Calvinism and the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)?
- Thread starter jwright82
- Start date
- Status
Ivan
Pastor
Current state? Strong in some regions, weak in others. It's a struggle.
Hard to determine the ratio, but Calvinism is growing.
The SBC does not assimilate any groups. The SBC isn't an organization as such. It will depend on the leadership at each of the SBC institutions as to how Calvinism is accepted, rejected, tolerated or ignored. There have been a few attempts made from special groups, but I don't think anyone is really trying to do that.
Got to go to work right now. Try to give more info later.
Hard to determine the ratio, but Calvinism is growing.
The SBC does not assimilate any groups. The SBC isn't an organization as such. It will depend on the leadership at each of the SBC institutions as to how Calvinism is accepted, rejected, tolerated or ignored. There have been a few attempts made from special groups, but I don't think anyone is really trying to do that.
Got to go to work right now. Try to give more info later.
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
I don't think there are any arminians in the SBC. At least not to their way of thinking. Everyone I have ever talked to vehemently deny it. They don't want to be lumped in with the Methodist.What that makes them, I'm not sure.
are you saying that they just don't like to be called arminian or are you saying you don't think anyone in the SBC ascribes to that doctrine? If you are trying to argue the latter, then I would have to disagree. From my experience (all the SBCers in my city and the ones in my family) are ALL arminians. I've never actually asked them if that's what they prefer to be called, but nonetheless they are certainly arminian in doctrine.
Steve Curtis
Puritan Board Senior
Though there are many who are 5-pointers (and thus not Arminian), the bulk of the rest deny the possibility of losing one's salvation, so that even those who are not 5-pointers are still something other than consistent Arminians (at least in the historical sense of the Remonstrance). Most self-identify as "4-pointers."
CharlieJ
Puritan Board Junior
I don't think there are any arminians in the SBC. At least not to their way of thinking. Everyone I have ever talked to vehemently deny it. They don't want to be lumped in with the Methodist.
are you saying that they just don't like to be called arminian or are you saying you don't think anyone in the SBC ascribes to that doctrine? If you are trying to argue the latter, then I would have to disagree. From my experience (all the SBCers in my city and the ones in my family) are ALL arminians. I've never actually asked them if that's what they prefer to be called, but nonetheless they are certainly arminian in doctrine.
Just because someone believes in election doesn't mean he's a Calvinist. Just because someone denies election doesn't make him an Arminian. Both Calvinism and Arminianism are systems of doctrine with historical definitions. It's a very bad habit in Calvinist circles to label anything non-Calvinist "Arminian." Almost no SBC people would agree totally with either Remonstrant or Wesleyan Arminianism. However, they are quite similar on several points. They call themselves "biblicists," and I would call them something like "free-willers" or "Semi-Pelagians."
Andres
Puritan Board Doctor
okay, I see your point, but I still would have to disagree based on the SBCers I am familiar with (excluding of course my PB brethren). Yeah, the SBCers I am familiar with are arminian to the core. I don't know if they would agree with even 1 pt.
Steve Curtis
Puritan Board Senior
That surprises me. I grew up in SBC circles and always thought that "once saved, always saved!" was one of the main things (besides believer's baptism) that ties them all together. [Of course, their doctrine of "eternal security" is a pale reflection of the perserverance of the saints.]
buggy
Puritan Board Freshman
Perhaps a better way to call them would be modified Arminians.
Why still Arminian? Arminianism is more than just "whether you can lose your salvation". The so-called "biblicist" thinks he's no Arminian because he believes in "once-saved-always-saved". But the basic tenet of Arminianism is still this - one still has enough inherent good within him to turn to God by exercising his own ability to believe, under influence by the grace of God.
Still a cooperative effort between God and Man, to some extent.
Why still Arminian? Arminianism is more than just "whether you can lose your salvation". The so-called "biblicist" thinks he's no Arminian because he believes in "once-saved-always-saved". But the basic tenet of Arminianism is still this - one still has enough inherent good within him to turn to God by exercising his own ability to believe, under influence by the grace of God.
Still a cooperative effort between God and Man, to some extent.
Steve Curtis
Puritan Board Senior
I would agree that they are foundationally Arminian, no doubt; their doctrine of sin is insufficient (excluding those who hold to Calvinist soteriology). And I am not saying that the "four-pointers" are really only one step (or point) away from being Calvinist. I was merely saying that they often consider themselves to be four-pointers, thinking that is the proper "biblicist" response to the "extremes" of Calvinism.
Kiffin
Puritan Board Freshman
Grimmson
Puritan Board Sophomore
Most of them don’t. If they say they do, then they redefine it on their own terms, just as with the fifth point in which many SBC folks call “once saved always saved.” We can continue even with the other four points and how they redefine it if you like.
We need to be careful not to allow confusion categories. Many SBCers will say, “am not a Arminian, am not a Calvinist, am a Christian and am biblical.” Having a biblicist approach is different then the type of predestinatarian doctrine that is held. In a sense mixing up the how a meal is fixed with the meal itself. The meal being the doctrine.
How can people say 'yes' to "God's Grace Is Irresistible" and then say 'no' to "God Chooses and Calls People"?
Grimmson
Puritan Board Sophomore
It is also a category error in the sense that both Arminians and Calvinists deal with specific issues that are narrow and a subset of Christianity compared to the term Christian which has a large umbrella or a board series of issues, not just with election. And like it or not all Christian systems will have a doctrine of election, because it is biblical.
Jeffriesw
Puritan Board Freshman
Most in the SBC Church I belong to would not classify themselves by either term (Cal/Arm) they would call themselves Bible believers. Most would be ready to throw down if you called them a Calvinist and argue till the cows come home. But I believe some of their "theology" would line up with Calvinism a lot closer than it would Arminianism. They just grossly misunderstand just was Calvinism is and what it is not.
It depends. When people are praying for God to convert people, it's strong. When they engage in theology and say that He can't convert them, it's weak.
DMcFadden
Puritanboard Commissioner
In my experience, the knowledge that most broad evangelical laypeople have of Calvinism is spotty, often misinformed, and based on caricatures. When even educated people such as Geisler misrepresent the position, it only adds to confusion by pastors and lay people.
If you actually documented the "theology" of most American Christians, my guess is that you would get a tangled skein of yard that could not be unraveled or straightened out.
Consider the recent statement by the Speaker of the House:
Try unscrambling that one; I dare ya.
When it comes to prayer, American evangelicals pray like Calvinists, believing that God hears and is able to answer.
When it comes to evangelism, American evangelicals tend to rely upon gimmicks and psychological techniques that would make Finney blush.
In the area of Christology, many American evangelicals default to an implicit docetism.
Calling today's American evangelicals semi-pelagians would be a counsel of generosity.
Most of all, broad evangelicalism and American Catholicism are too often comprised of a miscellany of inconsistent, ill-thought through, and downright contadictory strands that mix and match in the "best" tradition of American voluntarism. Fox's Bill O'Reilly proudly brands himself an observant Roman Catholic. Yet, it is a rare week where he does not resort to "karma" as his explanation of why bad things happen to bad people. Recently, he embarrassed a guest by asking her directly: "This is just karma. You believe in Karma don't you. I certainly do." The attorney/Fox regular hemmed and hawed and tried to change the subject from karma to the behavior in question.
One of my Baptist employees recounted his experience at church last night. He took his daughter to a children's program and stayed for the service. The associate pastor for youth at his church was concluding his sermon and preparing to officiate at a baptism (yes, the "youthish" service is on Wednesday in the main church worship center and includes the whole enchilada of church, including baptism, all done in a high decibel rock form). The sermon was part of a series on the Song of Solomon, featuring fairly "candid" and graphic advice to the married, the unmarried, and the young people. As he prepared to conclude the service, the pastor gave an altar call, invited people to accept Christ, and suggested that when he got into the baptistry, if anyone wanted to identify with Jesus, they could come join him and he would baptize them on the spot (adults, teens, or children with or without their parents present or consenting???). Evidently, prior to serving in this evangelical Baptist mega church (NOT SBC), he was on staff in a Restorationist congregation. So a little of the baptismal regeneration theology of the Campbellites that explained why the former church gave that kind of "invitation," now gets introduced through the side door into a congregation that would be horrified to be compared to the Campbellites. My guess is that the associate pastor did not understand why the Restorationist mega church insisted on baptizing immediately or why this evangelical Baptist mega church did not. But you must pardon him. He graduated from my seminary alma mater!
My guess is that many SBC folks are probably not far from the average broad evangelical people. Ask them if they are Calvinist or Arminian and they will likely shrug their shoulders and announce that they are Calminians.
If you actually documented the "theology" of most American Christians, my guess is that you would get a tangled skein of yard that could not be unraveled or straightened out.
Consider the recent statement by the Speaker of the House:
.
Try unscrambling that one; I dare ya.
When it comes to prayer, American evangelicals pray like Calvinists, believing that God hears and is able to answer.
When it comes to evangelism, American evangelicals tend to rely upon gimmicks and psychological techniques that would make Finney blush.
In the area of Christology, many American evangelicals default to an implicit docetism.
Calling today's American evangelicals semi-pelagians would be a counsel of generosity.
Most of all, broad evangelicalism and American Catholicism are too often comprised of a miscellany of inconsistent, ill-thought through, and downright contadictory strands that mix and match in the "best" tradition of American voluntarism. Fox's Bill O'Reilly proudly brands himself an observant Roman Catholic. Yet, it is a rare week where he does not resort to "karma" as his explanation of why bad things happen to bad people. Recently, he embarrassed a guest by asking her directly: "This is just karma. You believe in Karma don't you. I certainly do." The attorney/Fox regular hemmed and hawed and tried to change the subject from karma to the behavior in question.
One of my Baptist employees recounted his experience at church last night. He took his daughter to a children's program and stayed for the service. The associate pastor for youth at his church was concluding his sermon and preparing to officiate at a baptism (yes, the "youthish" service is on Wednesday in the main church worship center and includes the whole enchilada of church, including baptism, all done in a high decibel rock form). The sermon was part of a series on the Song of Solomon, featuring fairly "candid" and graphic advice to the married, the unmarried, and the young people. As he prepared to conclude the service, the pastor gave an altar call, invited people to accept Christ, and suggested that when he got into the baptistry, if anyone wanted to identify with Jesus, they could come join him and he would baptize them on the spot (adults, teens, or children with or without their parents present or consenting???). Evidently, prior to serving in this evangelical Baptist mega church (NOT SBC), he was on staff in a Restorationist congregation. So a little of the baptismal regeneration theology of the Campbellites that explained why the former church gave that kind of "invitation," now gets introduced through the side door into a congregation that would be horrified to be compared to the Campbellites. My guess is that the associate pastor did not understand why the Restorationist mega church insisted on baptizing immediately or why this evangelical Baptist mega church did not. But you must pardon him. He graduated from my seminary alma mater!
My guess is that many SBC folks are probably not far from the average broad evangelical people. Ask them if they are Calvinist or Arminian and they will likely shrug their shoulders and announce that they are Calminians.
Last edited:
jonjordan
Puritan Board Freshman
Lack of any theological education, not merely poor grades in theological education. My experience in a Reformed (5 point) SBC church is that once people hear clear, direct, Calvinistic teaching from the pulpit on a weekly basis they are very receptive to a truth that they may have grown up being told not to believe.
As far as the scope of the SBC as a whole, it has been interesting to see that the more popular figures within the denomination seem to be Calvinist (Akin, Chandler, Stetzer, etc). This may not be a great representation of the SBC as a whole but it will be interesting to watch over the years to come.
Kiffin
Puritan Board Freshman
No. Seminary grads were the ones surveyed.
That's why I am assuming there is a theological explanation for the apparent dilemma.
To put it point blankly one can be a 3 point calvinist in the SBC. They can make it sound like a 4 pointer but they deny the perseverance of the Saints and are so anti-nomian it is pathetic. Once you have prayed the prayer you are in and it doesn't matter if you ever have had a conversion that matters. You could be Brittany Spears and still be a SBC congregate. Go figure. Yes, they may call you to repentance but you are still in. Even if you deny Christ is Lord. That is the SBC. I was a member in the SBC. I still love the SBC. It has many good qualities when they are biblical. But the Churches I know have wondered from their moorings. READ BOYCE.
I would also like to add that a point that preaching from one of the Five Points of Calvinistic Preaching does not make a solid Church. There is a whole bible and I am Covenantal. I do know of Baptist churches that don't believe in evangelism. God will draw is their explanation but they forget there is water involved.
Ivan
Pastor
It depends on a lot of things. I haven't had any problems. I am irenic by nature so I can get along with most people. Some within the SBC would like to have a witch hunt and dispel all Calvinists (the Caners). Others are supportive although not Calvinists (Akin). Some are closet Calvinists and others are ardent proponents of the theology.
It’s truly a mixed bag. Officially, the stance of most is that we are to be tolerant of one another. If things continue in the direction they are going I think there will be a day of reckoning, but most of that is only significant in the South. Frankly, no one really cares about Southern Baptists outside the South, whether Calvinist or otherwise.
So, to answer your question, no there is no hardline division.
This is not experience here in Indy. So I figure it is geographical.
- Status
Similar threads
