Sovereign Grace Ministers ? ? ?

All about grace:

Though you and I probably disagree on lots of stuff, you are right about the imbalance that a lot of young "Calvinistas" have coming out of school. Of course, a generation ago, the "in" thing was a gospel-killing liberalism, which is far worse than a calvinistic imbalance.

I was led to the Lord by doctrines-of-grace SBC types in the early '70s, but these guys were not academics, and their calvinism was always in balance with a living faith. The Founder's movement has become dry and academic. A mentor of mine, who was a Calvinist 'way back in the 50's, attended one Founder's conference and came back disgusted--he said, "I did not know the Truth could be made that boring."

The problem is inadequate discipleship, not a failure to make people "missional." A believer who has been well-discipled will be evangelistic; a professing believer who is not well-discipled will not be evangelistic, no matter what their theological orientation is. Young seminarians raised in a typical mainline SBC church have a cardboard theology that is about a mile wide and an inch deep. They run into Reformed thought, and it blows them away because of its biblical richness, but they don't have time in seminary's brief interlude in their lives, to develop a perspective and a context that is in balance.

As far as Bible preaching goes (the name I prefer to "exposition"), that is what we are to do, preach the Word (2 Tim 4:1-4, Acts 20:17-34). It does not end there, of course; just like it did not for Paul. Preaching that is not in the context of "one anothering" ministry is an academic exericise. Preaching that is not done in the context of recognizing the Lordship of Christ is just a form, it has no substance. FAR MORE DANGEROUS THAN CALVINISM IS THE FALSE IDEA THAT A PERSON CAN HAVE JESUS AS SAVIOR AND NOT AS LORD.

Finally, and theologically, the problem on both sides of the Calvinism debate is that each seems to take its methodology from its systematic theology, not from the Bible. The early church practiced evangelism by infection, not evangelism by program. People became Christians, they were discipled, they became strong in the knowledge of the Lord (personally applied to their lives) their lives changed radically, and other people became Christians through their personal witness and ministry (Eph 4:12-16). The Christians WERE Christian, and the Lord added to the church daily (Acts 2:42-27).

Those on the Calvinistic right seem to be more concerned with theological correctness and form than with the Biblical method of evangelism. Those on the other side manipulate emotions and seek "seekers" (a breed which does not exist--Rom 3:9-12, Is 64:7) and try to get them hooked in to the culture of a church by various growth methods. Both positions are biblically untenable and neither is where Jesus is.

Mat 28:18-20, in the Major B paraphrase is:

1. I have all power, troops, there will be no shortage of power.

2. As you are going about your daily business, make disciples of all ethnic groups, bring them into the local body through baptism [note, discipleship comes BEFORE baptism], and teach them to understand to the point where they are living all of the principles of the Faith.

3. I am with you in this--do it.

 

The life's work timeframe should not be unexpected by these newly minted, reformed minded SBC seminary grads. My advice to these young men is to pour their hearts into loving their people, expository preaching, and disciplining the next generation of leaders. If they truly believe in God's sovereignty, then they can rest in the knowledge that He will work through His Word and His Spirit and His calendar.

 

I, too, am a fairly recent PhD grad of SBTS but am no young theologue. I was 48 when I was graduated in December 2003. In my almost 30 years in the ministry, I've seen plenty of church splits, and very few of them were over Calvinism. I've seen a church split because a newly-minted SBTS Graham School grad tried to change the church into a Saddleback model. I've seen a church split because a deacon was living with a woman not his wife and the young pastor had the temerity to insist that the church needed to take a stand against the known and open sin. Quite frankly, all the handwringing about young Calvinist preachers splitting churches is more of a straw man argument against Calvinism than a representation of reality.

Many times churches split simply because the preacher carefully and diligently exposits the Scriptures and unregenerate members rise up in opposition.

I, too, have had conversations with Dr. Mohler. I told him that I was more interested in convincing folks to be submissive to the Word than to become Calvinists. IMO, the former will take care of the latter. It did for me.

Why has Dr. Mohler distanced himself from Founders? He knows who butters the bread. I appreciate Dr. Mohler deeply. He is a Calvinist and possesses a great mind and ability to bring a biblical perspective upon culture. Nevertheless, Founders is anathema to the mega-church pastors of the SBC.

BTW, while I'm on my little rant, please allow me to observe that so much of the so-called evangelism in the SBC is no biblical gospel. Stressing the holiness of God and the necessity of repentance and understanding the substitutionary nature of the cross was what our Baptist forefathers proclaimed. Too often, a fuzzy "asking Jesus into your heart" suffices today.

Bill

 

Arminianism begats easy believism, which begats unregenerate church members, which begats liberalism, which begats dead churches.

Out of balance Calvinism begats laziness, which begats hypercalvinism, which begats dead churches.

The man of God must be Biblical and balanced.

 

I agree with a lot that has been posted here in this thread. I too have been saddened to see many come out of seminary with a more "reformed" soteriology and thus they seem to have an arrogance about them as if they are God's special gift to the church and ministry.

There was an example here in our association of a young guy right out of seminary came to a church and was fired with in 6 weeks because he came in and tried to turn the church upside down. He decided to do away with the invitation and to get rid of all the American flags and any other symbol of a "pagan" nation.

 

Some Observations concerning Calvinistic Pastors and Calvinism in SBC Churches.

Every meeting that I attend that is labeled "Calvinistic" be it a Founders Conference or a local Founders Fraternal there are always some pastors present that I connect with and always some that I do not connect with.

But then that is true of any group of pastors I ever meet with! I am convinced that some men should not be pastors no matter what they are, Calvinist or Non-Calvinist.

These men cause problems no matter where they go simply because of their lack of leadership skills, their lack of people skills and their general obnoxiousness. That God called them I cannot dispute because that is always His business not mine.

I suspect that when a Calvinist pastor who fits this mold begins to preach doctrine that he causes the angels of heaven to weep and the demons of hell to leap for joy.

Having said the above, I personally do not know of a single "hyper-Calvinistic" SBC Pastor who has succeeded in the ministry of an SBC Church.

There is thus no need to warn against "hyper-Calvinism" because it simply doesn't exist for long in the SBC. SBC Churches have a pretty good track record of getting rid of divisive and extreme pastors no matter what their theological leanings. All the warnings against "hyper-Calvinism" that I read and hear about are warnings (actually generalizations) that ALL Calvinism eventually leads to Non-Evangelism.

This is simply not true and has been proven conclusively by the life and ministry of Charles Spurgeon, George Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards and certainly more recently by Dr. James Kennedy, who Southern Baptists have emulated and praised for years and even invited to speak at our conventions.

The misunderstanding that exists in the pews concerning this subject of Calvinism is VERY REAL, but it is a subject that many laypeople are interested in. How many of you attempted to teach the Doctrinal Study on Grace that was published by Lifeway several years ago? Dr. Timothy George in his study book "Amazing Grace: God's Initiative - Our Response" presented both a scholary and informative explanation of the Sovereignty of God and man's free will. I know you know that Dr. George is a Calvinist but then why did Lifeway chose to publish this study unless there was a perceived need for Southern Baptists to study ALL aspects of Baptist Doctrine?

The truth is that average Southern Baptist congregations are very shallow waters doctrinally speaking. Beyond vaguely defining "once saved always saved" I don't even know many Southern Baptist deacons who could cohesively articulate much Baptist Doctrine.

What worries me in my church is not that my folks don't understand Calvinism but that many of them still believe they can lose their salvation at the same time they believe that Grandpa, simply because he joined the church back in 1948 during the revival but never darkened the doors since and lived like a demon possessed man all those years, is somehow in heaven now with Jesus. We need more Doctrinal Preaching in our churches!!

 

Coming out of seminary with "an arrogance about them" is, unfortunately, a description that applies to many new seminary grads, regardless of theological persuasion. Be it Arminian, Calvinist, mystic, liberal, conservative, pragmatic, or whatever, seminary training can give the new pastor the idea that he has "it" together and is going to aid the poor, uninformed church members to rise to his spiritual height. More than one new pastor of whatever theological/methodological persuasion has been released by his church because of such an attitude. It is, unfortunately, a failing of youth, but it applies not only to youth.

Many times, though, the fault lies squarely with the local church. Because a truncated gospel has been preached, many in our pews are deluded into thinking they are Christians even while their attitudes are worldly and their hearts unchanged. Holding power in the church, they are offended by the plain preaching of the Word of God because it confronts their own sin. Their response? Not repentance---get rid of the messenger and blame it on his trying to ram his theology down their throats.

This in no way is a defense of Calvinistic preachers who deem that every sermon must emphasize a petal in TULIP. The whole counsel of God is to be preached, and that means not shying away from difficult-to-accept doctrines when they arise in a passage.

BTW, I've heard many contend that the Founders folks are cold, dead theologians with no passion for evangelism. In my experience, nothing could be further from the truth. There is a warm vibrancy of fellowship with the Savior and a fervency to see others come to Christ. There is not, however, a tolerance for the decisionism that passes for evangelism throughout most of the SBC of our day.

Also, if I may plug one of the best books I have ever read on biblical evangelism, I encourage all to read Will Metzger's Tell the Truth: The Whole Gospel to the Whole Person by Whole People.

Bill

 

Okay I will add some change to my .02 regarding a couple of issues discussed here ...

Discipleship -- in my opinion we have missed the central thrust of discipleship. EVERY time Jesus was asked about following God / what it meant to be one of his followers, he responded in relational terms (love God - love others - love enemies). Never did He refer to a certain level of knowledge or obtaining more facts. He spoke of interaction with others.

In my opinion discipleship has been turned into an accumalation of a certain amount of knowledge. The need to go "deeper" has created inward-focused Christians who criticize churches focused on reaching unbelievers and then flock to a congregation where they can walk verse-by-verse through the Bible and somehow believe they are going "deeper." I have asked repeatedly why churches that are known for their "deeper" teachings very rarely baptize more than a few dozen converts a year. Even the large churches of this method grow primarily from church transfers.

Teaching people to love God, love others, and love those who are totally unlike me is about as "deep" as Jesus gets.

How does a person know if we are disciples of Jesus? Not through knowledge - not through obtaining facts - people will know if we are disciples of Jesus by how we treat one another. That is straight from the Master's mouth.

I am not disparaging teaching biblical truth and knowledge, but I am challenging the belief that somehow discipleship must be tied to a certain method of preaching or knowledge (be it Calvinism, Arminianism, or whatever label we pin on our beliefs).

Discipleship is truly becoming students of Jesus Christ -- marked primarily in the NT by how he treated others.

This leads to a second issue worth addressing -- preaching. I will come back to that topic in a later post.

 

All about Grace,

How does what you write differ from what theological liberals such as Schleiermacher and Fosdick proclaimed? Though you claim that you are "not disparaging teaching biblical truth and knowledge," the tenor of your post seems to set "teaching biblical truth and knowledge" against being a disciple of Christ.

I don't think you'll find any Calvinist, at least not the warm, evangelical Calvinists of my acquaintance, who would disparage discipleship. However, my question is how can one be a growing disciple if one fails to major on understanding the revelation of the One being followed.

Growing in the knowledge of the Word and being "students of Jesus Christ" are certainly not antagonistic pursuits. They don't represent an "either/or" but a "both/and."

Your statement that "teaching people to love God, love others, and love those who are totally unlike me is about as 'deep' as Jesus gets" seems a bit odd. While I think the statement is in error (Jesus' parables can surely be pretty "deep"), surely you are not contrasting the "simple" teaching of Jesus with the "deeper" teaching of Paul, are you? And we know what Peter said about some of Paul's writings (2 Pet 3:15-16). Again, the book of Hebrews is certainly deep and requires careful study, and I don't find too many who claim Revelation is particularly simple.

Since you did PhD work at Southern (did you complete it?---I could not tell from your post), I'm certain you're not contrasting Jesus and the writers of some of the weightier epistles. Yet, your position reminds me of the mantra of many who claim that doctrine is unimportant, "Let's just love Jesus and others."

My concern is that so much which goes on in the name of evangelism and discipleship is little more than a subjective "What would Jesus do?" The answer to the question is found in the heart of the individual, not from the pages of the Word of God. The product may be little more than superficial reformation, not regeneration.

I agree that Christians seeking to understand the Scriptures can become too inward focused. There are always dangers in doing good things if one leaves other tasks undone. Quite frankly, though, too much study of the Word of God does not appear to be a clear and present danger in the good ole SBC.

Bill

 

It differs in foundation. No one is attacking the authority of God's Word. It is a given and a must. Again I am not suggesting love God/love others stands in contrast to gaining biblical knowledge. I am simply saying discipleship is not determined by the amount of knowledge one obtains. True discipleship is determined by one's level of obedience, which goes back to the statements of Jesus regarding how a disciple is defined.

I am not suggesting Calvinists disparage discipleship. I am suggesting that I have found that those who focus on "deeper" teachings ministry (regardless of their theological stripe - even though Calvinism seems to produce more of these types) seem to equate discipleship with gaining more and more "knowledge" of the teachings of Scripture. I am simply saying there is no precedence in Scripture for discipleship being determined by gaining a certain amount of knowledge.

Knowledge is a part of discipleship - knowing Christ involves "knowing" Christ. But knowing facts about Jesus Christ does not make one a disciple of Jesus Christ. Again I simply refer to the words of Jesus when asked how one would know we are his disciples - his response had nothing to do with obtaining knowledge.

Agreed. I am talking about focus.

I am not talking about the fact Scripture has portions that are "deep" or "difficult to understand". This is a given fact. My point is that this has little to do with discipleship. Carefully studying Hebrews or thinking one understands the teachings of Revelation does not make one a better disciple of Jesus Christ. Neither does extended study and/or teaching of the mysterious elements of Scripture make one a better disciple or produce better disciples.

I completed a MDiv at SEBTS. At SBTS, I completed a ThM in Systematic Theology (under Blaising/Ware) and completed a PhD in NT studies (under Schreiner). My mentors are some of the "elite" in SBC circles. I told you I am an anomaly for SBTS grads.

I am not contrasting Jesus with anyone. Are you? You run the same risk in the opposite direction. I am simply saying that when Jesus was asked what it means to follow him, he never referred to obtaining a certain level of knowledge.

And I am concerned that what goes on the name of discipleship and deeper teachings causes Christians to become self-focused instead of others-focused.

It is obvious from passages like Luke 15 that the heart and passion of God is for those outside the fold and not those inside the fold. As a matter of fact those with the greatest level of spiritual knowledge receive the harshest criticism from Jesus.

Here is a question for all of us to consider: why were unbelievers comfortable around Jesus more than the spiritual people of his day and why was Jesus more comfortable around sinners than the religious elite?

Actually I believe that the knowledge level of the average long-time churched Christian far exceeds their level of obedience.

 

So when did you do your PhD at Southern? We must have been there at about the same time. I had Schreiner for the "Major Issues in NT Theology" seminar in the fall of '99 and graduated in December '03. I was a geezer though, compared to most of the younger bucks.

Who do you consider "the fold" in Luke 15 to be? The saved? Isn't Jesus contrasting those who are "found" with those who think they have no need for repentance? Jesus continually confronted the religious leaders of Judaism for their self-righteousness and their contempt for "sinners." Their problem was not their focus upon "deeper teachings." Rather, it was their self-righteousness and hypocrisy.

Also, while God is passionate about those "outside the fold," his judgment is certain upon those who refuse to repent and believe on Christ, regardless of their formal relationship to the church.

What is the point of your question? I considered several approaches but figured I would get clarification first. The reason is because I have heard that question asked in a simplistic sort of way as an attack on the ministry and on those holding to the importance of doctrine.

.

I disagree. After three decades in the ministry, I think both are dismally low. In the typical SBC church, long-time church goers have little doctrinal awareness and, when confronted with the high demands of Christ concerning discipleship, are personally offended. No more than a third of SBC members can be found in corporate worship on any given Sunday, and at least perfunctory attendance is the easiest thing a Christian does. I did it as a non-convert for 18 years.

I really don't think you and I are far apart, other than the fact that I am an unashamed Calvinist! While you are rightly concerned about those who become "ivory towered" theologues (and I would share that concern), I am concerned about those who are all about relationships without an objective, biblical foundation (and I suspect that you would share that concern). Thanks for the conversation.

Blessings,
Bill

 

Deleted double post.

 

I posted this in another thread, but I think the following commentary is appropriate for our discussion: "Let Him Who Boasts Boast In This"--Knowing God, Studying God's Word, Knowing God's Truth, and Serving God's People . I post it again primarily for someone coming to this thread via search or otherwise may not see the other.

Bill

 

That is a great article. Thank you for sharing it.