Calvinists Already Own ELCA-WELS-LCMS-ELS-CLC sic. Now They Are Taking Over the Baptists

Graham was identified with the Southern Baptists, but was raised Presbyterian. He was a minister registered, at different times, with the Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists - if I recall correctly. But this takeover is another category altogether.

Is Calvinism or Reformed Doctrine Taking Over Your Church?
https://traditionalbaptistchurch.com/is-calvinism-or-reformed-doctrine-taking-over-your-church/

Many pastors are closet Calvinists who know that their congregations are not yet ready to understand Reformed doctrine, that is, until they can instill certain half-truths that must be accepted before a church becomes Calvinistic.

It is certainly inevitable that any pastor who reads theology, who has connections, who has a theological degree, will have become aware of Calvinism at some point along the way. At the very least every pastor will be asked at some time, by someone, somewhere, “What is Calvinism?”or will be given a little booklet by an advocate for Calvinism. In fact, any pastor or elder who is unfamiliar with the threat of Calvinism is dangerously ignorant and is not adequate to defend the flock against error.

Calvinism or Reformed theology is very popular. All popular systematic theologies and commentaries on Romans are written by Calvinists.


--

 The only debate among the "conservative" Lutherans is whether to use the ESV edited by a Calvinist or the outrageously bad NIV. The KJV and updates are never mentioned, in spite of its ties to Luther - or because of its ties to Luther.

Memo: How to smoke out a Calvinistic pastor in your church

https://founders.org/2010/03/05/memo-how-to-smoke-out-a-calvinistic-pastor-in-your-church/

TOM ASCOL | MARCH 5, 2010

Yesterday I was sent the following 3 documents that have been circulating in Western Tennessee among some Southern Baptist Churches. It seems that they were distributed at seminars being held for churches to teach “how to find out if any of your staff are Calvinists and how to get rid of them.” Since receiving them I have communicated with others who have verified that they are being made available to Southern Baptist churches in Tennessee, not by any official denominational worker, but by zealous people who view the doctrines of grace as heresy. I am trying to contact one or more of those persons in hopes of better understanding what has provoked this mission.

The first document is in the form of a memo and is entitled, “Reformed Red Flags.” It contains a list of 16 “behaviors” to look for when seeking to smoke out Calvinistic pastors. Number 3 on the list is “use of the ESV Study Bible.” Someone should alert Crossway immediately. Founders made the list, as did John Piper, Jonathan Edwards, RC Sproul, James White and the first Southern Baptist confession of faith (which is still used at Southern and Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminaries, and which even the famous non-Calvinist Paige Patterson has signed), the Abstract of Principles.

To read the documents in a larger size, click on them.

---

The FAQs: Southern Baptists, Calvinism, and God’s Plan of Salvation

JUNE 5, 2012  | Joe Carter

What's the controversy?

Two weeks ago a group of current and former Southern Baptist leaders signed and posted a statement which attempts to draw a clear line between Calvinism and what they call the “traditional Southern Baptist” of soteriology. The document has attracted a considerable number of supporters and critics and sparked a vocal debate about the role of Reformed theology within the Southern Baptist Convention.

If I'm not a Southern Baptist, why should I care about this debate?

Because the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) is the largest Protestant denomination in America, both the controversy and the debates about Calvinism are likely to spill into other non-reformed denominations and parachurch ministries and have an influence on the larger evangelical community.

What is the document and how was it introduced?

On May 30, the original signers of the statement, titled “A Statement of the Traditional Southern Baptist Understanding of God's Plan of Salvation,” posted the document on the website SBC Today.

As SBC Today notes, the format and subject matter of the statement is similar to that of the Together for the Gospel statement, which was signed or affirmed by some Southern Baptist leaders who embrace Reformed views.

Who signed the statement?

The document was originally endorsed by six former SBC presidents (Morris Chapman, Jimmy Draper, Paige Patterson, Bailey Smith, Bobby Welch, and Jerry Vines), two seminary presidents (Chuck Kelley of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary and former SBC president Paige Patterson, who now serves as the president of the denomination's largest seminary, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary), and five state executive directors (Jim Futral of Mississippi, David Hankins of Louisiana, Mike Procter of Alaska, John Sullivan of Florida, and Bob White of Georgia).

To date, over 350 Southern Baptists serving as denominational leaders, pastors, evangelists, church staff members, Baptist seminary and college personnel, and lay leaders have also added their names to the statement.

***

GJ - I became aware of this conflict only a few months ago. I always thought of Calvinism (Reformed doctrine) being antagonistic toward the Baptists, so a switch would not be likely. 

Wheaton College asked me if I was Calvinist, Arminian, Cal-Arminian, etc. I thought the labels rather droll, especially Cal-Arminian.

These various groups are antagonistic toward Luther's Biblical Christianity and the German Reformation's exegesis of the Bible. Lutheran Objective Justification is a smooth way to introduce Calvinism into the Lutheran Church without giving notice of intent.

 A chameleon can turn every color but one - white.

Not Exactly News - The Bible Is Corrrect about Infant Faith!

Babies know the difference between good and evil at six months, study reveals

By David Derbyshire
Last updated at 9:25 AM on 10th May 2010

At the age of six months babies can barely sit up - let along take their first tottering steps, crawl or talk.

But, according to psychologists, they have already developed a sense of moral code - and can tell the difference between good and evil.

An astonishing series of experiments is challenging the views of many psychologists and social scientists that human beings are born as 'blank slates' - and that our morality is shaped by our parents and experiences.

Good rabbit, bad rabbit: Simple experiments involving babies have shown that we have a strong morality instinct from an early age

Instead, they suggest that the difference between good and bad may be hardwired into the brain at birth.

In one experiment involving puppets, babies aged six months old showed a strong preference to 'good' helpful characters - and rejected unhelpful, 'naughty' ones.

In another, they even acted as judge and jury. When asked to take away treats from a 'naughty' puppet, some babies went further - and dished out their own punishment with a smack on its head.

Leading research: Professor Paul Bloom, of Yale University, said a series of morality tales featuring puppets were shown to babies of varying ages

Professor Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University in Connecticut, whose department has studied morality in babies for years, said: 'A growing body of evidence suggests that humans do have a rudimentary moral sense from the very start of life.

'With the help of well designed experiments, you can see glimmers of moral thought, moral judgment and moral feeling even in the first year of life.

'Some sense of good and evil seems to be bred in the bones.'

For one study, the Yale researchers got babies aged between six months and a year to watch a puppet show in which a simple, colourful wooden shape with eyes tries to climb a hill.

Sometimes the shape is helped up the hill by a second toy, while other times a third character pushes it down.

After watching the show several times, the babies were shown the helpful and unhelpful toys. They showed a clear preference for the helpful toys - spending far longer looking at the 'good' shapes than the 'bad' ones.

'In the end, we found that six- and ten-month-old infants overwhelmingly preferred the helpful individual to the hindering individual,' Prof Bloom told the New York Times.

'This wasn't a subtle statistical trend; just about all the babies reached for the good guy.'

Two more tests found the same moral sense.

More...

• Premature babies 'feel more pain in later life'

In one, the researchers devised a 'one-act morality play', in which a toy dog tries to open a box. The dog is joined by a teddy bear who helps him lift the lid, and a teddy who stubbornly sits on the box.

They also made the babies watch a puppet cat play ball with two toy rabbits. When the cat rolled the ball to one rabbit, it rolled the ball straight back. But when the cat rolled it to the second rabbit, it picked up the ball and ran off.

'In both studies, five-month-old babies preferred the good guy - the one who helped to open the box; the one who rolled the ball back - to the bad guy,' said Professor Bloom.

When the same tests were repeated with 21-month-old babies, they were given a chance to dish out treats to the toys - or take treats away.

Most toddlers punished the 'naughty rabbit' by taking away treats. One even gave the miscreant a smack on the head as a punishment.

Although the studies appear to show that morality is hard-wired into babies brains, some psychologists urged caution.

Dr Nadja Reissland, of Durham University, said babies started to learn the difference between good and bad from birth.

'Everything hinges on who decides what is normal,' she said. 'By saying pushing the ball up the hill is helpful, the researchers are making a moral judgement. The babies might just prefer to see things go up rather than down.

'In the other test, perhaps the bear closes the box to prevent the dog from getting in there because there is something dangerous inside. It is like a mother keeping children out of an area where there is something harmful.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1275574/Babies-know-difference-good-evil-months-study-reveals.html#ixzz0nY2H951A

***

GJ - Babies have their parents figured out on Day One. Grandparents are even easier for them to work on.

I spanked our grandson's hand at lunch on Mother's Day. I tapped his hand with two of my fingers. He told me that was not the right way. He demonstrated by spanking his own hand.

I said, "You have had a lot of experience?"

"Yes," he said solemnly.

I explained - "A grandfather hand-slap is two fingers, just like this. Tap. And followed by a big piece of candy. Maybe some money too."

Memo to Church and Chicanery - It's Not Working for the Babtists Either

The Christian Post

Southern Baptist Head: We Have a Vision Problem
By Lillian Kwon
Christian Post Reporter
Tue, Jun. 23 2009 06:02 PM EDT

Southern Baptist president Johnny Hunt delivered an impassioned and fiery message to fellow Baptist leaders on Tuesday, imploring them to get out of the lukewarm state found in many of America's pulpits.

Related
* So. Baptists Now a 'Declining Denomination'
* So. Baptists Seek Great Commission Resurgence
* Southern Baptists Convene to 'Love Loud'

Referring to the recent national spelling bee word that had puzzled many, Hunt said, "America has not heard of the word 'laodicean' but I'm afraid that the Church has not perceived it."

His address during the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting in Louisville, Ky., was a challenge to a denomination that has begun to see decline in membership.

"How do you feel you're doing?" Hunt posed. "How do you feel the Southern Baptist Convention is doing?"

According to statistics recently released by LifeWay Research – the research arm of the SBC – Southern Baptist membership will fall nearly 50 percent to around 8.7 million by the year 2050 if the current trend continues.

Membership dipped by 0.2 percent in 2008. While losses only began in 2007 after years of growth, Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay, said the rate of increase had been declining by 0.06 percent every year.

Titling his message "The State of the Southern Baptist Convention from Where I Sit," Hunt cited a passage from Revelation and indicated that many have become apathetic, indifferent and have lost enthusiasm.

"You can walk to the pulpit, you can lead the music, you can teach a Sunday School class and the attitude is 'I've been there and I've done that.' There's no tear in your eye, there's no fire in your soul, and there's no anticipation after delivery," he said.

"You can get to the point [where] you're so strong you can get up, read through your devotion, have this brief prayer and go. We become professionals. We know how to do it," Hunt added, lamenting how many have lost their dependence on the grace and Holy Spirit of God.

One of the greatest needs of the pulpits of America, he pointed out, is "more emulation of the truth of almighty God to match the exhortation of the proclamation of almighty God's word."

Southern Baptists this week will consider adopting the Great Commission Resurgence declaration, which reaffirms core Christian doctrines and aims to renew a passion for evangelism and church planting in America.

But Hunt is not concerned with simply adopting a document. After all, talk is cheap, he said.

What he's concerned with is seeing true commitment among Southern Baptists to the Great Commission Resurgence.

"I really do believe we need revival in the Southern Baptist Convention," said Hunt.

Revival, he indicated, must first happen in the more than 43,000 Southern Baptist pulpits in America.

"If God were to break the hearts of us, the pastors, and we would ... realize out there in those pews there's gold in them there pews! It's amazing how God's people will rise up and take a challenge," he highlighted. "They're not looking for a program to follow. They're looking for a vision to embrace."

He stressed that they don't have a money problem, for God has been good to them. "We have a vision problem," he said.

"God help us to get a vision of the lostness of the world," said Hunt, who is still convinced that the Gospel will be "taken and penetrate the lostness and the darkness of all nations" in his lifetime.

Hunt was re-elected for a second, one-year term as president of the SBC – the largest Protestant denomination in the country.

---

A good read - click here.


Rick Warren, on the far left, tries to distance himself from Robert Schuller now. (Sound familiar?) Ed Stetzer, on the right, is the fox in the hen house, doing "research" for the Southern Baptists while selling his goods to the Southern Babtists and anyone else who will listen - WELS, Missouri, the mini-synods and micro-mini-sects.

Both men seem to be reading the details of the Kirstie Alley diet.

UOJ from the Calvinistic Babtists

"You mean this Kokomo UOJ stuff is identical to the Primitive Babtist doctrine? And they are Calvinists?"

Primitive Baptist Universalist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series of articles on
Baptists

The Primitive Baptist Universalists (or PBUs) are a Calvinist Christian Universalist sect based primarily in the central Appalachian region of the United States. They are popularly known as "No-Hellers" due to their belief (unlike most other Christian denominations) that there is no Hell per se, but that Hell is actually experienced in this life.[1][2] Although they did not split as a denomination away from other Primitive Baptists until 1924, they have been theologically distinct as Universalists since at least 1907, when the minutes of the Washington District Primitive Baptist Association record a reproval:

Resolved, that whereas, we have been troubled with the doctrine of universalism that we advise the churches that if they have any elders preaching such heresies, or members arguing it, that they admonish them to quit preaching it or talking it, and if they fail to hear them to withdraw fellowship from such, and especially we admonish Hale Creek church to admonish Elder M. L. Compton to refrain from such doctrine.

[edit] Summary of theology
Universal reconciliation: Christ's atonement was for all humanity, and at Resurrection all humanity will be reunited with Christ for an eternity in Heaven.

Hell is a factor of the temporal world, where temporal sins will be punished by an increased separation from God.

Satan is an entity solely of the temporal world, existing only as "natural man" warring against "spiritual man."

Sin, punishment, and death are factors only of the temporal world, thus ceasing to exist after Resurrection, and sin is punished in the temporal world by a separation from God.

The joy of righteousness is its own reward, so retribution and reward are needed only for the here and now.[3]

***

GJ - So we can see why so many WELS leaders are attracted to Church Growth Babtists like Stetzer and Stanley. They are going back to their UOJ roots. There are some differences, but Enthusiasm is fairly similar the world over. Making the Atonement of Christ a universal absolution is not surprising for any group denying or "downplaying" (Valleskey) the Means of Grace.

Synodical Conference types cannot see this because they do not really understand Calvinism or the Confessions. Someone like Herman Otten, a true Bronze Age Missourian, will publicly state his agreement with the Brief Confession (not in the Book of Concord) instead of the Book of Concord itself.

The CFW Walther/JP Meyer advocacy of Universal Objective Justification--absolving the world without the Word - or even a text citation--paved the way for Church Growth apostasy.

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "UOJ from the Calvinistic Babtists":

While synod leaders have a lot to learn, they will never admit it or learn it. It is easier to act with an air of authority. One problem, however: they have lost their moral authority and members are realizing it.

---

Kit from Wisconsin has left a new comment on your post "UOJ from the Calvinistic Babtists":

Whoa, I spend my day telling students not to use Wikipedia as a reference for anything.... :) I am disappinted in you.

***

GJ - This is what I get for doing extra research! I knew of the Babtist Unitarians only through Wikipedia, so I gave credit where it is due. L P Cruz has written some good comments about Calvinism and UOJ. I plan on using those insights in my book on justification. Yes, Kit, I wean students off Wikipedia too, but I still use it for background reading.

Another Satisfied Reader

Rev. Kent A. Heimbigner, Ph.D. has left a new comment on your post "Baptist Theologian Takes Congregation Out of LCMS:...":

Hi Greg:

Thank you for your interest in what my good and faithful congregation has done. I have met you, and certainly appreciate your sense of humor, but for the sake of those who may not understand it, I offer a couple of points of clarification:

1) There is no such thing as "Baylor Baptist University." There is only "Baylor University," which has a Baptist history, but is not affiliated with any Baptist denomination.

2) I am not a "Baptist theologian," nor am I going to join the Eastern Orthodox. I am getting a chuckle out of putting those together and imagining what it would be like to be an Easternizing Baptist. I guess they are both synergists, but I'm not. I will remain Lutheran. At ordination, I swore an oath. It matters to me. And my beloved congregation is on that same "we've got to stay Lutheran" page with me.

BTW, for my response to Fr. Fenton heading east, check out my blog on the website, http://www.confessionallutheran.org/content/view/142/91/

Todd, thanks for your clarifying posts. Greg, it's been too long, and I hope our paths cross again in due course. Peace be with you both.

***

GJ - Actually, Kent, you asked to stay here for the LCMS conference and didn't show up or explain.

I see you share Todd Wilken's sense of humor. Or, as Bruce Church suggested, "What's the point?"