I’m going to ask our Calvinist readers to stay off this one.
This is a question for those who have self-designated as “traditionalists.” I will delete comments from Calvinists on this post. This is a non-Calvinist forum today! You may state your views without argumentation here. I may ask a question for clarity, but you have the floor today.
Here is the question I hope some of you will answer – honestly and graciously.
What is it you want from Calvinists in the SBC?
Obviously, there are three simple solutions.
- Calvinists could abandon their doctrines.
- Calvinists could leave the SBC.
- Calvinists could agree to keep their views quiet ad
I hope you will agree that none of these is likely at this point. Calvinists are not likely to leave en masse at this point, nor are they all likely to abandon the “Doctrines of Grace” suddenly. And since Calvinists are Calvinists by conviction, it is hardly likely that they will simply sit quietly.
So, let’s get into the realm of reality.
- Are you willing to walk in friendship and fellowship with Calvinists?
- If so, what would be the basis of that fellowship? What would Calvinists need to do to make that happen?
- What, from your “traditionalist” viewpoint, can Calvinists do to make it easier for us to have unity and full fellowship in the SBC?
What is it that traditionalists want from Calvinists in the SBC?
Be specific, please. And this is not a place to bash Calvinists. That’s not the point. Just tell me what Calvinists need to do so we can all walk in unity and peace, doing missions together.
(For those of you who are interested in my motives here, I am going to put up a similar post for Calvinists and try, with these posts, to figure out what we want and to see if there is a way through our disagreements to greater partnership in the gospel.)
This ought to be fun.
Dave, I believe that I have said that I can get along with regular ole Calvinists all day long. Others have said this, too. In fact, we did co-exist peacefully for years. I loved to Criswell preach….he was a 4 pt. Calvinist. I love to Dr. Russell Moore preach…another 4 pt. Calvinist. I use Dr. John McArthur’s Study Bible when preparing sermons. Even now, I have many, many Calvinist friends, whom I love very much. It’s not so much about Calvinism. It’s all about New Calvinism. It’s about the attitude that some of these fellas have….harsh, arrogant, disrepectful. It’s about… Read more »
Here’s my question David.
What, specifically, is the difference between a regular ole’ Calvinist and a New Calvinist?
Dave,
I tried to explain that with my description of New Calvinists above.
David
Okay, so its more about attitude than beliefs? Thats what I’m getting from what you said. Two men can have the same beliefs, but the New Calvinist is the one who is trying to convert everyone and who views anyone who isn’t Calvinist with suspicion?
Am I on topic here?
Dave,
You are mostly correct.
David
And elder ecclesiology? Is that part of it for you?
Dave,
An Elder ruled ecclesiology…rather than a congregationally ruled ecclesiology….and, that’s with some of them. Also, some have a view of baptism, as I described above.
Do you have a problem with Elder-led polity?
Dave,
If you mean a church led by its Pastor/Elder, then no. Of course, Pastors should lead their churches, by recommending, suggesting, teaching, and by example.
Should the Pastor be the CEO of the Church? No. I dont think so.
Also, if a Church wants to have multiple Elders…then fine and dandy. They should have as many as they feel that they need.
But, to have a board of Elders ruling a Church is not what Baptist believe the Bible teaches about ecclesiology. Right?
David
Dave,
I know you said no comments from Calvinists, but I do want to commend David here for his association rejecting the Founders-friendly Church from membership based on their baptism practices. I wholeheartedly agree with their decision. As a Calvinist, I would have voted “no” on them as well.
My association in eastern Iowa did the same thing a few years ago. IT wasn’t a reformed church, just one that lacked convictions. They stated that they did not require immersion for membership and we refused to allow them into fellowship.
I was part of a church plant that fell apart because of this issue. Looking back I probably should have left instead of engaging in debate on the subject, but the big issue was that the pastoral leadership wanted to allow people to join the membership who weren’t biblically baptized. (Also, this was before I ever got into Calvinism).
This is easy for me. After 20+ years of searching, studying, seriously considering, teaching and interacting directly with many, many people on this topic, I’d only like to see one thing. I’d like to see the general, normal response of Calvinists to the “Traditionalist” view (or anything less than 5 poin) to be: “I still believe the stronger case is made for Calvinism, but I see how you can be consistent and Biblical and view it that way. Maybe you’re correct.” That’s all I want. If that became the standard response, any issues I have are solved. If that can’t… Read more »
Further thoughts: http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2827869747215800666#editor/target=post;postID=2902381674762509511
A lot less… hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, revellings, and such like.
And a lot more… love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.
See Galatians 5:19-23
Am I hearing you say, Kevin, that Calvinists tend to operate in the flesh, not in the Spirit? Do you believe that is true more on one side than the other?
Or are you saying that both sides need to heed these verses?
Just wondering what point you are trying to make.
Dave, This very good question may result in relatively few comments, given the ground rules restricting Calvinists from chiming in. There are simply a fewer number of Traditionalists who engage SBC Voices. While I do not presume to speak for all the Traditionalists, I do write and comment here regularly, so I’ll give this a try and then run off to do some yard work, hopefully allowing my commentator number to fall on my 23rd Anniversary with Karen tomorrow and the week of VBS to follow. WHAT DO TRADITIONALISTS WANT FROM CALVINISTS? 1. We DO NOT want you to abandon… Read more »
Dave, For the sake of brevity, I am going to echo much of what Rick has written with a couple comments. With a brief refernce to the statement on soteriology recently released, I would personally prefer majority to traditional and I understand the unintended interpretations both terms carry but they were intentionally used to simply identify what we believe to be the more predominate position of SB’s in the pew today. These particular terms were not chosen to “officially represent or characterize or indentify or worse, exclude anyone in particular.” The conception of this statement itself is less than a… Read more »
Bob,
I am glad you were “brief” in your comments. 🙂
No smiley faces!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
><>”
Bob,
If it is true that your ministry has “nothing to do with Calvinism,” why does your church’s website have in very large letters the phrase “Non-Reformed, Non-Calvinist?”
Scott,
I guess it is perfectly fine for churches to note that they are reformed on their web sites and me not… for the record I did it so that people who come to my web site know where we stand. I certainly do not want any confusion at that point on anyone’s part.
My question is, why is that even a concern to you in the first place?
><>”
Rick, That was extremely well worded. I agree completely.
Considering the current controversy with Dr. Hankins, I’d say that the real traditionalists would want the Calvinists to stop buying into the claim that these anti-Calvinists are in any way “traditional.” They are not. Traditionalists, as indicated by the BF&M, have willingly been inclusive of Calvinists without adopting any of their extremes. If Hankins’ group was actually representative of the majority, then the BF&M would have looked much like his statement, which is not inclusive of Calvinists.
I apologize for the digression.
I thought only Traditionalists would be allowed to post in this comment thread?
David
Just subscribing to comments.
I agree with almost everything in Rick Davis’a post. With the exception of the use of traditionalists. Can we not throw a flag here and say hey fellas you used an inappropriate word choice here, because from the history I have read of the SBC there is no traditional approach to soteriology? Also, there are a couple of things I would add to things I personally would like to see from our Calvinistic entity heads. 1. More intentional involvement of less Calvinistic brethren. The fact that we should all be able to rally around the new gospel project curriculum, was… Read more »
Dave, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this influential site about such an important topic today for Southern Baptists. As a signer of Dr. Hankins’ statement, I meet the qualifications you have established. I’ll begin with what I DON’T want. I don’t want Calvinistic Baptists to abandon their doctrinal convictions, keep quiet, or leave the SBC. I don’t want to see anyone removed, fired, or replaced. And I don’t expect anyone to sign a doctrinal statement if they can’t affirm it in good conscience. Also, I don’t expect anyone to sign a doctrinal statement which favors either side… Read more »
In re-reading my post, I saw an error in paragraph 2. I apologize. I meant to say that I don’t expect anyone “who serves in a convention-wide denominational agency (such as the Executive Board or Lifeway)” to sign the statement. I left the portion in quotations out of my statement and it doesn’t make sense as it stands. I don’t mean that denominational employees should not sign it. I only mean that I can understand if they would hesitate to sign it since they serve all Baptists, both Traditional and Calvinistic.
My truly Reformed friends say that I am not Reformed because I don’t believe in all 5 points. So, I guess that entitles me to comment here. I think that Rick and the others have said some good things. The points that deal with who speaks at the Convention or the Pastor’s Conference or who are trustees or whether the Convention and its agencies become more or less focused on Reformed theology are not really in the hands of the so-called Calvinists. Those decisions are left in the hands of those who are elected to be trustees and executives of… Read more »
One more thing, I want Calvinists to buy me a couple of dozen, Krispy Kreme donuts every month…and, I want them to buy me all the ice cream I can eat whenever we’re together for different events…like the SBC, the TBC, etc.
David 🙂
I can’t have doughnuts or ice cream, but I’ll take coffee.
If you like Moose Tracks and you’re willing to share… 😉
Moose Tracks is one of my favorites….really, anything with chocolate and nuts is my favorite.
ATTENTION ALL CALVINISTS: I will be expecting donuts and ice cream at the SBC!!! Beneigh’s, or however you spell it, will be acceptable in the place of donuts!
David
Vol,
You Tennessee bred, biscuit eatin’ infidel. Doughnuts are not Beignets and Beignets are not Doughnuts.
New York Cops eat Doughnuts……………as do low down Yankee fans.
New Orleans mobsters eat Beignets……..as do the Fathers of the CR and their stepchildren.
Last time I was in NOLA, I bought a box of Cafe du Monde Beignet mix. I just tried making them.
Not the same.
CB,
I just wanna know are you gonna buy a couple of them at New Orleans? I require coffee, as well.
David 🙂
Vol,
I will be more than glad to buy you a Beignet in NOLA, but if you try to use it to sop syrup and butter from a tin plate like you do a Cathead-Biscuit, I will claim I do not know you. I will make you sit with Tim Rogers, Bart Barber and Robin Foster if you don’t act properly cultured at Cafe du Monde.
CB,
I’ll try my best.
David 🙂
CB,
I’ll try my best, Bro. lol
David
Vol, All you have to do is act more “Vandyish” and less “UTish” while you are there and that will be cultured enough to get by in the land of the LSU SWAMP-LIZARD NATION. I say that because if you act too “UTish” you might intimidate the little sissy LSU folks at Cafe du Monde and they will serve us instant coffee and week old Beignets as an act of passive-aggressive payback. As you know, “Vandy Dandies” don’t intimidate anybody so if you act like one of them, you will do just fine. BTW, Tim Rogers is a TAR HEEL… Read more »
I know I’m not supposed to post in this thread…but can we have a SBCVoices get together in NOLA? I would love to share some coffee with you guys.
I wish I knew more about NOLA. I don’t think Cafe Du Monde is that far from the Convention Center, but I’m guessing that immediately after the session at night, it will be pretty full. I thought about a Monday night Cafe Du Monde trip, or possible just having everyone each together at the Convention ($8 hot dogs or whatever).
I’d like to get together.
Just signing up for the comments.
I would like Calvinists to communicate without using opaque words and phrases that actually have polyvalent meanings but are used by Calvinists with the Calvinist assumptions being unindicated in the discourse. For example: sovereignty of God doctrines of grace Reformed Many Calvinists exercise an attitude and a verbal practice that these phrases belong to their understanding only and thus they can be used only with Calvinist presuppositions. Neither the semantics of the phrases nor historical usage gives Calvinists exclusive “copyright” claim to them. It would be better to adjectivally clarify the concepts. the Calvinist understanding of God’s sovereignty the Calvinist… Read more »
Amen, David(Not Adrian’s Son) Rogers…..and then, to be called liars, or mischaracterizing the Calvinist position, just because we disagree with their words, phrases, and ideas.
David
I think Rick and Adam have made some excellent points. Let me just add a few comments about three “pet peeves” of mine in this area: (a) “Traditional Baptist” — This is not perfect nomenclature, but it’s hard for those of us who sometimes identify with this nomenclature to think of a better nomenclature. I had this problem recently in chatting with Kentucky Baptist Convention leaders about how to describe my dialogue on Calvinism with Dr. York in August. His was pretty easy — he is going to be the Calvinist Baptist. But then, that’s not accurate either, because there… Read more »
Do you remember the movie “Independence Day” when the president is in the underground bunker at Area 51 and he ask the alien “What do you want us to do?” What was the aliens response? ____________
Sorry, just kidding! :o)
“ad hominem attack”?
“I’m not saying that, but when well-known Calvinistic Baptists claim that the gospel IS Calvinism,” ..”that does come across as very arrogant ”
Like Spurgeon for intance?
“Calvinism is the gospel” –Spurgeon
So, here’s where we are–not all Calvinists are lower-than-a-snake’s-belly meanies (though some might be) and not all non-Calvinists are backwoods biblically-illiterate bumpkins (though some might be)… and we all like ice cream and/or coffee. Now that that’s settled, can we PLEASE just get on with cooperating with each other for the furtherance of the Gospel?
I would like for Calvinists to vote against any federal, state or local legislation that would negate the Second Amendment and my right bear arms as a free citizen of the United States of America.
done!! now I would like all non-Calvinists to learn all the words to Rocky Top and never root for Alabama again…
If you read Matt’s answer above, you see the real issue that many of us who are non Calvinist face day in and day out. Claiming to know our intentions, hearts, and thoughts when in reality they are elevating themselves to be superior. Calling us insecure and then claiming that non C’s are the one causing division? The name calling is frequent and brutal. Admit it and turn from it. Second, I would like an admission that Founders does desire to influence and bring about the increase of the Calvinist thought in SBC life. We are not making a strawman… Read more »
After thinking through this and trying to discern exactly what this may mean, I have determined a few things I would like to see. If you do not want Dortian Calvinism to be referred to as Hyper Calvinism, then identify the hyper-Calvinist. We are accused of arguing against hyper-Calvinists whenever we present an argument. But our arguments are coming from what people, who identify themselves as Calvinists, say they believe. Also, stop hiding behind “the mystery of God” argument when we place an argument before you. Anytime a debate ensues your natural argument comes back to “mystery of God”. Another… Read more »
Commenters, remember that this is a non-Calvinist only comment stream. I’ve let a few Calvinist comments stand as long as they were not argumentative.
But I asked that Calvinists not argue on this post and that non-Calvinists not argue on the other.
Please abide by those rules.
I will reiterate. This post is for non-Calvinists to delineate their desires. No argumentation from Calvinists will be permitted here.
It’s inevitable that Christians will have their opinions about the Bible. But Baptists and Southern Baptists must settle for a unity based upon essentials alone. That means that people who think beyond that must not attempt to standardize their ideas. They are theirs and theirs alone. That goes for both sides. Baptists have never been monolithically Arminian or Calvinist. No one should take advantage of a resurgent trend to spread it. Non-essential beliefs should remain privately held. And I maintain that most non-essential matters will keep us going in circles anyway.
“There are parts of the Bible that you don’t believe.” “I hope that one day the Holy Spirit will enlighten you as He did me.” “You can not respond to Calvinism without being divisive.” “The Gospel is Calvinism and Calvinism is the Gospel.” “You really need to get your education from (not going to name) seminary. They really teach what the gospel is all about.” “When you get more education, you will see.” These statements came from men, young and old, that are Calvinist. They are pastors, and two of them (both men have been in the ministry for 40+… Read more »
I want to thank all who have posted here; great insight. And, I would like to thank SBC Voices for hosting this; it is a good place for dialogue. Most of all I want to thank my SBC Calvinists brothers or sisters who have taken the time to read this with open minds. Please know I and many others have read “Calvinists – What do you want from Traditionalists?” And I appreciate very much the comments there. I even appreciated the raw comments that came across as angry (most of us can relate to frustration at not being understood when… Read more »
A member of the LONGHORN NATION has spoken. You boys feel kinda lonely down there now that the A&M NATION has been converted to the righteousness of the SEC don’t you Brad?
CB,
Two words: “Hook ‘Em” 🙂
P.S. – I think A&M may long to be back in the Big 12 soon. They didn’t enter the sweetest division in that conference.
One more item that I would request of Calvinists: To understand that the affirmations and denials were not intended to be divisive! Using the term “divisive” is a little offensive (side note: using the positive term “unity” to oppose the signing doesn’t negate the offense) unless one showed intellectual honesty by using the same term for a SBC Calvinists group (say like Founders) or to describe those who would sign (say like Dr. Mohler) a Calvinistic document (say like T4G). This is a theological document, by its very nature it divides; but that is not its intent (anymore than it… Read more »
As usual, I’m late in commenting. As someone who is definitely *not* Calvinist, I suppose I should be commenting on this post, but what comes to my mind is something I want from both sides: Take a week, and for your daily quiet time, meditate on I Cor 8:1-4. Particularly pay attention to verse 2. How does it affect your ability to be certain in your knowledge of theology (or anything else)? How do you take it seriously without it taking away your ability to preach the Gospel with certainty? Do you take it seriously? I’ve got my own ideas… Read more »
As long as we’re making media references, let’s just say that as an old Babylon-5 fan, I’m looking at Dave going to both the Traditionalists (or whatever you call them) and the Calvinists and asking “What do you want?”, and I’m having to resist picturing Dave as Mr Morden, minion of the Shadows.
Calvinists should not hide. Calvinists shouldn’t turn every text into a proof text. However, this is true of other theological viewpoints. Guys, I am just sorry that it has come to this. I think this statement is simply going to cause harm. I am a church planter and pastor under 40. I know a lot of good Calvinists who will be hurt by this. … Not just 20somethings, but older guys I went to NOBTS with who have no agenda. So, I guess the main thing I want from Calvinists is to stay in the SBC. Many of these guys… Read more »