Thank you to Dr. Thomas Nettles--professor of Historical Theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary--for his review of my book on Fuller and Calvin (here and here). Dr. Nettles' honest and constructive review may be viewed on page 88 here.

This is a flyer that is being distributed at my church; however, anyone interested is welcome. I hope to see some folks starting September 8th. Our web-site is www.fbclclibertycity.com or call 903.984.4494.

Denominationalism, Baptists, and the Bill of Rights

An appreciation for one’s denomination is not as prevalent today as it once was. Nevertheless, concerned members of the body of Christ should have an understanding and an appreciation for the heritage and contribution of their denomination. What are our distinctive beliefs? What have we contributed to the Christian community and society generally? These are important questions. Since I am a Baptist, I would like to recommend that you read a great article (here), written by Kenneth Keathley, regarding the Baptists key involvement in the adoption of our great nation’s Bill of Rights. 

HAPPY 4TH OF JULY  

Salvation: Not an Escape from the Material

I recently preached a sermon dealing with two competing doctrinal orientations from the first-century: sensualism and the biblical Pauline model. We are often implored, from the broader community, to consider the brevity of life, and that we should, as a result, live our lives to the fullest. Of course, this is true, but not in the sense that we ought to embrace a gluttonous lifestyle, morally speaking. Rather, we must make the most of the short time we have by focusing on our hope in Christ—on our hope for a glorified physical (i.e., material) eternal existence in the presence of God. Salvation is not an escape from the material, as many (e.g., Plato) have supposed; instead, it is an escape from sin and death. We should, then, make the most of our material existence (laboring for the gospel) in the here and now, as we look forward to the material existence that awaits us in eternity. Video for the sermon may be viewed HERE.

God's Word Trumps Personal Experience

I preached this last Sunday morning on 2 Peter 1:12-21. Peter is assuring his readers that he will continually repeat and reinforce the message that has been entrusted to him. The truth of the gospel was not a fairytale to Peter. It was not just a collection of stories that encouraged mankind to live elevated lives. No, Peter claims that he was an eyewitness not only to the earthly ministry of Christ, but also to the transfiguration. This event was when God the Father spoke in affirmation of Jesus, and in doing so confirmed the deity of Christ (the Greek phrasing here speaks of a oneness of being). To Peter, the truth of the gospel was real; he had seen it and experienced it for himself. But, when you move past this section in the passage to verse 19 you see Peter reveal something incredible. Peter tells his readers that we have something more sure than personal experience; we have the word of the prophets. Now, Peter is referring not just to the major and minor prophets in the Old Testament; he intends to indicate the Old Testament Scriptures generally (it should not be overlooked that just two chapters over in 3:16 Peter refers to Paul’s New Testament writings as Scripture as well). In other words, the word of God trumps personal experience. If we are seeking truth in this life, Peter would argue, God’s word is more sure than anything else, personal experience or otherwise.

Below is a link to the full sermon video:  

Sermon video link 

Thank You, Dr. David Allen

After considering the situation for a bit now, I have decided not to write an extended piece on the recently published A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation (see my previous piece here where I make some preliminary comments on the previously mentioned title). Since there have been so many responses from both sides (many of which were angrily toned), it seems unnecessary for me to attempt to offer something original here. I will, however, recommend that you read (here) a recently released article addressing the perennially important debate between “Calvinism” verses “Traditionalism” in Baptist life. Dr. Allen, though taking a position somewhat different than my own, has written a wonderful and conciliatory piece. Below are two quotes that I find particularly helpful.  

"If we are to come together in unity, we must do so as Baptists, not as Calvinists and Traditionalists.”

“Fifth, generally speaking, all Southern Baptists are concerned about theology. With respect to the current discussion, some of my Calvinist friends as well as some of my Traditionalist friends need to become better and more careful theologians and historians.”

A Preliminary Response to “A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God’s Plan of Salvation”

A recent doctrinal statement has been released wherein Southern Baptists are implored to reject Calvinism as a theological benchmark and to embrace a series of doctrinal affirmations and denials that presumably affirm a kind of baptistic Arminianism. And indeed a number of prominent and respectable Baptist ministers and theologians have signed their name in approval. The document may be read here.

I have only briefly looked over this document, but I plan on reading it much more carefully in the near future. I will blog on this more fully at a later time. Nonetheless, I have a couple of preliminary observations:

“. . .we are asserting that the vast majority of Southern Baptists are not Calvinists. . . We believe it is time to move beyond Calvinism as a reference point for Baptist soteriology.”

Though I generally agree that Calvinism as a baptistic nomenclature is less than helpful (for reasons of ecclesiology and missiology rather than soteriology), I am troubled when the writer asserts that the majority of Baptists are not Calvinists. He may be right about this (in a robust 5 point sense); yet, I find myself asking: how does the writer know? In other words, he did not publish his research.

Also, something else disturbing to me is that the doctrinal affirmations and denials lack nuance. For example, when speaking of election, double predestination is assumed, and there is a failure to acknowledge moderate Calvinism which opts for preterition as an alternative—something that is historically quite common among Calvinists (Andrew Fuller for instance). The result of this lack of nuance is that though I realize my theological views are often different from the writer of this document, I am nonetheless affirming and denying right along with the document (with some obvious exceptions of course). And, the writer, as a result, is in danger, at times, of making a caricature of this so called “New Calvinism.” If we can agree (and I’m preaching to both sides now) that many of our theological conclusions are the same, then, perhaps, we can co-exist with a greater degree of unity. More on this later…