Southern Baptist Robin Foster On Simply Being Baptist

Here is a good quote from Robin Foster from SBC Today:

I am a Baptist, pure and simple in the historical and biblical sense. I believe being a “good” Baptist means we are to be people of the book and that the truest form of a New Testament local church is a visible group of regenerate Christians who covenant together to practice believers baptism by immersion, carrying out the two ordinances of the church: baptism and the Lord’s Supper (participants are to be saved and properly baptized), organized under a congregational system of polity, submitting to the Lordship of Christ, and propagating the gospel to the lost. As a “good” Baptist, one should uphold the doctrines of inerrancy, priesthood of all believers, and soul competency. Now, in a biblical sense, there is no one “good” but God. I am only borrowing the language used by both speakers, but also in a biblical sense I am under the strong belief that these doctrinal stands, working together, identify us as Baptists. I again revisit the question, “Why can’t we all identify ourselves as Baptists and be free to be a Calvinist or a non-Calvinist?” Why does identifying with Calvinism make one a better Baptist than a non-Calvinist? The answer, it doesn’t. Both groups have been instrumental in passing on a rich heritage to us. To classify us into a hierarchy based on our understanding of soteriology creates nothing but worldly division. Again, for all including those who distort Calvinism as the dreaded death knell to Southern Baptists, let’s be Baptist and be free to choose how we define our soteriology.

I would prefer to be known as a Baptist pastor who diligently searches the scriptures for God’s wisdom, shepherds the flock for which I have been given responsibility, and tells others about the love of Jesus for them. Pure and simple.

Might I add an amen---now if the rest of the SBC would follow suit maybe they could get back to the basics of being Baptist. A return to Liberty Of Conscience and Soul Freedom---the traditional Baptist virtues for starters would allow the freedom for one "to be Baptist and be free to choose how (they) define (their) soteriology" rather than blind creedalism. Even better---putting Christ at the center and as the main point of all things will eradicate "the worldly divisions" within the Body of Christ as a whole---for focusing on Christ and participating actively in His redemptive work eliminates the need to get caught up in the external trappings of religion and the non-essentials of faith.

On God's Creation And God's Election

Anyone that reads Reformed theology will soon come to know that God's elective acts are firmly rooted in God's creative acts. Whereas all Reformed theology gets it right to tie the act of God's creating to God's electing---I must part ways with the Calvinist stripe of Reformed theology on several points of Tulip theology. First of all, Tulip theology is mainly associated with predestination though predestination has nothing to do with Tulip theology. Here are all the points of Tulip: Total Hereditary Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints. I agree with most all of these points except for the way that Calvinists define them.

On Total Depravity---whereas depravity of humanity is true, no state of depravity is total or else experience of God's salvific power would be impossible even if by the sole act of God. Rather humanity is in a state of spiritual blindness until the Holy Spirit prompts individuals to respond to God's effectual call. Arminian Today: Article 3: An Arminian Commentary on the Five Articles of the Remonstrance, Classical Arminianism: WHAT IS CLASSICAL ARMINIANISM? PART THREE: TOTAL DEPRAVITY, John Fletcher on Being “Dead in Sin” Once then when an individual responds to God's effectual call via the Holy Spirit's prompting then the individual's will is totally freed from the bondage of sin.

Election is both conditional and unconditional depending on the ontological and empirical object and subject of election. Unconditional election then is only true of Christ, for Christ is both elected and reprobated for us in the event of the Incarnation and the Crucifixion and in the harrowing of hell. Jesus as elected one pertains to Jesus being elected as both God and man for us from the foundation of the world. Jesus was reprobated for us in the moment during His Incarnation that He became sin for us at the advent of the Cross. http://theevangelicalcalvinist.blogspot.com/2009/08/karl-barths-election-alternative-to.html, ::: How Barth’s Doctrine of Election Informs His Doctrine of Justification ::: The election of individual believers then is conditional upon Christ then as all who are in Christ are elected in Christ and must continue in faith and belief in Christ in order to be saved. Classical Arminianism: EN CHRISTO Election then is a matter of Christological truth rather than a random and arbitrary act of determinism.

The Atonement is both limited and unlimited depending on the effects of the Atonement one is talking about. The full effects of the Atonement are limited in scope but not in number. The scope by which the Atonement's full effects are limited is that only those who have true faith and belief in Christ shall be saved---which is the full effect of the Atonement---salvation. Arminian Today: The Extent of the Atonement, Classical Arminianism: LIMITED ATONEMENT: BIBLICAL MANDATE OR SYSTEMATIC PRESUMPTION? (PART ONE), Classical Arminianism: LIMITED ATONEMENT: BIBLICAL MANDATE OR SYSTEMATIC PRESUMPTION? (PART TWO) However the Atonement is unlimited in extent and range as the world is continually in a state of reconciliation and redemption and no one is beyond redemption. Also as Article IV of the Saxon Visitation Articles states:

Article IV. On Predestination and the Eternal Providence of God.
The pure and true Doctrine of our Churches on this Article.

1] That Christ died for all men, and, as the Lamb of God, took away the sins of the whole world.

2] That God created no man for condemnation; but wills that all men should be saved and arrive at the knowledge of truth. He therefore commands all to hear Christ, his Son, in the gospel; and promises, by his hearing, the virtue and operation of the Holy Ghost for conversion and salvation.

3] That many men, by their own fault, perish: some, who will not hear the gospel concerning Christ; some, who again fall from grace, either by fundamental error, or by sins against conscience.

4] That all sinners who repent will be received into favor; and none will be excluded, though his sins be red as blood; since the mercy of God is greater than the sins of the whole world, and God hath mercy on all his works.

Scripture also testifies that Jesus has sheep in other pastures and that they will know Him by His voice.

Next Grace is unconditional but resistible hence those unwilling to believe or continue in belief in Christ. Classical Arminianism: "I" for IRRESISTIBLE GRACE, Arminian Today: Prevenient Grace Compared With Irrestible Grace,The Arminian and Calvinist Ordo Salutis: A Brief Comparative Study Wesley on the resistibility of grace:

It is generally supposed, that repentance and faith are only the gate of religion; that they are necessary only at the beginning of our Christian course, when we are setting out in the way to the kingdom.... And this is undoubtedly true, that there is a repentance and a faith, which are, more especially, necessary at the beginning: a repentance, which is a conviction of our utter sinfulness, and guiltiness, and helplessness.... But, notwithstanding this, there is also a repentance and a faith (taking the words in another sense, a sense not quite the same, nor yet entirely different) which are requisite after we have "believed the gospel;" yea, and in every subsequent stage of our Christian course, or we cannot "run the race which is set before us." And this repentance and faith are full as necessary, in order to our continuance and growth in grace, as the former faith and repentance were, in order to our entering into the kingdom of God.

Finally there is a perseverance of the saints but it is not a "once saved always saved" type of perseverance but one centered and contingent upon continued faith and belief in Christ. Luther on falling from grace also from the Saxon Visitation Articles:

The False and Erroneous doctrine of the Calvinists On Predestination and the Providence of God.
1] That Christ did not die for all men, but only for the elect.

2] That God created the greater part of mankind for eternal damnation, and wills not that the greater part should be converted and live.

3] That the elected and regenerated can not lose faith and the Holy Spirit, or be damned, though they commit great sins and crimes of every kind.

4] That those who are not elect are necessarily damned, and can not arrive at salvation, though they be baptized a thousand times, and receive the Eucharist every day, and lead as blameless a life as ever can be led.

Source: The Creeds of Christendom, Volume III, by Philip Schaff (Copyright, 1877, by Harper & Brothers.

http://classicalarminianism.blogspot.com/search/label/Perseverance%20of%20the%20Saints,Arminian Today: Perseverance: The False and the True, http://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/category/perseverance/page/2/

Anyways these are my personal views upon which I believe the Doctrine Of Election either stands or falls. However when you get down to it, your views on election are informed by that which you find most consistent with God's self-revelation in Christ. See also: Martin Luther and the Doctrine of Predestination and http://threehierarchies.blogspot.com/2005/08/lutheranism-between-calvinism-and.html.

D. A. Carson Calls Christians To Biblical Prayers

D. A. Carson is one Conservative Evangelical scholar that I respect and admire, but his recent comments on prayer at Biltmore Baptist Church 's prayer conference are a little off. The Biblical Recorder reports:

Carson spoke about how the word of God should reform every area in a Christian’s life, especially prayer.

As Paul did in Ephesians 3, Christians should pray for the life-transforming power of Christ and a better understanding of the limitless dimensions of Christ’s love. In returning to a biblical standard of prayer, Christians must pray for Christ’s power to strengthen and transform. The Christian must cry out for “a demonstration of God’s power” to work in him, making him “the habitation of the almighty God,” Carson said.

Paul desired for the Ephesians to be established in the Savior’s transforming love and to know God’s love in such a way that “knowing it might surpass all that could be known.” Carson directed his audience to ask God “to show you the ugliness of sin and the spectacular love of Christ that deals with it.” Then “you will see how wide, long, high and deep is this love of Jesus that surpasses knowledge,” he said.

The church needs intercessors and Christians must beg God, as Moses did during the account of the golden calf, for mercy. Christians must beg God not to pour out upon His church the judgment it deserves. “Moses seeks the favor of God and asks Him to relent and not bring disaster,” Carson said. Moses pleads upon God’s mercy and God relents. God does not drift through interactions with His people but “He expects this unrelenting intercession, this dynamic experience,” Carson said.

Carson urged believers to acquire a vision of God’s holiness, the awfulness of sin and empathy for fellow believers that would “lead you to stand in the gap” as Moses did for the Israelites. He asked God to “blot out” his life if He would not forgive the Israelites. Moses stood in the gap, willing to take the punishment. Carson admitted, “It is rare I find myself thinking of things like that.” Yet, Christians must think and pray like that, he said.

In response to Moses’ plea, God unpacks His character, showing He is compassionate and gracious but cannot let the guilty go unpunished. Moses begs God to go with the Israelites, whether he shows compassion or justly punishes them. He knew the Israelites were nothing without God. Believers must recognize, as did Moses, that without God, “everything else is a disaster.” There is no one to whom Christians can go except God. Therefore, pray and beg for God’s presence, regardless of what it brings, Carson said.

Revival is God-given, but Christians must reform their prayers so that they seek God and not an event. Prayer for revival must not simply be prayer for an experience. Rather, it must be that God’s people be holy and delight in Him rather than self-made pursuits of “religiosity,” Carson said. Christians must return to a biblical standard of prayer and not any other man-made measure. This is why Carson urged believers to pray scripturally and “find life, purpose, and hope” in Christ through His word.

While I agree with Carson, "Christians must pray for Christ’s power to strengthen and transform." However, I don't agree that we should pray "biblically"---whatever praying "biblically" means. Who gets to decide what a biblical prayer is anyway---you, me, D. A. Carson, the Pope, John Calvin, etc.? Nowhere in the scriptures does it say that believers should pray biblically. However, Christians should always pray Christocentricly as Jesus gives us the standard of Christian prayer in The Lord's Prayer:

Pray then like this:

“Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil. (Matthew 6:9-13 ESV).

Prayers should also be individualistic and subjective as prayers are believers' intimate connection to the Divine. Praying scriptures is sometimes helpful though such as in the lectio divina model, but there are some scriptures we shouldn't pray such as Psalm 137:9 and Psalm 143:12 for example as neither one of those scriptures are consistent with God's self-revealed character in the person and work of Christ. After all, Jesus should be at the center of all our prayers. In closing, I will leave you with two quotes from Karl Barth on prayer:

"To clasp the hands in prayer is the beginning of an uprising against the disorder of the world."
— Karl Barth.

[P]rayer is the most intimate and effective form of Christian action. All other work comes far behind, and it is Christian work… only to the extent that it derives from prayer…

See also: Karl Barth: The Liberation of the Christian: From Anxiety to Prayer and:

Jesus Christ lived the perfect life as God intended for man here on earth by deriving all that He did from God the Father. "I do nothing of My own initiative" (John 5:30; 8:28; 12:49; 14:10), Jesus said, "but the Father abiding in Me does His works" (John 14:10). Jesus lived the life of the Perfect Man2 for every moment in time for thirty-three years by constantly living in the prayer of faith. He chose to be receptive to the activity of God the Father in all that He did and said. Karl Barth explains,

"He became the first One properly to take and receive the divine gift. He takes up towards God the position of One who has nothing, who has to receive everything from God. He trusts in God that He will in fact receive it from Him. He entrusts everything to Him. This is how He lives...a life controlled and upheld by the grace of God. In all His life as a man Jesus was only and altogether a Suppliant. As the Son of God He is Himself altogether the divine gift and answer. God triumphed in this man. He did it because this man actually asked, and asking took and received; because this man sought, and seeking found; because this man knocked, and as He knocked, it was opened to Him. In this way God triumphed in the asking. This man prayed. He prayed to God for His unspeakable gift."3

Dr. Jonas: Hübmaier Could've Been As Big As Luther And Calvin

Dr. Jonas talks Balthasar Hübmaier with Tripp: Balthasar Hübmaier, Another Flaming Heretic with Dr. Glenn Jonas: Homebrewed Christianity 46 and says that things might have been different if Hübmaier hadn't been executed by burning. Who knows maybe Anabaptist thought would have been more received in Evangelical circles today rather than the blatant love of all things Calvinism---not that there is anything wrong with Calvinism in and of itself---just Fungelicalism approximation that Calvinism equals the Gospel.

Anyways, give a listen to my friend Tripp's Podcast with Dr. J., one of my favorite people and professors while I was at Campbell.

The Movie Signs And Faith

This past Wed. night, we discussed the movie, Signs as we watched that movie for the last two Weds. Vick didn't have a handout prepared as we were going to watch the movie, The Big Kahuna, but had to substitute Signs instead. For that movie the question: how can we share our faith in this postmodern age? is appropriate. But anyways---back to Signs---here is some general background info on the movie:

Signs is a 2002 science fiction thriller film written, produced, and directed by M. Night Shyamalan starring Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, Rory Culkin, and Abigail Breslin. Although the plot revolves around aliens and crop circles, producer Frank Marshall said, "It's really about human emotions set in motion by a supernatural event." The film received generally positive critical reception and was one of the highest grossing films of 2002.

(As a side note, since Vick is involved in the movie industry, I'd just like to say that one of my relatives on my dad's side, Don Smetzer got to know the Culkin family really well when he was the still photographer for Home Alone).

One of the issues of the movie, Signs, is the loss of faith. In one of the key scenes at 9:17-9:31 of this clip:

reminds me somewhat of 1:37-1:53 of this clip from Amadeus and Family Guy: ---if just for the sense of feeling abandoned by God. Loss of faith is a mystery, but for whatever reason---it happens and tragedy like in the movie is a common cause of it. As an example the esteemed textual critic, Bart D. Ehrman:

... says the reason he turned to agnosticism was due to his inability to deal with the problem of evil and suffering as it is presented in the bible and not the reliability of the text.

Vick brought up this verse within the context of the movie:

Romans 8:29 RSV- For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren.

In Greek: οτι ους προεγνω και προωρισεν συμμορφους της εικονος του υιου αυτου εις το ειναι αυτον πρωτοτοκον εν πολλοις αδελφοις

Transliterated: oti ous proegnô kai proôrisen summorphous tês eikonos tou uiou autou eis to einai auton prôtotokon en pollois adelphois

For a more detailed study of this verse see: Romans 8:29. The two key terms are:

proginosko--- Definition
Strong's - to know beforehand, that is, foresee: - foreknow (ordain), know (before).
Thayer's - to have knowledge before hand; to foreknow - of those whom God elected to salvation; to predestinate.
Webster's - To have previous knowledge of; to foresee.
And: προώρισεν (proōrisen)--- Definition
-to predetermine, decide beforehand
in the NT of God decreeing from eternity
to foreordain, appoint beforehand

Predestination:
A Calvinist understanding of this verse is that individuals are randomly and arbitrarily chosen by God before God even created the world with no insight into individuals' lives as if God played Russian Roulette to determine who is saved. The Hyper-Calvinist view is that God even chose who is damned through no fault of their own. The Arminian understanding is that: "...God does not so much choose, but instead infallibly predicts, who will believe and, persevering, be saved. Although God knows from the beginning of the world who will go where, the choice is still with the individual." The Barthian view is that:

predestination only properly applies to God Himself. Thus, mankind is chosen for salvation in Jesus Christ, at the permanent cost of God's self-surrendered hiddenness, or transcendence. Thus, the redemption of all mankind is a devoutly to be wished for possibility, but the only inevitability is that God has predestined Himself, in Jesus Christ, to be revealed and given for mankind's salvation.

My view is somewhere between the Arminian and Barthian views, of course. One other note is the question of the Traditional understanding of one of God's attributes, Omniscience---which was subtly explored in the film. Although, I agree with the Traditional understanding, I am sympathetic to the valid question of Open Theism: does God know all? After all, Jesus who is God incarnate said:

Matthew 24:35-36 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

The Day and Hour Unknown
36"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[a] but only the Father.

Footnotes:

Matthew 24:36 Some manuscripts do not have nor the Son.

Todd Friel's Absurd Comments About Brian MacLaren

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Commentary:

At 0:54 Brian says that he is a plethora of denominations as truly Jesus is not limited to our denominational identity---I don't see why Todd thinks that's so wacky.

At 1:45 Brian explains that Jesus and truth aren't limited to Christianity as Jesus is truly Lord of all regardless of their beliefs. (See John 4:1-15 and TheoPoetic Musings: Intensive Gospel Study: John 4)--also, see this video:

---apparently Todd doesn't agree that Jesus is Lord of all. Also in 2:19 Brian believes in the orthodox view of holistic truth---apparently Todd heretical-ly rejects holistic truth.

At 2:46 Todd once again fixated on judging others' beliefs brings up hell---though I can agree with Todd that hell is a real theological concept---we still mustn't judge others beliefs just as Jesus didn't tell the Samaritan woman that she was going to hell for not believing as the Judean Jews did.

At 3:33 once again Todd speaks nonsense---dominioninism and Kingdom theology are not one in the same. Kingdom theology is putting the Lord's Prayer in action. Todd and his cohorts at Way Of The Master are dominionists trying to coerce people into buying into their conservative political views such as their anti-evolution/anti-abortion in all cases ideologies by setting guilt traps---see http://www.wayofthemasterradio.com/podcast/2008/10/14/october-14-2008-hour-2/ for example. Brian is not a dominionist and he is correct Jesus spoke more about life here on earth rather than an afterlife.

Todd at 3:36-4:10 misconstrues the Gospel as being about 3 propositions only, which he says scripture states---but he is wrong of course---scripture states that Jesus alone is the Gospel. Preaching, repentance and faith are means to viewing the Gospel (Jesus) but not the only means---Todd left out love, service, prayer, etc. Also---Luke 4.18-19, quoting from Isaiah 61 states:

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.”

Brian in 4:12-5:56 raises the issue of redemptive violence in the act of crucifixion which is a valid assessment---even if I don't entirely agree with his conclusions as Jesus willing sacrificed Himself in the face of evil and the world's violence. Todd however arrogantly chastises Brian by saying atonement by blood is the only way which eventhough I believe in blood atonement---I believe people are free to question the necessity of such a violent act of forgiveness. However, Todd's beef is not that but Brian's support of the Christus Victor view of the atonement (which is what the Early Church believed and is supported by scripture ie. I Corinthians 15: 53-58) rather than the Penal Substitutionary view of atonement, which Todd idolizes, because John Calvin first formulated the theory in it's present day form (by reading in legal terms into the bible---because Calvin was trained first as a lawyer before becoming a Magisterial Reformer).

In 6:46-7:31, Todd as usual appealing to Charles Spurgeon (who believed in the Calvinist heresy of individual predestination) to try to somehow prove that Brian is a heretic. It's interesting considering Todd's heretical fungelical teachings such as: that all sins are sins of the flesh fighting against the spirit/the flesh is evil, which is nothing short of Neo-Manichaeism and semi-Docetism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are your thoughts?