Comments on: SBC: In Need of Direction http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/ Southern Baptist News & Opinion Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:29:18 +0000 hourly 1 By: Dr. James Willingham http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2888 Dr. James Willingham Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:38:41 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2888 It would really be helpful, if all of the participants in this discussions as well as the proposed leaders knew their Baptist History. Just note for the moment that everyone talks of the cooperationist baptists as liberals. I remember when I was a student at the flagship school of so-called liberalism in the SBC at that time. One of the profs. asked me: "Would you like to know who is the most liberal man in the seminary?" I kind of shrugged as I had not really given it much thought: "I guess." He said, "I am and, if you tell any one that I told you so, I will call you a _____ liar!" Years later as I was thinking the whole thing through, I realized that the professor did not know what he was talking about. He was actually talking to the most liberal man in the seminary (now mind you I am not talking license). Both the moderates and the conservatives were into the name calling business and using tags to id. and destroy one another (read modernist and fundamentalist) according to the tried and proven principles of propaganda. The term liberal means different thing in different periods. A liberal in the 1700s was one who believed in freedom and liberty and that the way to such was by the right principles and behaviors. Bear with me. Who introduced religious liberty? The Baptist! Who was the most Bible believing types of that period? The Baptists! In America the big majority (probably 90-95%) of Baptists were believers in Sovereign Grace then. So powerful was their appeal that 255 Congregational Churches became Baptists according to C.C. Goen in his History of the Great Awakening. A friend of mine told me that he preached in one of those churches (in the 1960s?) that had become Baptist in the 1700s-early1800s. What kind of power wins the day like that? One where the proponents are willing for the truth they hold to prove its own case. Why would Washington request that Gano immerse him? That event according to my Moderate professor of Field Ed. was witnessed by 60 some people during the Revolutionary War. And then there is the issue of uniting Separates and Regulars as well as the issue of persuading General Baptists to become Regular Baptists. Believers in Predestination, etc., are the people who really begin the Great Century of Missions. I remember some of the profs. at seminary thought I was a problem (not all), but they never had to worry about me trying to get one fired or approving of students attacking them. One student did, and I encouraged him to apologize - not for differing with the professor, but for attacking his personality. The student realized his error and apologized. Ethics was the issue. Differing on theological principles is a challenge, but a study of I Cors. 13 does suggest that one must be extra careful about how one conducts one's self in the disagreement. My view came to be this across many years of thinking through the issues: The other fellow needs to be concerned about the fact that I might infect him with my views. Answering a teaching that one considers to be false is a proper thing, but how one answers is the issue. Some are shrill with fear, because they do not know their own doctrine very well. Usually the opponent might be more knowledgeable than the believer. Note, I said knowledgeable. The truth as our knowledge develops might latter prove that individual's understanding to be wrong. On the other hand, it might prove our understanding is wrong. Real understanding is generally not a thing of the moment until we have had years to think about what had been revealed. The nature of biblical doctrine is the problem. It is hard for us to realize that what the Bible says in one place is not the whole truth of all it might teach on a subject. And then we must face the reality that some of the doctrines are composed of two truths that on the surface are hard to reconcile or were not even meant to be reconciled but held in the mind as a tension, a desireable tension which enables one to be balanced and flexible. To illustrate consider the doctrine of verbal inspiration. I was fortunate early in my ministry to stumble across L. Gaussen's Theopneustia. He set forth the doctrine of verbal inspiration as two-sided, composed of the human and the Divine aspects. The so-called Liberal writers of that day lost me, when they accused people like Gaussen aad Warfield of holding to mechanical dictation. While Gaussen actually used the term dictation, he did not mean mechanical dictation. One of my fellow students had a professor mark down his paper, writing in red on it:"this man started mechanical dictation." We pulled the book, and I showed the student where Gaussen had devoted a whole section to the human writers. The prof. admitted that he was wrong, but would not change the student's grade. Emil Brunner in one his works quoted B.B. Warfield as if he believed in mechanical dictation. In a paper I wrote for another prof., I was able to show how Brunner had quoted Warfield out of context. This, in part, is how we win the battle. Another way is to know the other side's argument better than they do and your own even more. It is hard, tedious work to over learn, but it is the way to victory. I could say more, but this will serve for now. <abbr><em><abbr><em>Dr. James Willinghams last blog post..<a href="http://thirdgreatawakeningcom.blogspot.com/2009/02/climax-of-reformation.html" rel="nofollow">The Climax of the Reformation</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> It would really be helpful, if all of the participants in this discussions as well as the proposed leaders knew their Baptist History. Just note for the moment that everyone talks of the cooperationist baptists as liberals. I remember when I was a student at the flagship school of so-called liberalism in the SBC at that time. One of the profs. asked me: “Would you like to know who is the most liberal man in the seminary?” I kind of shrugged as I had not really given it much thought: “I guess.” He said, “I am and, if you tell any one that I told you so, I will call you a _____ liar!” Years later as I was thinking the whole thing through, I realized that the professor did not know what he was talking about. He was actually talking to the most liberal man in the seminary (now mind you I am not talking license). Both the moderates and the conservatives were into the name calling business and using tags to id. and destroy one another (read modernist and fundamentalist) according to the tried and proven principles of propaganda. The term liberal means different thing in different periods. A liberal in the 1700s was one who believed in freedom and liberty and that the way to such was by the right principles and behaviors. Bear with me. Who introduced religious liberty? The Baptist! Who was the most Bible believing types of that period? The Baptists! In America the big majority (probably 90-95%) of Baptists were believers in Sovereign Grace then. So powerful was their appeal that 255 Congregational Churches became Baptists according to C.C. Goen in his History of the Great Awakening. A friend of mine told me that he preached in one of those churches (in the 1960s?) that had become Baptist in the 1700s-early1800s. What kind of power wins the day like that? One where the proponents are willing for the truth they hold to prove its own case. Why would Washington request that Gano immerse him? That event according to my Moderate professor of Field Ed. was witnessed by 60 some people during the Revolutionary War. And then there is the issue of uniting Separates and Regulars as well as the issue of persuading General Baptists to become Regular Baptists. Believers in Predestination, etc., are the people who really begin the Great Century of Missions. I remember some of the profs. at seminary thought I was a problem (not all), but they never had to worry about me trying to get one fired or approving of students attacking them. One student did, and I encouraged him to apologize – not for differing with the professor, but for attacking his personality. The student realized his error and apologized. Ethics was the issue. Differing on theological principles is a challenge, but a study of I Cors. 13 does suggest that one must be extra careful about how one conducts one’s self in the disagreement. My view came to be this across many years of thinking through the issues: The other fellow needs to be concerned about the fact that I might infect him with my views. Answering a teaching that one considers to be false is a proper thing, but how one answers is the issue. Some are shrill with fear, because they do not know their own doctrine very well. Usually the opponent might be more knowledgeable than the believer. Note, I said knowledgeable. The truth as our knowledge develops might latter prove that individual’s understanding to be wrong. On the other hand, it might prove our understanding is wrong. Real understanding is generally not a thing of the moment until we have had years to think about what had been revealed. The nature of biblical doctrine is the problem. It is hard for us to realize that what the Bible says in one place is not the whole truth of all it might teach on a subject. And then we must face the reality that some of the doctrines are composed of two truths that on the surface are hard to reconcile or were not even meant to be reconciled but held in the mind as a tension, a desireable tension which enables one to be balanced and flexible. To illustrate consider the doctrine of verbal inspiration. I was fortunate early in my ministry to stumble across L. Gaussen’s Theopneustia. He set forth the doctrine of verbal inspiration as two-sided, composed of the human and the Divine aspects. The so-called Liberal writers of that day lost me, when they accused people like Gaussen aad Warfield of holding to mechanical dictation. While Gaussen actually used the term dictation, he did not mean mechanical dictation. One of my fellow students had a professor mark down his paper, writing in red on it:”this man started mechanical dictation.” We pulled the book, and I showed the student where Gaussen had devoted a whole section to the human writers. The prof. admitted that he was wrong, but would not change the student’s grade.
Emil Brunner in one his works quoted B.B. Warfield as if he believed in mechanical dictation. In a paper I wrote for another prof., I was able to show how Brunner had quoted Warfield out of context. This, in part, is how we win the battle. Another way is to know the other side’s argument better than they do and your own even more. It is hard, tedious work to over learn, but it is the way to victory. I could say more, but this will serve for now.

Dr. James Willinghams last blog post..The Climax of the Reformation

]]> By: John T Meche III http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2108 John T Meche III Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:09:30 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2108 Danny Akin is my guy as well. He is humble, not a Calvinist, and well liked. My other pick would be Ed Stetzer. <abbr><em><abbr><em>John T Meche IIIs last blog post..<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheCrossDrivenBlog/~3/CdrCUrYDZbA/content-resurrection-breathing-new-life.html" rel="nofollow">Content Resurrection: Breathing new life into old content...</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> Danny Akin is my guy as well. He is humble, not a Calvinist, and well liked. My other pick would be Ed Stetzer.

John T Meche IIIs last blog post..Content Resurrection: Breathing new life into old content…

]]> By: Lane http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2107 Lane Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:24:19 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2107 I'm coming into this discussion late, maybe too late to understand what's going on. I see you're using WordPress; it might help if you had a page describing all these vision labels and such for people who haven't been following this topic before now. I thought reformed = calvinist, but I see not. Well, I'm neither, so that's probably why I'm ignorant. Your post took a lot of time to write, but I recommend your reading posts over to catch obvious glitches. This passage has a number of examples: <strong>We either need a non-calvinist who is still theologically respected by 5 point Calvinists or a Calvinist that does have it on his forehead in an arrogant manner. We can’t even has a calvinist that puts his Reformed theology has a priority for change within the SBC.</strong> I’m coming into this discussion late, maybe too late to understand what’s going on. I see you’re using WordPress; it might help if you had a page describing all these vision labels and such for people who haven’t been following this topic before now.

I thought reformed = calvinist, but I see not. Well, I’m neither, so that’s probably why I’m ignorant.

Your post took a lot of time to write, but I recommend your reading posts over to catch obvious glitches. This passage has a number of examples:
We either need a non-calvinist who is still theologically respected by 5 point Calvinists or a Calvinist that does have it on his forehead in an arrogant manner. We can’t even has a calvinist that puts his Reformed theology has a priority for change within the SBC.

]]> By: Sallie http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2080 Sallie Tue, 17 Mar 2009 03:03:23 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2080 I would love to see a side by side report about who all is even in the running. For one, I know Mohler is out -- cancer treatment, right? But I'm just not familiar with enough of the other guys to really know. I read blogs and look up "top names" I hear back and forth (Les, weren't you in the running last year or year before??) from time to time but you can't just put "southern baptist convention" "nominations for president" in a seach engine and come up with anything that leads you anywhere for anything current. It's a tough decision to make when the first real bit of info you start getting is only weeks before the convention. Sallie <abbr><em><abbr><em>Sallies last blog post..<a href="http://www.mikeandsallie.com/sallie/index.blog?entry_id=1360931" rel="nofollow">It's Spring...</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> I would love to see a side by side report about who all is even in the running. For one, I know Mohler is out — cancer treatment, right? But I’m just not familiar with enough of the other guys to really know. I read blogs and look up “top names” I hear back and forth (Les, weren’t you in the running last year or year before??) from time to time but you can’t just put “southern baptist convention” “nominations for president” in a seach engine and come up with anything that leads you anywhere for anything current. It’s a tough decision to make when the first real bit of info you start getting is only weeks before the convention.

Sallie

Sallies last blog post..It's Spring…

]]> By: Matt Svoboda http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2078 Matt Svoboda Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:04:54 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2078 Les, I have not heard the term 'hard calvinists' come from calvinists, but have heard the term from non-calvinists. By hard calvinist they typically mean a calvinist that 'wears there calvinism on there sleeve.' They are typically a 5 point, double predestination Calvinist, though not always. For instance I would not be called a hard Calvinist because I am a 4 point Calvinist that is an infralapsarian. <abbr><em><abbr><em>Matt Svobodas last blog post..<a href="http://evangelicalvillage.com/2009/03/16/finding-permanence-in-the-light-and-momentary/" rel="nofollow">Finding Permanence in the Light and Momentary</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> Les,

I have not heard the term ‘hard calvinists’ come from calvinists, but have heard the term from non-calvinists. By hard calvinist they typically mean a calvinist that ‘wears there calvinism on there sleeve.’ They are typically a 5 point, double predestination Calvinist, though not always.

For instance I would not be called a hard Calvinist because I am a 4 point Calvinist that is an infralapsarian.

Matt Svobodas last blog post..Finding Permanence in the Light and Momentary

]]> By: Matt Svoboda http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2075 Matt Svoboda Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:22:14 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2075 Les, Some might consider him a Calvinist, but most I talk to say he's 'somewhat calvinist.' Point being, when his name is brought up to non-calvinist warning 'CALVINIST' signals don't start going off. Joe, I am truly not that worried about Wade and his Burlesonites. Remember he was removed from the board of trustees because his ilk are not in charge. I do want to say that it is not only Burleson and his ilk that promote this 'cooperationist vision.' I think there are a few others in the SBC that simply think with their hearts and not their minds that lean in that direction. I probably should be more cautious about this cooperationist vision than I am, knowing that liberalism always seems to come back with a force. <abbr><em><abbr><em>Matt Svobodas last blog post..<a href="http://evangelicalvillage.com/2009/03/16/finding-permanence-in-the-light-and-momentary/" rel="nofollow">Finding Permanence in the Light and Momentary</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> Les,

Some might consider him a Calvinist, but most I talk to say he’s ‘somewhat calvinist.’ Point being, when his name is brought up to non-calvinist warning ‘CALVINIST’ signals don’t start going off.

Joe,

I am truly not that worried about Wade and his Burlesonites. Remember he was removed from the board of trustees because his ilk are not in charge. I do want to say that it is not only Burleson and his ilk that promote this ‘cooperationist vision.’ I think there are a few others in the SBC that simply think with their hearts and not their minds that lean in that direction. I probably should be more cautious about this cooperationist vision than I am, knowing that liberalism always seems to come back with a force.

Matt Svobodas last blog post..Finding Permanence in the Light and Momentary

]]> By: Joe Blackmon http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2074 Joe Blackmon Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:59:47 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2074 <i><b>The cooperationist vision for the SBC is one that would eventually destroy the Southern Baptist Convention. They pride themselves on ‘cooperation’ being distinctively Baptist, but I strongly disagree. That form of cooperation is not Baptist, it is liberal.</i></b> Without question this is the most frightening potential for the future of the SBC. The saddest part is I am really worried that Burleson and his ilk are giong to be able to see their vision come to fruition. It is paramount that we continue to contend ernestly for the faith. <abbr><em><abbr><em>Joe Blackmons last blog post..<a href="http://heargodspeak.blogspot.com/2009/03/introducing-kjv-yellowpages.html" rel="nofollow">Introducing the KJV Yellowpages</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> The cooperationist vision for the SBC is one that would eventually destroy the Southern Baptist Convention. They pride themselves on ‘cooperation’ being distinctively Baptist, but I strongly disagree. That form of cooperation is not Baptist, it is liberal.

Without question this is the most frightening potential for the future of the SBC. The saddest part is I am really worried that Burleson and his ilk are giong to be able to see their vision come to fruition. It is paramount that we continue to contend ernestly for the faith.

Joe Blackmons last blog post..Introducing the KJV Yellowpages

]]> By: Kern Pegues http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2072 Kern Pegues Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:39:12 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2072 If you can get a copy of it, I would recommend you listen to Matt Chandlers message at the Pastors conference in Jacksonville last month. He use the prodigal son's brother as an example. Everyone should listen to it. Kern If you can get a copy of it, I would recommend you listen to Matt Chandlers message at the Pastors conference in Jacksonville last month. He use the prodigal son’s brother as an example. Everyone should listen to it.

Kern

]]> By: Les Puryear http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2071 Les Puryear Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:05:43 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2071 Matt, Interesting post. I'm curious about what you mean by a "hard" Calvinist. I've not heard that term in Reformed circles. Also, I love Danny Akin. Unfortunately, he has drawn the ire of the BI folks because of his willingness to work with Mark ("potty mouth") Driscoll. Also, I believe Dr. Akin adheres to four of the five points of Calvinism so he may be too Calvinist for you. Thanks. Les <abbr><em><abbr><em>Les Puryears last blog post..<a href="http://lesliepuryear.blogspot.com/2009/03/my-report-to-guy-muse-on-our-vision.html" rel="nofollow">My Report To Guy Muse On Our Vision Trip to Ecuador</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> Matt,

Interesting post. I’m curious about what you mean by a “hard” Calvinist. I’ve not heard that term in Reformed circles.

Also, I love Danny Akin. Unfortunately, he has drawn the ire of the BI folks because of his willingness to work with Mark (“potty mouth”) Driscoll. Also, I believe Dr. Akin adheres to four of the five points of Calvinism so he may be too Calvinist for you.

Thanks.

Les

Les Puryears last blog post..My Report To Guy Muse On Our Vision Trip to Ecuador

]]> By: Matt Svoboda http://sbcvoices.com/sbc-in-need-of-direction/#comment-2069 Matt Svoboda Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:46:37 +0000 http://sbcvoices.com/?p=974#comment-2069 Debbie, To be clear in my last sentence I say, 'Before you know it' meaning we are not there yet, but I think following the cooperationist logic that is where it would take us. When you go the 'cooperationist' route then you get what Spurgeon knew. You get a road that leads to death because before you know it, anything goes... Spurgeon recognized it in his day, called it out, lost, but before you knew it he was vindicated because he was right all along. The group he battled against went the cooperationist route and before you knew it they were accepting heretical teaching in order to not exclude anyone and soon after that they died. To be a Baptist, or Southern Baptist, we must hold our doctrine on slavific AND baptist issues or we are not longer Christian Baptists. <abbr><em><abbr><em>Matt Svobodas last blog post..<a href="http://evangelicalvillage.com/2009/03/16/finding-permanence-in-the-light-and-momentary/" rel="nofollow">Finding Permanence in the Light and Momentary</a></em></abbr></abbr></em> Debbie,

To be clear in my last sentence I say, ‘Before you know it’ meaning we are not there yet, but I think following the cooperationist logic that is where it would take us.

When you go the ‘cooperationist’ route then you get what Spurgeon knew. You get a road that leads to death because before you know it, anything goes… Spurgeon recognized it in his day, called it out, lost, but before you knew it he was vindicated because he was right all along. The group he battled against went the cooperationist route and before you knew it they were accepting heretical teaching in order to not exclude anyone and soon after that they died.

To be a Baptist, or Southern Baptist, we must hold our doctrine on slavific AND baptist issues or we are not longer Christian Baptists.

Matt Svobodas last blog post..Finding Permanence in the Light and Momentary

]]>