A Review of Calvinism and Southern Baptists

The Way We Were is a well researched work by Dr. Fisher Humphreys on trends in Southern Baptist theology through the years. This is a review of the portion of the book dealing with “Calvinistic Belief,” a current hot topic among Southern Baptists.

He dates the initial encounter between the emerging Baptists movement and the synod of Dort in the Netherlands (1618-1619) and the five articles crafted there. From the beginning the Baptist made it clear they opposed the confessions adopted there by the Dutch church. The five Canons of Dort are summarized by the acronym TULIP standing for:

Total depravity
Unconditional grace
Limited atonement
Irresistible grace and the
Preservation of the saints.

The last of these is the primary one with which the original Baptists agreed as do most present day Baptists. The other four tenants are held by a vocal minority of Baptists.

Calvinists point out various Christian leaders who adhered to their beliefs. A far larger number can be noted who disagree with them. It is not a matter of who believes what but the validity of what is believed that matters. These held by an articulate minority of Baptists are presented with viable objectivity.

GOD UNCONDITIONALLY ELECTS SOME PEOPLE TO BE SAVED

Calvinists believe in what is known as “double predestination,” that is God predestined how people would respond to Him and foreknew they would respond. Baptists cannot reconcile this idea with such texts as II Peter 3:9 “the Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance…” and I Timothy 2:4 stating God “will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

In general Baptists believe God chose to save those who would of their own free will put their faith in Christ. They do not believe God in His sovereignty arbitrarily decided who would be saved and who damned. They believe God wants all people to be saved but will not override their free will given them by God.

Southern Baptists in general believe that to hold the Calvinistic view would result in their loss of evangelism and soul winning missions efforts.

CHRIST DIED FOR THE ELECT ONLY

Calvinists believe in “penal substitution” regarding Christ’s death. They believe that Christ died for only the elect. This is called “limited atonement” in that they believe the atonement is limited in that it was intended only for he elect.

Baptists believe in “general atonement,” that is Christ died for all sinners and by their free will they determine whether to respond to it receptively in faith. Only a minority of Baptists believe Christ died just for the elect.

ALL PEOPLE ARE TOTALLY DEPRAVED

Calvinists believe that since all persons are spiritually dead they cannot repent and respond to God. They hold that a person must first be born again then they can respond to God in faith and repent.

Most Baptists agree no one can save him or her self. They believe salvation is all by God’s grace through faith in Christ. Repentance and faith are held by them not to contribute to salvation but are the means whereby the all sufficient grace of God is received. There is no merit in receiving grace. All merit is in grace being given by God.

GOD’S GRACE IS IRRESISTIBLE

Calvinists believe God’s grace cannot be resisted by those chosen by God to be saved. Calvinists believe that if this is not true God is not sovereign.

Southern Baptists in general believe that God’s grace can be resisted and this results in a person not being saved. They also believe in the sovereignty of God and that He sovereignly gave man a free will with which to respond or not respond. They believe that for God to give such freedom and then respect it does not constitute a diminishment of the sovereignty of God but a recognition of the way in which the sovereign God has chosen to relate to human beings.

PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

Southern Baptists are in general agreement on the concept of the security of the believer known as “once saved always saved” or preservation of the saints.

There is a slight semantic difference in what Calvinists believe on this topic. They believe in the perseverance of the saints.

(The following two paragraphs are a sidebar to the book review.)<
Put side by side the difference becomes clear.

SOUTHERN BAPTIST Preservation of the saints God does it It is based on God’s promises It is absolute

CALVINIST Perseverance of the saints Man does it It is based on man’s performance It is relative

Contrary to the concept of “it is all about grace” this last point actually means the Calvinists position on the subject is works based. This leaves some Calvinists hoping they have done enough good work. Baptist know for sure God has done a perfect work.

When the Southern Baptist Convention was organized in 1845 five traditions were represented. One was known as the Charleston tradition, which was Calvinistic. The Sandy Creek tradition discounted Calvinism and emphasized evangelism. The Georgia tradition represented the Southern regionalism of the Convention. The Tennessee tradition emphasized the distinctiveness of Baptists churches. The Southwest tradition stressed evangelical-denominationalism. The Convention sided against the Calvinist tradition and with the evangelical persuasion. The Sandy Creek tradition prevailed. That is the doctrinal foundation of most Southern Baptist churches. Their heritage is other than Calvinistic. There have always been some in the ranks of Southern Baptists with Calvinistic leanings. Some are people of note. However, the denomination in general has always supported the position of its founders who sided against the Calvinistic tradition.

Humphreys concluded that in light of this Southern Baptists who resist Calvinism may be called traditional Baptists in the sense that the first Baptist resisted Calvinism, and in the sense that today most Southern Baptists resist it.

THE WAY WE WERE, by Fisher Humphreys, Smyth & Helwys, Macon, Georgia, revised 2002, pp. 67-73.

Covert Calvinists

There is more growing in the garden than a TULIP.

This is not about the doctrine of Calvinism it is about the tactics of many Baptists who are Calvinists. I don’t want to paint with a brush too broad. Not all Calvinists act alike and virtually everything said about them is denied by others among them.

Having written on the subject the best thing I have been called in reactionary emails is sub-human. Bigoted, ignorant, untruthful, unlearned, and some not as nice terms have been in email messages. They have written long messages filled with numerous questions to which they demand answers. Failure to respond in detail is reason to be branded unenlightened. Some of their smarmy comments are degrading. They can’t be convicted of being laconic. Any attempt to respond lovingly and logically is met with a paroxysm. Efforts to be personally gracious result in a vitriolic cudgel.

I am sure that is not indicative of all Calvinists. As a matter of fact I have some warm and personal friends who are Calvinists. However, those emailing their defenses are not warm but hot. It seem strange that those who claim it is all by grace show so little grace. Where did civility, courtesy, and common sense go?

The biggest disagreement I have with a large segment of modern Calvinists is not just doctrine but spirit and style.

Many have worked their way into local churches as covert Calvinists. They seem to operate on a no ask no tell basis. If representatives of a local church don’t know what a Calvinist believes and how to ask questions subversion often occurs. Once a Calvinist pastor comes into a church his approach seems to be not to preach it from the pulpit but to mentor or if you prefer disciple cell groups until their base is perceived to be strong enough to go public. Thus, they precipitate confusion and division in the church.

My appeal to any Calvinist among Southern Baptist is to be open, honest, and above board. Don’t be subversive. Have the courage of your convictions and in being considered by a church acknowledge from the beginning what you believe.

Some furtively teach a “Baptist Catechism” by John Piper to the children of parents who would strongly object to the content if they knew what was taught. At least one such pastor has said he would have to free the children from the ideas of their brainwashed parents.

From among those they have indoctrinated they seek to establish elders in order that they might have a group of power brokers.

Even a truth can be a seed of discord. If Calvinism were true at all points bringing it into a fellowship not disposed to embrace it sows discord. God hates sowers of seed of discord.

If persons are Calvinists let them be proud and open about it. They should let a church know in advance what they are getting. To be a stealth Calvinist is deceptive and dishonest.

Some profess to be evangelical Calvinists. With rare exception Baptists churches where influence is gained have a dramatically reduced evangelistic ministry. An elemental observation of individual Calvinists indicated the expression evangelical Calvinism is meretricious. Many no longer conclude worship with an invitation or promote soul winning.

They profess to believe in missions but missions as defined by their actions means social work not soul winning. There are a rare few Calvinists who believe in witnessing to the lost. Such is by no means the norm. However, the few who do are held up as proof Calvinists are soul winners. Why should there be any urgency if God has already decided who He is going to save and His grace can’t be resisted?

In general most Calvinists are more concerned about converting people to Calvinism than to calling persons to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. They tend to have one theme —- Calvinism. Their argumentative temperament does little to attract people to Christ or encourage an open and honest dialogue.

Engaging in such repartee is not my calling.

Scholars such as educators can admirably debate the issue but the average congregation into which it is introduced engages in divisive conflict unfortunately. Theologians among our British predecessor would engage in heated debate over theological issues and when finished go enjoy a cup of tea together and socialize. That is not the mentality shown me by Calvinists within the Baptist community. Acidulous comments are not becoming of God’s children.

Caustic Calvinists attack others who profess to follow Christ with the same spirit with which they attack their own who are out of fellowship. They “treat them like the heathen.” In reality they treat them antithetically to the way Christ treated many heathen. Christ was so compassionate toward heathen He was accused of being their friend (Matthew 11:19 Luke 7:34). He never spoke of them as hopeless outsiders. On some occasions he even complimented them (Matthew 9:10ff; 11:19; 21:23; Luke 18:10ff). Matthew and Zacchaeus, two heathen tax collectors were drawn to Christ as friends.

My experience with many Calvinists is not what would attract me to them as friends. In relating I have found they interpret thoughtful gestures of a conciliatory nature and/or warmth as a weakness identifying you as a person vulnerable to attack and attack they do. A sulfurous attack is not likely to win friends or influence people in a positive way.

It has been my good fortune in recent years to be associated with faculty members and students from three colleges in Michigan founded on Calvinism. My relationship has been most cordial and enjoyable. They have manifested no combative spirit. Conversely they have been most gracious and friendly. I perceive a mutual love and acceptance. Their spirit is that which Southern Baptist’s Calvinists need to exemplify.

They evidence there are gracious Calvinists who practice civility. To them and other such Calvinists no offense is intended by this article. It is their opprobrious colleagues who as herein described who offend more people than they attract. They destroy any bridge of harmony. To the civil and gracious Calvinists I want to thank you for emulating the spirit of our beloved Christ to those of us who do not believe as you. Many of us who labor under the banner of the cross believe in the sovereignty of our loving and all gracious God without believing in all points like you yet respect and love you. Let’s not destroy one another and give the lost world reason to revel over our conduct.

Is Baptism Essential for Salvation?

To establish where we are going the answer in a word is: NO.

Some who believe in works salvation assert it is an essential act of obedience in order to receive salvation.

Scripture declares salvation is by the grace of God not of works (Ephesians 2:8,9). We are not saved by works but to work (Ephesians 2:10). We are not baptized in order to be saved but because we have been saved.

There are more than 150 verses in the New Testament that assert salvation is based on God’s grace and it efficacious when man responds with a faith commitment. Some texts are:
Matthew 26:28; John 1:12; 3:15-18, 36; 5:24; 6:35, 47; Acts 16:31, Ephesians 2:8,9; II Timothy 1:12; Hebrew 9:14; Revelation 1:5.

These and other texts eliminate all human efforts to earn, merit, or deserve God’s favor.

If in studying Scripture there is a verse the meaning of which is cloudy turn to a text on the same subject which is clear and interpret the unclear one in light of the clear one. That is, when a passage standing alone seems to have one or two meanings always accept the one in harmony with other texts.

Persons insisting on baptism being essential to salvation group unclear texts and select their personal preference without regard for the clear ones on the subject. They often take an additional step and disregard the clear passages or at best misinterpret them.

There are some passages that standing alone appear to support the position that baptism is essential to salvation. These when properly understood in relation to salvation by grace through faith and not of works become clear. Some such are:

MARK 16: 16
“He that believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”

The last phrase of verse 16 makes it clear not being baptized is not what causes a person not to be saved, but not trusting in Christ is.

ACTS 2: 38
“Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins….”

The Greek word translated “for,” eis, can be translated “because” and often has the meaning of “because of.”

One may say, “I am going to the mall for a pair of shoes,” meaning to get a pair of shoes. Used in this way “for” means to obtain a pair of shoes.

One may say, “I am going to jail for shoplifting a pair of shoes.” Used in this manner “for” means “because of” stealing a pair of shoes.

This verse does not teach a person is baptized in order to obtain salvation but because of being saved.

ACTS 22: 16
“Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

A bit of understanding of the meaning of the Greek from which this is translated helps.

“Arise” and “wash” are two Greek imperatives.

“Baptized” and “calling” are two Greek aorist participles.

The participles “baptized” and “calling” are thus to be understood at the same time as the action of the main verb. The washing away of sins is thus seen as a result of having called on the Lord. This harmonized this passage with the many teaching salvation is by grace alone.

JOHN 3: 1,5
Water as mentioned here refers to water involved in physical birth not baptism.

Physical birth is referred to as being born of “water” and spiritual birth, the second birth, is the reference of being “born of the Spirit.”

I CORINTHIANS 12:13
“For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body—….”

As an act the word “baptized,” baptizo, meant to immerse. It was used to speak of being identified with a person or thing. Persons were spoken of as being “baptized unto Moses” (I Cor. 10:2). Such did not mean they were immersed in Moses but rather identified with him. Hence, by the Spirit we are identified with the body of Christ.

The “body” referenced here is not the local church but the spiritual body of Christ” (Ephesians 1:22,23).

This passage does not refer to water baptism but to the baptism of the Spirit into Christ.  

I PETER 3:21
“There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”  

Bottom line: salvation is possible because Christ is risen from the dead not our putting away the filth of the flesh.

Verse 20 helps understand this verse. The eight saved in the days of Noah were saved “though water” not by the water. “…were brought safely through the water” is the translation give by “The New Testament in Modern Speech.”

Baptism is the answer “of a good conscience toward God.” The Greek word translated “answer,” eperotema, is a technical business term. In a business contract there is a time of question and answer: “Do you understand and accept the terms of this contract and agree to abide by them?” With the answer of “yes” the contract becomes binding.

This verse means God wants to know if you accept His terms of salvation and service in my Kingdom and will you abide by them? If so, signify it by being baptized. Baptism is intended to be a “Yes” answer to the question. Baptism is an act which is intended to say, “I accept the terms of God, that is, that I have been saved by faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is my good conscience pledge that I have accepted Christ and His terms.”

The idea of the effectiveness of baptism is contingent upon the resurrection of our Lord and the grace it provides. It is His grace not baptism that saves a person. Baptism is our pledge of commitment to the resurrected Lord.

ROMANS 6:1-8
This reference is not to water baptism but Spirit baptism. Persons thinking it to refer to water baptism find no encouragement in the text to support such a concept.

Church Discipline

MATTHEW 18: 15-17
The church community needs to know how to deal with failure and sin. This necessitates a pattern for reconciliation. If action is taken the person “sinned against” is to initiate the action of restoration. The goal is to win and restore relationships.

A surface reading of the passage is much more legalistic than anything Jesus ever said. A background of the day and the spirit of Christ helps understanding what it actually teaches.

First, the church did not exist during Christ’s life time. The passage seems to represent a fully organized and functioning church such as today. This could not have been the reference.

The Greek word translated “church” in this passage is EKKLESIA. It was a common term for those called out, a congregation of any sort. In Acts 7:38 it is used to refer to the congregation of the children of Israel.

As EKKLESIA relates to the New Testament church it has a two fold application:

• Primarily it refers to all called by and to Christ in salvation, the universal church.
• Only in a secondary sense does it refer to the local church.

Matthew 18: 17 refers to “heathen and tax collectors.” It should be remembered Jesus was accused of being a friend of such people (Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:34). He never spoke of them as hopeless outsiders. On occasion He even praised them: Matthew 9:10ff,11:19; 21:23; and Luke 18:10ff.

Notice the individual “sins against you” indicates it is a personal matter not a group affair. The issue is one to be settled between two people. The subject at hand is stated, “if your brother sins against you” (Vs. 15). This does not grant the right to legislate what is and what isn’t sin. The sin of reference in verse 15 is in context identified in verse 10 as despising a person and is not a reference to all wrong. In light of Peter’s question posed in verse 21, it has to do with a personal difference. This is one of the “little ones” (Vs. 10) who has gone “astray” (Vs. 12). The purpose is to get back the “straying” one (Vs. 12).

STEP ONE:

Go to the individual privately to avoid embarrassment and show honor for the offender. The norm often is to talk to everyone but the one considered to be an offended. It is between two people. 

The spirit of what Christ said was, “If anyone sins against you it is your responsibility to take the initiative and spare no effort to make things right between you.” This is to be a personal meeting between the two not an email or letter. It is not to be done with a censorious spirit but a sympathetic one. The purpose is to gain your brother (Vs. 15).

The passage does not limit the number of times the offended person is to go to the offended in order to be reconciled.

Peter’s question and Christ’s answer in Matthew 18:21 indicates how tolerant a person should be of an offender: “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him?” Christ’s answer, “seventy times seven” reveals the spirit of genuine forgiveness knows no limits. Forgiveness is a condition of the heart not a matter to be calculated. What Christ meant was forgive without ever stopping.

STEP TWO:

If that fails take a small group of responsible wise persons who are Spirit filled and mature in the Bible and go again. Deuteronomy 19: 15 is a background for this saying.

This step can be a check-off for the person who considers him or herself to be offended. It is at this point the seriousness of the matter becomes apparent. It may lead the one considered to be offended to realize the “offense” may not justify this serious step.

The purposes of the witnesses is not just to condemn the person. The witnesses might well help the one who considers self to be sinned against to see his fault in the matter and prevent demands for reconciliation that are excessive or improper. The witnesses must be objective and fair to both parties. The witnesses can help talk things over in a loving positive atmosphere. The witnesses are not simply to witness against the offender but to be sure the one offended is not unreasonable. They thus protect all parties including the alleged offender.

STEP THREE:

If that doesn’t resolve the issue then a larger responsible group of mature loving believers can become involved. Their judgements must not be legalistic but rather based on love. The EKKLESIA does not mandate the entire church body as constituted today. Again, such did not exist at the time of this statement. It can be a responsible group of mature, Spirit filled, loving individuals with a good understanding of scriptural standards. The text would allow this. No “Judicial Board” should be elected to serve this function. Different people can be utilized in different cases. However, if a local church insists on the entire congregation being involved that also is permissible.

At some point the act of the unrepentant must be told to the church (Vs. 17). If this dramatic action does not lead the person to realize the gravity of his or her action and “he refuses even to hear the church” (Vs. 17). There is then reason for discipline.

If this fails Jesus says the person is to be treated “like a heathen and tax collector” (Matthew 18: 17).

Many interpret this to mean the person is to be treated as hopeless. That is not how Jesus treated heathen and tax collectors. A study of Scripture reveals He treated them with kindness and compassion. Matthew and Zacchaeus, two tax collectors, were drawn to Christ as best friends. Christ even dined with Zacchaeus.

Whatever this passage teaches it does not teach a person should be abandoned. It is a challenge to love and win him for Christ.

The idea of a local church electing to “withdraw fellowship”is contrary to the intent of this passage. If it wants to cancel formal membership that is another thing. The teaching of the passage is that if the church undertakes to discipline a person it commits itself to continued efforts to restore such a one.

Matthew 18: 18 used the expression “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven….”

This does not mean we have the authority to or not to forgive sins and bar a person from heaven. It teaches earthly relationships are lasting. Therefore, we should get them right.
MODERN ENACTMENT:

If a church congregation decides to bring a person before them and charge the person with specific sin caution must be exercised. In our culture a person can sue the church even if guilty as accused. If the body is going to conduct a hearing regarding a sinner a statement should be read before the proceeding begins that a matter of business is to be conducted by the church as an incorporated body and only members of the incorporation, the church, can be in attendance, all others are asked to excuse themselves. Once it is determined only members of the local church are present the proceeding can begin. Every conceivable effort should be made to avoid a matter coming to this end.

Calvinism and Non-Calvinism

The Acrostic “Tulip” Has Long Been Used to Identify the Five Points of Calvinism. Following Is a Response of a Position on These Same Five Points Based on an Acrostic of “Roses.” Belatedly I Have Come to Understand Dr. Timothy George Previously Used “Roses” As an Acrostic Giving Meaning Other Than Is Applied Here. With an Acknowledgment of His Use of the Terms the Following Alternate Application Is Offered. These Points Represent the Position Held by Non-Calvinists.
the Points As Utilized in the “Tulip” Are Not in Order of the Spelling but Are Listed As They Relate to a Similar Point Made by “Roses.”

Roses Tulip
Radical Depravity Total Depravity
These Two Points Agree We Can Do Nothing to Save Ourselves. These Points Are Enough Alike They Are Acceptable by Most Baptists.Overcoming Grace Irresistible Grace

Overcoming Grace Agrees That God Accomplishes Salvation
but Rather Than by a Deterministic Means He Allows Human Responsiveness to His Constant Wooing. Irresistible Grace Is Broadly Denied by Most Baptists in That It Teaches Those Predestined to Be Saved Can’t Resist Salvation.

Sovereign Election Unconditional Election
Sovereign Grace Allows for a Genuine Human Accountability to Respond to God. These Two Points Are Enough Alike They Are Acceptable by Most Baptists.Eternal Life Perseverance of the Saint

Perseverance of the Saints Suggest That Though We Are Saved by Grace We Are Kept by Works. We Are Saved and Kept by Grace.
Eternal Life Better Conveys This Idea. These Two Points Are Enough Alike They Are Accepted by Most Baptists.

Singular Redemption Limited Atonement
Singular Redemption Asserts Jesus Death Alone Is Sufficient to Save Everyone but Is Efficient Only for Those Who of Their Own Free Will Respond to the Grace of God and Repent and Believe. Limited Atonement Is the Least Acceptable by Most Baptists in That It Teaches Only Those Chosen by God Will Be Saved, That Is, Christ Died Only for Those Predestined to Be Saved.