Theology and The Future of the SBC

[Thousand Hills]

If you have time this is a good discussion, reminds me in some ways of the debates around here (what do we call each other? - Big R, little r, non-cal?), and I would hope if those of us here were to debate face to face it would be with as much respect as these two seem to have for each other.

Dr. Eric Hankins and Dr. A. Mohler Jr. - At Southern Seminary (Nov 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlUVevDZVMM

My take aways:
- mischaracterizations abound on both sides, ugliness on both sides, not helpful
- we should be discussing theology, otherwise we'll end up like the mainline denoms (we can't dumb it down to the point there is nothing to talk about)
- none of the debate does any good if it takes our time away from living what we believe (witnessing) etc.
- we need each other!!

 

[SolaSaint]

Anyone ever tell you look like the guy off of Green Acres?

 

[Thousand Hills]

Anyone ever tell you look like the guy off of Green Acres?

:laugh::laugh: Who, Mr. Haney or Arnold the Pig?

I take it you didn't have time to watch the video and discuss.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If you have time this is a good discussion, reminds me in some ways of the debates around here (what do we call each other? - Big R, little r, non-cal?), and I would hope if those of us here were to debate face to face it would be with as much respect as these two seem to have for each other.

Dr. Eric Hankins and Dr. A. Mohler Jr. - At Southern Seminary (Nov 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlUVevDZVMM

My take aways:
- mischaracterizations abound on both sides, ugliness on both sides, not helpful
- we should be discussing theology, otherwise we'll end up like the mainline denoms (we can't dumb it down to the point there is nothing to talk about)
- none of the debate does any good if it takes our time away from living what we believe (witnessing) etc.
- we need each other!!

I listened to 23 minutes and I had to shut it off. Now Im not a SBC guy so I dont have a stake in either side but I just got a feeling it was just very strained..... I felt uncomfortable for both guys having to dialog. At one point, they admitted that they would not get together & plant churches together. OK so how can you both say you are Southern Baptists together..... the whole thing was just......well strained (I was going to say bizarre but thats not politically correct & probably insulting right?) Mia culpa.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Anyone ever tell you look like the guy off of Green Acres?

Dont you recall......thats Mr. Kimble

 

[SolaSaint]

:laugh::laugh: Who, Mr. Haney or Arnold the Pig?

I take it you didn't have time to watch the video and discuss.

I will later and come back to comment. Thanks Hank.

 

[Thousand Hills]

I listened to 23 minutes and I had to shut it off. Now Im not a SBC guy so I dont have a stake in either side but I just got a feeling it was just very strained..... I felt uncomfortable for both guys having to dialog. At one point, they admitted that they would not get together & plant churches together. OK so how can you both say you are Southern Baptists together..... the whole thing was just......well strained (I was going to say bizarre but thats not politically correct & probably insulting right?) Mia culpa.

Go get you some pepto and take another shot at it. I listened to it twice, and I don't think they said they wouldn't plant together, maybe I need to get some q-tips.

Regardless, I benefited from it some. I think Paul Washer is right when he says the issue isn't Cal vs. Arm, its regeneration.

 

[Van]

Rather than seeking reach common ground, they seemed willing to agree to disagree. This leaves the truth, wherever it is, hidden from one or both sides.

1) They agreed that anyone who holds 4 or 5 points of the TULIP can be classified as a Calvinist. But 5 point Calvinists on this forum claim they should not be referred to as Calvinists.

2) They agreed both Calvinism and Non-Calvinism eschew Arminianism. We on this forum welcome Arminians under the "Non-Calvinist" umbrella.

3) They agreed that the Baptist "faith and message" should not be changed but instead left as is, i.e. open to differing interpretations.

4) The Calvinist argued that saying different things to different audiences was good policy.

Bottom line, a discussion about discussing Soteriology within the Baptist community, long on generalities, and devoid of any illumination of our differences.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Go get you some pepto and take another shot at it. I listened to it twice, and I don't think they said they wouldn't plant together, maybe I need to get some q-tips.

Regardless, I benefited from it some. I think Paul Washer is right when he says the issue isn't Cal vs. Arm, its regeneration.

You think I am a Liar then? and I have no idea what Washer is referring to, but i see it as ....in a word, "worldliness." One religious society follows it & the other doesnt.....well recorded on this board "daily" for all to view.

 

[Thousand Hills]

You think I am a Liar then? and I have no idea what Washer is referring to, but i see it as ....in a word, "worldliness." One religious society follows it & the other doesnt.....well recorded on this board "daily" for all to view.

Sorry, don't know where we mixed up. I was saying I could be wrong and didn't hear them say that. No I don't think you are a liar.

 

[Thousand Hills]

Washer in his 10 Indictments sermon just some snippets:

We have traded regeneration for decisionism

The fourth indictment is actually an ignorance of the doctrine of regeneration. I know that there are both Calvinists and Arminians here, and I know that there are all sorts of strange animals in between. I guess I call myself a “five point Spurgeonist.” But I want you to know this: Calvinism is not the issue. No, I’ll tell you what the issue is: it is regeneration! And that is why I can have fellowship with Wesley, Ravenhill, Tozer, and all the rest—because regardless of where they stood on the other issues, they believed that salvation could not be manipulated by the preacher, that it was a magnificent work of the power of almighty God. And with them, therefore, I stand.

It goes back again to regeneration and the providence of God.If God truly converts a man, He will continue working in that man, through teaching, blessing, admonition, and discipline. He will see to it that the work He has begun will be finished. And that is why the writer says, “Without holiness no one will see the Lord.” Why?—because if there is no growth in holiness, then God is not working in your life. And if He is not working in your life, it is because you are not His child!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Washer in his 10 Indictments sermon just some snippets:

Have you a link for this? I'm missing context here. Thanks.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Washer in his 10 Indictments sermon just some snippets:

We have traded regeneration for decisionism

The fourth indictment is actually an ignorance of the doctrine of regeneration. I know that there are both Calvinists and Arminians here, and I know that there are all sorts of strange animals in between. I guess I call myself a “five point Spurgeonist.” But I want you to know this: Calvinism is not the issue. No, I’ll tell you what the issue is: it is regeneration! And that is why I can have fellowship with Wesley, Ravenhill, Tozer, and all the rest—because regardless of where they stood on the other issues, they believed that salvation could not be manipulated by the preacher, that it was a magnificent work of the power of almighty God. And with them, therefore, I stand.

It goes back again to regeneration and the providence of God.If God truly converts a man, He will continue working in that man, through teaching, blessing, admonition, and discipline. He will see to it that the work He has begun will be finished. And that is why the writer says, “Without holiness no one will see the Lord.” Why?—because if there is no growth in holiness, then God is not working in your life. And if He is not working in your life, it is because you are not His child!

Interesting....TY

 

[Thousand Hills]

Have you a link for this? I'm missing context here. Thanks.

you can find the sermon on youtube. Heres a link to the pdf or other versions.

http://www.chapellibrary.org/index.php/literature/title-catalog/?fldCode=tiat

 

[SolaSaint]

Hank,

I'm listening right now almost to the end. I too think they both danced around the subject of soteriology and both seemed afraid to take a stand. Hankins confused me, he hates being called a noncalvinist or an Arminian, so what does he want to be called? Mohler when he was talking about the Baptist Faith and Message said something along the lines of keeping it as is to accomodate more people. Shouldn't the BF&M line up with scripture first before trying to please man? I didn't take much away from this.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Hank,

I'm listening right now almost to the end. I too think they both danced around the subject of soteriology and both seemed afraid to take a stand. Hankins confused me, he hates being called a noncalvinist or an Arminian, so what does he want to be called? Mohler when he was talking about the Baptist Faith and Message said something along the lines of keeping it as is to accomodate more people. Shouldn't the BF&M line up with scripture first before trying to please man? I didn't take much away from this.

So join me then in saying what Paul said in Galatians 6:17 : From henceforth let no man trouble me for I bear in my body the mark of the Lord Jesus.

So what am I saying....only what the apostle is? In other words, God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of the lord Jesus so stop talking to me about all these blood differences, not really that obsessed. Stop with the 7 Dayers & the Catholics & the SBC inability to join together. Again God forbid that I should glorify any of this ...... no brethren. But I will make my boast in nothing & no one, nor in any special teaching except for the Lord Jesus Christ & in Him alone. He is enough for me to contemplate, worship & love for all the days of my existence......and into the next world.

So brothers.....this is all just polite conversation....nothing more.

 

[preacher4truth]

'Ten Indictments Against the Modern Church' is free here.

 

[OldRegular]

Washer in his 10 Indictments sermon just some snippets:

We have traded regeneration for decisionism

The fourth indictment is actually an ignorance of the doctrine of regeneration. I know that there are both Calvinists and Arminians here, and I know that there are all sorts of strange animals in between. I guess I call myself a “five point Spurgeonist.” But I want you to know this: Calvinism is not the issue. No, I’ll tell you what the issue is: it is regeneration! And that is why I can have fellowship with Wesley, Ravenhill, Tozer, and all the rest—because regardless of where they stood on the other issues, they believed that salvation could not be manipulated by the preacher, that it was a magnificent work of the power of almighty God. And with them, therefore, I stand.

It goes back again to regeneration and the providence of God.If God truly converts a man, He will continue working in that man, through teaching, blessing, admonition, and discipline. He will see to it that the work He has begun will be finished. And that is why the writer says, “Without holiness no one will see the Lord.” Why?—because if there is no growth in holiness, then God is not working in your life. And if He is not working in your life, it is because you are not His child!

Until I firmly believed in the Doctrines of Election and Sovereign Grace I was frequently brought to despair by the manipulation of people, especially young children, by pastors and especially traveling "evangelists". My despair was caused because many of these people who trotted down the aisle believed they were saved by a "decision" induced by the speaker, however shallow that decision might be.

I am comforted now because I believe that God will in His own time and in His own way bring his "chosen ones" to salvation, Period! That being said the local body will suffers because it is wrongly influenced by unregenerate members.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Until I firmly believed in the Doctrines of Election and Sovereign Grace I was frequently brought to despair by the manipulation of people, especially young children, by pastors and especially traveling "evangelists". My despair was caused because many of these people who trotted down the aisle believed they were saved by a "decision" induced by the speaker, however shallow that decision might be.

I am comforted now because I believe that God will in His own time and in His own way bring his "chosen ones" to salvation, Period! That being said the local body will suffers because it is wrongly influenced by unregenerate members.

What do you mean by local body?

 

[Van]

Lets consider the concept of trading decisionism for regeneration?

When we make a decision for Christ, have we been previously regenerated? Yes, according to the mistaken doctrine of Calvinism. No, according to scripture.

When we make a decision for Christ, does that save us automatically? Yes, according to the mistaken doctrine of Arminianism. No, according to scripture.

When are we regenerated (made alive) before we are united with Christ or when we are together with Christ? Before we are united with Christ according to the mistaken doctrine of Calvinism. When we are united with Christ according to scripture.

Only when God credits our faith as righteousness, does He put us in Christ, where we are made alive, together with Christ, Ephesians 2:5

In a mass of confused thinking, Calvinists use "regeneration" as code for irresistible grace. Thus when we are altered (regenerated, quickened, made alive) we are enabled to seek God and put our faith in Christ. Pure twaddle.