I hate hidden agendas – they are unworthy of God’s people. Paul said, in 2 Corinthians 4:2 that he renounced secret and shameful ways. So, I want to come clean here and tell you exactly what I am doing.
In the book, “Anyone Can Be Saved: A Defense of ‘Traditional’ Southern Baptist Soteriology” edited by David L. Allen, Eric Hankins, and Adam Harwood, Dr. Allen opens the discussion with an excellent essay entitled, “The Current SBC Calvinism Debate: Observations, Clarifications, and Suggestions.” It is one of the best things I have read on the topic. What I’d like to do is simply copy it here for you to read in full, but there’s this little hindrance called a copyright and the good folks at Wipf and Stock might object. So, I will interact with what Dr. Allen wrote in enough detail to give you a good idea of what he said without, hopefully, running afoul of any laws!
He begins by asserting the obvious.
Two things are crystal clear. The issue of Calvinism in the SBC is not going away, and finding our way forward is not going to be easy.
He is absolutely right. Southern Baptists have been “discussing” this topic (with varying hues of red faces) since the convention was founded, with both the Sandy Creek and the Charleston streams flowing free. If the Lord tarries and the convention survives, in 100 years there will be Calvinists and non-Calvinists arguing still. Hopefully, they will also be partnering for the gospel.
Dr. Allen makes eight key points, which I believe both diagnose the problem in our current Calvinism discussions and provide an effective course of treatment.
1. As Southern Baptists, our agreements outnumber our disagreements.
To hear some, Calvinists and Traditionalists preach different gospels, but Dr. Allen highlights the doctrines we hold in common. We confess the BF&M 2000, the Lordship of Christ, the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture, the lostness of humanity and the exclusivity of the gospel, and that salvation is by grace through faith alone. Bart Barber had a post years ago in which he listed common doctrines of Calvinist and non-Calvinist Baptists. Seems like the list ran over 40 items.
Dr. Allens asserts that this is a necessary discussion, though I’ve seen great damage come from it. If the attitude Dr. Allen promotes can prevail, I’d rethink that. He speaks of the unity of Baptist Calvinists and Traditionalists around the BF&M.
It is sufficiently broad in latitude that we can all live, breathe, and work under its umbrella. In fact, Calvinists and Traditionalists, for the most part, have been doing that already for quite a number of decades.
Preach!
2. Because of this common ground, we should avoid “the Scylla of attempting to run all Calvinists out of Dodge and the Charybdis of attempting to return us as a convention to the Calvinistic theology of some of the founders.”
These attempts foster division. Some insist Calvinism is outside of “Southern Baptist soteriology” and others wish to paint the founders of the SBC as monolithically Calvinist. These are attempts to assert “superior Baptistitude” (yeah, just made that us). Instead, we must accept one another as equal partners in the SBC world.
If we are to come together in unity, we must do so as Baptists, not as Calvinists and Traditionalists. We must unite around Baptist distinctives which include the only glue that can hold us together; a biblical, Baptist theology wedded to a Great Commission resurgence of evangelism and missions. We don’t have to cease to be Calvinists or Traditionalists to be Baptists.
Can I get a witness?
3. We need to love and respect one another even though we are not in complete agreement on every theological point.
He says,
We should speak the truth in love and avoid strident, emotive language.
Well, there goes blogging.
Seriously, in blogging, few of us avoid the periodic (or frequent) violation of these wise words, but many now see the Bible’s calls to unity, gentleness, and respect as markers of a lack of conviction. One blogger recently labeled unity an idol. Thankfully, he is extreme, but many use the words of Jesus to the Pharisees in Matthew 23 as justification for verbally eviscerating one another and ignoring the calls to build up, to be meek, to guard our words, and to be loving in all we do. That takes real courage and conviction.
Yes, there are charlatans and sinners who must be confronted, but kindness, love, and respect must be our default.
4. We need to be reminded that the truth of a given position is in no way related to who or how many hold that position.
Are you saying that a LifeWay survey of how many Baptists identify with each side doesn’t establish truth?
If it could be proven that a majority of our founders believed in Calvinism, it is not proven. If we can show that 97.2% of key leaders in the SBC today reject Calvinism, it does not disprove it. The Berean spirit (Acts 17:11) must prevail as we are guided by God’s word.
Obviously, all sides believe that their position is established in Scripture. That is why love and respect are needed. We accept one another as brethren (and sistern) while we grow in the knowledge of God’s word and its author.
5. Generally speaking, all Southern Baptists are concerned about theology.
Dr. Allen makes an important point, even if we all know Baptists who couldn’t care less about theology and doctrine.
He graciously includes a rejoinder to Traditionalists not to disrespect the theological competency of Calvinists. Some dismiss Calvinists as more concerned with systematics than biblical theology, as shaping their theology from confessions and creeds more than from exegesis, and of tending to get lost in the weeds of hero worship (Piper said it, I believe it, that settles it).
But I’ve been involved enough with Calvinists to deliver a friendly word of rebuke. Many Calvinists tend to look at Non-Calvinists and especially at Traditionalists as theological rubes who just don’t have the insight or intelligence to see the Bible correctly. I’ve heard solid Bible scholars spoken of dismissively simply because they hold to non-Calvinist positions. One can be intelligent, a scholar of God’s word, deeply in love with Jesus, and come to a position different than yours.
Dr. Allen gives a list of 8 errors to avoid in theological debate.
- Do not subsume one set of Scriptures under another.
- Prejudicing that which is logical in Scripture over that which is paradoxical. (I believe paradox, or antinomy, may be the key to all hermeneutics)
- Succumbing to logical fallacies to maintain our particular theology.
- Doing systematic theology before biblical theology. (This should, perhaps, be #1?)
- Confusing one’s theological system with the gospel and reacting to criticism of the system as a challenge to the gospel.
- Confusing a critique of someone’s theological system as a critique of that person.
- Engaging in ad hominem attacks.
- Questioning the motives of others in theological discussion.
6. Avoid misrepresenting another’s theology.
This is at the heart of much of our problem in Calvinism discussions. People say, “This is what Calvinists believe,” and Calvinists say, “but it isn’t.” The Traditionalist then enforces his interpretation of Calvinist belief over what the Calvinist claims to believe. The TS comes out and Calvinists shout, “Semi-pelagian.” Traditionalists say, “We are not Semi-pelagian because….” but Calvinists continue to enforce the Semi-Pelagian accusation. We speak but do not listen.
The key to any discussion is to be able to present the views of the other side in a way that the OTHER SIDE UNDERSTANDS.
I have been in some form of ministry for nearly four decades, and have noticed that every marriage I have ever seen that is in trouble has the same problem. Communication. The problem can present in terms of money or sex or children or a hundred other things, but 100% of the couples that end up in my office for counseling are terrible at talking to one another. No, that’s not it. They are terrible at LISTENING to each other.
Ever heard of active listening? That’s where a man sits on the couch with his wife and asks her how her day went. She speaks and then he says, “What I heard you saying was…” and he tries to accurately restate what she said. If he gets it wrong she helps him clarify until he can succinctly restate what she was saying. Then, and only then, after he’s listened carefully to what she said, does he respond. Then, she says, “What I heard you saying was…” It takes hours to have a simple conversation! But when a marriage is in trouble, it is because man and wife have stopped listening to each other. They are interpreting and overblowing and forming their responses before they’ve actually listened.
The SBC is a giant dysfunctional marriage and we are terrible at listening to one another. What if Calvinists made a good-faith effort to genuinely understand what Traditionalists and other non-Calvinists believed, and the various non-Calvinists did the same thing? It would be a great first step.
Dr. Allen makes a distinction between understanding a theological system and examining its implications. This is always going to be tricky. The key issue with non-Calvinist views of Calvinism is their belief that they are deterministic. Calvinists deny that in various ways. But Traditionalists and other non-Calvinists make the claim that the implications of the Calvinist system are deterministic. Calvinists do similar things when they examine the implications of various free-will systems.
If we begin with a genuine effort to understand the theology the other side believes, then simply argue at the level of implications, it may not lead to easy resolution, but it is a good first step. The key is that we cannot willfully, ignorantly, or through laziness, misrepresent the other side in our discussions.
7. Is the TS divisive?
Dr. Allen distinguishes several kinds of division, some of which are healthy and others not so.
Any Baptist is free to state his or her theological position. Doctrine by its nature is divisive but that division is not inherently unhealthy. It becomes so when we respond badly. Has the TS been divisive? Undeniable so. But it was wholly appropriate for Eric Hankins to write and release this. It was wholly appropriate for others to critique it – to affirm it and to disagree with it. We are a deliberative body. We discuss and we disagree.
But too often our disagreements have been unhealthy because of how we have behaved. That isn’t the fault of the TS but of the way people have behaved either in support of it or in opposition to it. Establishing and advocating for a theological position – that is wholly appropriate. How we’ve done that often is not.
8. The entire enterprise calls for a healthy dose of humility and prayer.
I’m not sure what to add to Dr. Allen’s words.
The goal in this dialogue should not be to win at all costs. The goal should be to win the world to Christ at all costs.
What Dr. Allen said.
David Allen for president. I don’t know of what…but something.
“We believe in election from eternity, effectual calling by the Holy Spirit of God, and justification in his sight only by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. And we believe that they who are thus elected, effectually called, and justified, will persevere through grace to the end, that none of them be lost.” Where is this from? The Principles of Faith of the Sandy Creek Association! This body of churches and those of the Charleston Tradition, rooted in the 1689 Confession, were the matrix of the Southern Baptists: clearly a Reformed matrix.
Posted on Face Book by Dr Haykin.
Maybe clearly Calvinistic , but not clearly a reformed matrix.
Those terms get used interchangeably; so I’m curious how you are distinguishing them.
Calvinism really only covers the doctrine of salvation. Reformed is a broader theological terms which includes other areas of doctrine. In other words, one can be Calvinistic and dispensational, but they can’t really be reformed and dispensational.
Thanks.
Just wanted to make sure I had my categories correct for the distinction you were making; I doubt most people who speak of a reformed perspective delineate in that way as the discussion usually stops at soteriology.
First of all, I enjoy this blog. I am a deacon at a SBC church, who teaches an adult Sunday school class, ( yes some churches still have those). We have been looking at church history, and when we got to Erasmus, we had to look at KJV onlyism, textual criticism, if was not a Sunday walk in the park, telling people for the first time about the “ comma Johanneum” and the “periscope adultera”. But dealing with church history has been even harder, reformation, drowning, inprisoning parents because they would not baptize their infant children, but we also looked… Read more »
Benny,
Thank you for your service to the Body.
I am a 5 pt C.
And while Platt is right that there is no such prayer in the Bible, it doesn’t make the sinners prayer superstitious.
Do You believe that Jesus died in the place of others?
And that He is the Son of God who rose from the dead?
If yes to those two questions, then we agree on the Gospel.
Mike, thanks for the thanks, and yes I whole heartedly agree with your two beliefs. But , and I am trying to arrive at a complete understanding of your 5 pt. C beliefs, and do believe we are brothers in Christ, I can’t see how you guys make the leap that you do, so if you don’t mind can I ask you a few questions? Doing my research for our church history class I have reached out to multiple reformed brethren in my community, and after the formal pleasantries, after they have agreeed to enlighten me, they never respond back… Read more »
Benny, What leap? But on your other point, and i dont who you are talking about, so this is just a general and a possibility, but many times people learn a system of beliefs and they never investigate the Word themselves to grasp how what they believe interacts with the whoe counsel of God. So they are not confortable speaking outside of their own ‘system’. The people I have interacted with to observe this are probably not pastors. But they are from all sets of different Christian beliefs. They know what they know and they are happy to ‘live’ in… Read more »
Let me say this first, I heard John MacArthur say in a q & a at a conference, “ I am sure I am wrong somewhere in my doctrine, I just don’t know where it is, if someone can point it out to me, and prove me wrong, I will change.. I agree with that, and I have gone into the study of Calvinism with that mind set, I’ve tried to take emotions out of the study, and all my presuppositions out as well. I love your comment about seeing what the word says, totally agree, to that point, the… Read more »
Benny, As you mentioned, there is not just one Calvinistic position, so I can only speak for myself. I can’t explain Dr. Mohlers words or John McCarthur’s either. So let me answer the questions you have raised, from my point of view. You said: “What about the play on words of 1 John 4:19 (kjv) We love him because he first loved us. Could a reprobate honestly say ? “ I hate him because he first hated me”” No C I know would give the reprobate that excuse. First, before He demonstrated His love to you in saving you, you… Read more »
Mike, thanks for your response, I am going into meetings for rest of today, I will respond this evening.
I do have a response, and a few more questions, thanks for the back and forth..
Mike wrote:Calvinists [as well as most philosophisers] dont believe in libertine free will. Mike and Benny, this is true because most philosophers aren’t Christians. But among Christian philosophers the opposite is true. As one Calvinist doing his doctoral program put it, “I’ve always found it a little disturbing that very few Christian philosophers have been willing to tolerate Calvinism. It’s almost an orthodoxy among Christian philosophers that libertarianism is true. I myself received a pretty damning condemnation of my denial of libertarian free will from Alvin Plantinga[The leading living Christian philosopher] in personal conversation when I was an undergrad, enough… Read more »
Paul, Thanks for your response. I get it that you believe in Libertarian Free Will, but you didn’t really address my criticisms of it. As to those who engage unbelievers either believing in LFW or conduct themselves in such a way that the unbeliever thinks they do, that isa red herring. First, most unbelievers rightly believe they have free will, and have no need to understand if it id Libertarian or Compatibilistic. Second, they appear the same in conversation. One cant tell what kind of free will [as if they really care, which they don’t] a person has simply in… Read more »
Paul,
Enjoyed your post….
Andy, It may be semantics, but I also believe that we are incapable to save ourselves, and God always makes the first move to call us, through the holy spirit. I just believe that we do have a choice to make to accept after the spirit makes us aware that we need a savior, but when I listen to John Piper say that the salvation cake was baked long before I was born, and that It has already been decided who the elect are, It gives me a lot of things to think about. Did God determine that Satan would… Read more »
Benny, You said… “And when the elect share the gospel ( as we are all commanded to do), In doing so, to share is that a free will choice to share, or when we are in line at the DMV to renew our car tag, and we get the prompting from the spirit to share the gospel with the guy in front of me, who always seems to not be able to find his car title and holds up the line, and I know to share, but for some reason, I don’t talk to him about Jesus, was that predestined… Read more »
Mike, Sorry if I misunderstood you, but I may have made an assumption, your first response to my post was that you are a 5 pt C, are you saying you don’t subscribe to Total depravity, as in so dead that a person can’t respond, dead?
Mike, I use the same example you used ( the Bible never mentions trinity), but with the full cannon we come to believe in the trinity. I finished James white’s book on the trinity a while back, and enjoyed it. C are dogmatic of total dapravity ( trinity example), but I think the full flow of the Bible ( trinity example) takes us in the free will path, we are separated from God spiritually, but not spiritually dead. C take the T/D road. To me your whole system breaks down on T/D, if the reprobate is doomed from the womb,… Read more »
Benny, I agree that we don’t want to go beyond what scripture says, but we also want to be careful not to deny what scripture states, even if we then seek to clarify what those statements mean. So I personally would be uncomfortable denying that we are spiritually dead, given that Ephesians 2 says twice that we were “dead in trespasses”. Combined with Romans 8 saying the natural man “cannot” please God, and romans 3 saying “no one seeks God.” I would say it seems at minimum, due to the fall, and left to ourselves, no one would seek God.… Read more »
Benny, Thanks for your reply. Note that I didn’t use the phrase Total Depravity. I used some Scripture to show why those perishing reject the Gospel. Note as well, that I beieve they do so of their own free will. And those same Scriptures show why they COULD NOT freely accept the Gospel. I expect that in our conversation, that you might address what I actually have said, since you pointed out that not all C’s think the same about every doctrine. Otherwise, I would be led to think that your objections are based not on the actual Scriptures but… Read more »
Benny, you said: “Forget hating Esau, I am just in awe that he could even love Jacob.. ( easy to say if you view yourself as one of the elect), my view is he didn’t hate Esau, he just loved Jacob more, similar to Rachel and Leah. Luke 14:26 Jesus says if any man come unto me and “ hate” not his farther and mother… I think the Greek will confirm he means we are to love Christ more, than all our earthly loves. This is part of why I think C’s have built a bridge too far, to try… Read more »
So, just to be clear, you believe that God created individual souls just so He could send them to Hell, with no choice on their part possible?
Kevin,
Let’s be clear.
You believe God knows all things including the future, right?
Assuming so, and thus assuming you are not an Open Theist, then you know that God knew by name who would perish no matter what and created anyway.
You also then know that God knew exactly who would not be helped by the Cross but made Jesus the only provision for salvation anyway.
Then we are in agreement, right?
Dr. David Allen is a brilliant scholar and will be the co-recipient, along with Dr. Steve Lemke, of the 2018 Jerry Vines Award, which will be presented at the Connect 316 Celebration in Dallas. They will join earlier winners Jerry Vines (2015), Paige Patterson (2016), and Steve Gaines (2017). Dr. Allen is also my former Youth Minister. When I was born again in the early 1980’s at Prestonwood Baptist Church in Dallas, I sat down with David Allen for my decision counseling and I am quite certain he led me in praying the Sinner’s Prayer. I deeply appreciate his sharp… Read more »
Hi Rick! I saw your post and reference to Prestonwood. Our senior pastor here in Augusta,Ga is Dr. David McKinley, who came up under Jack Graham. I wondered if you had. Tossed paths with either while you were there. Small, small world!
Hi Donna,
It is indeed a small world. I certainly know the name David McKinley. He was on staff, but he would probably not remember me. I sang a few times in church, including one or two duets with Christy Spackey. I also played the lead (Peter) in the 1983 youth musical entitled, “The Witness.” Since I was active in the Youth Choir, I was closer to Chris and Diane Machen, and of course, Dick Baker. My Sunday School teachers were John and Lori Simmons and Dave Gibson. I have very fond memories of Prestonwood.
Blessings,
Rick
Dave,
I agree with you, that Dr. Allen’s essay is excellent.
I agree with each of his points.
I dont understand why it is in a book that has a divisive title.
May the true Gospel continued to be proclaimed by all Southern Baptists.
I wonder if David Platt believes the prayer that the Publican in Luke 18 is best described like this “the sinners prayer is not a biblical response to the gospel, should it not concern us that there is no such superstitious prayer in the New Testament, should it not concern us that the Bible never uses the phrase accept Jesus into your heart”. I would note it was the Son of God who told the story and he also told a woman at the well ” “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to… Read more »
Dr. Allen’s excellent points are common sense to me. I loathed stepping into the landmines of this debate – albeit unwittingly – in the Baptist church. Simply asking a sincere ‘beginner’s’ question about a Bible verse got this response from my SS teacher: “You’re a Calvinist!” I had to ask what’s a Calvinist??? While I was Baptist, I was constantly reading that one camp or another was stealthily infiltrating, or making a power grab, or luring us sheep into some terrible type of Christianity that shames Jesus, repels the lost and kills churches. I’m not kidding. Someone once anonymously mailed… Read more »
I went down the path years ago, that it seems you are traveling now, if we have a hunger for The word of God, we will eventually come to some forks in the road, do your research and choose wisely. Are you familiar with who wrote the BSF study on the book of Romans? Also don’t be too afraid of philosophy in studying the Bible, we all have to use it. When Jesus says in John 10:7 “ I am the door” we use philosophy to discern that he doesn’t really mean that he has 3 hinges super glued to… Read more »
Hi Benny, Yes I investigated BSF, but overall have relied on my experience with it off and on over 20 years, as a participant and a leader. What I love about it is the grassroots approach of you & God’s word first, relying on His Spirit. BSF doesn’t tell me what to think, it invites me to a disciplined individual study of God’s living word, and sharing this in community. We don’t use commentaries. We read Romans & other Scripture that relates. I’m a group leader. Each week I facilitate women sharing what they’ve learned from their individual study, and… Read more »
Karen, thanks for the response, I normally don’t have much time to respond at all to any of the interesting post , or comments on this blog, but my vehicle is down, and I am stuck in the office. I have enjoyed the back and forth on the current state of the SBC, with the certain election of J.D. Greear coming this summer, and I listen and read about all the chest thumping by both sides, and since it is among believers it doesn’t really bother me at all. I do have my own views, and all us have bias… Read more »
Karen, Don’t be too hard on philosophy or for history, I have taught Sunday School for over 20 years, and sadly I have first hand knowledge, most Southern Baptist know very little about church history, which not to get off topic but to me that has a lot to do with the current dust up about the growing vein of Calvinism in the SBC. If we don’t know church history, how do we know why we believe anything? We know what we believe, but sadly a lot of times we struggle to know why we believe this doctrine over another… Read more »
I appreciate those who love church history! I’m glad to know some, but I won’t pursue it. Three times I got into it were 1) when in a Baptist church, to catch up on Baptist beliefs, distinctives & those two big landmines: recent history leading to split conventions, and the Calvinism debate; 2) reading biographies such as Francis Schaeffer, Baker James Cauthen, and several missionaries; and 3) when The DaVinci Code book came out, I researched & taught my adult SS class the historical problems with that book, and some factual church history. #1 above had almost no power or… Read more »
Former Baptist, now nondenominational Bible church in Fort Worth, Texas. And too wordy, sorry!
Benny, In response to this: “Mike, Sorry if I misunderstood you, but I may have made an assumption, your first response to my post was that you are a 5 pt C, are you saying you don’t subscribe to Total depravity, as in so dead that a person can’t respond, dead?” Many people think they know what C teaches, and maybe you do. But you also have pointed out that C belief is nt monolithic. So it seems you want to discus the points of C. I have found out that many who do so [on both sides] dont know… Read more »
Mike, my intent was to respond to your questions, I guess I got caught up in your statement of being a five pointer that I looked past what you said, and just started talking past what you were saying, sorry my bad.. I will state what I believe from the word, and try not to refer to any extra biblical writings. I was prior to my conversion, leaving in my own righteousness, as best I could at least, or so I thought. Romans 10:3 I heard the gospel proclaimed, ( invited to church by my future wife, the holy spirit… Read more »
Benny, Full day today. Thanks for your testimony. It is great! Let me recap without the doctrine thrown in You were a sinner. You were invited to church. You were convicted of your sin. You heard the Gospel. You had faith in His Word. You believed and were saved. Now let us look at the Scriptures that talk about salvation. The Scriptures, as laid out above, say that you hated God, and were His enemy. They say you were blind to the Gospel truth and were perishing. They say that when God opens your eyes you are no longer blind… Read more »
I’ve commented quite a bit on this one post, and side tracked myself from the start, so as to the book and Dave’s excerpts and comments. I will watch from a distance and see what transpires within the SBC, and as I read last night about the dust up about The website, LBC, and the campaigning for the upcoming election, this is so sad, but I think it is a preview of coming attractions. Will the SBC split over the Calvinist vs. non Calvinist debate, no I don’t think so, with all the autonomy that is built into the SBC,… Read more »
Benny,
you asked:
“If most all the SBC roots do in fact flow from an original Calvinist tree, why did it lay dormant for so many, many years?”
How can any one know the answer to this question. But actually, it wasn’t dormant. It wasnt gone or even asleep. It just wasn’t as prominent as it is now.
Second, not all SBC roots flow from an original C tree, but there was two strands. And as i am sure you agree, popularity doesn’t mean truth.
For any interested, here is a paper on the the doctrinal divide in the SBC.
I think everyone will find it fair and even handed.
https://aquila.usm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1119&context=honors_theses
Dave, this is a really good article, and you and David ALLEN are right. If everyone in the SBC would listen to what was written here, then we could truly have peace in the SBC. It will take a mighty moving of the Holy Spirit to fix what’s broken in the SBC.
Hoppeful and Prayerfully,
David