, a more "general" understanding
of the atonement.

At the founding of the Southern Baptist Convention in May 1845, it would have been difficult to find leaders who were not Calvinistic in their theology, Dockery said. He distinguished between a Calvinistic denominational leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention and its less Calvinist laity. At that time, however, the question over Calvinism was not plaguing the newly formed denomination. Dockery drew attention to the Calvinistic leanings of the Abstract of Principles, a document written by James P. Boyce that would serve as a doctrinal weathervane for Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, which was founded in 1859 in Greenville, S.C., before it moved to Louisville, Ky. Boyce was president of Southern Seminary from 1859 to 1888.
the atonement

As Southern Baptists became more programmatic in the mid-20th century, Dockery said, "the SBC re-envisioned itself, largely ignoring the 19th Century roots."

It was during this time that Southern Baptist theologians like Herschel Hobbs began moving Southern Baptist theology "toward a modified understanding of predestination and foreknowledge. He [Hobbs] believed that God affirmed every free human choice in such a way that the choices are not predetermined." The "modified Arminianism" of Hobbs and famed pastor Adrian Rogers, Dockery said, stands in stark contrast to the 19th century Calvinism of Boyce, Broadus and Manly.
It depends. @Yeshua1 has explained that moderate Calvinism us no Calvinism at all. Only a fool would claim that all initial SBC churches affirmed Calvinism, and only an ignorant fool would claim Johnson and Howell were 5 point Calvinists as their works are readily available (my thesis was on Howell and I spent weeks rwadi f his hand written journals).

Do you believe moderate Calvinism (a 3 or 4 point Calvinist) qualify as Calvinists?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top