Featured Lousiana College and Calvinism

Just my way of given thanks to the Lord brother....goes like this..."Praise God for whom all blessings flow ":godisgood:

 

Aguillard AND students or are you taking Dr. A at his word that HE has fielded complaints? Dr. Hiles was on the fast track to senior leadership...I wonder what prompted him to change?

This is the crux of the matter. Southern is a good example. The professors at Southern are told UP FRONT that they will teach in accord with the Abstract of Principles. If they refuse, they aren't hired. That is quite different than hiring someone with a request to teach within the bounds of the BFM, and then changing the mark mid-stream. I ask again, what were these professors asked to do when they were hired and how have they deviated from that? And you're right about funding...in fact, nobody seems to be wanting to fund LC. I'm sure this episode won't help.

If you don't think the differences are of consequence, then I don't know what to say to you. I think you've raised this issue to a level of importance that our particular and general baptist forefathers would think ridiculous.

 

Okay, I'm going to preface my statement by saying I in no way support or condone LC or any of their practices.

I don't think you can say this student has been "FORCED" to withdraw from classes. It seems very much as it is this student's decision to withdraw instead of facing consequences of his own actions and statements. I do not agree with his statement that any of the pressure he is getting is "unwarranted." In my reading of what he has said I see pretty heated statements. I believe to claim complete innocence is a little far fetched. Now I don't know what LC's student handbook says, and it seems I can't access the site to read it. A number of universities have code of conduct statements that discuss interfering with university function and disruptive conduct. As a student of a university, you agree to abide by the student code of conduct, and if the LC code includes something about making disparaging comments against the university, then the student has agreed to abide by it. It is the student's choice to either face up to the charges and challenge them or to leave which is what this student chose to do. While leaving is in his rights to do, I don't think you can choose to leave and then bash the school for your choice in doing so.

I actually don't think LC is in the right in these cases and I don't agree with what they are doing. However, I understand that if you are a student of the university you are required to abide by rules set out by the university. If you do not like the rules, you are able to leave. I really don't like it when things like this come up in the blogosphere because blogs contain opinions more often than fact and the facts that are used are often skewed and twisted to meet the means of the person posting them. Unfortunately what you end up with is a heavily one sided argument.

Anyway, I will probably get some heat over this opinion but I felt like it needed to be said.

 

The current reformed movement is not like Calvinism of the past, which did not make it a primary issue. It puts it front and center, is Crusaide-like, and much like KJVOism in a lot of ways. For this reason and this only it has become a fighting issue. With reformed people of this ilk there is no "cooperation," only "reform or die." I think they're a little surprised people aren't just rolling over to their drivelous demands any more.

 

Are you referring to the staff members who were fired or are you referring to your own opinion of the reformed movement?

 

Harsh words, dude

 

Did you raise this same question when previous professors contracts were not renewed? Because this isn't a new occurence. Or is it simply that because these professors are in the reformed camp that NOW you are concerned for the hiring and firing practices at Louisiana College?

I'm pretty sure I already know the answers.

 

You didn't answer my questions.

 

For the most part I am happy to take Dr. Aguillard's word. However, I do know of two specific cases outside of that. As far as Dr. Hiles goes I can't say.

Professors are required to sign an affirmation of the BF&M 2000 and commit to teaching within the parameters of this document.

However, there have been in the past few years other professors who did not have their contracts renewed who also taught within the confines of the BF&M. So I'll ask again. Why NOW are you concerned with the hiring and firing practices at LC? Because I didn't hear any outcry in these past years.

No I believe you are only concerned because these professors are in the reformed camp. If they were non-Cals you would have no issue with what is being done at all.

 

LOL...I rest my case.

 

I'm just speaking from recent experience here on the field, where reformed "missionaries" (mainly from Korea but also from southern China) come in and put this issue front and center and have split churches affecting thousands of believers in my location. When they come in dividing as they do, they are the quintessence of heretics, i.e., dividers. With such there is no cooperation, nor should such be sought.

 

Here's something from someone who put the doctrines front and center just like his Master did. I apologize in advance for quoting scripture in context here...

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: " I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent." Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence. But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God-and righteousness and sanctification and redemption that, as it is written, "He who glories, let him glory in the LORD."

 

As a side note. I just stumbled upon this in one of my old Old School Baptist (PB) Websites

However, it is not our purpose to incite hatred or persecution against any man or sector of society. Since our Baptist ancestry was greatly persecuted, and since we are also falsely accused and ridiculed unto this day, conscience forbids that we should bring the same upon others. Instead, the scriptures command us that the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth (II Tim 2:24-25).

Accordingly, we recognize that love and charity are the first test of all that claims to be Christian (Mt 22:36-40, Jn 13:35, I Jn 2:9-11), and though we have all truth, we are but nothing without it (I Cor 13:2).

Blessings :flower:

 

Dr. Scott Culpepper's Open Letter to the LC Board of Trustees

Here is a post that will be of interest http://onepilgrimsprogress.wordpres...lege-board-of-trustees-by-dr-scott-culpepper/

While Calvinism is certainly an issue in Louisiana, it appears to be a smokescreen in this case, particularly given the timing. Everybody should have known that these men were Calvinists, with most if not all of them being graduates of SBTS and SEBTS. From the information I have, Dr. Aguillard was hired in part to avoid a perceived Calvinistic "takeover" of LC or at least to prevent undue Calvinistic influence. Yet they were hired anyway and he's only now coming out against it. According to reports I've seen, on at least one occasion in recent years, a professor asked his class if it was "ok to discuss Calvinism" after a student said that a certain passage in the Greek seemed to be teaching predestination, etc. (I want to say this was one of the professors whose contract was not renewed.) The reader will draw his own conclusions about what that says about the atmosphere there.

 

My grandfather had a saying about assuming things, but it would be prudent to repeat it. I'll just say you'd be wise to take his advice.

You've just defeated your argument. If these professors have not violated the BF&M 2000, there needs to be a just cause given for their non-renewal. Poor practices in the past do not justify poor practices in the present.

I'll give you a little back ground about me. I was born and raised in Alexandria. I have been in and around LC personally since 1988 when my sister enrolled. Prior to that, my aunt did her undergraduate and graduate work there. I could get more specific than that, but I wouldn't want to expose relatives who perhaps wish to be left unmentioned. Additionally, I know and have known employees of the LBC and Louisiana Baptist Foundation for quite some time. I tell you this so that you will know that I am not a "novice" with regard to the goings on at LC.

I've been concerned for LC as long as I can remember. I was concerned about the instruction my sister received. While I was glad to see a return to a more biblical approach after she graduated, the "method" the board chose to employ was patently uncharitable and, some would say, unethical. (The same can be said for Dr. Dilday's treatment at SWBTS, but that's another matter).

So, you're wrong that I'm only concerned now. I've only recently been a member of this message board, but I'm under no compulsion to prove my Louisiana Baptist bona fides to you.

All that really matters is that I'm a member of a church that sends money to the LBC. As such, I have every right to question the actions of a president that my tithe money goes to support.


Am I wrong?

 

I'm pretty sure that old saying only works if the person actually uses the word "assume".

I have not defeated my argument because non-renewal does not have to be justified. They do not have tenure.

No you are not wrong to question. What is wrong is the level of righteous indignation expressed at the removal of these three professors that has not been shown by the reformed camp in the past. When previous professors contracts were not renewed nothing was said, but now that it is three Calvinists being removed there is a cry of moral outrage.

You called the response of Dr. Aguillard to Calvinists being hired at LC "uneven at best" in a previous post. I find the sudden outrage over the hiring and firing practices at LC by Calvinists to be equally "uneven."

 

Consistency is a separate matter. What really matters is what is right and what is wrong. Can you tell me what these professors have done to be terminated? You've already said they haven't taught in contradiction to the BFM 2000. We'll handle other hirings and firings when we have a grasp on this one. Tell me what you think.

You've said earlier that you think the professors should have to teach according to the majority of LBC opinions. That is not in the BF&M 2000. You think it should be added? Fine...let's vote on it. That doesn't change the current situation. Hiles was upheld as a model professor within the last 12 months!

You didn't know me and I wasn't a member of this board before June 2012, so you can't really know whether or not my reaction is "uneven".

 

I've already answered that.

If Louisiana College were an SBC seminary you might have a point here, but LC is strictly an entity of the LBC. LC is not bound just by the BF&M, but must also adhere to the wishes of the Convention. The majority of whom do not wish to see LC continue to be known as "Geneva on the Red."

Point taken. Yet I still haven't seen you state that you expressed the same outrage over previous professors dismissals.