Call me curious...
Why is it generally acceptable for non-Calvinists to publicly impugn, misrepresent, and malign Calvinists without anyone calling them to account in the same forum?
Why are any number of self-professed non-Calvinists free to write what THEY understand Calvinists to believe in state Baptist papers or to caricature Calvinists from the platform of the Annual Meeting without any rebuttal or counterpoint?
Why are Calvinists not given the opporunity through SBC channels to clearly state what they actually believe without having to be in a "balanced" context like the Patterson/Mohler discussion?
Why isn't a capable, recognizable 5-point Calvinist approached by BP or ABP to articulate the doctrines of grace from one who actually holds to them?
Why are Calvinists the ones who are characterized as militant, aggresive, and angry?
There seems to be a double standard among Southern Baptists.
One final thought, many non-Calvinists are seemingly upset at being labeled "Arminian." But following the logic of some, anyone who holds to the 5 points is a "Hyper-Calvinist." That means that to be simply a "Calvinist" you would have to hold to only 3 or 4 of the points (I'm not sure who gets to define which points those might be). Following that same logic, you would not have to hold to all 5 points of the Remonstrance to be considered an Arminian. Claiming all 5 would make you a "Hyper-Arminian." So if a person claims to agree only with the "P" of the TULIP (and therefore affirm the other 4 points of the Remonstrance), why would he object to being called an Arminian? Hmm.
Dave
Why are any number of self-professed non-Calvinists free to write what THEY understand Calvinists to believe in state Baptist papers or to caricature Calvinists from the platform of the Annual Meeting without any rebuttal or counterpoint?
Why are Calvinists not given the opporunity through SBC channels to clearly state what they actually believe without having to be in a "balanced" context like the Patterson/Mohler discussion?
Why isn't a capable, recognizable 5-point Calvinist approached by BP or ABP to articulate the doctrines of grace from one who actually holds to them?
Why are Calvinists the ones who are characterized as militant, aggresive, and angry?
There seems to be a double standard among Southern Baptists.
One final thought, many non-Calvinists are seemingly upset at being labeled "Arminian." But following the logic of some, anyone who holds to the 5 points is a "Hyper-Calvinist." That means that to be simply a "Calvinist" you would have to hold to only 3 or 4 of the points (I'm not sure who gets to define which points those might be). Following that same logic, you would not have to hold to all 5 points of the Remonstrance to be considered an Arminian. Claiming all 5 would make you a "Hyper-Arminian." So if a person claims to agree only with the "P" of the TULIP (and therefore affirm the other 4 points of the Remonstrance), why would he object to being called an Arminian? Hmm.
Dave
posted by dave woodbury | 11:14 AM
7 Comments:
It was predestined to be this way.
You may have heard of a former Editor of Georgia's state paper, the Christian Index, who I have heard is a Calvinist. His name is Al Mohler, and in his present position he has a pretty large audience with whom to share is theological beliefs.
Right. Which is why I didn't ask, "Why don't Calvinists have a platform to share their theological beliefs?" What I asked was, "Why are Calvinists not given the opporunity through SBC channels to clearly state what they actually believe without having to be in a "balanced" context like the Patterson/Mohler discussion?" By "SBC channels" I was referring to the annual meeting, pastor's conference, BP, and state papers. Sorry if I was unclear.
Non-Calvinists (actually anti-Calvinists) got to attack and misrepresent Calvinists unchallenged from the stage at Greensboro. Why didn't a Calvinist get an opportunity to speak unchallenged? I'm honestly asking. Was it because the only men asked to speak were anti-Calvinists? Or is it because no Calvinist offered or took advantage of the opporunity to properly represent what Calvinists believe?
My article was not entirely aimed at the anti-Calvinist faction. It is also in part aimed at those who have some standing in SBC life who hold to the doctrines of grace. I would love to see one of them release an article through BP or a state paper addressing the recent interest in Calvinism from a Calvinist's perspective.
I'm sorry if my questions struck a nerve. It appeared from the statements made by those who preached at the pastor's conference and the annual meeting that anti-Calvinism as the official stance of the convention. The only opportunity for a Calvinist to speak publicly at the annual meeting had to be balanced by a non-Calvinist. As a Calvinist that frustrated me.
I guess it was indeed predestined to be so. But then again so was the Fall and the crucifixion of the Savior at the hands of ungodly men. That doesn't remove the responsibility borne by those who committed the acts.
Thanks for the comments though.
Dave
Kevin-
I just reread my post and it sounded a little defensive. I didn't mean it to sound that way. I honestly couldn't tell if your first comment was meant ot be humorous or a sarcastic criticism of Calvinism. I responded as though it were the 2nd without knowing. If it was meant in jest, disregard my last paragraph.
This is what I read in the local newspaper and on national TV. This church is all over the country in every national paper and newsprogram, this TULIP Church is what the average American see's and reads about you. Ask the average American today and you will see who is attacking whom!
Reed below what this church put in the paper.
"Manifesto of Westboro Baptist Church"
We are a TULIP Baptist Church!
We believe -- and vigorously preach -- the 5 Points of Calvinism!
Anyone preaching otherwise is a Hell-bound false prophet, a messenger of Satan, to whom we say, Anathema Maranatha! and, Let him be accursed of God!
To every lover of Arminian lies -- believing and preaching that God loves every individual of mankind -- we say, You are going to Hell! Period! End of discussion! God's decree sending you to Hell is irreversible! Hypocrites! How can ye escape the damnation of Hell?!
Google them and you will see. Most Baptists are sick of this theological battle you are destroying our SBC churches.
I apologize, I messed up my comment, became it was completely different than what I wished to say. When I said you, I did mean you. You have a nice blog. My critical remarks was towards “Westboro Baptist Church ” (TULIP) who came and disrupted our small community. When I look back over my own words and considered how I'd written things and it didn’t sound right. I offer my apology, because it was not my intent to cause offense.
Again, nice blog.
Best regards.
Anonymous
Brother, I meant the comments good naturedly. I understand your feelings. When Mohler became the editor of the George Baptist Christian Index he immediately started running full spreads in which he discussed theology. That has been a long time ago, so my memory is foggy, but I do not remember ever thinking "wow, this guy is a Calvinist."
The Pastor's Conference has always been and probably always will be a place for pulpiteers. I am not sure why it is true, but Calvinists as a general rule are not the best pulpiteers.
Just some random thoughts.
ks
Post a Comment
<< Home