Calvinism & Controversy in the Southern Baptist Convention

   The Building Bridges Conference at Ridgecrest Conference Center November 26-28 stirred but the slightest denominational dust among Southern Baptists.  But why should it?  Billed as a venue to understand better the differences between Calvinism and NonCalvinism, the conference hoped to bury the theological hatchet between the sides of good and the sides of the not-so-good (each side of which is interpreted by its dedicated adherents).  Or, if not bury the hatchet, at least put it on the shelf for a while.  It's time to stop hacking to pieces our Baptist brothers... >>>

Dr. Tom Ascol, Founders Ministries and vocal Southern Baptist Calvinist, sounded such a call when he rhetorically queried

"And have you ever witnessed Southern Baptist Calvinists and non-Calvinists pointedly challenging each other's views and affirming their common convictions all the while maintaining genuine goodwill even to the point of actually enjoying each other's company? In Dr. Akin's talk he made this statement, "One of our problems has been semi-Arminians with an attitude and Calvinist with a chip on their shoulder." Almost without exception those attitudes were absent from the conference."

Ah, but all was not so well received.  Dr. Ascol, a few lines later, takes Norman Jameson, Editor of The Biblical Recorder, to the back of the barn and whips the snot out of him for openly conceding in an editorial the conference did nothing to light his fire.  Says Dr. Ascol: 

"I don't expect everyone to celebrate the success of this conference...Norman Jameson has reminded me, however, that we still have some among us who are unwilling to let facts influence their opinions." 

According to Ascol, Jameson's view is 'warped' and a blatant 'misrepresentation', a 'distorted report'. While Jameson's view is decidedly spunky and cutting, personally I believe it too much to suggest it either warped or distorted. 

Moreover, Calvinist blogger and Founders darling, Timmy Brister, offered a post that IS both warped and distorted.  Dr. Ascol recommends Brister's caricature of Professor Malcolm Yarnell as a Barney Fife-Buffoon in the Professor's contribution to the conference.  It seems Dr. Ascol and I not only see Calvinism differently but also what precisely constitutes warped and distorted.

I read Jameson's editorial.  It was lively indeed and surely did not offer the reader warm and fuzzy feelings toward the conference.  I suppose for Jameson the bottom line is, he is not Calvinist and wonders why Southern Baptists are even talking about it:

I remain, however, just as befuddled by it [Calvinism], not a whit more attracted to it and just as certain it has severe potential to divide. A conference speaker even listed one advantage of Calvinism as prompting "better church splits."...Why are we talking about Calvinism at all? Why don't we leave such discussion to denominations who base their doctrines on Calvin's understanding of scripture?  We're forced into the conversation because in some Baptist academic circles - with the nucleus at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and its president Al Mohler - there is a movement to convince us that our earliest leaders were at heart and by theology Calvinist.

Ever how rank and blunt Jameson's words are there is a kernel of truth in what he expresses.  We are seemingly forced to speak about Calvinism.  And as for Southern Seminary, led by Dr. Mohler, being Calvinism's flagship within Southern Baptist life--not to mention Professor Nettles, of course--no one is prepared to deny.  Founders specific goal, at least the way I gather it from hanging out at Founders Ministries and its Director's Blog, is to convince us that Baptists in the South were all but unanimously Calvinist before, during and after the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845. 

Indeed, according to Southern Baptist Calvinists, reformed doctrine did not begin to wane until approximately the second quarter of the 20th century. A favorite whipping post for Calvinists is the theological influence of E.Y. Mullins, who, more than anyone else, led the Convention to embrace a pitifully weak statement on Calvinism in the 1925 Baptist Faith and Message. 

My own view is, albeit the weaknesses President Mullins possessed, it is not necessary nor valid to include his 'Calvinist-lite' among them.  Calvinism, as I have attempted to show numerous times on this site, was,  long before E.Y. Mullins, losing its grip on Baptists in the South.  Allow me just one recent illustration of this I read only recently.

Wayne Flynt, Professor Emeritus at Auburn University, is Editor-in-Chief of the new Online Encyclopedia of Alabama, a partnership project between the Alabama Humanities Foundation and Auburn University.  It is a leading authority on Alabama history and Baptist history in Alabama.

Published in 1998 by the University of Alabama Press, Alabama Baptists: Southern Baptists in the Heart of Dixie, written by Professor Flynt,  stands as the most recent definitive study of Baptist origins in Alabama.

Below are a few quotes from Dr. Flynt's work:

"No Biblical dispute shaped early Alabama Baptists so profoundly as Calvinism...Although Baptists were Calvinists in the general sense of that term, they modified the doctrine" (p.26)

"If Charleston, South Carolina provides the clearest ancestry for Calvinism, Sandy Creek, North Carolina, lays firmest claim to the revival tradition.  Ardent, charismatic, emotional, independent, biblicist, the Sandy Creek tradition merged elements of both Calvinism and Arminianism" (p.27)

"Among Alabama Baptists, the erudite Daniel P. Bestor and the fervent Sion Blythe best represent the Arminian strain.  Bestor brought from his native Connecticut a strict Calvinist theology, believing that '"that the elect were virtually justified from everlasting."  But gradually his theology changed as he performed the functions of minister on the Alabama frontier.  By the end of his life, one Calvinist friend accused Bestor of "verging on Arminianism" (Ibid).

"Patriarch Hosea Holcombe was a strict Calvinist, but was tolerant and broad minded toward deviation from what he considered orthodoxy.  He believed that most first-generation Alabama preachers took a 'middle-ground' view of Calvinism.  There was also much confusion in the state.  What some called "Calvinism...is denominated Arminianism with others; and a misunderstanding sometimes occurs from a different manner of expression...Holcombe did grieve over a "considerable number of ministers in Alabama" [who had evidently departed from Calvinism" (p.27-28)

"Some tensions over missions and benevolence existed between Calvinists, Arminians, and hyper-Calvinists from the formation of the first Baptist churches in Alabama" (p.32)

[After rehearsing numerous disputes that plagued Baptists in the first part of the 19th century (p.76-80), Professor Flynt concludes] "All these debates remained secondary to the dispute over Calvinism" (p.80).

Thomas F. Curtis (professor of theology and moral science at Howard College) probably did the best job of translating Calvinist issues into ideas comprehensible to the average lay person...It was true, he concluded, that God had chosen his people from all eternity.  Yet the salvation clear to God was contingent and conditional upon the elect's repentance and faith, as if God had not elected them at all.  However, awkward this straddling of Calvinism might make Baptists appear...By the 1850's, virtually all their preachers defended the same ground." (p.80)

The quotes I offer could be compounded over again.  The controversy over Calvinism in the Southern Baptist Convention is not new.  Indeed, from our beginnings we have argued about it and doubt does not exist that we will, anytime soon, lay down our differences.

One more reflection about the Building Bridges Conference.  Ed Stetzer offered a brief statistical analysis of the rising influence of Calvinism among Southern Baptists.  His presentation is telling.  According to him, a full 27% of our seminary graduates embrace 5 Point Calvinism and a whopping 67% adhere to God's grace being irresistible.  Thus, the conclusion could be that Calvinism is not only seeping into Southern Baptist Churches, the dam* could very well be busted!  And that, especially since only a stretched 10% of present Southern Baptist pastors embrace Calvinism.

I do have my doubts about Stetzer's method, however.  And, know, I haven't the faintest illusion I could possibly know statistics nor the scientific analysis of them.  I can, however, read just like the next person.  My first question would be to Stetzer why would he combine categories so distant in degree to make his claim for both the 27% of graduates being 5 Point Calvinists and 67% embracing irresistible grace? 

The way I take it, Stetzer lumps those who 'strongly agree" with 5 Point Calvinism into those who "somewhat agree" with 5 Point Calvinism.  But why is this a valid combination?  Were I to ask someone do you 'strongly agree' with justification by faith alone and they responded "I somewhat agree with justification by faith alone" I'd wonder immediately what they were talking about. 

Similarly, if someone said he/she 'somewhat agreed' with baptism by immersion or the Trinity or the Resurrection, my response would not be conclusive.  I'd want to know more...a heck of a lot more.  Nor am I the only one who would ask such a question or draw entirely different conclusions--even shocking conclusions--from the data.

My hope is that we will--both Calvinist and NonCalvinist--fulfill the Great Commission our Lord gave us.  I also hope we can do so without killing each other in the process.

With that, I am...

Peter

*Thanks to a meticulous reading by 'ji', I fortunately could edit the "X-rated" cousin of the word "dam" out of my post;  not in time, unhappily, to miss the feedreader.  So, if you've got that version and you're not so fond of my writings here, you have a jewell to be sure.  I'm now on record 'cursing'.  To all my faithful readers, my deepest apologies... 

Comments

[ji]

Peter,

great post - we are definitely in agreement here. one question - the damn is about to burst or the dam? Thinking one thing and typing another perhaps :)

[volfan007]

peter,

it's extreme calvinists like timmy brister that really turn some non-five pointers off, and turns some non-calvinists into anti-calvinists. the quote you gave from him in your post, and other comments by him at other places are the prime example of why some people in the sbc are turned off to the five point crowd altogether.

as always, peter, you are insightful and very accurate. thanks.

david

[Chris]

Peter,

Thanks for your opined analysis of the conference. It is always good to hear the collective voices. Having studied theology with Dr. Akin, I know he has always seen ground for cooperation. This was demonstrated remarkably by his serving at SBTS. While I am persuaded by my own personal study and practical ministry to be more to the Calvinistic (I prefer the whole of the reformation not just Calvin), I do see that indeed cooperation for ministry is a must. I kind of liken it to me and my red-headed brother(s), Different hair color but the same DNA. I like you am Baptist by conviction, and a Biblicist by devotion, training, study and desire. As you state here, what is important is that we do the work God gave us-Proclaiming the gospel and calling all to repentance. I stated on a previous post, it is imperative to all shades of Baptist to rally around what we can agree on, namely,
1. God's Idea- Salvation.
2. Holy Spirit's Work- Regeneration.
3. Man's Christ submitted life- Demonstration.
Though we each might define these differently, I don’t think the nuances are as important as the big picture. That is unless, some preach easy-believism. But to me this is a different subject altogether, regardless at how one attempt to link it to a system of soteriology. By the way, I don’t color my hair and neither do my brothers!

[Chris]

Biblicist also in Practice. I might add, repentant practice too.

[Tom]

Peter,

Interesting post. I agree with most of it. I wish I could have attended the conference but I have listened to all the presentations online. Some were helpful and some were not.

I started studying Calvinism after the 2006 Pastor's Conference. I started out trying to refute Calvinism and have ended up embracing it. Having said that, I no longer think it has to be a divisive issue although I think it has to potential to be very divisive.

I personally think that theology matters but that if we take it too far we end up in legalism (from either side) and that is not where we need to be. I agree with your statement that we must strive to fulfill the great commission. Anything short of that and we are being disobedient to the direct command of God.

[peterlumpkins]

ji,

To you, my friend, I owe a degt of gratitude. Thank you both for your encouragement and also for the 'heads-up' on my unfortunate use of the wrong 'dam'...

David,

We find ourselves in much agreement and for that I am glad. Nor am I ever able to overlook the generous things you have to say. Thank you. Grace...

Chris,

You words demonstrate wisdom beyond your years and I am glad to know you personally. A level head and clean heart God will never despise. Let us committ together we shall strive for both, all for Him, of course...

Tom,

You are welcome here. And, though we differ, I sense your obvious desire to converse on a level beyond the sometimes normal arena of push and shove.

I peeked at your site and commend it to others who possess kindred spirit.

Grace. With that, I am...

Peter

[Steve]

Good words folks.
Steve

[jim champion]

Peter

I am the Ji that posted earlier - you are not the only one that is seemingly not able to type today!

Jim Chamnpion

[Robin Foster]

Peter

You anti-Calvinist bigot!

Okay, I am sorry for that. The comments were too nice and I thought I would stir things up a bit. :-)

It seems to me that both Calvinist and non-Calvinists have some pretty good size pride chips on their shoulders.

I still feel the conference was a good thing and I don't believe Dr. Mohler is trying to make the SBC into his Calvinistic image.

Concerning the percentages, I have no answer other than if someone graduates from Southern they have gotten a great education. They are only second to SWBTS. :-)

As Dr. Patterson said, we need each other to overcome the mistakes of the early General and Particular Baptists. We also need to make sure we don't fall into prideful arrogance when we chastise our brother.

God Bless

Bro. Robin

P.S. I really don't think you are an anti-Calvinist bigot. Really, I don't.

[peter lumpkins]

Robin,

Thanks for leaving a little footprint. I agree that anytime Christian charity is pursued in expressing our views, the kingdom of hell is delivered an eviction notice.

I also agree that Southern students gain a great education. No question. Though, with Dr. Mohler's vocal role as well as the faculty he has assembled at Southern, it's more than arguable his goals polish SBs to a more brilliant reformed luster.

No doubt that balance is decidedly a key aspect for our future success. Grace, my Brother Robin.

With that, I am...

Peter

[Scott Gordon]

Robin,

HEY, that's my line! Remember, I'm one of those nasty 5-pt-ers! Problem is...I'M NOT HYPER!!! (except when people call 5-ers hyper!)

Peter,

I'm not saying that you or anyone else here does that. I encountered one of 'those' chipped-shouldered no0n-calvinists over at SBCToday recently. Problem is, he didn't want to talk (bummer.). I appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue in a calm and rational and diplomatic way. It's kinda like discussing eschatology...I'm, by definition, post-trib (yeah, yeah). BUT, I won't mind anyone saying "I told you so as we fly through the air during a pre-trib rapture
:-)

It's time we respect one another (even if you are wrong ;-) )!

SOLA GRATIA!

[Scott Gordon]

TO ALL,

Please forgive the typos! Typing in the dark is a definite challenge!

[peter lumpkins]

Scott,

Thanks. I honestly attempt to be cordial. Sometimes, as do you, I find certain folk a bit testy but it's usually when I'm standing on their holy ground. Here, things are much more calm except when I make a critical evaluation of Founders. I am surprised that I've not been challenged by a spunky young zealot over this present post where once I picked a bit at Dr. Ascol's better judgment.

Anyways, you are both welcome, Scott, and invited to cast your net in this pond anytime you sense you can make a contribution including but not limited to our needed correction.

Grace. With that, I am...

Peter

[Byroniac]

I only wish I had attended the conference, so I could feel justified in forming opinions (though truthfully that's never stopped me before). I suppose I will have to listen to the Lifeway audio as soon as possible, so I can have some kind of informed judgment on it. The only problem is, there are only about 20,000 sermons, seminars, and podcasts I should have listened to already to be caught up today and know everything that's going on. I feel like the message I read on a poster once, "God put me on earth to accomplish a number of things. Right now, I'm so far behind I will never die!"

[Scott Gordon]

Peter,

Thank you for your gracious diplomacy and benevolence!

I appreciate you greatly.

SOLA GRATIA!

[peter lumpkins]

Scott,

Thanks my brother. Have a great weekend and a faith-filled Lord's Day. With that, I am...

Peter