Have Southern Baptists Strayed?

[OldRegular]

The Abstract of Principles for the first Seminary of the Southern Baptist Convention [currently the Southern Seminary] founded by James Petigru Boyce, John A. Broadus, and Basil Manly, Jr states in part:

Article 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.

Article VIII. Regeneration

Regeneration is the 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.

Article XIX. The Resurrection

The bodies of men after death return to dust, but their spirits return immediately to God - the righteous to rest with Him; the wicked, to be reserved under darkness to the judgment. At the last day the bodies of all the dead, both the just and the unjust, will be raised.

Article XX. The Judgment

God hath appointed a day, wherein He will judge the world by Jesus Christ, when every one shall receive according to his deeds: the wicked shall go into everlasting punishment; the righteous, into everlasting life.

How far have Southern Baptists strayed from these principles?

 

[Dr. Bob]

From a reformed baptist (non-SBC), I can only pray ALL THE SBC CHURCHES preach this!

 

[Trotter]

I don't know about all the SBC churches, but this fat Soouthern boy does!

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[cindig]

Dr. Bob,
I looked up what the beliefs of Reformed Baptist are, and it sounds just like mine, and I am Southern Baptist. What exactly are the differences?
Thanks
<{{{><

 

[donnA]

We teach this. Whats the problem?

 

[stevec]

That's a big 10-4 down here in southwest Florida!

 

[Dr. Bob]

We are old-fashioned SBC type, calvinistic 1689 London Baptist Confession. There is a gorup of SBC trying to help the group return to its roots - called "Founders". They are much like the reformed Baptist.

MUCH of the SBC today, however, is not so doctrinally grounded. Pastors may believe it, but members don't have a clue and no one dares preach it.

Boyce and Broadus would not be named in sermon illustration!! But they could tell the latest story of Max Lucado or Chuck Swindoll.

 

[dianetavegia]

I've been in SBC churches since birth and have never had a Calvinistic preacher and would not stay under one.

 

[OldRegular]

Each time I hear someone put down Calvinism I recall something that Charles Spurgeon, that greatest of Baptist preachers since the Apostle Paul, wrote: Calvinism is just a "nickname" for the Biblical Doctrines of Grace, or words to that effect.

I would dearly love to see the SBC embrace the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith before the Lord calls me home.

Any Southern Baptist out there who wants to learn how insidiously the error of Arminianism crept into the SBC churches should read By His Grace and for His Glory by Thomas J. Nettles. This book also presents an excellent defense of the historic Baptist Doctrines of Grace.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Most southern baptists are more Calvinistic than they think! They would more accurately be labelled 2 or 3 point Calvinists than Arminians(which is not simply non-Calvinist).

There are not many SBC churches here in WV - only 2 in this local area. I used to attend an SBC church. Very sound doctrinally but not "reformed". All SBC churches I've been to have been likewise - although that's only a small representation.

 

[OldRegular]

Dr. Bob

I believe Dr. R. Albert Mohler, current president of Southern Seminary, would hold to the Abstract of Principles of the Southern Seminary as originally written. There does seem to be some sentiment within the SBC to return to its roots, particularly the "Founders" group as you noted. Hopefully this "disease" is highly contagious.

 

[dianetavegia]

Why oh why do people think if you aren't a Calvinist that you're Arminians?

I do NOT believe in pre selection (election) of a few for salvation and pre selection of others for hell. To me, this is the most important part of the Calvinistic belief and if you aren't a 5 pointer, you're not a Calvinist, IMHO.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
Most southern baptists are more Calvinistic than they think! They would more accurately be labelled 2 or 3 point Calvinists than Arminians(which is not simply non-Calvinist).

There are not many SBC churches here in WV - only 2 in this local area. I used to attend an SBC church. Very sound doctrinally but not "reformed". All SBC churches I've been to have been likewise - although that's only a small representation.

I would say that most Southern Baptists believe in the Perseverance of the Saints or the Security of the Believer, unfortunately generally expressed as "once saved always saved". I guess that makes them 1 point Calvinists.

 

[OldRegular]

Anyone who questions the doctrine of election should study the Gospel of John and Paul's letter to the Church at Ephesus very carefully.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Diane,

Calvinists = Election / predestination
Arminian = Free will

If you don't believe in Election / Predestination, the only alternative is a free will choice, and that would make you an Arminian.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[dianetavegia]

Arminians do not believe in Once Saved, Always Saved and I do, as does my church(es).

Honestly Joseph, again, if someone isn't a 5 pointer.... then the labels don't apply! I'm neither. Our pastor says to tell people we're just Biblical Christians.

 

[Charles Meadows]

I've always hated the term "Arminian" because I think the average person doesn't know what it means really.


Consider the baptist who believes in the total depravity of man and who believes that believers are eternally secure. He however disagrees with limited atonement and believes that grace can be resisted. He believes in a loose sort of election but not to the point of supralapsarianism. What is he?

He is NOT an "Arminian". Geisler calls this a "two point Calvinist".

Consider the original Arminian Remonstrance... Eternal security was something that was rejected - but the obverse was not necessarily validated. That is to say Jacob Arminius' followers didn't all believe that salvation was lost again after each subsequent sin. Look at the 2 main "Arminian" branches of Christianity - Wesleyanism and Catholicism. Both would reject the idea of being "semi-Pelagian". Both bodies subscribe to a belief that there is a cooperation between an individual (with free will) and the Holy Spirit - that is to say a person's own will does not save him!

So what is our baptist churchman????

 

[Daniel David]

The London Baptist confession is covenantal and therefore should be rejected.

I am a calvinist, but would oppose any movement toward covenantalism.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Diane,

The problem with that, as I see it, is that if you can choose your salvation, then you can choose to give it back. You are the one who is responsible for your salvation. If God elects you for salvation, it is God's choice and therefore, we are relying on God for our salvation totally. We, in no way under Calvinism, rely on ourselves for our salvation.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Phillip]

Back to the subject. I do not see a change in Southern Baptist Churches, except possibly some larger churches that seem to be becoming liberal.

I just came from a church such as this, the pastor actually admitted that he was not Baptist and determined that the Baptist churches had the most opportunity to have career growth, so he picked SBC and went to Southwestern Seminary in TX.

He's extremely liberal and very political. For example, the church voted about 52% to 48% to build a new church after he requested people to pray about the decision. He had the kids come in and vote (they usually are not in the business meetings).

They actually have dances in the church with so-called "Christian rock" music. Sounds like heavy metal to me, and I run a Contemporary FM radio station in town, so I know the music quite well.

In our church, I discussed Calvanism with the pastor. He will not preach Calvanism as a doctrine by the name of "Calvanism" because it is not a Biblical name; but he is definitely not Arminian. He had a bad experience when explaining Calvanism to a person who went off the deep end.....loooonnnnggg story.

We are very conservative. It appears most of the smaller churches here in the Bible belt have been very happy with the conservative reformation of the SBC.

The only thing we do not like is the fact that Dr. Criswell, who preached it would not let go of FBC Dallas, and he teaches his students that the pastor controls the church to the level of having things slanted his way in the voting. At least this is what I have heard, although it may be more urban legend than real.

Outside of that Dr. Criswell was an excellent Bible teacher.

In answer, I think everything is the same in the heartland. We have churches accepting women pastors and some other things, but these are on the East Coast where liberalism is natural. Most churches that disagree with the Baptist Faith and Message drop out of the convention. Example: Second Baptist Church in Oklahoma City voted to change from Baptist.

It was a sad day for Baptists, but they did the right thing considering their liberal beliefs.