Featured Seminary Question

They can use whatever they want. I find it ironic/odd/funny that a member of the committee that put together the 2000 version, won't use it at the school where he is president. Special dispensation for him I guess

I would also say that the Abstract is not mildly Calvinistic, it is full blown, double predestination Calvinistic. Which, though I would disagree with it, is at least logically consistent with Calvinistic thought.

 

The abstract of principles does not affirm active reprobation, and thus your statement is just silly. Not only could a mild Calvinist (Infralapsarian) sign it in good conscience, I would argue that a sublapsarian (4 pointer) could as well. Nothing in the text would prevent that.

Further, it would be ridiculous for Southern to use the 2000 BF & M, since it is a very BROAD document. It is meant to incorporate the entirety of the Southern Baptist tradition; it would not be appropriate for the stricter standards required (rightly) of the faculty. Southern does adhere to the BF & M, they just hold to MORE than that...

 

IV. Providence.

God from eternity, decrees or permits all things that come to pass, and perpetually upholds, directs and governs all creatures and all events; yet so as not in any wise to be author or approver of sin nor to destroy the free will and responsibility of intelligent creatures.

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.

I'll let the reader decide if this is mildly Calvinistic. I'm not objective, my bias is that the implications of these two doctrines is that it is strongly Calvinistic.

 

Any less than that would not be Calvinistic at all. Nothing in here about reprobation, which is the defining difference between "mild" Calvinism (Infralapsarianism) and stricter (Supralapsarianism). In fact, there is nothing about limited atonement. Hence, even a four pointer (Sublapsarian....not really even Calvinist!) could affirm this as well. If THIS is "Strong Calvinism" to you, you must have a VERY extreme Arminian view of God's sovereignty!

 

I guess. We seem to each be using adjectives the other doesn't care for as I wouldn't consider myself extreme.

I see "eternal choice of some" as eternal damnation of the rest. Though not spelled out and called reprobation, the implication is predestination to damnation. Also, seems to me that in the most basic sense, some equals limited.

Again, I'm not objective about this, just my point of view.

 

Especially if you read them with the same bent as you do the scriptures...:thumbsup:

 

I may quibble (it is my nature) but okay(ish)

There is an interesting article (Common Call Magazine) about a church in Dallas having a residency (like a doctor would) program for ministers at their church. Very interesting read.

from article:
The pastoral residency program in a teaching church provides ministers an experience similar to what young physicians gain through a medical residency program in a teaching hospital.

Pastoral residency offers an extended transitional period for seminary graduates in a hands-on learning environment where they gain experience in preaching, teaching, worship planning, pastoral care and administration. They serve on a church staff and perform pastoral duties, but they work under the guidance of a mentor pastor and within the context of a supportive teaching congregation that encourages reflection and provides encouragement.

 

I believe little of this has to do with the academics world, but rather what the world has thrown at the Christians. Today the Christian world is being challenged in its authenticity and in its views. So the Christian community has been forced to rethink its views and do some serious work at responding to its critics.

For example I cannot think of anyone who promotes the NT as Holy Ghost Greek. There are parts of what liberals taught that conservatives believe today. A good example would be of how to interpret Hebrew poetry.

While the liberals serve a religion and have ignored God, the conservatives do not care much about a religion but have come around to a better understanding of who God is. Today there are some very good conservative scholars who walk with God and face their critics with real answers instead of nonsense such as "God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

For years I believe that what the critics were saying was being ignored by Christians until a number of them left the faith. The young people today are dealing with real issues and want real answers. They can read the critics on the internet. Those I have dealt with make claims that are false but young people have not usually heard anything different from the church. So often the church does little to teach its people how to interpret and why the seemingly contradictions in scripture other than to ignore them.

 

Christians without tools is like asking a man to build a home with just a hammer.

I believe the reason why many pastors do not deal with such issues is because of their lack of training and/or boldness.