« Tom Ascol: "I have no interest in participating in any such disunity" by Peter Lumpkins | Main | Dr. Jerry Vines discusses his signing the recent statement of faith: "It's time to discuss the elephant in the room" »



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

peter lumpkins


Precisely. All the comments are gone which were logged through DISQUS. I'll check for a way to import them back in. However, if you want your comments, make sure you keep your DISQUS account going.

With that, I am...

cb scott

That is a good thing you Georgia ridge-runner. I have been trying to comment here for several days of late and in recent weeks and without any success. You have missed some major help and highly intellectual input due to my absence because of your lacking in technological savvy.




Peter, you have done a good thing today. :)


Peter, I hope you're getting some posts together about the vitriolic attacks against traditionalists.

Poor Calvinists don't realize that their response has only served to prove what traditionalist have known. Calvinists have no respect nor do they want unity with anyone who is not Calvinist.

The campaign to declare that SBC Seminariy Presidents, former SBC Presidents, Theology Professors and all the signors of the statement of belief are too stupid to know what they've signed or just plain heretics proves that Calvinists want nothing less than a takeover of the SBC. If you truly believe traditinalists are idiots or worse heretics than a takeover is absolutely the only thing to do.

Unity for Calvinists simply means shut up, send your money and do not question those who are superior to you.


Brother Peter - I can't offer CB's highly intellectual input, but pleased to see you ditch DISQUS to allow this ole man's occasional penetrating insight without having to jump through tech hoops. The only thing I will miss about the DISQUS platform is the reply thread to particular comments.


Peter, where are you? Over at SBC Pravda the YRR Punks are so desparate to attack anyone who is not a Calvinist that they have now fallen into the trap of denying the definition of Semi Pelagian espoused by Monergism. YRR are oh so smart - they're even smarter than the ol Calvinist at Monergism! (Of course they're not - what' going on at SBC Pravda is the evidence of how the YRR believes themselves superior to all who are not Calvinists and will attack the peasants with vitrolic cries of heresy!)

Differences between Semi-Pelagianism and Arminian Beliefs

by John Hendryx
While not denying the necessity of Grace for salvation, Semi-Pelagianism maintains that the first steps towards the Christian life are ordinarily taken by the human will and that Grace supervened only later.


signed or just plain heretics proves that Calvinists want nothing less than a takeover of the SBC. If you truly believe traditinalists are idiots or worse heretics than a takeover is absolutely the only thing to do."
"The campaign to declare that SBC Seminariy Presidents, former SBC Presidents, Theology Professors and all the signors of the statement of belief are too stupid to know what they've ..."

Mary, It has been a bit amusing yet sad to watch. I am certainly glad a debate is going on at SBCToday where non Calvinists comments are not deleted. Or the YRR, very arrogant and mean, statements are not deleted to protect the movement..... like they are on other blogs.

The charge of "it leans toward semi pelagianism" is really a non sequitur. They are heretic hunting using their newly aquired seminary educations or listening to Mars Hill teachers on tracking down Pelagianism.

Any such statements of belief "can lean toward something". What they are really saying is "clean it up and make it lean toward our brand of Calvinism". (Let's face it they are not really Calvinists, nor were the Founders really Calvinists. There were "Calvinistic", perhaps)

But my all time favorite claim by a YRR is that Luther was a Calvinist! Right. Luther studied the Institutes? Okaaaay. This is how interchangable the word "Calvin" is with Gospel. I mean common sense is definitely not a YRR trait.

Another lacking in common sense tactic: If they say something is semi Pelgianism then we must prove them wrong. Where on earth did they learn these debate tactics? Alinsky? Such an entitlement mentality. It has been pointed out ad nauseum but it is never good enough. They really believe they get to define it. And that is where we have really messed up, I think. They really do have an entitlement mentality.

Notice how they always make the rules or provide the premise we are to interact from. That is a major problem in this whole debate. People need to get over them calling us names of famous heretics. They are going to do it anyway because they have been trained that way. Just give them more rope.

I must tell you I am having flashbacks from my days of debating liberals on politics. They always tried to set the premise and frame the debate. And you had to "prove" your position with THIER definitions. But it is impossible to do that when you don't even agree on foundational issues or definitions. So they trot out the heretic charge which the older/wiser Calvinists are trying to put a stop to because it will backfire eventually. Since these young minds were indoctrinated in these tactcis by following guys like Driscoll and listening to Mohler at GC, now they have to live with the natural consequences of training them to think only they have the real truth. Anyone else starting to see how easy it became to justify burning heretics and are glad that it is illegal now?

Has anyone seen any response from Al Mohler? That guy has 9 lives and will walk away from this one to help CJ Mahaney plant his new "shepherding cult" church in Louisville "near the seminary". After all it usually goes something like this when he is talking to the SBC (and not the GC or T4G): Prove Ezell is a Calvinist.

And we all know Calvinism really has nothing to do with it in the long run. I think Todd Littleton had it totally right in a comment over at Voices. It is really about power and who is going to be our Pope.

These comments are just my opinion which means basically nothing! :o)


Lydia, since you're not a Calvinist you must by default be a heretic or just too dumb to be on the internet. :)

Calvinists own all definitions. Calvinists own all labels. Calvinists own all church history. If we weren't so dumb we'd be Calvinists! Oh and my favorite Calvinists get the right to whine and moan about being misrepresented and caricutured all the while they misrepresent and caricuture the other side!

Just a quick google search on semi pelegianism shows that the definition the YRR are pushing is not anything close to what has been accepted up to this point. I wonder if the Calvinists will try the liberal trick of changing the wikepedia definition to fit the definition they want today?

I just had this conversation with my husband today - the Calvinists play all the Alinsky games of the liberals - as you pointed out - only they get to decide what the definition of "is" is. And keep attacking, attacking, attacking and maybe you can silence your opposition - Fear mongering. You don't want to be a heretic do you? So of course it's better to side with the Calvinists. Why do you want disunity? the Calvinists have never ever done anything wrong! They're just heretics and liars!

I think too, there is a problem that the YRR are so indoctrinated into the cult that they cannot think outside the Calvinist box so when they read a document like the Traditionalist document they immediately apply all the presuppositions they've been taught - if it ain't Calvinism then it must be man centered gospel, heresy, not historical - just plain dumb. You notice when the YRR try to paraphrase the document they always fall back on the caricutures and act as if what they wrote is anything remotely like what the document says.

Dave Miller better start riding herd quickly because SBC Pravda is exhibit one that all the claims by Traditionalist are absolutely spot on. Calvinists have no respect for anyone not Calvinist and how on earth could there be unity if we're all a bunch of heretics? Thus we all need to be reformed.


The Calvinists overlords have decided to apply the scarlet H and now are going to decide if those they've chosen to label as heretics should be allowed in the SBC. I'm sure Paige Patterson and Jerry Vines are really concerned about being kicked out of the SBC. Wasn't there a claim that the Calvinists didn't want to take over the SBC?

From SBC Pravda:

"But it doesn’t matter if you disagree, the label still fits. If you believe a human being is able to respond to the gospel without God first overcoming our inability, you are semi-Pelagian. Cut and dry, that is it, case closed. Nothing more needs be said. Next question: is there room for semi-Pelagianism in the SBC?"


After reading the threads over at just Today and Voices, I really have to wonder if the current BFM wouldn't have been treated to the same tactics if written today and if Mohler had not been on the committee?


Lydia, the BFM that Al Mohler would push through today would be purely Calvinist.

As you can see in that quote from SBC Pravda, if you don't accept Calvinism you are semi-pelegian. And then you have Roger Olsen chiming in from the other side proclaiming that is you don't accept Arminianism or Calvinism than you must be semi-pelegian. Our betters have declared what our choices are and any rejecting what the Calvinists declare makes us heretics.

I think it's interesting that over at SBC Pravda they were ranting about how no one was dealing with their arguments but over at SBC Today they are dealing with their arguments and the ranters are no where to be found. At SBC Pravda the YRR can declare something is so and POOF it's so. Not so much at SBC Today. Commenters at SBC Today have already destroyed their arguments.

do the the YRR really think that what the Traditionalist statement is saying is a suprise to Al Mohler and Tom Ascol? Do they really think that someone like Mohler and Ascol didn't know what Patterson and Vines et al believed? And now you have YRR openly discussing whether there is room in the SBC for men like Patterson and Vines? I'm thinking Pope Al's gonna have to make a statement real quick abou how Jerry Vines and Paige Patterson et al are his brothers in Christ and they are not semi-pelegian or heretics. This should get real interesting.



Wow, Mohler is really doing the two step. He certainly does not want to alienate his base so he throws them a bone but warns of tribalism.

But check this unbelievable statement out:

"That leads me to make another qualification. I do not believe that those most problematic statements truly reflect the beliefs of many who signed this document. I know many of these men very well, and I know them to be doctrinally careful and theologically discerning. Some of these very men have served most boldly in the defense of the faith, and they have taught me much. We should be honored by the privilege of a serious theological conversation with one another, and we will all speak more carefully when we are respectfully questioned by those with whom we disagree."

So some of the people who signed the document, according to Al, do not really believe parts of the document. WOW! Al knows them better than they know themselves. He must really have some magical powers! Special anointing?

Maybe Al has gone off the deep end and is drunk with power. Maybe he knows no matter what he does the SBTS Trustees will back him. What a nerve! And we pay him to insult us!

peter lumpkins

Mary & Lydia,

Thanks for keeping the conversation going. Of all times to be incapacitated so that I cannot respond! Yet pastoral duty beckons me and I must show.

Know I have not been without thought on the matter. The persistent criticism of "Semi-Pelagianism" including not only insinuations from some uninformed bloggers but also from informed men like Olson and Mohler I intend to address. Of course, Founders Ministries is going to find an Arminianian heretic behind every bush and under every rock ;^). Indeed they also recruit advocates for their position from the most unlikely places (i.e. W.A. Criswell).

Even so, I should be able to put something up by Thursday.


With that, I am...

peter lumpkins


Thanks for the kudos on comments. I don't think I'm ever going to mess with them again. Just way too much hassle.

With that, I am...


As suspected, Mohler handled this situation with grace and charity towards both sides (especially to those tibalists who display little grace). Repentance is a must.


Another thing that's being exposed here is the pure hypocrisy of Calvinists. Constantly Calvinists are complaining of being caricutured and accused of things they are not guilty, but here you see these rapid militant Calvinists who are declaring people heretics by calling them semi-pelegian and than when asked not to call names boldly proclaiming that they are not going to stop their caricutures and name calling, but will continue to name call because being Calvinists that makes them superior and thus gives them the authority to name call. Then they just gloss over the fact that a brother in Christ has asked to not be called a heretic and declare that it's time to discuss whether there's room in the SBC for such heretics thus proving exactly who it is in the SBC that wants to start kicking people out. So never again can a Calvinist complain about being misrepresented and misunderstood. All anyone has to do is see how nasty the Calvinists actually are in those threads over at SBC Pravda to see why traditionalists have problems with Calvinists in the SBC. If you don't accept Calvinism than you must be a heretic and the Calvinists need to figure out how to get rid of the heretics in the SBC.

Lydia, Al Mohler has to deal with the monster he's created in the YRR. He needs them still politically, but he cannot be happy that the YRR are declaring heresy and talkin about whether those who've signed the statement should be allowed in the SBC. The thread over at B21 was interesting as B21 wants to pretend they like someone like Paige Patterson and have invited him to whatever it is they do at the Convention - some people are not happy with them. This traditionalist statement just exposes what nonCalvinists have known for some time - it's the Calvinists who really don't like us and do not want unity at all because we are all just too dumb and heretical if we're not Calvinist.


I wonder if Ascol is going to repent and apologize for calling this tradtionalist statement divisive and claiming it will only lead to disunity when Mohler has affirmed the right of traditionalist to organize? Mohler's statement where he gives permission to nonCalvinists to unite is very telling. Thank you Pope Al for granting permission to the peasants to talk amongst themselves. Now will the YRR quit their namecalling and abuse now that the Pope in Louisville has issued his decree?


Mike, Do you seriously think it is charitable for Mohler to tell learned colleagues they don't really believe what they signed? Did you not see that little zinger embedded in the whole statement

I find that incredibly arrogant for an SBC employee to say about his colleagues. And don't ever forget. He is an "employee".

It never ceases to amaze me the mass delusion of some toward ACTUAL words in the Calvinist camp. It is as if they cannot see/hear the actual words. This was pretty much the response from that side to his GC video where he insulted 80% of the people who help pay his salary.


Lydia, Mohler's wink wink message to his tribe is "stop calling them heretics, just call them stupid."

And what a joke that the man who allows only 4 and 5 point Calvinists on staff at Southern keeps pushing the mantra "BFM, BFM, BFM" The BFM is a shiney object to distract from the discimination of Traditionalists that is occuring with the full resources of the SBC.

peter lumpkins


Repentance for what?

With that, I am...


Whew! Dr. Mohler's tripe about tribe was convicting (not!). I'm sure his troops were waiting for the general to speak and he has delivered "Don't worry ... I'm still here ... I'll take care of it."


I found him using "tribal" a bit amusing since that is the word Driscoll uses all the time in an opposite manner. Sending a message to the angry YRR to cool it, perhaps?

Also, I agree with Mary, the thread at Baptist 21 was very telling. The YRR rabid ones are turning on their own. See the average YRR guy views unity as agreeing with them. Mohler is smarter than that and has always played both sides. That is who he is. So now it is coming to a head. Let's see if the YRR guys obey their leader.

I must admit, I have never really viewed this entire issue as Calvinism vs. Traditional. I have viewed it as simple power politics. I guess I live too close to Mohlerworld. Here is a guy who was made President of SBTS at age 33. He has been called the smartest guy in the room for years. People really believe that. Time mag listed him as up and coming evangelical years back. I mean he has basked in this world for a long time. He believes it about himself. But he is very good at putting on the humble veneer while at the same time he insults his colleagues and 80% of Baptists on the GC video.

I mean this is a man who gave a statement to the secular press after the wikileaks docs came out and CJ had to step down. He praised CJ and trashed the bloggers. SGM survivors is full of information about protecting molesters, cultic teaching, etc, etc, in a shepherding cult. Mohler praised it all. He agrees with it. He was instrumental in rehabing CJ to the evangelical world. I do not think many people are taking into consideration what is really going on. Mahaney is moving to Louisville now to plant a church "near the seminary". Where has Mohler been on Driscoll and sodomy? He is a culture warrior, so where has he been? Does he approve going from 40 voting elders to 3 as a model for ACts 29 churches we fund?

He has a lot of explaining to do. Let's see if the Trustees and leaders of the SBC will man up and hold him accountable for once. My guess is that they are so in awe of him they would never question him.


Lydia writes "Sending a message to the angry YRR to cool it, perhaps?"

The New Calvinism movement has been a strange marriage of old guard Calvinists and the YRR. But if the revolution is to succeed, the old leaders need the energy of youth. While they have other heroes of the faith (Piper, Keller, Driscoll, etc.), the YRR in SBC ranks still respect Dr. Mohler ... for the time being. YRR aggression has put the movement at risk; thus, the subliminal message to cool it.

(P.S. This thread has taken on a life of its own which has nothing to do with DISQUS vs. TYPEPAD, but I suspect that Peter is listening in and will address "Al Speaks" soon)


"Repentance from what?"

Come on Peter, you have read the comments in your blog. You have also read many of the YRR statements. Both sides are a cesspool of venom. If you don't believe me. Wait a few hours and read the comments that arise as a result of this post.

peter lumpkins


Making generic criticisms like you've done counts exactly zero in this conversation. Either be specific or drop the point. Thanks.

With that, I am...


"Making generic criticisms like you've done counts exactly zero in this conversation. Either be specific or drop the point."
Really Peter? Generic criticisms? I thought that I was pretty specific. Referring to the maturity of the conversations coming from both camps as a cesspool is pretty specific. Your fan club does no better than the fan club of the Driscolls etc... Snide, sarcastic, condescending remarks against fellow brothers and sisters in Christ are nothing less than wickedness. You know it and your followers know it. Need I be more specific?
Its almost sadly comical to see both camps screaming that the other has dust in their eyes when they don't even realize that there is a railroad tie jutting from both of their own sockets.
So yes, I say repentance!


"Your fan club does no better than the fan club of the Driscolls etc... Snide, sarcastic, condescending remarks against fellow brothers and sisters in Christ are nothing less than wickedness. You know it and your followers know it. Need I be more specific?

Oh dear. He thinks I am a "fan" of Peter's. Gee, I certainly have disagreed 'vehemetly' I might add, over the years on some finer points.... one being Caner.

Not to disparage Peter but he does not arbitrarily delete me like SBCPravda does. And what is so frustrating is another commenter makes the exact same point, using worse tone and not deleted! I was once deleted for answering a question as "Yes Comrade".

Recently Rick Patrick addressed someone as "comrade".

Maybe it is a gender thing? Women cannot say "comrade"? It is unladylike?
Pravda is so inconsistent and (I have a sneaky suspicion Setzer is advising) arbitrary in deleting it is pitiful to some like me, Howell, Harriet and others, it is simply not worth the effort. So that is basically the extent of my fandom. If I don't agree, I say so like I did with Casey's comment. Peter can moderate me if he wants as it is his living room that I am entering. I am a big girl.

But a "fan"? Like Driscoll fans? I have never listened to a Peter sermon or bought a Peter book. If all Driscoll "fans" were like me, Driscoll would be dried up and broke. :o)

BTW: Mike your comment sounded a bit like a cesspool so welcome! (wink)

And perhaps the real tithers of the SBC (not the mega's) will enjoy reading the YRR comments on the blogs so much they will want to plant more Calvinist churches. Who knows.


Lydia its teling that you responded to my comment when your name was not mentioned... especially in the manner that did.


You what's funny about someone like Mike is that he claims that "both" sides are a cess pool and yet he doesn't actually go to both sides and call them names? Did I miss his chiding over at Pravda? Usually when a commenter claiming both sides are a cess pool are here at Peter's place it's just someone who wants to call "side" names.

Lydia, it's pretty clear at Pravda that Calvinist are held to different standards than the Traditionalist and only women who are Calvinists are allowed to post over there. Heaven forbid you're a woman who has caught one of Pravda's YRR in some inconsistentcy that he can't deal with!


"Lydia its teling that you responded to my comment when your name was not mentioned... especially in the manner that did."

What does it tell you, Mike? That I am not one of Peter's "fans" you mentioned in your comment? You wanted to have a private convo with Peter about his alleged fans here?


Les Prouty


How are you? I always enjoy reading your and others' comments over here. Yoy said,

"Lydia, it's pretty clear at Pravda that Calvinist are held to different standards than the Traditionalist and only women who are Calvinists are allowed to post over there. Heaven forbid you're a woman who has caught one of Pravda's YRR in some inconsistentcy that he can't deal with!"

Why don't you, and Lydia since she is also a woman and...well I don't know if Lydia is a Calvinist, go over to SBC Voices and join in? Give it a try? I'm sure that if you have something to contribute there to the conversation you'll be allowed.


Umm, no Les, thanks for the invitation. Lydia (not a Calvinist but a mutualist which makes her even less welcome than someone like me who is simply a heretical traditionalist) and I would not be welcomed. There are different standards at Pravda for men and women, Calvinists and Traditinalist.

I know Lydia tried for quite some time to post over there but was attacked unmercifully by many of the YRR because they couldn't deal with her logic. There is a very misogynistic feel to Pravda. And you know since it's Pravda they do tend to control the conversation to keep the YRR from looking bad.

I think if you looked critically at how some people like Rick and Volfan are treated over there you can see why us wimmins would not be comfortable. Now I can give as good as take, but a woman that "gives" it back over there will get deleted and banned. I've watched women try getting in the sand box with them.

I'll just stay over here with Peter where nonsense such as "I am going to delcare you a heretic and call you a heretic despite you asking me not to, but you better stop "lying" and caricuturing about what Calvinists think" nonsense is not gonna fly.


And seriously, Les, I don't want to have anything to do with people who promote ideas such as this current post at Pravda:

"At the same time, there is no place where violence is more ugly. To our shame, cold shoulders, verbal accusations, and even fistfights are not uncommon among the people of God. Such provocations are not contained to the local church, either. They also take place in much larger and more public venues, as is the case with the recent document brought forward by Eric Hankins et al—“A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation"

Comparing the Traditionalist Statement to Violence in Israel? Seriously! What the Calvinists at Pravda continue to do is prove everything that has been said about them. These are nasty hateful people. Calvinists don't want unity, they want everyone who doesn't agree with them to sit down and shut up. How offensive is it that a blog claiming to be SBC "VOICES" prints something this vitrolic and hateful?

Les Prouty


I don't know. I've seen plenty of disagree,ent over there. Now it is not for the faint of heart for sure. Volfan is right back in there and has been treated very fairly overall.

Look, SBC Today has a few people over there calling Calvinists heretics. He was challenged but not mistreated. And his posts still stand today.

But, if you go there, perhaps most other places than here, and all you or someone does is refer to the host as Pravda and persistently attack Driscoll and Mahaney and etc.,mwhatever the topic is, well that's probably not going to go too far.

Besides, how can you tell who the New Calvinists are anyway? I'm a Calvinist,mi dislike the document and it's preamble and don't like the name Traditionalist. But I hardly qualify to ba called a New Calvinist.


Les, let's just cut to the chase and say that when people are calling the statement divisive because of the premble it's because they claim Traditionalists are liars. We've been called liars for years now and that's pretty much what all this "divisive" talk is about. Calvinists claim that no Calvinists anywhere has ever done anything wrong and you are a liar if you state differently.

Secondly, let's look at exactly how this conversations goes shall we?

Traditionalist: Here's my experience with Calvinists, here's what I believe Calvinists are saying, and here's what I think.

Calvinists: LIAR LIAR pants on fire. That's not true. No Calvinist has ever done anything wrong eveh! You're an idiot who doesn't understand Calvinism. If you understood it you'd be a Calvinist.

Traditionalist: Here's what I beleive the Bible teaches about the doctrine of Salvation.

Calvinists: Heretic! You're not just an idiot who doesn't understand Calvinism you're a flaming heretic and now we have to decide whether you can be in the SBC with us.

Traditionalist: Please don't call me a heretic. I don't beleive that to be true because of this, this and this.

Calvinists: You are a heretic! Look at all the Calvinists who disagree with you. That proves you're a heretic!

Tradtionalist: Please stop calling me names. You claim that I've misrepresented you and that upsets you, but you are now calling me a heretic.

Calvinists: Because you were wrong about Calvinism and I know what heresy is when I see it. Walks like duck....

Traditionalist: I didn't call you names. I simply shared what my experience is and what I believe are the logical conclusions to your belief.

Calvinists: I don't care what you think heretic. Shut up about Calvinism and get out of the SBC with your heresy.

Tradtionalist: Don't you see the double standard with you complaining about what the premble states and you calling me a heretic when I say I'm not.

Calvinists: Calvinists are the only ones who know anything. Not only do you not know anything about Calvinism you don't know anything heresy. Because I'm right there is not a double standard. I can claim you believe something you say you don't and I can label you in a way you don't agree with because only Calvinists matter. Because the FOUNDERS that's why!

How is the Founders movement not divisive? The movement that proclaims it wants to reform the SBC? The movement that wants to restore the "lost" gospel? How is it not divisive that Tom Nettles is on the Board of Directors of the Founders Movement? How is it not divisive that for thirty years the Founders have held conferences with regard to how to reform the SBC? How is it not divisive that there are a group of "Founders friendly churches?" I can could on and on about all the ways the Calvinist have organized and pushed to reform the SBC. But that's not divisive? Of course when they speak about what those who don't embrace DOG believe they are always so kind and cuddly. Being Calvinits and being right in everything means never having to say you're sorry.

Finally, Les, after seeing your attaboy for the divisive hateful post at Pravda "this document is the equivilant of the violence in Israel" you are just not somebody I want to know. Go hang out with the other hateful vitriolic Calvinists because I'm not playing this game with you anymore.

Les Prouty


Well. Thanks for such a grace filled response to me.

May " The LORD bless you and keep you;
the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;

the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.
(Numbers 6:24-25; Numbers 6:26 ESV)



I must be clear when I respond. I know that the written word does not always communicate intent. You must know that I am not following the tone of this blog (at least the tone of it against Calvinism). I write this with respect and honor. I intend no harm. You can take that and tear it to shreds or you can take it for what it is.

Mary I have no idea what you are talking about. What in the world is Prvada? Also, I said that the immature conversations taking place from "both" sides are a cess pool.

Mike, "claims that "both" sides are a cess pool and yet he doesn't actually go to both sides and call them names?"
Why would I want to call you names? Why would I want to call those from my "side" names? How does that make God look great? I back godly men (and women) who seek to honor God with all their beings, Arminians or Calvinists (For example, Jerry Vines, David Platt, Billy Graham, Francis Chan). When it becomes about Calvinism or Arminianism, then it is no longer about God and I am not for that.
If we cant join in glorifying God, then shame on us.

This will be my last post. I pray that God blesses you all with His graciousness and kindness. May your joy be in Him.


"Why don't you, and Lydia since she is also a woman and...well I don't know if Lydia is a Calvinist, go over to SBC Voices and join in? Give it a try? I'm sure that if you have something to contribute there to the conversation you'll be allowed."

Gee Les, why not invite me to dine in a snake pit? And you don't know if I am a Calvinist? I spewed my green tea when I read that one. Why would I follow a 16th century European state church despotic religion named after a mere human?

Thanks and I am sure Dave is thrilled with your invite but it is an exercise in futility over at Pravda. Let me just give a few highlights of hanging over there. Jared Moore insisted that I am a Calvinist but just don't know it and this was after about 100 comments of me trying to reason with him. That line of illogic was to get Mohler off the hook for the GC vid comments...see poof! You are a Calvinist....Mohler off hook! I was starting to think I was conversing with Clinton who was telling me I was really a liberal but did not know it.

Miller is so inconsistent with comments he deletes people like Harriet (who is really really nice and not like me) but keeps the nasty in your face comments by the "boys" (yes, they act like boys) Only when a non Calvinist calls them out on it using obvious logic that makes them look bad, does Miller delete the entire convo to sweep the YRR vitriol under the rug (Saw that recently with Matt and Jim G calling him out)I am not so sure Miller is able to recognize it since he agrees with them. Then Miller gets wined and dined by the Gospel Project big cheeses and now Setzer is advising and commenting some. That was it for me. Dave is too easily influenced and then he writes an article like "Stop it" but then does the same thing ignoring the vitriol. He cannot see it. None of the YRR guys can see any of it. They will yell, "prove it, prove it! Calvinists were the founders (as if that means anything today as they were all pro slavery) Prove we are mean Calvinists! You are a heretic, prove calvinists are mean! You just don't know the bible." It cracks me up. Have you ever hung with middleschoolers? It was that sort of experience for me. I come away realizing they have been indoctrinated and cannot think logically at all.

Miller is too inconsistent to bother with the time it would take to comment and then have it deleted. I was once deleted for answering one of the young despots with "yes, comrade". Yet, Rick addressed someone with it just a few days ago. So, I know Dave has different standards for different people. Don't take that wrong. I have tons of respect for Rick. I think I should send him a KY ham or something for the abuse he has taken over there and his patient and longsuffering responses. If you see him, tell him I said that smart AND funny is the new sexy. :o)

I have read over there for a long time. Dave gets "readably" angry when someone like Howell makes sense. Of course, he would deny that. So there you go.

At some point, someone is going to have to tell the emperor, Mohler, he has no clothes and the proof of what he and Driscoll and Mahaney and all the Reformed celebrities have churned out is all over the blogs. It is their indoctrinated creation. Told them only they were right and..... here we are. Many of these YRR guys have the logic and disposition of 13 year olds and you older guys are not doing them a favor by not consistently pointing it out. You are enabling it. Come on Les....comparing this issue with violence in Israel? That is so childish I cannot even begin to address it. Unless.....we talk about the historical Calvinist bent to burn heretics. (wink)

But in reality, I should welcome all this because as more and more tithing non Calvinists read the threads, I think they won't want to subsidize such arrogance coming out of seminaries they support. These YRR guys don't even know they are arrogant. This is their normal. The least they could do is EARN some arrogance first.

I don't know about your state but in mine, the figures reported for CP giving are mainly small non Calvinist churches making up the bulk. While Mohler's mega gave 10,000 to the CP, It was typical to read of churches with less than 100 members giving such sums as 30,000, 20,000, etc.

The YRR wants the non Calvinist money for their education and to plant their NC churches with little despots who have the power to "discipline" like their celebs, Driscoll, Mahaney or Dever. But I think they overplayed their hand. Little old ladies who tithe don't like arrogant young pastors who can't wait to have the power to discipline people.

I think they made a huge mistake defending Driscoll's porn, sodomy and coup. And a huge mistake was made by Mohler for supporting the shepherding cult Apostle of the People of Destiny and defending him to the secular media insulting the bloggers "who did not like firm leadership". See, Les, it is all about control and lording it over people. More and more people are finally waking up to it. Despots just like their mentor, Calvin. It ain't baptist, friend.

Don't bother telling me as I already know it. Yes, I am mean. I will take a beating for an unbeliever or from one. But not a Calvinist despot.


Lydia, don't even think about taking my Queen of Mean Crown. I've worked hard for it. Maybe you can be a Princess or Duchess of mean.

I love the disconnect between the rants about how the Preamble in the TD is wrong, wrong, wrong about what it says about Calvinists. Then Calvinists smoothly went into attack mode calling people heretics and when someone like Rick Whosit says "please don't call me names, I think you are not getting what I'm saying." the Calvinists declare they don't care what he thinks and they will call him whatever they like because they're Calvinists and superior in determining all things!

Well you know what? I don't care if you don't like what I say about Calvinists because I know I'm right and you're wrong so get over it! Oh that's not very nice of me, only Calvinists can have that attitude. How dare I forget the "rules."

Mike, if you're still around. Here's the thing. Here at Peter's place we constantly get people coming in lamenting tone, tenor, blah, blah, fill in the blank. The interesing thing is that these people are never seen on the other blogs admonishing against this or that. So if it's true that "both" sides are at fault shouldn't someone like you be admonishing both sides? Why only here are Peter's place?


"Lydia, don't even think about taking my Queen of Mean Crown. I've worked hard for it. Maybe you can be a Princess or Duchess of mean. "

Ok Mary. I will turn it in good condition. My head was too big for it anyway. :o)

I was thinking "Preachy Princess" but that would not line up with the BFM.


Lydia, I've decided that we can be coregents. This kingdom is too big and in too much of a mess for just one Queen of Mean.

Now you could be Preachy Princess as long as you were preachy with women and children or not in positions of authority - you know kinda like the Queen of England doesn't really have any authority, but she gets all the cool stuff anyway. This may suprise you but I've actually spoken from the pulpit of more than one church - when men were present! It's the authority thingy. I know I don't fit in with the patriarchy of the NC, but that's the SBC I grew up in.


Mary again I write this with great respect to you. How can you take pride in giving yourself the title "Queen of Mean"? As a follower of Jesus, (please do not read this as being written in a condescending manner) your identity is to be in Him. Let your light shine. Make Jesus look great!

Great questions! Here is a brief response: Being that I embrace the Doctrines of Grace naturally causes me to run in the same circles as others who agree with this doctrine. This being the case, I dont need to go to Reformed blogs, nor do I have time to "waste" on these places. I have three kids and three jobs. My passions and duties beckon from them, much louder than my computer. This is the main reason you have never heard from me on other sites.
In regards to calling Calvinists out, I do it quite often. Except I have the privilege of doing it face to face (since those are the circles I run in). I do not mean the privilege in the sense of being ugly to them, though I am very firm. I believe it to be a privilege because I am able to fully communicate to them through tone, touch, voice inflections etc... to communicate that I do not hate them nor wish them harm and so I am able to express much clearer the necessity of showing grace.
I am amazed at how so many of those who claim the Doctrines of Grace, have no idea what the true meaning of their "precious" doctrine means. Sadly, they wouldn't know what grace was even if it were to run up and slap them in the face.
It is people such as those (for the most part) who cause many of these types of problems (of course it takes two to Tango). And I have no problem lovingly correcting them. I know how obnoxious they can be... because I, at one time, was one of them. Thankfully our God is a gracious God and He cured me of my insanity! :)
Again, I pray that you continue to seek Him. And may your delight be in Him, who spoke our world into existence. Also please do not let my ignorant, like minded, mean hearted brothers cause you to stumble. Let me encourage you to meet them with the grace they claim to be so well informed about. Heap those burning coals on their heads! :)

Last, if you dont mind, please paste the addresses that you speak of on here. I would be interested to see what is being said.


Mike, thank you for response. I will conside your words. I'm not really mean. People who know me know me to be a very kind person. I am "scrappy" and I will take a stand. One thing that Lydia and I tease each other about is how words by a woman on these blogs are received differently than words by men. Men are allowed to be a lot meaner and never called on it. Men will attack women where they won't attack other men. Men will attempt to correct women while ignoring the men who need correction. Blogtown is not an easy place for women. So we learn to get tough and give back what we get. Doesn't necessarily make it right.

Blessings to you and yours. Three kids are the equivilant of at least six jobs - I know I have three and I can't imagine how you do it with three jobs. I know your wife is working along side you just as hard. I pray your situation will improve so you could at least get down to two if not one job.

Look to the right and you'll see a list of blogs. SBC Voices - is what we snarkily call Pravda - and SBC Today has the beginnings of all this hoopla.


"Now you could be Preachy Princess as long as you were preachy with women and children or not in positions of authority - you know kinda like the Queen of England doesn't really have any authority, but she gets all the cool stuff anyway."

I think Beth Moore already has that title. I know she has cool stuff, too.

" This may suprise you but I've actually spoken from the pulpit of more than one church - when men were present! It's the authority thingy. I know I don't fit in with the patriarchy of the NC, but that's the SBC I grew up in."

Mary, I am astonished! You stood behind the sacred furniture? (just kidding) The SBC I grew up in the women did everything because the workers were few and we were always in some church that needed help with everything. :o)

Hey, speaking of women speaking in church, did you know that the very Calvinist Piper and Challies (Reformed blogger) have decided that women cannot even read scripture in church services.



Thank you in return. :)
I went to SBC Voices and now have a new hero-Dave Miller. We need to hear this. We have to hear this. He is right, we do not have a theological problem in the SBC. We have an obedience problem.
I pray that his words of wisdom causes us to lock arms and sing Kumbaya... ummm never mind... Maybe not that. But at least maybe we can very soon be able to worship our Treasure together in a unified manner.

The comments to this entry are closed.