Prominent Southern Baptist Calvinist Tom Ascol explains his latest epiphany—a shift to being more irenic—in a June 30 article in the Florida Baptist Witness:
I've known Tom for a number of years thru the Florida Baptist Convention. He is the leader of the Founders which is the premier Calvinist entity in the SBC. He worked for many years to get the SBC nationally to pass the resolution concerning the membership of the SBC churches to be more accurate in who they count as members.
Tom has always been strong in his Calvinist positions, but he has also been a good source of what calvinists believe when I have asked him questions coming from my non-Calvinist position.
This is not a move away from calvinism - if you think it is, you don't know Tom. It is a move towards what is important if we are ever to move the Calvinist/non-Calvinist debate away from such a personal animus basis.
I think the title of this thread is a bit misleading. I don't think he sees himself as repenting, just growing.
I wonder who called him militant. John the Baptist came neither eating and drinking, and it was said he had a devil. Christ came eating and drinking, and He was called a glutton and a winebibber. I think if we could investigate the situation we'd find that Ascol is simply caving to noncalvinist pressure. They're the ones that appear to do most of the whining.
I think it's an admirable thing when some who see they have been unloving come to repentance, and then turn to being gracious and loving in all their endeavors for Christ. That's a great story. May God bless this brother.
However, I see another side to this whole thing. There are some that claim their own camp to be "the most loving," themselves to be "the loving side" of the theological camps (really more of a jab toward those who are other than themselves.)
The problem with this is Biblical love doesn't brag, or talk of self, nor seek her own. To do so is not a true representation of Biblical love, because while in the midst of claiming it they prove they do not truly possess it, but fall short. It's sort of like claiming humility.
I think a repentance of the latter is a greater miracle than that of the former.
" If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.
Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant,
does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered,
does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth;
bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never fails..." I Corinthians 13:1-8a
Well Preach, Tom Bryant claims he is a stand up guy... personally I dont know him and I'm skeptical to his message. However he represents the SBC & their not my choise. Im not much for blended churches were you tend to dilute theology & that is what I see most of these SBC churches doing...IE diluting theology to a Koom By Ahhh belief system. I further give Aaron credit for his skepticism & if this keeps up there will be more fractured churches as folks look for the Truth in preaching & teaching. I dont see this guy as growing rather turning his back (caving in) on his beliefs similar to a politician getting corrupted.
I sincerely hope that the Calvinistic fraction of the SBC scrutinize his commentary.
Tomorrow I may "appear" caustic and unloving (Like Jesus may "appear" to some in Luke 11 and elsewhere) as I, as a shepherd, with a staff beat off some wolves with it. I know it's hard to see both sides as love. But they are both of love. :thumbsup:
I dont think anyone in the SBC wants or desires anyone to "cave" on their theological convictions.
But I do agree there must be more mature thought given by churches (as well as information) regarding incoming pastors and where they stand theologically and the impact those stances may have on a local congregation.
I am a transplant of one such "split" in a church, where a new young (I might add dynamic) preacher was brought in, he happened to be as he states "historical baptist".
Most of the congregation had no idea what that meant.
Multitudes of families left, not because of the "theological" differences, but rather because of instituted "policy" changes, which as I think were a direct result of theological positions.
We CAN get along, but "reformed" oriented pastors should not come to traditionally "non-reformed" congregations without a clear "heads up" about "this is where I stand" and "this is what is likely to be different" as a result of what I believe.
BTW, I am sorry you seem to hold the SBC in rather low regard.
I have a solution for that......In the vetting process, ask specific questions to ascertain the mold of person you are looking for. For example, if my church were Calvinistic Id expect questions like "Can you take 15 Minutes to explain Election to us" & of course if he cant then he isnt going to be the pastor. I'm stumped as to why you cannot do that but on 2nd thought maybe I'm not. SBC's are blended so you have both theologies present. So I can see how you can get into predicaments. Im just saying that Id never get involved in churches that are afraid to teach Doctrines of Grace. Knowing me, you should understand that. Right.
You don't know him so I understand what you may see as compromising or caving in. But he won't compromise what he believes.
He has stood for Calvinism for all his ministry. And he still does. I find it amusing that people who don't know him or his ministry have already decided his motives.
Tom, if you look at my statement again I clearly stated I didnt know him...further with it, I indicated since you endorsed him, he is probably OK. However I believe he would have some very pointed questions from Presbyterians & other Reformed people as to his commentary. I will leave it there unless you want to pick it up.