A few bloggers at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary have recently began examining Altar Calls/the Invitation System:

• Corey Reynolds is questioning the invitation system.
• Geoff Baggett has started a series entitled “Altar Call Confusion.”
  • Part I
  • Part II
• Timmy Brister has two related posts on the topic:
  • He identified the modern equivalents of Finney’s “New Measures”.
  • Then he argued how the invitation system undermines evangelism.

  [HT:: Said at Southern Seminary]

Last week, I discovered that my friend Brian Shank had posted to his blog on September 10th. This is significant because the last time he posted was December 2, 2006. I’m placing the entirety of his September 10th post here in that I think that it may interest and promote discussion among some of our readers.

The remainder of what follows was written by Brian Shank:

The Scriptures are clear that it is God who saves the lost from their sins (Psalm 3:8, Jonah 2:9), and that He has determined to do it through the hearing of His word. Thus we read, “faith comes through hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17, NKJV). And again, “It pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe” (I Corinthians 1:21, NKJV). It is the gospel that is “the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16, NKJV). If we want to reach those who are on the wide road which leads to destruction, to show them how they may be reconciled to God for all eternity, we must study and learn what the Scriptures teach. Too many people and churches have left the diligent study of the word of God in their efforts to reach a world that will be cast eternally into the lake of fire, for a man-made method of becoming like the world in order to reach the world. However, it is the “Holy Scriptures which is able to make you wise for salvation through Jesus Christ” (II Timothy 3:15, NKJV). Therefore, “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (II Timothy 2:15, NKJV). As this verse shows, this studying takes work, hard work, but we need to forsake our petty efforts to entertain the world into the Kingdom, and become dependent on the Lord and His word once again, obeying Him because we love Him(Proverbs 3:5-7, John 14:15, 21).

The greatest theological error in Southern Baptist churches today is a lack of emphasis on the importance of regenerate church membership, Paige Patterson said Sept. 26 at a luncheon at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Patterson said a lack of discernment concerning valid candidates for baptism and a weak understanding of the nature of believers’ baptism have caused this error.

“Somewhere along the line, the concept of believers’ baptism has been lost,” he said. “I do believe that Baptists have become the worst of the infant baptizers today. You look at how many people we are baptizing under age 5 today and you see that we don’t understand that until someone has had a regenerating experience with the Holy Spirit changing his life he is not an appropriate candidate for baptism.

“You also must have some method of church discipline. It (baptism) all has to do with a regenerate church membership. Make no mistake about it; the uniqueness of Baptist perspective is not baptism by immersion. The uniqueness of the Baptist perspective is the baptism of believers only. The biggest problem that we have today in our Baptist churches is an actual loss in the understanding of the believer’s church.” (By Garrett E. Wishall, October 03, 2007, The Towers Online.)

Whether or not you agree that the loss of emphasis on the importance of regenerate church membership is the greatest theological error in Southern Baptist churches today (and I expect this to be discussed in the comment thread), surely all Reformed-minded Baptists recognize this issue is one area that certainly needs immediate reformation. The fact that Paige Patterson, who has such influence in Southern Baptist life (in that he was an architect of the Conservative Resurgence, the President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, the President of the Southern Baptist Convention, and is now President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary), has recognized this problem is a good sign that the Southern Baptist Convention will finally resolve to actually address this at the national conference- perhaps allowing messengers to vote on Tom Ascol’s Resolution on Integrity in Church Membership, which vote should have taken place in 2006.

Below is a post in a series I am writing this week on issues related to the Southern Baptist Convention.

Let me frame this post by beginning with a few quotes in recent years.

Danny Akin (April 2006):

“Act with personal integrity in your ministry when it comes to this issue. Put your theological cards on the table in plain view for all to see, and do not go into a church under a cloak of deception or dishonesty. If you do, you will more than likely split a church, wound the Body of Christ, damage the ministry God has given you, and leave a bad taste in the mouth of everyone.”

Frank Page (May 26, 2006):

“We must have honesty about this issue. There are churches splitting across the convention because pastors are coming in quietly trying to teach Calvinism or Reformed theology without telling the pastor search committees where they stand. The vast majority of Southern Baptist churches are not Calvinistic in their theology and it’s causing some serious controversy.”

Bill Harrell (October 26, 2006):

“I think the problem of Calvinism in the SBC could be solved if we establish one ground rule. If a man wants to start a Calvinistic church, let him have at it. If a man wants to answer a call to a Calvinistic church he should have the freedom to do that, but that man should not answer a call to a church that is not Calvinistic, neglect to tell them his leanings, and then surreptitiously lead them to become a Calvinistic church. That is not to suggest that all of our Calvinistic friends do that, but when it is done it is divisive and hurtful.”

Morris Chapman (First - June 13, 2006; Second - March 15, 2007)

“If you wish, debate Calvinism. We should not fear theological debate as long as the participants understand they are brothers debating one another in a friendly environment. While Calvinism is a fair debate in the halls of academia, we do not need to bring the debate into our churches at the cost of dividing our congregations.”

“One danger is that pastors are tempted to accept church pastorates in churches that are not Calvinistic, and then strive to drive them into the Calvinistic camp, thereby destroying an otherwise strong and healthy church.”

I think that’s enough quotes for now. Do you see a common thread here? Denominational executives have come out of the woodwork with warnings in the form of talking points telling young Calvinistic Baptists to stay out of non-Calvinistic churches. Young Calvinists like myself are told that we must “put all our theological cards on the table” with full disclosure of our soteriological and ecclesiological beliefs. Don’t get me wrong. I am all for that, but the problem comes when you talk to a pastor search committee who understands Calvinism through a book given them through their Baptist State Board of Missions by Fisher Humphreys who butchers the Bible and contorts the most fundamental understandings of Calvinistic doctrine. More and more non-Calvinistic churches are being given literature, sermons, and materials that is inaccurate, biased, and entirely unhelpful (if not Humphreys’ book, then Dave Hunt or Norm Geisler). The result is that it is impossible to talk about Calvinism to folks who have an altogether different definition from a different dictionary than Calvinists. To make matters more difficult, we are told, as aforementioned in Chapman’s quote that the issue of Calvinism is for academia, not the church.

(more…)