[Continued from Part 3]

4. What would you say is the most significant theological issue confronting Southern Baptists in this generation?

Calvinism is foremost, but glossology is emerging once more also. There are so many different schools of Calvinistic thought that no matter what is said to be a belief there are those of other schools who deny it. There are many admirable aspects of Calvinism with which most Souther Baptists agree. A high regard for the authority and integrity of Scripture, the belief that salvation is by grace alone, the atonement of Christ, and the belief that everything should be to the glory of God are broadly held concepts among Baptists. However, irresistible grace which teaches those predestined to be saved cannot resist salvation and limited atonement which says Christ died only for those predestined by God to be saved is where the road forks. This is where the introduction of the doctrines of Calvinism into a traditional Southern Baptist church becomes divisive. (more…)

[Continued from Part 2]

3. The issue of elder rule has been a controversial in many churches. What is your perspective on ruling elders as an expression of Baptist church polity and ecclesiology?

In the early church the terms “elders” (presbyteroi) and “bishops” or “overseers” (episkopoi) are used interchangeably as to functions not as titles or offices. The Bible gives clear insight regarding the roles of bishops and deacons but does not for elders leading many scholars to conclude it was not a separate office in the early church. There is no Scripture that teaches a church has to have a board of elders. The term “elder” has gone through an evolution since the Bible times. The present meaning and role is based on the role that evolved in subsequent years of the first century. Biblically the service of elders was to be performed by older individuals who related to the spiritual life within the church not the business affairs. Changing the of church governance can be traumatic for a congregation. If a church has a form of governance that works in place following a current trend is not advantageous. (more…)

[Continued from Part 1]

2. The resurgence of Calvinism in the SBC has been a controversial issue in some ways. What is your perspective on the resurgence in the SBC?

The school of doctrine is one thing. The method of introducing it into a local church and the contentious spirit of many current advocates are other matters of concern. Calvinism has been a nonissue issue among Southern Baptists for so many years most laypersons were not indoctrinated or even aware of its consideration in our ranks. Therefore most pastor search teams have not known to ask a potential pastor about it. Many pastors predisposed toward Calvinism have practiced a policy of don’t ask, don’t tell, and have come in fully aware the church was not committed to the doctrines of Calvinism. They conduct home cell study groups of confidants until they feel they have enough support to introduce it into the mainstream of the church. This has been highly disruptive to many local churches. It is a destructive deception. A potential pastor should be open and clear regarding the issue. The warrior spirit of many young Calvinists in attacking the integrity and intellect of those with whom they disagree is appalling and un-Christ like. Address principles and don’t attack personalities. Don’t try to defend a principle by attempting to destroy the reputation of a person. (more…)

A week ago today the Center for Theology and Ministry at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary interviewed Dr. Nelson Price. [HT:: Timmy Brister.] As many statements made by Dr. Price may be of interest to SBF readers, I will show the first four of the five questions and answers in this post and give brief responses. [You can read the entire interview HERE.] (more…)

Dr. Nelson Price continues his article on “Covert Calvinists” as follows:

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. (more…)

Dr. Nelson Price continues his article on “Covert Calvinists” as follows:

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?

Again, despite our disagreements with Dr. Price, we should have enough humility to let the last three sentences of the above paragraph allow us the opportunity for self-evaluation. Do we communicate the doctrines of grace with a gracious attitude? Or do we act as if we have come to know the doctrines based on our own intellectual superiority? Do we have the patience, forgiveness, and love toward others that God displayed toward us in redeeming us while we were still His enemies?

But the first sentence in the above-quoted paragraph also intrigues me. In the comments of Part 1 to this response, Thomas Twitchell pointed out, “If he has good Calvinist friends, he should not be caricaturing and mischaracterizing them or their beliefs.” So the question is, why do so many speakers and writers, when giving strong anti-Calvinist rhetoric, insist upon mentioning that they have some Calvinists- Calvinists who, according to them, go against the general trend of Reformed mentality- for personal friends? (more…)

On NelsonPrice.com, Dr. Nelson Price has his articles listed under two main categories, “Price Lines” and “Price Tags” [having a mind that tends towards puns and such, I genuinely appreciate that Dr. Price is willing to have fun with his own name in this way]. Under these categories, each article in arranged in alphabetical order. That is, each article except for one. The first article in the “Price Tags” category, filed before the articles beginning with “A”, is titled “Covert Calvinists”. Obviously, this article is considered to be of utmost importance to Dr. Price, as it is placed in such a prominent position. In this article, Dr. Price makes several assertions that merit response by this blog, a response which I hope to provide in my next few articles.

(more…)

Introductory Clarification:
When offering a critique of a sermon or essay, it is truly my desire to do so in obedience to the God’s command through the Apostle Paul, “Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.” (1 Thessalonians 5:20-22)

In any given sermon or essay we may critique here at Strange BaptistFire.com, there may be much “good” to which we desire our readers would “hold fast.” Yet due to the nature of this website- which was started with the goal of providing a defense for attacks against Reformed soteriology within Baptist circles- the articles here tend to focus on the latter part of the command, i.e., “Abstain from every form of evil.” The “evil,” in this case, is that of unbiblical teaching. Usually, our critiques are in response to some charge that Reformed soteriology is incompatible with the Scripture; our goal is to show how such charges fail and to establish that any teaching which runs contrary to monergism (the heart of Reformed soteriology) is, in fact, unScriptural, and thus an evil to be avoided.

Please notice two things about our critiques, or responses:

1. These are not meant to be personal attacks whatsoever. When we critique a sermon or article in the public domain, we do so with the hope of providing a resource so that the large audience exposed to the teaching may have opportunity to view a reasoned response. The focus is on the content of the teaching. There is a very real sense in which it simply does not matter what particular teacher gave a certain statement; if we are not showing favoritism (James 2:1) and we are being impartial and sincere (James 3:17)- as we truly desire to be- then our response will be the same no matter whose words are being addressed.
2. These are limited to the particular teaching cited. Occasionally, we at SBF will critique a sermon or article that we believe to be in error in virtually every point. Much more often, though we may be in substantial agreement with many points the speaker or writer may make, yet there will be certain ideas that we think it necessary to address. Though SBF bloggers usually try to make this distinction clear in our writings, I would again like to stress that readers should not assume that the scope of our critiques extend beyond what is specifically indicated.

Introduction
In this article (as obvious by the title), it is my intention to address the article on NelsonPrice.com concerning “Church Discipline.” As noted in a previous post, Dr. Price has established himself as an opponent not only of Reformed soteriology, but of the wider reform movement within the Southern Baptist Convention- a movement stressing not only soteriology, but issues such as biblical church leadership and biblical church discipline.

The Biblical Foundation for Reformation Within the Southern Baptist Convention
At the beginning of the Protestant Reformation in the 1500s, the reformers challenged the authority of the Roman Catholic Church with the conviction that Scripture alone is the final authority for every Christian. This conviction concerning the authority of Scripture was buttressed by the doctrine of the necessity of Scripture- people must read or hear the Word of God in order to be saved and to live a life pleasing to the Lord (Romans 10:14)- and the clarity of Scripture- that the plain meaning of Scripture is easy to understand, especially in matters of salvation (therefore, in the Reformation context, it was unnecessary for the teaching Magisterium of the Roman Church to define sacraments and offer canon law,etc.). Finally, the original reformers insisted on the sufficiency of Scripture- that we have all we need for life and godliness in God’s Word. In the context of the Reformation, the doctrine of scriptural sufficiency was understood to mean that Christians do not need the Roman system in order to be justified before God and to grow in godliness. In our modern context, the sufficiency of Scripture can be applied to refute notions that certain music will help people make a decision for salvation or that the Church needs to learn from psychology in order for members to be sanctified.

During the Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention, the primary issues at stake were the inspiration, inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture- subdoctrines upon which the doctrine of the authority of Scripture is built. Little attention was given to the other doctrines of Scripture mentioned above- i.e., the necessity, clarity, and sufficiency of Scripture. Neglect of these doctrines has led to the rise of the seeker sensitive movement and the emergent church movement which in various ways threaten to undermine the gains made for biblical authority during the Conservative Resurgence. Nelson Price’s article on church discipline offers examples of how the clarity and sufficiency of Scripture are often inadvertently undermined in the Church today.

Nelson Price on Church Discipline: Clarity
In the article under examination, Dr. Price cites Matthew 18:15-17 and gives an introductory paragraph. In the next paragraph, Price writes, “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.” As he explains this statement, Price seems to be guading against the notion that the phrase, “Let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector,” means to indicate that the person under discipline is hopeless in terms of salvation. But this notion is not gained by “a surface reading of the passage,” but rather by unbiblical traditions people have added to the passage based on Roman Catholic ideas concerning excommunication. To call into question the ability of the average believing reader to understand and apply the text without going beyond the immediate context into historical and grammatical details (Price argues throughout that “church” does not mean “church”) is to make church members unnecessarily dependent upon the teaching office of the church- something utterly against the spirit of reformation.

Nelson Price on Church Discipline: Sufficiency
Since, as paranthetically mentioned above, Price argues that “church” does not mean “church,” the commands Jesus gave to the apostles are not directly applicable to believers today. In other words, whereas a simple reading of the text would view Jesus’ words as direct commands to the church- commands that could simply be followed- Price would have us read these words as principles, which may be understood as optional. Price writes, “The EKKLESIA does not mandate the entire church body as constituted today… However, if a local church insists on the entire congregation being involved that also is permissible… If a church congregation decides to bring a person before them…” So, just as Dr. Price insists that the New Testament gives the Church no specific model for her government, he also insists that Jesus gives the Church no specific commands concerning church discipline. Scripture is thus portrayed as insufficient to govern the community of believers in Christ. This denial of scriptural sufficiency ultimately undermines the doctrine of biblical authority as the commands of God are considered to be mere opinions.

As I have written before, there are many important ways in which Dr. Nelson L. Price has positively impacted the state of Georgia and the world for the cause of Jesus Christ. [If anyone doubts this fact, I would strongly encourage you to read the introduction to the post just linked before commenting here.] Regrettably, however, Dr. Price has established himself as an opponent of reformation within the Southern Baptist Convention. I say “reformation” and not simply “reformed theology” because among the articles at his website (www.nelsonprice.com), there is material not only arguing against the “five points of Calvinism,” but also calling into question the doctrines of biblical eldership and biblical church discipline. Though there are also many articles on his website with which we would heartily agree, those that are written in opposition to reformation are of such a serious nature and Dr. Price himself is such an influential figure within Southern Baptist life that I am beginning a category to respond to some of his articles here on Strange BaptistFire.

First, I would like to address his article titled “Elders,” which concludes with the following paragraph:

In general Southern Baptist Churches have not used an “elder” form of governance as has the Presbyterian Church. Of late some have begun using it. Changing the form of church governance can be traumatic for a congregation. If a church has one that works in place it is a good one and need not be change simply because of a current trend. (more…)