Maybe the Mayan Calendar Was Marking the End of the Southern Baptist Convention

Tonight, Dr. Jerry Vines, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention and former pastor of FBC Jacksonville, Florida, will speak at Louisiana College’s Guinn Auditorium at the Louisiana Baptist Convention’s Evangelism Conference. In a blog post published today, when asked what are the biggest challenges facing the SBC today, Vines states:

Theologically, will the issue of Calvinism create further division in the SBC. I have been a SBC preacher over 50 years. I have worked quite well with my Calvinist friends, many of whom I invited to preach for me. I have no desire to run all Calvinists out of the SBC; I think it would be divisive and wrong. But, current attempts to move the SBC to a Calvinistic soteriology are divisive and wrong. As long as groups and individuals seek to force Calvinism upon others in the Convention, there will be problems. There is a form of Calvinism that is militant, hostile and aggressive that I strongly oppose. I have stated before, so it’s not new news, that should the SBC move toward five-point Calvinism it will be a move away from, not toward, the gospel. [Emphasis added]

I want to respond to Dr. Vines answer because his response is not that uncommon, especially among the frequent commenters at SBCToday.com There are, I suppose, many more in the SBC who agree with Dr. Vines and his assessment and because of this I would like to address his statements for an honest reflection from the “other side.”

Theologically, will the issue of Calvinism create further division in the SBC.

Of all the possible theological issues within the Southern Baptist Convention, Dr. Vines lists Calvinism as the greatest theological challenge to the convention. This is not surprising for those aware of Dr. Vines history regarding the John 3:16 Conference and the book birthed from the conference and edited by Dr. David Allen, Whosoever Will. What is unfortunate is the wording of Vines’s statement. Perhaps I am being overly sensitive, but citing Calvinism as the reason for current division within the SBC is not helpful to the discussion. Calvinism neither walks nor talks, it is a system of theology. Even Dr. Vines holds to a system of theology, regardless of its unknown identity (non-Calvinist), to which I would in fairness not label divisive. That said, Calvinism is not creating division in the SBC but people are. Guns do not kill people, people kill people. Calvinism does not split churches, people split churches. And these people, on both sides of the theological divide, are responsible to God and their church for their behavior.

Calvinism has always existed in the SBC and the underlying thought of Calvinism being some divisive intruder into the convention is erroneous and unfair.

 I have been a SBC preacher over 50 years. I have worked quite well with my Calvinist friends, many of whom I invited to preach for me.

I do not know Dr. Vines’s history of fellowship with Southern Baptist Calvinists but I will take his word that he has worked well with these men and women. Though, I wonder what kind of Calvinists Dr. Vines had filling his pulpit in light of his later statement in the interview: “I have stated before, so it’s not new news, that should the SBC move toward five-point Calvinism it will be a move away from, not toward, the gospel.” I suppose they weren’t “five-Pointers.”

I have no desire to run all Calvinists out of the SBC; I think it would be divisive and wrong. But, current attempts to move the SBC to a Calvinistic soteriology are divisive and wrong.

These statements need serious attention as I have come across similar statements on non-Calvinist blogs and comment sections. Dr. Vines parallels two ideas:

1. Running all Calvinists out of the SBC is divisive and wrong.

2. Attempts to move the SBC toward a Calvinistic theological perspective is divisive and wrong.

The error in such a statement is that the two actions are not equal. The first action involves establishing some kind of non-Calvinist orthodoxy by which those who do not adhere are not welcome in the SBC. The second action involves SBC seminary graduates going into churches and faithfully preaching and teaching God’s Word. The two actions are not equal! The SBC seminaries are graduating both non-Calvinists and Calvinists. The last number floating around from Lifeway was that around 30% +/- of SBC seminary graduates were Calvinists. Statistically, with only 10% +/- of SBC churches being non-Calvinists, our Calvinist seminary grads are going to be placed into a church that is made up largely by non-Calvinists. This is not some kind of deceptive conspiracy set forth by the Calvinist powers that be, but a theological and statistical reality occurring right now in our convention. If one’s response to this reality is, “Well, those Calvinist seminary graduates need to find a Calvinistic church and stay out of the non-Calvinist churches”, then Calvinist seminary graduates will in effect be “run out” of the SBC because they do not have a church to pastor. This would be divisive and wrong.

As long as groups and individuals seek to force Calvinism upon others in the Convention, there will be problems.

I’ve also heard statements similar to these before and found them wanting of evidence and explanation. I am honestly not sure what “forcing Calvinism upon others” looks like so I will not comment on this assertion.

There is a form of Calvinism that is militant, hostile and aggressive that I strongly oppose. I have stated before, so it’s not new news, that should the SBC move toward five-point Calvinism it will be a move away from, not toward, the gospel.

In homiletic mastery, Dr. Vines finishes his paragraph with a climactic punch. Unfortunately, I am unsure of his last two statements and their relationship to one another. Is he equating the militant Calvinist with a five-point Calvinist? I am unsure.

Pressing on, Dr. Vines mentions a form of Calvinism that is “militant, hostile and agressive.” Again, this is not a form of Calvinism but a form of Calvin-IST. The theological system is not the offender but the aggressive, hostile, and militant person. I am at odds with this type of person and acknowledge such people do indeed cause problems within churches. Dr. Vines then goes on to mention his view of five-point Calvinism which he believes will move the SBC “away from, not toward, the gospel.” This type of statement is beyond the pale and, if espoused by many in the SBC, leads me to believe that perhaps the Mayan calendar was not counting down the end of the world but marking the date of the Southern Baptist Convention’s demise. This type of rhetoric which attacks good and outstanding members of the SBC, both past and present, will only cause problems and lead to a split in the convention. The statement is also anti-historical. I guess The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary founding president and five-point Calvinist James P. Boyce and many other SBC founders were leading the SBC away from the gospel all those early formative years. Am I to believe, according to Dr. Vines, that the SBC was at some point rescued from those who did not have the gospel? I am disappointed that Dr. Vines would make such a statement given his long history in SBC life.

In sum, Calvinism does not split churches and it will not split the Southern Baptist Convention. It will be people who split churches and, if it happens, it will be people who split the Southern Baptist Convention. It will most likely not be “militant, hostile and agressive Calvinists” that bring us to that point, as they are but few in number. No, it will be the legion of those who refuse to accept the reality of a theological evolution within the SBC who will bring about the split. I am not a Mayan, nor the son of a Mayan, but December 2012 is not that far away. It is my hope and desire that the Southern Baptist Convention will remain powerful for the kingdom of God for many years to come.

Joshua

I am a disciple of the risen Christ Jesus, husband to Libby, full-time student at Louisiana College, part-time blogger at thedailybleat.com and canoniblog.wordpress.com, and future seminarian.