Could This Soteriological Innovation Save the SBC?
About Dave Miller
Dave Miller is the senior pastor of Southern Hills Baptist Church in Sioux City, Iowa, and editor of SBC Voices. He served as President of the 2017 SBC Pastors’ Conference. He is a graduate of Palm Beach Atlantic and SWBTS. He has pastored churches in Florida, Virginia, and Iowa. Twitter
Nope!
It is unAmerican to question BACON!
It’s Un-American to ruin bacon. :o)
Dressing the “Tulip” in “Bacon” won’t make it any more palatable than before.
Mmmmm. Bacon. uuugggghhhh.
What were we talking about?
Absolutely! If we can’t rally around BACON, all hope is lost.
If bacon can’t solve it, then there is no hope…
A rose by any other name smells as sweet. . . or as whatever.
The “A” is what will be the initial catching point for Arminians, and it seems to me the remaining letters do not do justice to the Calvinist positions of limited atonement or irresistible grace. My suspicion is that if promoted–assuming this not not just fluff (which I suspect it is)–you will be accused of being less than honest and forthcoming about what Calvinism really believes. And I say this as one who is not particularly enamored with 16th century theology of either flavor.
John
A is the problem? Really? Bummer. I didn’t see it as Dumbing down what Calvinist’s believe but as a way to say, can you agree with us this far? When Dave says “could this save the SBC” (I mean its obviously silly) but it semms he’s aiming at common ground.
So if we Tweak the “A” to something more along the lines of foreknowledge instead of election then maybe they’ll go for it! Maybe?
Otherwise, I’m working on a CASSEROLE acrostic.
How many Arminians do you know who could go for “Already Elected” any more than they go for “Unconditional Election”? As I said, I am not in love with any 16th Century theology, be it Calvinism or Arminianism. They both require presuppositions that are consistent with the Enlightenment and European philosophy of the post 1500s, but not necessarily with the Ancient Middle East. And I do not really like the idea of “foreknowledge,” because it implies that God is somehow bound by time, or at least bound in time. We experience time in a linear fashion, but I suspect God… Read more »
Lettuce rejoice!
It may be a baconbit too soon
If only we could come up with a “fried chicken” a acrostic. It would be approved in a moment!
I was busy working on a GREEN BEAN CASSEROLE acrostic…
I might get on board with that!
john
I’m just worried about the hyper-baconists who don’t believe in sharing their bacon with others.
If you are supposed to have bacon, it will appear on your plate!
Campus Crusade may have to revise their four spiritual laws… “God loves you, and has a wonderful meat for your breakfast…”
That’s an idea right there.
“Never falling away”. I fall away all the time. But He comes after me as He does the lost sheep. Sheep wander away, constantly. That is why they need a Shepherd. Will He lose us? No. Could we lose ourselves? Jesus warns us against that in the Bible. I don’t like all of the eternal security talk because may lead people to taking all of this for granted. It fosters a sense where the Christian faith is like a business deal, a contract, rather than a living relationship. We do have the assurance of our salvation, but we don’t ever… Read more »
Now there’s a theology we can really sink our teeth into….er, sorry.
I don’t think this idea is going to fry
REASON: it’s definitely not kosher
Dave, In church today I was preoccupied with the assurance of salvation by the word “begotten”. In 1 Peter 1:3-5 it says, “Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” Begotten means, “brought into being” and the… Read more »
I prayed the Bacon prayer this morning and I got turkey bacon. I need to improve my prayer life.
Please credit Jules La Pierre for making this excellent graphic!
https://www.facebook.com/BACONItsTheNewTULIP/posts/248793505236447
I had a BLT at Camelia Grill in the French Quarter last week. Oh. My. Goodness. It was unreal. Piles of thick,crispy bacon, lettuce, tomato, mayonnaise, on wheat bread. Wow.
It happened after the vote on the resolution on unity in the gospel, though, so I think it was a sign. Now, this.
Hold the tomato and mayo and I’ll eat it.
If you really want to get approval, I think you’re going to have to fit your theology into the letters BBQ.
Pork BBQ
People chosen
Only by grace
Regenerated by the Spirit
Kept despite ourselves
Beaten into submission
Because I am a wretch
Quieted with the love of God
Okay, the bacon one is better. Back to my day job. Would you like fries with that?
Free grace
Regenerates lives
Imputes Righteousness
Evangelizes the Lost
Seeks the Savior
Yep, I’ll take FRIES with my Pork BBQ.
Everything is better with bacon on it.
I’ve been looking at the post illustration, and it occurred to me that it was ripped off of a poster that hangs in Harvard University’s Porcellian Club . . . a very exclusive social club of elected members who are members for life. Members carry pig paraphernalia (pig key chains, that sort of thing) and membership is SO EXCLUSIVE that only the ‘right people’ have ever made entry into the distinguished Porcellian. Franklin D. Roosevelt, while at Harvard, never made the cut, and reportedly stated that this was ‘the greatest disappointment of my life’. Many other famous people never gained… Read more »
It’s been floating around the net for a few weeks, so we just copied it over here. Not sure where it started the run.
Started with this guy: https://twitter.com/bkben3 he’s on IRC and quite surprised at how it’s taken off.
Seeing how we are doing breakfast… How about a large serving of…
GRITS
G – Grate Commission Focused
R – Repentance from Arrogance and Divisiveness
I – Intentional in seeking Unity
T – Total commitment to the BFM2000
S – Sensitive to the Views of Others
I’m familiar with the Great Commission, but what is the “Grate Commission”?
Spreading cheese to the uttermost parts of the earth.
First bacon, and now, cheese.
Who could have a problem with this?
That’s Monty Python’s calling, I believe.
I just saw a bit of a program on bacon on the travel channel last night. And I love bacon. You folks are creating some consuming desires. Definitely a lust of the flesh…and I can even cook bacon!
Jesus wept.
I like this acrostic Dave, very “crisp” though I think we can do better….can’t some one do something with ‘grace’ or ‘saves’ that says the same?
Here are two suggestions for G.R.A.C.E. that I humbly submit: G ood-for-nothing sinners = Total Depravity R eserved a people unto Himself based solely on His good pleasure = Unconditional Election A ctual, not merely potential, atonement = Limited Atonement C onquering grace is certain to save = Irresistible Grace E ternal life promised = Perseverance of the Saints G alatians 3:22/Genesis 6:5 = Total Depravity R omans 9:11; 11:5 = Unconditional Election A cts 2:39; 5:31 = Limited Atonement C olossians 2:13 = Irresistible Grace E phesians 4:30 = Perseverance of the Saints ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Also, Moody Roberts, pastor of… Read more »
Nobody else does, but I like my personally adopted tulip:
Total Depravity – Gen 6:5/Gal 3:22
Unlimited Love – John 3:16/Romans 5:8
Limitless Atonement – John 3:16/2 Cor 5:19
Invitational Grace – Matt 16:24 / Romans 10:13
Perseverance of the Saints – Eph 4:30 / 2 Cor 1:22
Personally, I love the breakfast acrostics, think I want to work on that!!
And in the words of that famous theologian, Forrest Gump -“That’s all I have to say about that.” GRIN
If you look closely at John 3:16, you’ll notice the word “believes.” That word limits the “whosoever.” Jesus died so that whoever believes, not whoever disbelieves, will go to heaven. He did not die so that whoever disbelieves will go to heaven. He died for believers to go to heaven. He died for believers [to go to heaven].
Nick,
I understand everyone is welcomed to an opinion, but grammatically you cannot make a verb modify a noun or pronoun. Whosoever stands by itself grammatically in this subordinate clause.
Whosoever is not “limited” in any way. In the original language it actually means, “whosoever.”
My understanding of the original is that it literally means “all the believing ones.” Not simply “all,” as in: “Jesus died so that all will go to heaven,” but rather, “Jesus died so that all-the-believing-ones, and only the believing ones, will go to heaven.” If you remove the “believing ones” as modifying/limiting the “all,” then you end up with Universalism: Jesus died so that all will go to heaven. People are free to believe that, but that’s not what John 3:16 says. You can’t just toss out “believing ones.” Please allow me to also point out an important observation from… Read more »
The word in question, “pisteu?n” (literally “believing men”), is a participle, and here’s what a Greek Grammar says about participles. “Although they share some characteristics with infinitives, participles function more like verbal adjectives than nouns. As a verb it has tense and voice, but as an adjective each participle has a specific case, gender, and number too. In fact, they function identically to adjectives in sentences. Like all adjectives, the participle will agree in case, gender, and number with the noun or pronoun it modifies. This precision takes the guess work out of deciding which noun the participle is modifying.… Read more »
Nick, You are perhaps a superior linguist to myself, so I will not push the syntax issue too far. I teach Latin, Greek, and Hebrew but at the High School level. So, I could definitely be wrong about how God intended “pas” to be translated. I can say with some confidence that “believing” does not qualify “pas,” but “pas” qualifies the verbal. You are arguing that the phrase actually means, “some limited group that believes” with “pas” carrying the weight of “some limited.” I personally know of no grammatical rule of syntax in Greek or English that would support that… Read more »
Frank, you said: >>I could definitely be wrong about how God intended “pas” to be translated. “…hina pas ho pisteuon” must be taken together. “Pas” does not stand all by itself. Recently, as you probably are aware, a well-known Southern Baptist preacher hammered the word “Whosoever!” several times, as if it were a complete sentence. It’s not. At best, it’s “whosoever believes.” More accurately, it’s “all the believing ones on Him” or “all who are believing on Him.” You said: >>I can say with some confidence that “believing” does not qualify “pas,” but “pas” qualifies the verbal. You are arguing… Read more »