“Born Again” in the SBC

Recent Discussion Regarding Regeneration
Much has been discussed regarding the doctrine of regeneration in recent years, not to mention recent days, particularly in Baptist life.  Bob Ross, for example, has dedicated two blogs – The Calvinist Flyswatter and The Reformed Flyswatter – to his vitriolic opposition of what he calls the “born-again before faith heresy.” Morris Chapman, the President of the Southern Baptist Executive Committee who has long been a voice of reason within denominational life, inexplicably used the occasion of his annual report in June to the convention to touch upon this doctrine.  Chapman stated:

“The Southern Baptist Convention is experiencing a resurgence in the belief that divine sovereignty alone is at work in salvation without a faith response on the part of man.  Some are given to explain away the ‘whosoever will’ of John 3:16. . . .  Man is often tempted to design a theological theory in light of a biblical antinomy in order to clarify what God is trying to say.  Man’s system will be inferior to God’s system now and forever. . . .  The belief that sovereignty alone is at work in salvation is not what has emboldened our witness and elevated our concern for evangelism and missions through the ages.  This is not the doctrine that Southern Baptists have embraced in their desire to reach the world for Christ. If there is any doctrine of grace that drives men to argue and debate more than it drives them to pursue lost souls and persuade ALL MEN to be reconciled to God – then it is no doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ.”  (emphasis added)

After being called on the carpet by a number of Baptist bloggers for his erroneous assertion that Reformed Southern Baptists negate the truth of human responsibility and believe no faith response is required in salvation, Chapman issued a “clarification of intent” on his website.  The clarification served merely to expand his contention against Reformed Southern Baptists by declaring faith itself is a not a gift from God.  More recently, Ross ally and Chapman defender Peter Lumpkins touched upon Calvinism and regeneration in several of his recent blog posts (see Calvinism, Monergism, and Southern Baptists; Calvinists Critique Morris Chapman’s Clarification – Parts I & II; and Calvinists and Their Caricatures).  Lumpkins’ main contention, it seems, is against those within the Reformed camp who assert monergism.  Monergism is the the theological view that:

“In regeneration, the Holy Spirit unites us to Christ independent of any cooperation from our unregenerated human nature. He quickens us through the outward call cast forth by the preaching of His Word, disarms our innate hostility, removes our blindness, illumines our mind, creates understanding, turns our heart of stone to a heart of flesh — giving rise to a delight in His Word – all that we might, with our renewed affections, willingly and gladly embrace Christ.”

Lumpkins asserts non-Calvinists do not dispute monergism proper (e.g., that the Holy Spirit is the sole, exclusive agent Who affects regeneration).  He conteds, however, “the spiritual transformation He exclusively works in and on us by no means takes place apart from conditions.  Non-Calvinists usually confess regeneration is conditioned upon saving faith, and consequently the new birth is subsequent to rather than antecedent to, saving faith.” (emphasis original)  Lumpkins notes correctly “many Calvinists argue” that “faith, repentance, conversion and rebirth are so intrinsically bound together in Scripture, so far as experience goes, they are virtually indistinguishable.”  His main point seems to be that Southern Baptists advocating monergism do not have a Southern Baptist foundation on which to build, but only a Primitive Baptist (e.g., hyper-Calvinist) one.  This foundation has been erected, Lumpkins asserts, by C. B. Hassell.  Lumpkins warns, “Southern Baptists really need to take a long, sober look where the most visible Calvinists in our convention possibly desire to take us.  Primitive Baptist theology could be but a handful of trustees away.”

I see two main issues in regard to the arguments set forth by Ross, Chapman, Lumpkins, and others.  First, the question arises whether or not “traditional” Southern Baptists have ever held to the view that regeneration precedes faith.  The contention of this trio, and those with similar views, seems to be, at least implicitly, that Calvinistic individuals within the SBC who affirm this view are anthropocentric theologues who do not belong in the denomination.  Perhaps the Baptist Faith & Message is broad enough to accommodate them, but their theological roots are not truly Southern Baptist.  Such Baptists are Primitives at best, heretics at worst, and certainly followers of a man (i.e., Calvin) rather than followers of Jesus Christ.  Second, the question arises as to whether or not “Calvinists” want to “take over” the convention.  It is often implied that convention Calvinists, especially those associated with Founders Ministries, desire nothing less than denominational domination.  The plan of these Calvinist seems to be “divide and conquer,” and they alone are responsible for any and all division related to their theology.

Regeneration Preceding Faith Considered Historically
As to the first issue, it is not accurate to assert Southern Baptists have never held to regeneration preceding faith.  The very first work projected for publication by the Southern Baptist Sunday School Board (now LifeWay) when it was established in 1891, was A Catechism of Bible Teaching by John Broadus.  Published in 1892, it contains the following questions in Lesson 8 on Regeneration:

1. What is meant by the word “regeneration”?
A. Regeneration is God’s causing a person to be born again.

5. Who produces this great change?
A. The Holy Spirit regenerates. (John 3:5, 6)

7. Are people regenerated through Bible teaching?
A. Yes, people are usually regenerated through the Word of God. (1 Pet. 1:23; James 1:18)

8. Can we understand how men are born again?
A. No, we can only know regeneration by its effects. (John 3:8)

9. Does faith come before the new birth?
A. No, it is the new heart that truly repents and believes. (emphasis added)

Elsewhere, Southern Baptists’ first writing theologian, John L. Dagg, describes regeneration in the following manner:

“In our natural state we are totally depraved. No inclination to holiness exists in the carnal heart; and no holy act can be performed, or service to God rendered, until the heart is changed. This change, it is the office of the Holy Spirit to effect…. It is the taking away the heart of stone, and giving a heart of flesh; giving a new heart; putting the law in the heart; quickening or making alive; a resurrection from the dead; an illumination; a conversion, or turning back to God. So great is the change produced, that the subject is called a new creature. . . .  The production of love in the heart by the Holy Spirit, is the regeneration, or the new birth; for ‘he that loveth, is born of God.’”  (emphasis added)

In regard to the breadth encompassed by the term ‘regeneration’, Dagg adds, “The term regeneration is sometimes used in a comprehensive sense, as including the whole formation of the Christian character. At other times it is used for the first production of divine love in the heart. In the latter sense, the work is instantaneous.”  He speaks of faith preceding regeneration in the “comprehensive sense,” but does not believe it precedes regeneration in the “instantaneous sense.”  He notes:

“Faith is necessary to the Christian character; and must therefore precede regeneration, when this is understood in its widest sense. Even in the restricted sense, in which it denotes the beginning of the spiritual life, faith, in the sense in which James uses the term, may precede.  But a faith which exists before the beginning of spiritual life, cannot be a living faith. . . .  ‘We love him, because he first loved us:’ but these words do not teach, that our love to God originates in the conviction that we are the favorites of his love. The love of God towards us, operates both as an efficient, and as a motive.  1. As an efficient cause. ‘For his great love where with he loved us, when we were dead in sin, hath quickened us together with Christ.’  Here is an operation entirely distinct from that of mere motive. The dead body of Christ in the grave, was quickened by the Spirit; and a like power quickens the dead soul. ‘We believe according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead.’  Here faith itself is ascribed to this divine operation.”  (emphasis added)

Another earlier Southern Baptist theologian and the first president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, James P. Boyce, writes in his Abstract of Systematic Theology, “…Regeneration is the work of God, changing the heart of man by his sovereign will, while conversion is the act of man turning towards God with the new inclination thus given to his heart.”  According to Boyce, therefore, regeneration precedes “the act of man turning towards God” (i.e., faith).  He maintains:

“The Scripture teaching is that God operates immediately upon the heart to produce the required change, by which it is fitted to receive the truth, and mediately through the word in its reception of that truth. . . .  The Scripture attributes the birth to the will of God exclusively, thus showing that in some aspect it is not to be regarded as due to the reception of the truth. . . .  The relation of regeneration to conversion will, therefore, appear to be one of invariable antecedence. Wherever the appropriate truth is at the time present its relation is almost that of producing cause, for the prepared heart at once receives the truth.  Hence, as this is so generally the case, they have been usually regarded as contemporaneous and by some even as identical.  But that regeneration is the invariable antecedent is seen from the fact that…2. Regeneration (as in infants) may exist without faith and repentance, but the latter cannot exist without the former.  Therefore, regeneration precedes.  3. Logically the enabling act of God must, in a creature, precede the act of the creature thus enabled.  But this logical antecedence involves actual antecedence…”

Lest one be tempted to argue that Boyce is speaking of conversion, and not of faith, it must be pointed out this early Southern Baptist contends conversion includes a knowledge of the true God; knowledge of personal sin, guilt and condemnation; sorrow for sin; determination to turn from sin and to seek God; conviction of a personal need of help in doing so; knowledge of Christ as Savior from sin; and personal trust in Christ and His salvation.  Namely, conversion consists of repentance and faith.  Further evidence Boyce held to regeneration preceding faith comes from his Catechism of Bible Doctrine.  In it, he asks, “What is the first work that the Spirit accomplished in those who are saved?”, then answers, “The work of regeneration.”  Regeneration, described as “Our being born again,” is said to enlighten “the mind to understand savingly the Word of God.”

The Abstract of Principles, Southern Seminary’s doctrinal confession since its founding on April 30, 1859, places regeneration prior to repentance and faith in its affirmations.  This placement is not accidental.  Regeneration is described as “a change of heart, wrought by the Holy Spirit, who quickeneth the dead in trespasses and sins enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the Word of God, and renewing their whole nature, so that they love and practice holiness.  It is a work of God’s free and special grace alone.”  (emphasis added)  Faith is defined, in part, as something “wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit.”  (emphasis added)

One may not agree with those who assert regeneration precedes faith, but one may not argue that this position is antithetical to Southern Baptist theology, let alone heretical.

Calvinist Takeover
Having been associated with Calvinists in Southern Baptist life for over two decades, I honestly don’t know any (and, yes, I’m on a first-name basis with several of the “big names”) who want the SBC to be ruled by the Reformed.  In the first place, the Reformed are primarily concerned with theology, not with politics.  The reality is that most Reformed Southern Baptists are sick and tired of political posturing within the convention.  The problem, however, is that their concern with theology means a concern for reformation.  When they speak of reformation, some Calvinists give the impression they desire for the entire denomination to come under the sway of Reformed doctrine.  I don’t believe this is their intention, but it is certainly the perception.

Part of the problem with this persistent perception exists because several Reformed Southern Baptists insist that “Calvinism is the gospel,” and that “Arminians” in the convention are “heretics” teaching “works righteousness.”  To put it bluntly, such Reformed folk need to simply shut up.  Non-Reformed Southern Baptist brothers and sisters do not believe any such thing.  They view faith as belief and trust in Christ Jesus and His work at the cross, not as a work meriting salvation.  To put it simply, their belief is analogous to the beggar who reaches out to receive a piece of bread. He has not earned the bread. His work has not produced the bread. He is simply reaching out his hand and receiving the bread as it is given. Is reaching out a work? No. It is the condition of receiving the bread.

While many Calvinists certainly get blamed for asserting such an erroneous view regarding their fellow believers, it is the furthest thing from their minds.  As they minister in non-Reformed congregations and denominational settings, they simply desire to be used by God for the advance of His kingdom, partnering with their fellow Christians in our Lord’s service.

In the second place, the vast majority of trustees within SBC life are not of the Reformed variety.  Some are, no doubt, but not to the point where people in non-Reformed pews should tremble at the prospect of a “handful of trustee selections” ruling as iron-fisted despots and enforcing Calvinistic dogma upon the denomination.  Numerically, such a prospect is simply impossible.  We’re outnumbered, and we know it.  The thing we fear is not failing to take over the convention, but being expelled from it.

Conclusion
Many Calvinists have already departed SBC life for life and service in other denominational settings.  Many others are contemplating the same, yet are somewhat hopeful at the prospect of remaining in order to cooperate with their fellow Southern Baptists for the sake of the gospel.  This hope has been fostered greatly by the generosity and courtesy shown them recently by Johnny Hunt during his service as president, and by Danny Akin who has worked to build bridges of trust and cooperation between the non-Reformed and Reformed.  It remains to be seen how things will unfold, but, for now, doctrinal differences need not divide us.