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.

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…