Missing from the Calvinism Advisory Team

This post is more about an observation than it is a gripe.  Yes I am going to highlight something I think is missing in the formation of the Advisory Team but not as a fuss to or about Dr. Page.  Rather the reality of what I see missing is due to the current climate in SBC life and Evangelical churches as a whole.

The team that will study the issue of how Traditionalists and Calvinists will move forward together in the SBC may be more challenging than the Name Change or even the GCR report.  The list presented in Baptist Press shows some balance.  There are people representing Educators, Entity Heads, Pastors, Ethnic groups, and Denominational people.  There are mid size church Pastors and Large church Pastors.  Southern Seminary is covered with the largest group (those with close ties to Southern) and representatives from New Orleans and Southwestern.  We have Northern representation and even the East Coast (and Beltway at that).

But who do we NOT have?

As I looked at the list and discussed the breakdown on a call last night while driving, something jumped out at me and screamed loud and clear.  In the whole of the debate/discussion/elephant one group has been missing all along.  This group finds itself on the front lines of this issue right along with the turmoil in churches.  For over ten plus years now this group has been being left out of the Convention conversation on most issues simply because they are being left out of most church life.

In Ephesians we find this group given a clear Biblical role and place in New Testament churches.  Read the following verses:

 Eph 4:11-16
11    And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,
12    for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,
13    till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;
14    that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,
15    but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head-- Christ--
16    from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.
(NKJ)

So who is missing?

Where is the voice of the Evangelists?

I think this missing voice speaks volumes to where we are today more than we may be willing to admit.

Is "to the Nations" really missions?

There I was last week on a lake and in a boat listening to my old (according to my two sons) music and driving the family crazy with it while doing some reflection of ministry and missions.  You see, I have this problem of not being able to shut the mind off just because I am on vacation.  I like to use that time to sfocus on key thoughts etc..  And this year it was missions and ministry.

 In particular, what are we really doing and can we do more.

In this thought process the whole terminology thing came kept coming up.  Having been in SBC churches all of my life, missions strategy is all too familiar.  GO, REACH, and now The Nations are terms used to motivate and remind us that there is something BIG we are suppose to be doing.  But lets really look at the current lingo.

Reach the nations!

What does that mean?

Do we know what it really means?

Is the meaning the same from one person to the next?

Tough questions that produce answers describing a major issue in our mission efforts.  Is it possible that the term we are currently hearing over and over again is ushering in an actual opposite effect of little real missions?

Now grant it that I may be accused of being picky or crazy.  But think with me for just a moment. 

What does it mean?  Are we to reach whole countries?  Sure!  But how?  If we do a humanitarian effort in a country, have we taken the Gospel to the Nations?  If we hold a few worship services in this country, does that fulfill the mandate?

What does it really mean?  Have we been told by those who coined the phrase?  Are we told by those who use it in sermons and lectures on missions? 

When I hear the term, I think I know what it means but I am not sure.  Where is this term defined? 

A clear missions strategy must have a clear common understanding.  Every Pastor and staff member must be in sync with every entity leader in knowing what the term means.  But then it dawned on me, we live in a time when taking up an offering for xyz material need in some country is praised as reaching the nations.  Is it?

But today, I will allow for contemplation on this initial post about this subject while praising the members of our church for raising over $3,500 with just two weeks notice to send my traditional worship leader to India for two weeks to train Pastors in evangelism and the teaching of the Word of God so they can reach their home country residents. 

We will continue this thought later this week...

If we do not fight the culture...?

I have suspected for some time now that a day would come in the USA when we would see more than rhetorical attacks against Christianity and Biblical principles.  I suspected that these attacks would come in my life time.  I did not suspect that these attacks would come so soon.  But enter the Chick Fil-A saga.  And here we are.

When Dan Cathy acknowledged his beliefs about marriage he ignited a storm that has brought Americans to a crossroads.  As a citizen, Cathy simply simply stated that marriage should be between a man and women.  As a citizen he has every right to say what he believes.  But there are those in America who disagree with that right depending upon the content of what is said.

The crossroads is not tricky.  As a country we will either take a right hand turn and once again be a Republic of freedom and constitutional law or we will turn left, and lose our freedoms while traveling down a road mixed with tyranny and the absence of religious freedom.  Yes, the crossroads is now in front of us.  We are waiting for the moment.  The decisions of which way we turn are upon us.

Why now?

Over the past few years the fight for right and wrong has been hit with apathy and left leaning ideology.  The hits that came were NOT from those outside of Christianity.  Our attacks have come from within Christianity.  Gone are the leaders who rallied us in the past.  Their replacements have presented a different model.  A model that frowns on culture wars and embraces naively the idea that people will accept all the differences and NO one will be harmed.  We have been told by these few that discrimination will not occur.  For once we cease the war, our love will earn the respect of those different from us.

They have been and are WRONG!

We have paved the road that has brought us to this crossroads.  We ceased from fighting.  We compromised our beliefs.  We joined the culture.  And we are paying for all the above dearly.

Men and women died so you and I could be free.  No politician or elected official has the right to tell a business owner or church or group of Christians, what they can and cannot say.  NOT in America. 

Or can they?

This is the crossroads.  If Chick Fil-A is attacked for her owners remarks, then why not go ahead and attack churches of all types?  You think I am crazy?  Think about the following.  In Chicago where the mayor is a former presidential Chief of Staff (who claimed that chick Fil-A was NOT welcome in Chicago) their zoning laws are allowing a strip club to go up next to a catholic home for the elderly run by nuns.  Just a few years ago the outcry over this type of decision would have been more than vocal.  Today, there is silence.

There is something wrong here!  Terribly wrong!

Though I am Baptist, I praise the Catholic church for fighting against many of the provisions in the healthcare reform bill.  Many Baptist have been silent.  Are Catholics now going to be targeted in the manner of Chick Fil-A?  Ask the priests and Bishops of the Catholic churches what they teach about same sex marriage.  Are they no longer welcome in Chicago, Boston, or San Fran?  Are Baptists next?  We see defense of criminal non profit groups like Acorn and yet we see attacks on non profits who support values and Biblical principles. 

If we do not get back into the fight we will lose the right to do what we are doing now as ministers and churches.  If we do not get back into the fight our children will live in a country with freedom only as a history point (if they even mention it at all).  And if we do not get back into the fight, we will have NO ONE to blame but ourselves.  For the weapons used against us were NOT more mighty.  We just ceased from using our weapons and thus allowed strongholds to build up in our lives, communities, and culture.

It is true that Christianity has always been more productive when freedom was lacking.  I do not for one moment think that fighting the culture will solve all the problems.  But I do know that abandon the fight will bring about attacks on Christianity like we in America have never seen nor experienced.  We are forgetting the real issues at stake.  We are forgetting we are salt and light.  We are blowing that which was bought and paid for with blood and ultimate sacrifice.  How dare we.

We cannot afford to sit out the fight any longer!

Double Standards Multiplying

Life is getting more and more complicated.  Calls ring out for inclusion.  Pleas are made for love and mercy, acceptance and equal protection.  Standards once thought to be grounded in cement are now shown to sit atop sinking sand.  What is taking place in America and American Christianity?

The clear visual for us today is seen in the uprising over Chick Fil A.  The owner of the company, a private company, speaks his mind about what he believes to be true, and mainstream media outlets go ballistic.  People who practice the freedom of speech suddenly want to attack the owner of a successful business for doing the same.  A boycott is called for of the chicken serving establishments. City officials are pressured to rule these establishments as unwanted in their cities.

So what has happened to free speech?

I think this is an honest question.  America has been under attack for years from the homosexual community.  No doubt that much has been gained by there attacks.  But how can this community of people use the rail of free speech and equal protection while denying the same to people who speak opposite.  Important in the thought process is understanding that Chick Fil A has never NOT served a homosexual.  They have never been accused of showing bias on any level.

This double standard is the result of compromises made over the years to the homosexual community.  It is a price that we will now have to pay and somehow work through.  We allowed a small group to gain a foothold in our decision process.  Chaos is now an everyday norm.  And there is not found a visible end anywhere down the road.  Honesty is passing from the Christian community.  In some circles today, what was once called homosexual activity is now passed as only battles due to previous life events.  When Christians accept the double standard, the path to deliverance and true freedom are lost.  When we allow this double standard to exist, we join the attack on the Gospel of Jesus and His Word.

How do we move forward?

I serve in a community that has one of the highest homosexual populations in all of Tennessee.  Homosexuals attend our services weekly.  I do not soften the Word of God as to the sin of homosexuality nor do I compromise limits for their involvement.  Yes I have been questioned on this.  Yes I get an occasional letter or email.  Once I even got a visit to the office.  But never have I ever been called unloving or homophobic for my beliefs and how those beliefs are taught and lived out on a daily bases.

People talk of building bridges these days.  We must remember that we cannot build anything of substance on sand.  Sin will not uphold the truth of God's Word.  Sin allowed and justified cannot a bridge of biblical ministry support.  Teaching the truth in love will drive a wedge often between people.  The bible says of itself that the Gospel is an offense.  Rants are not needed.  But neither should compromise be found in this discussion.  Many have come out of the homosexual lifestyle because of the work of God in their lives.  And this will continue to be the case if we keep the Word of God out front in this discussion.  The "if" is the key. 

How long will Chick Fil A hold out?  Will they cave in to the pressure?  I pray NOT!  For more is at stake than one mans right to speak publicly about his beliefs.  The whole foundation of allowing the Word of God to speak and direct on this subject is on the line.  If we lose this fight, we lose the path of sharing the Gospel to the American community as a whole - we lose our own credibility.  And that my friends will be disastrous.

Double standards multiplying are more serious than many think!  And the homosexual community is NOT the only place that this is occurring.

Ask, Don't Ask, Accept, Don't Accept, Repent or ?

If the title caught your attention then it will definitely confuse you as it is applied to varying ideas of how one enters into salvation with Jesus.  The increase in articles, books, and sermons covering the whole idea (good and bad) about how a person actually enters into a relationship with Jesus Christ can give one a migraine headache of epic size.

Does a person need to ask Jesus into their life and accept Him as Lord?

There is a big difference between the yes answer and the no answer.  Those who hold to the traditional view of salvation would answer yes.  They would acknowledge that a person must make the decision to turn from their sin (repent) and accept Jesus through faith.  The traditionalist people have believed this for years.  You will find this belief in most Evangelical churches and denominations/Associations/Conventions. 

I agree with this understanding of the Biblical teaching about salvation and hold that this is the Gospel.  I believe that God gives every person the opportunity to make the above choice/decision.  He knows that many will not.  He knows that many will.  My key reason for being convinced in my spirit and mind comes straight from the Word of God.

Notice how clearly salvation is explained in the "how" with the words of Paul in writing to Corinth:

2 Cor 7:10
10    For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death.
(NKJ)

In this passage, Paul is discussing his letter written to them and how it affected them.  He chooses to use the analogy of their sorrow to highlight with the gift of salvation just how a person realizes they are a sinner against God, sees they cannot fix the effect of their sin, and through this Godly sorrow are brought into salvation via the act of repentance.  God's Holy Spirit calls, teaches, and convicts.  Each person must make a choice as to what they will do in response to God and His work offered as a gift.

This process should be taken very seriously.  In fact, the Bible is clear on this when when Paul writes to the people at Philipi and says:

Phil 2:12-13
12    Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;
13    for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.
(NKJ)

Clearly Paul acknowledges in this verse that salvation is God's gift.  It is God who works in the calling, conviction, and giving the ability to respond.  Yet Paul also acknowledges that each person must "work out" or make sure they have made the choice and live out the reality of that choice.  One does not realize that they are saved.  One is not born as a chosen one while others are born damned for Hell.  One must respond to the work of God and then allow God to work.  Salvation is all of and about the work of God in and through Jesus.  Yet God does not force Himself on anyone.  It is beyond religion and systems of thoughts.  It requires faith in the Grace of God.  It requires one to repent.  It is more than just a simple mental decision.

I am the first to admit that too many people in all walks of Christianity make salvation more about saying yes to heaven and no to hell.  They want to see their children and grandchildren baptized.  I have seen in over 23 years of ministry that repentance can be somewhat downplayed - which I think is totally wrong.  Without repentance, one cannot be saved.  Salvation is serious.  Salvation is the most important thing in life!  We cannot get this wrong!  Salvation does not precede repentance.  It is impossible with the above verse out of 2 Corinthians.  

 

And I do not think it is lowering or weakening the sovereignty of God to say and believe what I have written for the process is clearly described in God's Word.  

Have you accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior of your life?  Did you repent and acknowledge that you needed the death of Christ as payment for your sins? 

Learned from my perspective and concerns w/New Calvinism!

Yesterday I wrote a post that was an attempt to get dialogue started on what it is that Calvinists and New Calvinists believe.  The result was much to my surprise.  The folks over at sbctoday.com carried the post and the comments can be viewed their also.  Add to the comments the phone calls of yesterday and today and boy did I learn a great deal.  I just finished a phone call with someone who, along with family, have come out of a Calvinist takeover church.  The story is the same and the 9Marks path of reforming a church is being followed to the letter (as with many, it hit major resistance and left a church totally splintered).  Here is more of what I learned from this part of the journey:

1.  The old form of Calvinism is still alive and well and as friendly and cooperative as ever.  I knew it was but was not seeing it much on the internet.  The Soteriology of the old form balances with the Traditional Statement where it counts the most. 

2.  The Founders version grouped with younger learning theologs are not the mainstream but they sure think they are!  I pray these guys learn quickly that God has not taught them so that can call out other Pastors based on their knowledge to enlighten them and clean up other churches.  They will one day soon learn that ministry; real ministry, is more than arguing some point and claiming superiority.

3.  The limit of blogging and the influence there of is growing weaker by the day.  I think I am thankful for this.  Social media may not be as strong as we think in ministry matters other than informing our people of events and ministry needs etc.  We need to acknowledge this and NOT over react.

4.  You can burn an afternoon quickly if one is not careful.  And when the burn is complete, thre is not much to show for it.

5.  I believe there is a way for cooperation in the SBC with the mainstream older Calvinists as there has been for years.  They are not fully aware of the New Calvinists and refute their assertions at every turn.  This is encouraging.  I am not sure how to cooperate with the New Calvinists.  I keep thinking that the way is out there, but I have yet to see it. 

6.  New Calvinism would make a great study of pollsters and PhD students.

7.  How quickly we forget or neglect some of the simple admonitions in scripture when we want to prove our point or set the world straight!

8.  Bearing False Witness is still a sin.  New Calvinists might need remedial training.

9.  I am more convinced than ever that the Calvinists need a mega meeting of their own to figure out how they will deal with this new breed.  Maybe we have approached this wrong.  The old Calvinists need to listen the New Calvinists and seek to learn what makes them tick.  From that learning it may be possible for them to lead them in today's ministry and churches. 

10.  If you do not live within the influence of certain geographic areas, you might not be aware of New Calvinism at all.

11.  I sure do miss Dr. Adrian Rogers.  I wonder if he would have blogged and tweeted?

12.  Leaders in the SBC have their hands full!  Dr. Page and his task force/committee will need our prayers.

13.  We need statesmen in a bad way these days!

14.  There sure seems to be a problem with taking people at their word! 

15.  The elephant in the room is whether or not Founders and New Calvinists will back off their goal of transforming the SBC?  This is the biggie!  I cannot get an answer from anyone on this one.  Why is that?

And there is much more!

My perspective on why todays Calvinism is a concern.

Comments for this post will be allowed @ sbctoday.com as they plan on posting it on their site with my permission.

I have debated writing this post for some time.  The reality that anything written can be misconstrued is enough by itself to cause hesitation.  The last thing I want to do is leave the wrong impression with anyone.  I love Calvinists and I love Traditionalists.  I work with both and even some in other groups.  So I write the following to voice concerns that I am seeing and hearing.  I write to add clarification as to why I signed the traditional statement.  I write to reveal why this issue is a growing problem.  And since I write best by making lists, I will list out my concerns while making it clear that NO priority is given other than the first one on the list.

The list will include specifics and generic issues tied to people and promotion.  Again, these are my concerns and are questions that I have yet to get consistent answers from (new)Calvinists of today.  The older SBC Calvinists that I have known and respected were totally different.

My Concerns:

1.  Ask 10 different Calvinists what they believe must occur for a person to be saved and you will get at least 5 different answers.

2.  Do Calvinists really believe that John 3:16 shows that only the elect are the ones God loves.

3.  Do Calvinists believe that some people are born with NO hope of salvation?

4.  At what point do Calvinist believe salvation occurs?

5.  How can Calvinists call Traditionalists divisive when it is the Calvinists that have web sites and blogs that specifically state their desire to change the SBC and beyond?

Here is an example from the Founders blog (knowing their website clearly states their desire to change the SBC):  "It is indisputable that we are in the midst of a reformation and recovery of the doctrines of grace, or what has historically been called, "Calvinism." Both statistical and anecdotal evidence of this fact continues to mount. I believe that this is a movement of God and that it is even more widespread than recent studies indicate. As is true with any of work of God, the devil always keeps pace and seeks to steal, kill and destroy. If he cannot keep us from truth then he will do what he can to cause us to hold the truth in imbalanced and ungodly ways."

6.  Young Pastors and staff members are speaking and writing articles that it is dangerous to lead a child to pray to accept Christ?  If this is true, what then should a child do and how should a child be lead by their parents and other influences?

7.   Why is Lifeway sponsoring The Gospel Coalition conferences?

8.  Why is Lifeway promoting more Calvinists and their material?

9.  Why are Calvinists leaders NOT doing more to instill that Pastors must be upfront with their Soteriology?  There are even manuals on how to transition a church from Traditional to Calvinist doctrine.  If there is no move to change the SBC, why are there manuals by 9Marks and others?

10.  Why the aggression from Calvinists because many in the SBC do NOT agree with them?

11.  If the BF&M is enough, why do we have two Seminaries requiring faculty to sign other statements that are Calvinists/Reformed documents?

12.  Since when did Baptist and Reform go together?  The day to day operations of the church do not even match!

13.  If there is no takeover plan, why was there a SBC Professor giving the benefits of the takover (even using a racial slur) at one of the meetings during the SBC?

14.  Why did Lifeway do a survey that gave the participants no option other than saying they were either Calvinists or Arminion?

15.  With the exception of Infant Baptism, since when were Baptist and Presbyterians so much alike?  Dr. James Kennedy was my kind of Presbyterian but today's New Calvinists are nothing close in belief and practice.  Just think back to Evangelism Explosion materials (I was certified as a trainer in an SBC church).  Today's New Calvinists would reject Dr. Kennedy's material.  How and why?

These are the questions I have.  They are simple and I think need to be answered.  We are told that we need to cooperate.  I am fine with that.  I am concerned though that the answers to the above may highlight the difficult journey that cooperation will reveal.  Some Traditionalists are even saying they will sit this discussion out.  I wonder if they would maintain that position when the real truth of the answers are shown. 

I find this issue extremely important simply by the answers to point number one.  If we cannot agree on that one, then we have two different Gospels.  Cooperation will not occur at that point.

And speaking of the Gospel, is it not odd that Calvinists/Reformed call their Soteriology the true Gospel and thus label much of their work and conferences with the word Gospel in it?

These are my concerns.