« The Great Commission Resurgence: Biblical Mandate or Baptist Movement?: Part I | Main | HyperCalvinism vs. "Functional" HyperCalvinism »

2008.06.25

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Walt Sobchak

Hi Peter,

Are you advocating for E.Y. Mullins theology? If you are, you may want to check with the esteemed Dr. Malcolm Yarnell first, I'm not sure that Mullins is a Southern Baptist you want to follow methodologically. If nothing else, you seem to be sympathetic with Mullins based upon this post.

Should we advocate for the sovereignty of man's choice in our evangelistic methodology? You seem to imply that Thomas Nettles is wrong when he advocates the sovereignty of God over the sovereignty of man's choice for our evangelistic methodology. If so, they you're flirting with open theist.

Peter, just beware of where these implications may lead you.

Grace & Peace,
Walt

peter lumpkins

Walt,

I am unsure to what you are referring on this particular post, friend. If you want to check out my views of Mullins, I suggest you search the site. I have a post or two up.

As for checking with anyone before I pen something, that's rare, you need to know; unless, of course, it's to check on factual matters.

Nor does a rejection of Nettles' extra-biblical view of God's sovereignty entail the ridiculous assertion of somehow making man sovereign. A simple false dichotomy, I'd say they call it

Peace today. With that, I am...

Peter

selahV

Peter: great post sounds so trite when commending this post. It speaks far more of your heart and mind than most folks may interpret. I especially like: "And Secondly, we should take this language of "The Great Commission Resurgence" as biblical mandate not as Baptist movement. Some are indeed calling 'The Great Commission Resurgence" a movement within the Southern Baptist Convention."

Indeed, who are the "some" who are calling the GCR a "movement"? And if it is a "movement", from where are we moving and to where do "some" want us to move? I do wonder. I for one, think your thoughts on this subject have been quite compelling and seek to give clarity to yet another SBC buzz-phrase. Thanks. selahV

volfan007

Peter,

I wish that you knew just how much I enjoy reading your blog. I learn from it, and I'm encouraged from it, and it helps me understand where some people are coming from in their beliefs and teachings and statements. Thanks.

David

D.R. Randle

Peter,

Lately I have been focusing on teaching my new congregation about the entirety of the Gospel message - namely that Jesus Christ came to earth and lived a perfectly obedient life and died on the cross as a substitute for us, taking upon Himself the wrath of God and imputing to us His perfect life by grace alone through faith alone, being for all people everywhere, the only means of dealing with sin and securing eternal life.

Now, that's the Gospel, plain and simply. And I am sure you would agree. The problem is that the only consistent place where I find this Gospel pronounced clearly and completely (where penal substitutionary atonement is clearly outlined and defended and where the imputation of Christ's righteousness is rightly discussed) is in the writings of Calvinists (both dead and alive).

Now, that's not to say that there are no non-Calvinists who believe in penal substitution and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, but I do think it suggests that the most ardent defenders of these Orthodox elements of the Gospel are the Calvinists. Further, I think SBC Calvinists tend to be much more theologically minded than the typical Southern Baptist.

And all this leads me to my conclusion. We need the Calvinists in the SBC to remind us to sometimes "be focused more on clarifying who [we] are theologically rather than what [we] do evangelistically." Calvinists have always been better at the role of "theological gatekeepers" to bring us back to those points of penal substitution, the imputation of Christ's righteousness, and the belief that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone (not to mention Sola Scriptura and Soli Deo Gloria). Thus, we, as Southern Baptists, should work together and encourage Calvinists in the SBC, not fight them as if they were apart of a movement from Satan. At this time in history when postmodernism, egalitarianism, universalism, pluralism, open theism, and ever other evil-ism threatens us, we need theological gatekeepers to help us hold on to the Gospel in the midst of our evangelism. Thus, I think you should quit worrying about the ""The Calvinist Resurgence" morphing into "The Great Commission Resurgence" and instead get on board with what God is doing in renewing our theological vigor AND evangelistic zeal.

peter lumpkins

SelahV,

Thank you for your encouragement and readership. I delight that, in some ways others may not gain, a page of my heart is on display for your to read...

David, my Brother,

I am glad I can call you a fried and fellow sojourner in Christ. Your words are humbling to me...

D.R.

I am glad you logged on. I do not at all disagree with some of what you said since some of my favorite authors I've been blessed to read through the years have been Calvinists.

Nor do I disagree that Calvinists have been on the frontlines of the battle for the substitutionary at-one-ment of Christ--albeit wrongly focused on an unscriptural particularity as to its gracious sufficiency.

I do doubt, however, that Calvinists make the best 'gatekeepers' to our theological heritage, for many reasons, not the least of which stands one I just mentioned.

Also, I am glad my own view is nothing like what you suggest about the fictitious foe you mentioned: "Southern Baptists, should work together and encourage Calvinists in the SBC, not fight them as if they were apart of a movement from Satan" (italics mine). Nonetheless why you particularly chose to vent such here is baffling to me.

Finally, D.R., you possess every freedom--Note we here embrace a healthy view of human freedom--to "think [I] should quit worrying about the ""The Calvinist Resurgence" morphing into "The Great Commission Resurgence" and instead get on board with what God is doing in renewing our theological vigor AND evangelistic zeal."

Know, though, if you don't mind, I would very much enjoy the same freedom to think for myself.

Grace to all of you. With that, I am...

Peter

Byron

Peter:

I am a "three-pointer" in that I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection. Yes, I am a Calvinist, and wouldn't mind if the entire SBC became Calvinist. But I do not think belief in Calvinism is required to get the Gospel right, or in order to have fellowship, for that matter. However, to me the Calvinists are the most consistent in their understanding and explanation of the Sovereignty of God, proper theology, and in holy reverence for God in all things. But worshiping God rightly, with the proper reverence, and having a love for everything that is God's are all the inheritance of every true believer, not just Calvinists. Of course, I am more than a bit biased, but I see no reason to fear the Founders, the resurgence of Calvinism, or the future of the SBC. The Lord is in charge.

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: I guess I am not understanding what exactly your problem is with anything to do with the Great Commission. And yes, I do believe we as Southern Baptists need to reclaim the gospel which means that we are righteous not because of what we do but because of what Christ did on the Cross. Up until 2 years ago it was replaced by secular politics, a social gospel, and other things that left Christ out of the picture in my opinion.

I welcome anything that will bring repentance and a focus on the goal of winning people to Christ. It does seem by Convention messengers you are in the minority on this. I want to know why? Why are you suspect of even this. I don't get it.

peter lumpkins

Byron,

My brother, as far as I am concerned, the SBC can be filled with Calvinists of your temperament. I mean that. You know what you believe and do not insist others believe it with you, else they are sub-Christian. Grace...

Debbie,

If what I've written thus far gives you no idea, then just consider me too kooky to be clear and don't worry about it. Perhaps most others will feel the same.

With that, I am...

Peter

volfan007

Debbie,


When you said this..."Up until 2 years ago it was replaced by secular politics, a social gospel, and other things that left Christ out of the picture in my opinion." What in the world are you talking about?

David

The comments to this entry are closed.