Posted on 07/07/2016 7:09:11 AM PDT by Cronos
J.D. Greear, who was a strong contender for president at the recent Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting, says it's unfair to blame declining baptism numbers in the SBC on a resurgence of 5-point Calvinism in Southern Baptist life. Greear graciously stepped aside in a razor close race with Steve Gaines, pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis and a more moderate Calvinist — a contest that many say rested on how 5-point Calvinism affects church growth
In an interview with The Christian Post last Thursday, Greear, pastor of Summit Church in Durham, North Carolina, said it doesn't matter how many "points" of Calvinism one holds because "Jesus gave every one of us the Great Commission, and if we're not carrying it out, that's just plain unfaithful."
At issue is the degree of evangelistic zeal and the theological orientation that underpins the historic Southern Baptist emphasis on sharing the Gospel with nonbelievers.
Are critics correct who say 5-point Calvinist theology produces a "frozen chosen" mindset and that stricter Calvinist views yield less outreach and altar calls?
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
Historically some of the greatest evangelists have been Calvinists. The first name that comes to mind is George Whitefield, the man who God used to launch the Great Awakening.
So, did the Baptists choose the liberal or the conservative candidate for SBC president?
My southern gospel band plays at a lot of these places. I honestly don’t see them as “positive” places. There is a lot of despair and fear, partly because of all the “helfire” preaching (the “turn or burn” message).
And I’m an adherent to CI, not ECT.
Some enlightenment cqn be found here: rethinkinghell.com
When I was about young, my family was Baptist.
I remember getting all dressed up to go to church to be baptized, only to discover that it meant they were going to submerge me in the Chickahominy River. I abandoned Christianity as being run by nuts later that same day.
I still believe, I just don’t want any part of their nutbar clergy.
The social liberalism and compromise of people like Russell Moore is contributory as well.
So you were going to get baptised, but balked because it involved a river?
Sounds like "they" may not have been the ones who were nuts.
It’s an irrelevant debate. It’s like debating whether you have cancer because you brush your teeth.
The problem with the SBC is heretical fundamentalism. All that matters is “sharing the Gospel”. The rest of the Bible is ignored. Practically speaking, the leadership teaches John 3:16 and has reduced the 10 Commandments to one: Be extra, super-duper nice! When the current group of Arminians (Yes, the SBC is overwhelmingly Arminian) got control, they thought they could stem losses in membership by being “theologically inerrant” and socially moderate (liberal), unlike the previous (Arminian) leadership. After all, if you are going to “win people to Christ”, you don’t want what the Bible has to say about the sodomite lifestyle or abortion get in the way. In fact, they reason, embracing some environmentalism, affirmative action and race guilt, and feminism would be really helpful with the young folks.
The rank and file of SBC churches have little idea of what is going on, but the seminaries and the leadership are poisonous and are starting the down the path of the UMC and PCUSA (or the CBF, if you know something about the history of the SBC). Either someone cleans house, or the SBC will die over the next 20 years.
Theologically I belong in the southern Baptist tradition, but I’ve never been a member of any of their churches. Not exactly sure why that is, other than their services seemed a bit cookie cutter to me.
There are some SoBap churches that are growing. Sojourn Community Church in Louisville KY is doing quite well, and it is a Sobap church though they don’t broadcast it. Their preaching is right out of the reformed tradition, but their services can get, shall we say, a bit lively. When I visit the church I wear earplugs for the music.
The Southern Baptists have become more influenced by Calvinism as of late. One idea, that isn’t a historical Reformed doctrine (neither is it an historical catholic doctrine for that matter), is called “the Eternal Subordination of the Son” (to the Father). This is something new that the Calvinists have for some reason latched on to, even though I think Calvin would not have agreed with it. This strange doctrine is tied to the belief that women are eternally (even in heaven) subservient to men. So that is where they are going - to a watered-down view of Christ and a Mormon-like view of the sexes.
You can really tell who the "big tent" people are. They let outside factors infect their theology. IOW the end (church growth) justifies the means...
TULIP R us Protestants...
Scripture is pretty clear on what Salvation is.
Humans are easily manipulated by the Devil who is a liar and a thief. This is why these debates rage on and on.
A Baptism doesn’t “save”.
A Church Membership doesn’t “save”.
An alter-call doesn’t “save”.
Belief and Hope in Christ and His Finished work on the Cross as a remission for our sins does.
I’d also imagine that the SBC is losing congregants hand over fist because they keep bringing in more Ecumenical Ethicists into their mold, like that wolf Russell Moore.
This is my view of what is going on as an outsider. But it seems like they are going in a harmful direction.
I dunno. I've met several members of the staff of Southern Baptist Seminary here in Louisville, and they've made every effort to keep the church within the boundaries of orthodox teaching. It is a struggle, though, and they regularly are vilified by the more "enlightened" members of the tradition.
This is not a closed thread, correct. You are correct in your assessment. There is a strong “eternal subordination of the Son” that has entered into Reformed theology in some circles and it is also connected to woman being subordinate to Men even in heaven, which is close to Mormon Trinitarian doctrine. I was wondering when this was going to make it to FR protestant discussion.
Much of the Protestant discussion here centers on soteriology, how God saves and trying to define that. To me the more important issue is the theology on who God is, That is who Christ is (Divine Person with a full Divine and human nature) and that Christ with respect to his Divinity is “not subordinate” to the Father. No early Creedal formula in the early Church (Nicene, Apostles or Athanasian, which most explicity deals with The Trinity and Incarnation of Christ in very dogmatic terms).
Kudos to you to speaking to this and while I am not a Calvinist, you are correct that Calvin nor Luther would agree with this “eternal subordination of the Son” doctrine making its way in much of Reformed circles. Lots of FR Reformed guys cite this guy named Piper, who seems to be among the leaders in Reformed circles in the U.S, quite a bit, so I went to check this guy out and it seems he is a proponent of this heretical doctrine.
Would you want to get baptized in a river full of chicks and hominy?
Baptism means nothing without salvation event.
I like your screen name, and I was raised Lutheran, lol. Calvinism always seemed a little foreign to me but people who consider them staunch Calvinists should know that the “eternal subordination of the Son” is something Calvin would not have supported, nor Luther, and not for that matter the Catholic or Orthodox churches, for for that matter, traditional Baptists. This seems like something that was borrowed a bit from Arianism.
I wasn’t raised Baptist but we joined a new Baptist church that is STRONGLY Reformed/Calvinist. Not 5 point Calvinist. Good Biblical exegesis. My husband and I differ from such a completely narrow version of election but we have grown and they put up with us. Now, my pastor is really in to SBC politics and is getting his PhD from Southern Seminary, used to work for Albert Mohler. Last night at small group they mentioned this very topic and the debate is STRONG over this new “idea” and the traditionalists like my pastor who is Reformed does NOT agree with the “new” idea.
I realize more and more that we have to keep guard for what the Bible says because men start to think and then their thinking becomes eminent in their own minds.
Our church is very mission minded and in action. NO altar call but people are pointed to the need for Jesus. I love our church but I see contradictions with having no way but Reformed. Sometimes I bring them up. I think they pity my husband and I because we haven’t read the right theologians. LOL It is mostly ok but sometimes exhausting. I don’t want to read theology even though I recognize the strong importance of sound doctrine. I just don’t believe what men write is any more sound than God’s word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.