Dr Jordan:Back in the Spring, I was wondering if the BGCO would be mankig any response to what at the time was the interim report of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. Since that time, the SBC (at its annual meeting in Orlando) has adopted a version of that interim report one which gives greater emphasis on the cooperative program. Your reasoned response frames the issues for Oklahoma Baptists going forward. It puts the proper balance on what we should be doing in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the uttermost parts of the earth. I agree with you that the debate should shift from a discussion of how to cut the pie to a discussion of enlarging the pie. I attended the BGCO meeting on Monday evening, but I didn't attend on Tuesday. However, I picked up your address on Tuesday morning via the internet. As a layman, I'm outside the loop on what is going on. The tea leaves I'm reading are telling me that there is beginning to be more light and less heat in an attempt to bring together the two stakeholders which have been perceived to be at the epicenter of the debate of how the SBC can move forward this epicenter being the new leadership of NAMB and the staffs/trustees of the state conventions. Hopefully, continued discussions/negotiations between NAMB and the states will lead to a positive outcome. As Dr. Melton pointed out, unity is a key attribute of a church that is on-task for the Lord. People on all sides of this debate have not completed their work until a consensus is reached on how to implement the great commission across all domestic and international platforms. Roger K. SimpsonOklahoma City OK
ShonaSaturday, 12 January 2013
Greg,Thanks for answering your quoitsen for me, but I can do it myself.Quotations from SBCers that say a move AWAY from Calvinism is a move AWAY from the gospel. (None of them, except you, had the guts to name names, and say that a move TOWARD Hunt is a move AWAY from the gospel.)From Together for The Gospel (Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and John MacArthur are 3 of the 8 principles in this group.)Article VIIIWe affirm that salvation is all of grace, and that the Gospel is revealed to us in doctrines that most faithfully exalt God’s sovereign purpose to save sinners (Shane's note: most readers know this is code for Calvinists' understanding of salvation ) and in His determination to save his redeemed people by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.We deny that any teaching, theological system, or means of presenting the Gospel that denies the centrality of God’s grace as His gift of unmerited favor to sinners in Christ can be considered true doctrine.(Shane's note: the denial statement, after the affirmation of Calvinist soteriology, makes a clear assesment of ANY theological teaching that runs contrary to this cannot be considered true doctrine. ) I am not arguing with this statement I like these guys. But it is what it is: a direct refutation of non-Calvinist teaching as NOT being the gospel.)The Together for the Gospel group is much more polically correct than the John 3:16 Conference apparently was. They are careful to avoid the over-usage of the word Calvinist in their doctrinal statement and promotional material. It is, however, an exclusive group of Calvinists who have banded together for the purpose of expressing what they believe the true gospel to be, at the expressed, explicit exclusion of non-Calvinist teaching. Explore t4g.org for more information.Before I get to the Founders organization's quotes that teach that a non-Calvnist gospel is no gospel at all here's some interesting halftime entertainment. From a commenter NativeVermonter on the Founder's blog: Those who do not hold to the Doctrines of His Marvelous Grace are simply at the grammar school of repentance where we all were at one time. Hopefully after study and prayer our Lord will reveal to them the university of election. (I think he was alluding to some of Whitefield's statements.)Don't you feel the love? Even respect? Maybe mutual admiration?Here's a portion of the Founder's stated purpose: the recovery of the gospel and the reformation of local churches. What does this mean?(1) Recovery of the Gospel: As you peruse the website, you'll come to understand that the Founders believe (and so do I to some degree) that the true preaching of the Gospel has been lost in too many of our SBC churches. They explain that the Gospel can be recovered by a return to the 5-point Calvinism of the Founders of the SBC. They consistently refer to the founders as a point of strengthening their argument. (I think it is a valid strength, but I am analying what this is, not what Greg wants it to be.) Basically if we would stop preaching a non-Calvinist gospel, then we could begin preaching the true gospel. This website is replete with this argument. Men like Johnny Hunt may wonder if the Gospel that he is preaching is seen as being in need of recovery by the Founders-folks. Actually, if he perused this website, he wouldn't wonder.(2) Reformation of Local Churches: While I don't want to put words in their mouths, a crass, but truthful, way to state this point is this: Churches need to be calvinized in order to be healthy. They make no bones about the fact thet they believe that churches should adopt the soteriology of the Founders (Calvinism) rather than what is currently being taught in SBC churches. Let's go to Johnny Hunt again here: Does FBC Woodstock need such a reformation ? The Founders would say Yes. What do you think Dr. Hunt would say about this?While these guys may be smoother talkers and less in-your-face than the folks at the John 3:16 Conference, there is little doubt that their motives are parallel. They each are clearly stating their views on soteriology without apology.Together in the Task,Shane
ShonaSaturday, 12 January 2013
Greg,Thanks for answering your quoitsen for me, but I can do it myself.Quotations from SBCers that say a move AWAY from Calvinism is a move AWAY from the gospel. (None of them, except you, had the guts to name names, and say that a move TOWARD Hunt is a move AWAY from the gospel.)From Together for The Gospel (Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and John MacArthur are 3 of the 8 principles in this group.)Article VIIIWe affirm that salvation is all of grace, and that the Gospel is revealed to us in doctrines that most faithfully exalt God’s sovereign purpose to save sinners (Shane's note: most readers know this is code for Calvinists' understanding of salvation ) and in His determination to save his redeemed people by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.We deny that any teaching, theological system, or means of presenting the Gospel that denies the centrality of God’s grace as His gift of unmerited favor to sinners in Christ can be considered true doctrine.(Shane's note: the denial statement, after the affirmation of Calvinist soteriology, makes a clear assesment of ANY theological teaching that runs contrary to this cannot be considered true doctrine. ) I am not arguing with this statement I like these guys. But it is what it is: a direct refutation of non-Calvinist teaching as NOT being the gospel.)The Together for the Gospel group is much more polically correct than the John 3:16 Conference apparently was. They are careful to avoid the over-usage of the word Calvinist in their doctrinal statement and promotional material. It is, however, an exclusive group of Calvinists who have banded together for the purpose of expressing what they believe the true gospel to be, at the expressed, explicit exclusion of non-Calvinist teaching. Explore t4g.org for more information.Before I get to the Founders organization's quotes that teach that a non-Calvnist gospel is no gospel at all here's some interesting halftime entertainment. From a commenter NativeVermonter on the Founder's blog: Those who do not hold to the Doctrines of His Marvelous Grace are simply at the grammar school of repentance where we all were at one time. Hopefully after study and prayer our Lord will reveal to them the university of election. (I think he was alluding to some of Whitefield's statements.)Don't you feel the love? Even respect? Maybe mutual admiration?Here's a portion of the Founder's stated purpose: the recovery of the gospel and the reformation of local churches. What does this mean?(1) Recovery of the Gospel: As you peruse the website, you'll come to understand that the Founders believe (and so do I to some degree) that the true preaching of the Gospel has been lost in too many of our SBC churches. They explain that the Gospel can be recovered by a return to the 5-point Calvinism of the Founders of the SBC. They consistently refer to the founders as a point of strengthening their argument. (I think it is a valid strength, but I am analying what this is, not what Greg wants it to be.) Basically if we would stop preaching a non-Calvinist gospel, then we could begin preaching the true gospel. This website is replete with this argument. Men like Johnny Hunt may wonder if the Gospel that he is preaching is seen as being in need of recovery by the Founders-folks. Actually, if he perused this website, he wouldn't wonder.(2) Reformation of Local Churches: While I don't want to put words in their mouths, a crass, but truthful, way to state this point is this: Churches need to be calvinized in order to be healthy. They make no bones about the fact thet they believe that churches should adopt the soteriology of the Founders (Calvinism) rather than what is currently being taught in SBC churches. Let's go to Johnny Hunt again here: Does FBC Woodstock need such a reformation ? The Founders would say Yes. What do you think Dr. Hunt would say about this?While these guys may be smoother talkers and less in-your-face than the folks at the John 3:16 Conference, there is little doubt that their motives are parallel. They each are clearly stating their views on soteriology without apology.Together in the Task,Shane
ShonaSaturday, 12 January 2013
Greg,Thanks for answering your quoitsen for me, but I can do it myself.Quotations from SBCers that say a move AWAY from Calvinism is a move AWAY from the gospel. (None of them, except you, had the guts to name names, and say that a move TOWARD Hunt is a move AWAY from the gospel.)From Together for The Gospel (Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and John MacArthur are 3 of the 8 principles in this group.)Article VIIIWe affirm that salvation is all of grace, and that the Gospel is revealed to us in doctrines that most faithfully exalt God’s sovereign purpose to save sinners (Shane's note: most readers know this is code for Calvinists' understanding of salvation ) and in His determination to save his redeemed people by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.We deny that any teaching, theological system, or means of presenting the Gospel that denies the centrality of God’s grace as His gift of unmerited favor to sinners in Christ can be considered true doctrine.(Shane's note: the denial statement, after the affirmation of Calvinist soteriology, makes a clear assesment of ANY theological teaching that runs contrary to this cannot be considered true doctrine. ) I am not arguing with this statement I like these guys. But it is what it is: a direct refutation of non-Calvinist teaching as NOT being the gospel.)The Together for the Gospel group is much more polically correct than the John 3:16 Conference apparently was. They are careful to avoid the over-usage of the word Calvinist in their doctrinal statement and promotional material. It is, however, an exclusive group of Calvinists who have banded together for the purpose of expressing what they believe the true gospel to be, at the expressed, explicit exclusion of non-Calvinist teaching. Explore t4g.org for more information.Before I get to the Founders organization's quotes that teach that a non-Calvnist gospel is no gospel at all here's some interesting halftime entertainment. From a commenter NativeVermonter on the Founder's blog: Those who do not hold to the Doctrines of His Marvelous Grace are simply at the grammar school of repentance where we all were at one time. Hopefully after study and prayer our Lord will reveal to them the university of election. (I think he was alluding to some of Whitefield's statements.)Don't you feel the love? Even respect? Maybe mutual admiration?Here's a portion of the Founder's stated purpose: the recovery of the gospel and the reformation of local churches. What does this mean?(1) Recovery of the Gospel: As you peruse the website, you'll come to understand that the Founders believe (and so do I to some degree) that the true preaching of the Gospel has been lost in too many of our SBC churches. They explain that the Gospel can be recovered by a return to the 5-point Calvinism of the Founders of the SBC. They consistently refer to the founders as a point of strengthening their argument. (I think it is a valid strength, but I am analying what this is, not what Greg wants it to be.) Basically if we would stop preaching a non-Calvinist gospel, then we could begin preaching the true gospel. This website is replete with this argument. Men like Johnny Hunt may wonder if the Gospel that he is preaching is seen as being in need of recovery by the Founders-folks. Actually, if he perused this website, he wouldn't wonder.(2) Reformation of Local Churches: While I don't want to put words in their mouths, a crass, but truthful, way to state this point is this: Churches need to be calvinized in order to be healthy. They make no bones about the fact thet they believe that churches should adopt the soteriology of the Founders (Calvinism) rather than what is currently being taught in SBC churches. Let's go to Johnny Hunt again here: Does FBC Woodstock need such a reformation ? The Founders would say Yes. What do you think Dr. Hunt would say about this?While these guys may be smoother talkers and less in-your-face than the folks at the John 3:16 Conference, there is little doubt that their motives are parallel. They each are clearly stating their views on soteriology without apology.Together in the Task,Shane
Pinku Saturday, 07 July 2012
Dr Jordan:Back in the Spring, I was wondering if the BGCO would be mankig any response to what at the time was the interim report of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. Since that time, the SBC (at its annual meeting in Orlando) has adopted a version of that interim report one which gives greater emphasis on the cooperative program. Your reasoned response frames the issues for Oklahoma Baptists going forward. It puts the proper balance on what we should be doing in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the uttermost parts of the earth. I agree with you that the debate should shift from a discussion of how to cut the pie to a discussion of enlarging the pie. I attended the BGCO meeting on Monday evening, but I didn't attend on Tuesday. However, I picked up your address on Tuesday morning via the internet. As a layman, I'm outside the loop on what is going on. The tea leaves I'm reading are telling me that there is beginning to be more light and less heat in an attempt to bring together the two stakeholders which have been perceived to be at the epicenter of the debate of how the SBC can move forward this epicenter being the new leadership of NAMB and the staffs/trustees of the state conventions. Hopefully, continued discussions/negotiations between NAMB and the states will lead to a positive outcome. As Dr. Melton pointed out, unity is a key attribute of a church that is on-task for the Lord. People on all sides of this debate have not completed their work until a consensus is reached on how to implement the great commission across all domestic and international platforms. Roger K. SimpsonOklahoma City OK
Shona Saturday, 12 January 2013
Greg,Thanks for answering your quoitsen for me, but I can do it myself.Quotations from SBCers that say a move AWAY from Calvinism is a move AWAY from the gospel. (None of them, except you, had the guts to name names, and say that a move TOWARD Hunt is a move AWAY from the gospel.)From Together for The Gospel (Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and John MacArthur are 3 of the 8 principles in this group.)Article VIIIWe affirm that salvation is all of grace, and that the Gospel is revealed to us in doctrines that most faithfully exalt God’s sovereign purpose to save sinners (Shane's note: most readers know this is code for Calvinists' understanding of salvation ) and in His determination to save his redeemed people by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.We deny that any teaching, theological system, or means of presenting the Gospel that denies the centrality of God’s grace as His gift of unmerited favor to sinners in Christ can be considered true doctrine.(Shane's note: the denial statement, after the affirmation of Calvinist soteriology, makes a clear assesment of ANY theological teaching that runs contrary to this cannot be considered true doctrine. ) I am not arguing with this statement I like these guys. But it is what it is: a direct refutation of non-Calvinist teaching as NOT being the gospel.)The Together for the Gospel group is much more polically correct than the John 3:16 Conference apparently was. They are careful to avoid the over-usage of the word Calvinist in their doctrinal statement and promotional material. It is, however, an exclusive group of Calvinists who have banded together for the purpose of expressing what they believe the true gospel to be, at the expressed, explicit exclusion of non-Calvinist teaching. Explore t4g.org for more information.Before I get to the Founders organization's quotes that teach that a non-Calvnist gospel is no gospel at all here's some interesting halftime entertainment. From a commenter NativeVermonter on the Founder's blog: Those who do not hold to the Doctrines of His Marvelous Grace are simply at the grammar school of repentance where we all were at one time. Hopefully after study and prayer our Lord will reveal to them the university of election. (I think he was alluding to some of Whitefield's statements.)Don't you feel the love? Even respect? Maybe mutual admiration?Here's a portion of the Founder's stated purpose: the recovery of the gospel and the reformation of local churches. What does this mean?(1) Recovery of the Gospel: As you peruse the website, you'll come to understand that the Founders believe (and so do I to some degree) that the true preaching of the Gospel has been lost in too many of our SBC churches. They explain that the Gospel can be recovered by a return to the 5-point Calvinism of the Founders of the SBC. They consistently refer to the founders as a point of strengthening their argument. (I think it is a valid strength, but I am analying what this is, not what Greg wants it to be.) Basically if we would stop preaching a non-Calvinist gospel, then we could begin preaching the true gospel. This website is replete with this argument. Men like Johnny Hunt may wonder if the Gospel that he is preaching is seen as being in need of recovery by the Founders-folks. Actually, if he perused this website, he wouldn't wonder.(2) Reformation of Local Churches: While I don't want to put words in their mouths, a crass, but truthful, way to state this point is this: Churches need to be calvinized in order to be healthy. They make no bones about the fact thet they believe that churches should adopt the soteriology of the Founders (Calvinism) rather than what is currently being taught in SBC churches. Let's go to Johnny Hunt again here: Does FBC Woodstock need such a reformation ? The Founders would say Yes. What do you think Dr. Hunt would say about this?While these guys may be smoother talkers and less in-your-face than the folks at the John 3:16 Conference, there is little doubt that their motives are parallel. They each are clearly stating their views on soteriology without apology.Together in the Task,Shane
Shona Saturday, 12 January 2013
Greg,Thanks for answering your quoitsen for me, but I can do it myself.Quotations from SBCers that say a move AWAY from Calvinism is a move AWAY from the gospel. (None of them, except you, had the guts to name names, and say that a move TOWARD Hunt is a move AWAY from the gospel.)From Together for The Gospel (Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and John MacArthur are 3 of the 8 principles in this group.)Article VIIIWe affirm that salvation is all of grace, and that the Gospel is revealed to us in doctrines that most faithfully exalt God’s sovereign purpose to save sinners (Shane's note: most readers know this is code for Calvinists' understanding of salvation ) and in His determination to save his redeemed people by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.We deny that any teaching, theological system, or means of presenting the Gospel that denies the centrality of God’s grace as His gift of unmerited favor to sinners in Christ can be considered true doctrine.(Shane's note: the denial statement, after the affirmation of Calvinist soteriology, makes a clear assesment of ANY theological teaching that runs contrary to this cannot be considered true doctrine. ) I am not arguing with this statement I like these guys. But it is what it is: a direct refutation of non-Calvinist teaching as NOT being the gospel.)The Together for the Gospel group is much more polically correct than the John 3:16 Conference apparently was. They are careful to avoid the over-usage of the word Calvinist in their doctrinal statement and promotional material. It is, however, an exclusive group of Calvinists who have banded together for the purpose of expressing what they believe the true gospel to be, at the expressed, explicit exclusion of non-Calvinist teaching. Explore t4g.org for more information.Before I get to the Founders organization's quotes that teach that a non-Calvnist gospel is no gospel at all here's some interesting halftime entertainment. From a commenter NativeVermonter on the Founder's blog: Those who do not hold to the Doctrines of His Marvelous Grace are simply at the grammar school of repentance where we all were at one time. Hopefully after study and prayer our Lord will reveal to them the university of election. (I think he was alluding to some of Whitefield's statements.)Don't you feel the love? Even respect? Maybe mutual admiration?Here's a portion of the Founder's stated purpose: the recovery of the gospel and the reformation of local churches. What does this mean?(1) Recovery of the Gospel: As you peruse the website, you'll come to understand that the Founders believe (and so do I to some degree) that the true preaching of the Gospel has been lost in too many of our SBC churches. They explain that the Gospel can be recovered by a return to the 5-point Calvinism of the Founders of the SBC. They consistently refer to the founders as a point of strengthening their argument. (I think it is a valid strength, but I am analying what this is, not what Greg wants it to be.) Basically if we would stop preaching a non-Calvinist gospel, then we could begin preaching the true gospel. This website is replete with this argument. Men like Johnny Hunt may wonder if the Gospel that he is preaching is seen as being in need of recovery by the Founders-folks. Actually, if he perused this website, he wouldn't wonder.(2) Reformation of Local Churches: While I don't want to put words in their mouths, a crass, but truthful, way to state this point is this: Churches need to be calvinized in order to be healthy. They make no bones about the fact thet they believe that churches should adopt the soteriology of the Founders (Calvinism) rather than what is currently being taught in SBC churches. Let's go to Johnny Hunt again here: Does FBC Woodstock need such a reformation ? The Founders would say Yes. What do you think Dr. Hunt would say about this?While these guys may be smoother talkers and less in-your-face than the folks at the John 3:16 Conference, there is little doubt that their motives are parallel. They each are clearly stating their views on soteriology without apology.Together in the Task,Shane
Shona Saturday, 12 January 2013
Greg,Thanks for answering your quoitsen for me, but I can do it myself.Quotations from SBCers that say a move AWAY from Calvinism is a move AWAY from the gospel. (None of them, except you, had the guts to name names, and say that a move TOWARD Hunt is a move AWAY from the gospel.)From Together for The Gospel (Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and John MacArthur are 3 of the 8 principles in this group.)Article VIIIWe affirm that salvation is all of grace, and that the Gospel is revealed to us in doctrines that most faithfully exalt God’s sovereign purpose to save sinners (Shane's note: most readers know this is code for Calvinists' understanding of salvation ) and in His determination to save his redeemed people by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, to His glory alone.We deny that any teaching, theological system, or means of presenting the Gospel that denies the centrality of God’s grace as His gift of unmerited favor to sinners in Christ can be considered true doctrine.(Shane's note: the denial statement, after the affirmation of Calvinist soteriology, makes a clear assesment of ANY theological teaching that runs contrary to this cannot be considered true doctrine. ) I am not arguing with this statement I like these guys. But it is what it is: a direct refutation of non-Calvinist teaching as NOT being the gospel.)The Together for the Gospel group is much more polically correct than the John 3:16 Conference apparently was. They are careful to avoid the over-usage of the word Calvinist in their doctrinal statement and promotional material. It is, however, an exclusive group of Calvinists who have banded together for the purpose of expressing what they believe the true gospel to be, at the expressed, explicit exclusion of non-Calvinist teaching. Explore t4g.org for more information.Before I get to the Founders organization's quotes that teach that a non-Calvnist gospel is no gospel at all here's some interesting halftime entertainment. From a commenter NativeVermonter on the Founder's blog: Those who do not hold to the Doctrines of His Marvelous Grace are simply at the grammar school of repentance where we all were at one time. Hopefully after study and prayer our Lord will reveal to them the university of election. (I think he was alluding to some of Whitefield's statements.)Don't you feel the love? Even respect? Maybe mutual admiration?Here's a portion of the Founder's stated purpose: the recovery of the gospel and the reformation of local churches. What does this mean?(1) Recovery of the Gospel: As you peruse the website, you'll come to understand that the Founders believe (and so do I to some degree) that the true preaching of the Gospel has been lost in too many of our SBC churches. They explain that the Gospel can be recovered by a return to the 5-point Calvinism of the Founders of the SBC. They consistently refer to the founders as a point of strengthening their argument. (I think it is a valid strength, but I am analying what this is, not what Greg wants it to be.) Basically if we would stop preaching a non-Calvinist gospel, then we could begin preaching the true gospel. This website is replete with this argument. Men like Johnny Hunt may wonder if the Gospel that he is preaching is seen as being in need of recovery by the Founders-folks. Actually, if he perused this website, he wouldn't wonder.(2) Reformation of Local Churches: While I don't want to put words in their mouths, a crass, but truthful, way to state this point is this: Churches need to be calvinized in order to be healthy. They make no bones about the fact thet they believe that churches should adopt the soteriology of the Founders (Calvinism) rather than what is currently being taught in SBC churches. Let's go to Johnny Hunt again here: Does FBC Woodstock need such a reformation ? The Founders would say Yes. What do you think Dr. Hunt would say about this?While these guys may be smoother talkers and less in-your-face than the folks at the John 3:16 Conference, there is little doubt that their motives are parallel. They each are clearly stating their views on soteriology without apology.Together in the Task,Shane