Will the SBC split over the doctrines of sovereign grace?

I have a lot of SBC friends that go to different SB Churches in my neck of the woods. The topic is coming up on a regular basis. It has not found favor among any of them.

It is being preached against as well and it will. This is only the tip of the ice burg. Just remember what I prophesied.

 

Maybe a split would be a good thing. Finally get some Baptists with backbone like the founding fathers, such as Dr Broadus and Alvah Hovey........long before the venom of Dallas Seminary brought out the foolishness that God's attribute of foreknowledge was the basis for election and predestination.

Then they could enjoy better fellowship with Canadian Baptists.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I disagree strongly! The whole world and its churches today are full of false doctrine and they love it; it makes them feel good! It is truth that is divisive!!
When a pastor preaches God's word without compromise today there is much hostile objection, especially from the seeker-sensitive crowd who want to tolerate every wind of doctrine in order to build their numbers! Truth is not tolerated as many do not want to submit to Christ, by His own words in scripture He is Lord Jesus Christ! Today man has found a 'better' way, one where he can do church in a friendly atmosphere, entertain the masses, and never ever preach from certain sections of the bible. Its as though they're not even there at all! How could he preach Romans 9-11?
How could he preach 1John 1?
Until all christian brethren see who God truly is and submit to Him they will continue to do 'church' their own way! That is divisive! They do not hear the voice of the Good Shepherd at all! The words that Jesus spoke were divisive! No compromise. One must acknowledge what He said and bow to it or leave and walk away unchanged!

 

Jim

As an actual southern baptist and not an outsider, I have personally asked family members what the theology was going back to the turn of last century.

I then checked their oral history with what is available in print. It does not seem to jive with the poison that you accept among the canadian baptists.

Put your vipers back in your bag.

Thank you.

Wayne

 

Wayne, two of my professors in seminary were Southern Baptists. Solid Calvinists. One was Dr. George B. Fletcher of Virginia and the other was Dr. C.D. Cole from Kentucky. His lectures are still in print in the Pioneer Baptist,,bulletin of Bryan Station Baptist Church...free for the asking and good reading.

At the time (50's) I thought all Baptist Churches in the SBC were Calvinist. I never thought they had disbelievers in their lot.

Thank God the majority of our pastors had good schooling here in Canada. I think if I had to live in the USA, I would be Presbyterian.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Jim

If you want to be categorized as a disbeliever . . . A Southern Baptist (with backbone) can easily call you anything you like . . .

There have been hyper-calvinists to almost arminian theologies threaded through individual Southern Baptists . . . from the lowest to the highest.

However, your professors should have enlightened you that the majority of Southern Baptists hover around what is known as new-light calvinism . . . and that came out of the Presbyterians hundreds of years ago . . . long before we Southern Baptists came together for missional activity . . . Most Southern Baptists hover around 4 to 5 points of calvinism and some go so far as the 6th point (double predestination).

new-lights believed in God's sovereign foreknowledge . . .

Cheers,

Wayne

You would become a presbyter?

 

Gordon Slocum said:
Yes the next be split will be over the Calvinist issue.

While that is brewing there is a small one on using wine instead of juice for the lords table and that won't last long - I'll give it about a year or less.

A split over Calvinism? Dunno.

A split over the use of wine instead of grape juice in the Lord's Supper? Not likely.

But watch two other issues: Tongues and alien immersion. A split, unlikely, but the churches which practice tongues will leave the convention when the messengers vote on a policy opposing tongues.

The practice of churches' accepting unscriptural baptisms is growing and will eventually demand the attention of the convention messengers. It's tied directly to the Church Growth Movement and the seeker-sensitive philosophy. But don't look for it to be resolved since so many churches are heavily into CGM.

 

As soon as you leave the south the SBC changes drastically. The politicians tend to not have an audience outside of the south.

 

Jim said:

Oh dont go that far! We have great reformed baptist churches here. Check out the Founders.org site and see how many over the US. They are very sound doctrinally, true to scriptural teachings of the doctrines of grace!

 

So those in the SBC like myself who do not see sovereignty the way you and other calvinists see it are "reprobates"? How dare you question anyone's salvation...mine included!

 

Baptists need men like William Carey and Andrew Fuller to lead us towards fulfilling the gospel of Christ and away from silly theological squabbles that do nothing but divide. Sure they were particular baptists, but they saw a greater purpose than having every Christian agree with their theological minutae.

 

We all know someone who gets so involved in something that the glass they look through is skewed.

This is actually happening and it will be very interesting as it plays out.

The issue of Calvinism is on the table. The message is out there. The survey was a major move to expose it. People are talking. Members are being made aware of the issues.

Scoff if you will. I guarantee you Calvinism will be on the outside looking in within 5 years.

 

All my life, an SBCer --- and 18 of those as a SBC pastor --- I do not see this happening

Why??

Because I believe that the average "Joe & Jane" Christian have moved to the point of spiritual ignorance & apathy

"Who is Jesus Christ?"

"I don't know and I don't care!!"

They are more interested in "physical" motivation than in spiritual motivation!

More interested in how they can keep their $300,000 luxury house, ski rig, deer huntin' club membership, health club membership, Lexus and SUV's --- while at the same time holding their breaths under a sea of debt --- while at the same time figuring out how to dodge the latest company downsizing --- wiseing up financially --- but at the same time "dumbing down" spiritually!!!!

In five years or less --- those of us who preach Bible Doctrine according to Titus 2:1 and following will be on the outside looking in --- while those who are IN will not be paying any attention to us and our doctrine. Doesn't matter who believes Calvin or who believes Arminian --- those on the inside won't give a rip!!! Crystal glass cathedrals are being erected all over the nation --- while at the same time --- those of us who preach sound doctrine are being evicted!!!

Not a "prophecy" but a promise --- look for me in 5 years --- I'll be outside looking to Jesus!!! The author and finisher of our faith!!

Preacher boys!!! Take your eyes off of the Crystal cathedrals that make our resumes look good --- and plant your feet on the Crystal Sea --- The infallable, inerrant, inspired Holy Scriptures!!!

 

Brother Blackbird,

That will preach!

Wayne

 

Brother

I have studied the issue. This is not the first time that I have heard, "If you are historical, and not heretical, you must believe as I do and John Calvin did."

And I get nauseated when someone will question the salvation and orthodox doctrine of someone that does or does not agree with the 6 points of calvinism.

I have had very good reformed conversations with Presbyters . . . save on baptism . . . and they DO NOT affirm that all baptists have been 'reformed'. The very nature of early baptists was NOT reformed. It has only been the 300 years that has seen reformed doctrines spreading widely within the baptists (we did have our beginnings 400 years ago).

As long as a Calvinist keeps his or her 'battle axe' doctrine in its scabbard, I am ok with leaving them alone. But in Texas one does not pull out an ax or a knife to start a gun-fight and expect to not get shot down.

When this doctrine first started making strong gains (mid 1990's - before that it was seen among a small group of seminary grads), I asked my grandmother (a pastor's wife with 2 great uncles that were SBC preachers) about the doctrines of predestination and free will.

What I heard then was that we as Baptists have believed that God calls everyone, He empowers those that are called to be able to repent, and that everyone has a responsibility to answer God's calling.

That is a down and dirty version. It corresponds with a strong thread of evangelism within SBC ranks. It corresponds well with the grass roots, common sense approach of SBC doctrines. However, I know that there were also those of the Charleston communion of SBC churches that endorsed strong Calvinism.

I would be in error if I said that what I know to be historically SBC doctrine was the only SBC viewpoint.

I do not appreciate being told that those that have held to historic SBC doctrinal positions are 'reprobate', doctrinally in error, or 'new'. Because they are none of the above.

PS - one of the greatest problems within the 'new calvinism' coming into the SBC is that it is from OUTSIDE. People that are discontented with their denominations liberalism are coming to the SBC 'conservativism' and demanding that we return to our 'roots'. Well they do not know our roots.

PSS - so now we must decide upon tongues, benny hinn, wine in communion, as well as new age theologies.

:1_grouphug:

In Him

Wayne

 

Amen to that!

As the scriptural preaching continues to diminish I am so thankful to know God will always have His remnant and give Him glory and thanks for being a part of it, worshipping at a biblical church where the sound doctrines of grace are preached and all is done to bring glory to the name of God!

 

I wonder what the Founders of the Southern Baptist Convention (founders.org), whom were all Calvinist's, would think if they knew this would ever be an issue.

 

Why is there so much talk of a "split"? Don't we as baptists believe in the autonomy (under God) of the local church? Each local church can decide which voluntary association of churches (if any) to join. Here in the UK, the majority of baptist churches are affiliated to the Baptist Union of Great Britain, but many are not. Some are associated with the Grace Baptist Assembly, some with the FIEC (Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches). Is it not similar in the U.S.? Or is it compulsory for a local baptist church in the southern states to be part of the Southern Baptist Convention? (I'm assuming that is what "SBC" stands for).

Every blessing,