Civility and Calvinism (Part Six)

In regard to the “Building Bridges” Conference, Dr. Tom Ascol noted that Norman Jameson – in his recent editorial in the Biblical Recorder – is an example of Southern Baptists “among us who are unwilling to let facts influence their opinions.” Ascol added:

“I suppose a Jamesonian spirit will remain with us until the Lord returns. Hopefully, it will diminish in influence as people check the sources for themselves and discover that the reality is far different from the distorted report. But whether the naysayers increase or decrease, what I experienced in Ridgecrest gives me hope for the future and encouragement to redouble my efforts to work together with those committed to the recovery of the Gospel and the renewal of churches whether or not we see eye-to-eye on the five points of Calvinism.”

Norman Jameson may feel that “Calvinists” are a bit hyper-sensitive, and perhaps we are at times, but I want to give him credit in presenting a positive (albeit at times uninformed) editorial.

First, he entitled his editorial, “Bridge building conference lowers alarm level.” Jameson states that the conference helped to lower the level of alarm felt by those who are concerned about the rise of “Calvinism” in Southern Baptist life. He states specifically, “if the general attitude of presenters is typical of the players in this debate nationwide, there is hope for civil, informed dialog among people who hold different views. That bears celebrating.” He also states that he himself is “a little less alarmed about creeping Calvinism in Baptist life.”

Second, Jameson notes, “While you might think that theology would castrate evangelism, the irony is that every Calvinist speaker testified to the urgent need for evangelism. And, they pointed out, one of the most widely used evangelism ‘systems’ for a decade was Evangelism Explosion, designed and produced by the Calvinist Presbyterian pastor D. James Kennedy, who died Sept. 5.” Despite the vitriol aimed at SBC “Calvinists,” particularly those associated with Founders Ministries, for not believing in inviting people to trust in Christ alone for salvation, this editorial makes it plain that such is not the case.

Third, the editor from North Carolina points out a “couple more themes in the Calvinist tenor” other than TULIP, namely church discipline and regenerate church membership. He writes, “…Calvinists, at the conference at least, appear to be pretty certain Baptist churches are filled with persons who are not saved, who are just as reprobate and destined for hell as anyone else who, well, as anyone else who God tapped for torment while He was contemplating creation. To their credit – and to the shame of all Christians – Calvinists look across church rolls and see too many who claim the name of Christ but whose lives bear no witness to being changed by the power and love of Christ.”

Mr. Jameson, thank you for pointing out these things. Now, let me “raise an alarm” on a couple of your points.

First, you ask, “Why are we talking about Calvinism at all? Why don’t we leave such discussion to denominations who base their doctrines on Calvin’s understanding of scripture?” Because many Southern Baptists affirm this statement:

Election is the gracious purpose of God, according to which He regenerates, justifies, sanctifies, and glorifies sinners. It is consistent with the free agency of man, and comprehends all the means in connection with the end. It is the glorious display of God’s sovereign goodness, and is infinitely wise, holy, and unchangeable. It excludes boasting and promotes humility.

This isn’t based upon Calvin’s understanding of Scripture, but of our own. What else can we think when Holy Writ makes such plain declarations as these?:

 

“But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:12-13)

 

“Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48)

 

“…Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will…” (Ephesians 1:4-5)

 

Second, you state, “We’re forced into the conversation because in some Baptist academic circles – with the nucleus at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and its president Al Mohler – there is a movement to convince us that our earliest leaders were at heart and by theology Calvinist.” Don’t blame Dr. Mohler and the nucleus at SBTS for this, blame the founders of Southern Seminary (such as J. P. Boyce), who in the adoption of that institution’s original charter placed the following statement (and which continues to this day as a part of the “fundamental laws” of the seminary):

 

“Every professor of the institution shall be a member of a regular Baptist church; and all persons accepting professorships in this seminary shall be considered, by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down, a departure from which principles on his part shall be considered grounds for his resignation or removal by the Trustees, to wit: . . . .

V. Election – Election is God’s eternal choice of some persons unto everlasting life-not because of foreseen merit in them, but of His mere mercy in Christ-in consequence of which choice they are called, justified and glorified.”