Pray for my Dad

My Father, who is a very active 82 year old, has been having some heart problems over the last few months. Yesterday he underwent a heart-cath at Southeastern Medical Center in Dothan Alabama. The Doctor discovered that he has two severely blocked and hardened arteries leading to his heart. The Doctor was able to fix one artery with stents, but he said he had a very difficult time getting the hardened artery to open up and had to use several stents which caused a tear in the lining of the artery wall. The Doctor almost sent him to surgery right then, but he got the tear to lay down in place and put another stent over it to hold it in place while it heals.

At this point the Doctor wanted to consult with a heart surgeon about what would be the best way to proceed with the care of my dad (more stents for the other artery, or open heart bypass surgery). After consulting with a heart surgeon it was decided that they would attempt to fix the other artery with stents next Tuesday (Nov. 24th), and if things do not go well they will do open heart bypass surgery.

I would really appreciate everyone remembering my father in your prayers… his name is William A. (Bill) Alford.

“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” (Rom.8:28)

Grace Always,
Greg

To the IMB --- It's Personal!

An article over on sbcIMPACT has got me to thinking about what is wrong with the IMB. Let me very quickly say that I believe that the IMB has in the past, and continues to this day, to do some outstanding work. Perhaps to the surprise of many of my readers, I am not against the work the IMB is doing… Anyway, this article caused me to stop and think about where the IMB is missing the boat, so to say, and how it might make positive improvements for the future. Below is the comment I posted over at SBCIMPACT.

I think one of the fundamental problems with the IMB is that our SBC Churches do not know our IMB missionaries. There have been some efforts in recent years to try and connect our missionaries with our Churches and they have failed miserably…

Our church supports two “Independent” missionaries that we both know and love. What has made the difference? We hear from them “directly” each and every month… and at least four or five times a year they pick up the phone and call me directly, and after catching up on what is going on in each others ministries we always wind up praying together over the phone… (I love these men). And usually they visit our church once a year, sometimes they cannot make it home every year but when they are stateside they come see us. I know that is a lot of personal
contact and it takes a lot of effort on their part, but in all honestly this is truly what has made the difference for us and it is what I see missing with the IMB.

I don’t care how much “junk” mail the IMB prints and sends to my church… no amount of this “professionally published” marketing literature they send will every take the place of just one hand written 3x5 post card from the mission field. And no DVD message from the IMB headquarters touting all the wonderful things the IMB is doing can ever replace having the phone ring and hearing the voice of a missionary on the other end say “I’m about to go into a new village this morning, Brother will you pray with me”.


Strange as it may sound… but in a very real way the IMB now finds itself in the position (unintended I am sure) of standing between the relationship of Churches and the Missionaries… Somehow this must be corrected.

Grace Always,

Total Depravity and Regeneration

Image via Wikipedia

Sometime back in September I was notified by Ben at Arminian Perspectives that he had written a post entitled Can A Regenerate Christian Be Totally Depraved? in response to a comment I made concerning Calvin’s actions toward Servtus that lead to Servtus being convicted as a heretic and burned at the stake by the government of Geneva. Basically Ben was strongly suggesting that Calvin was not a Christian because of his role in the death of Servtus. In trying to take a non-confrontational approach I tried to explain that Calvin’s sin (if indeed it was sin in this matter) in no way prevented Calvin from being a Christian as all Christians still have a “Corrupt” sin nature, and that all Christians still sin even after regeneration.

Here is a portion of the discussion that went on concerning this issue:
____________________

Greg Alford, on July 29th, 2009 at 9:31 pm Said:

Ben,

Thanks for being so gracious…

I really don’t think that any of us today are qualified to stand in judgment of Calvin’s conduct in this matter. Does the death of Servetus reflect badly on Calvin? You bet it does! Is Calvin the only Christian to ever have been wrongly influenced by the culture of his day? Not hardly. Does that excuse Calvin? Not at all. But it does remind us that we might not have done any differently had we been in Calvin’s position at the time. We like to think that we would have stood up against the Government and said this is wrong, but I doubt it after all we tolerate abortion in our society. (I know not a good example, but the best I can do)

You ask –

“Would he then be a totally depraved regenerate believer (since his actions regarding Servetus were post-conversion)?”

Very large smile… the answer would be “Yes”.

Just how long of a defense of that answer do you want me to give? You and I could be here for a good long time on this one, so I will spare you the long defense unless you really want to go down that rabbit hole.

Again, thank you for being so gracious… and I owe you a cup of coffee.

Grace Always,


Arminian, on July 30th, 2009 at 1:24 am Said:

Greg,

Doesn’t Calvinism hold that the regenerate are no longer totally depraved? After all, does not the C doctrine hold that total depravity entails inability to believe, but that regeneration enables and causes someone to believe? C’s often criticize the Arminian doctrine of prevenient grace as undermining total depravity. So if you would follow that line, then you would have the C doctrine undermining total depravity. So would you mind clarifying? You don’t necessarily have to defend, just explain a little. One more thing: if you believe that a regenberate believer is still totally depraved, do you think that is the standard C position or is your position unusual?

Thanks.


Greg Alford, on July 30th, 2009 at 3:59 am Said:

Arminian,

I suppose one of the greatest hindrances to truly communicating with those who are of a different theological persuasion than your own is that we have a tendency to only read, discuss, and listen to those who agree with us. Therefore we have a tendency to believe that everyone defines the terms like “Total Depravity” and “Regeneration” the same and when we hear others using these terms we assume we are talking about the same thing, when in fact we are not.

So, with the above disclaimer let me attempt to define “Total Depravity” for this discussion. Total Depravity speaks of the extent of Human Corruption caused by the Fall of Man. By extent of Human Corruption I mean that all of mans being; heart, soul, body, mind, and will were all corrupted by the sin of Adam. In short, man in his totality became corrupted by sin.

This is where we often misunderstand one another… No Calvinist that I know would ever say that Regeneration completely frees man of his corruption of sin. Man is only totally free of the corrupting influence of sin when he is glorified, and that will never be on this side of glory. The Apostle Paul spoke well when he said “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.”

It is with this understanding that I made the earlier comment concerning mans total depravity after regeneration; that even after man’s will is freed by the regeneration power of the Holy Spirit so that with his freedom he may now love his God, yet he finds that he is not fully made free from sin and while he indeed expresses his love for God, with his conduct he yet proves his corruption.

I hope this helps a little…

Grace Always,
___________________

Now let me return us to today's post by again defining the terms I am using, before asking the questions I really want to get into.

The result of the fall of Adam on mankind was, and is, “Complete Corruption”… or if you prefer the classical reformed phrase; “Total Depravity”. Theologians use the words “Complete” or “Total” to explain the scope of the effects of the fall of Adam on mankind, and not the depth of these effects. In common English what we are saying is; not that each and every man is as bad or as wicked as he can be, but that universally “ALL” of Man’s being was corrupted by the fall of Adam. Man’s flesh/desires were corrupted… Man’s mind/will was corrupted… Man’s soul/heart was corrupted. No part of man’s being was left unaffected by the fall of Adam. When compared to his original state before the fall of Adam, man now finds himself “Utterly Ruined” in the sight of God.

At this point I want to bring into this discussion a few comments made by the Apostle Paul that highlight man’s ruined condition. In Romans 7:18 Paul says “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing...” and in Romans 7:24 he cries out “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” Literally Paul is crying out for deliverance from the dead body he indwells. I think it important to this discussion that we note that this was the Apostle Paul speaking about himself after regeneration (new birth). And this leads into the following questions that are at the heart of this post.

1) What effect, both practical and theological, does regeneration (new birth) have upon the corruption of the fallen, now regenerated, man?

2) Does regeneration completely negate the corruption of the fall in the regenerated man? (yes/no)

3) Does regeneration partly negate the corruption of the fall in the regenerated man? (yes/no)

4) Does regeneration negate none of the corruption of the fall in the regenerated man? (yes/no)

Please Explain Your Answers... use as much space as you need.

Grace Always,

Light and Fluffy

Image via Wikipedia

Paul said “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?”

We live in an age where much of Christianity has been reduced to a mere Experience… and for most Christians this Experience has been reduced to a mere Decision.

Once the “Decision” has been made… Once the “Experience” has been Experienced… the Modern Christian has very little real need for God in his life, and unless he is in the middle of a personal crisis the Modern Christian feels very much in control of things and as the writer of the beloved hymn 'Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing' says; he is “prone to wonder”.

(This is the wisdom and spirit of this Modern age in which we live.)

In my opinion this casual approach to our relationship with God is a result of two doctrines that when combined has had the same effect on Modern Christianity and the Modern Church as yeast and water have when added to flour … They are: (1) Decisional Regeneration and (2) The Eternal Security of the Believer.

Modern Christianity, under the influence of these two doctrines, is like modern bread… it is altogether: ”light, and fluffy… puffed up… and full of air”.

Grace Always,

Is NAMB a "Relic of the Past"?

Last week on SBC Voices Blog I made a statement that has drawn some heated debate that I need to clarify just a little bit. The comment I made was:

“NAMB is a relic of the past… church planting networks like Acts 29 own the future.”

Responding to my comment Ron West wrote:

“Greg you seem bitter about the IMB and NAMB. You desire to have them done away with and calling them relics of the past is undeserved in my opinion.”

Now I will be the first to admit that I rarely beat around the bush about things and my comments can most certainly come across as being bitter or angry, both of which I am not. I do not equate having strong convictions with being either bitter or angry, but I can see how Ron could read that into my comments about the IMB and NAMB.

Following is the follow up comment I posted to Ron’s comment above which explains my original comment that “NAMB is a relic of the past… church planting networks like Acts 29 own the future.”

---

Concerning the IMB and NAMB:

My first preference would be that both the BOT and Administration of the IMB and the NAMB would realize that the Baptist Churches of the SBC, which they serve, are a diverse group of Churches. We Southern Baptist are far from being “of one accord and one mind”…

So it is with this understanding that I passionately believe that both our mission agencies should represent, and make allowances for (without discrimination), the diverse group of Churches that make up the SBC. This is something that they have NOT done in the past, and is something that I and many others in the SBC would welcome with much joy.

Should not every cooperating church, which is in good standing with the convention, have the reasonable expectation that it may fully participate with, and receive support from, these agencies equal to the participation and support afforded to others? Why is this convection such a “Radical” idea? Why is this asking to much for people like David?


The truth is that unless these agencies are willing to change and adopt a new attitude toward the diversity that is a reality in the SBC then they will rapidly become relics of the past as more and more of our churches look elsewhere for mission partners.

----

If you have had a negative experience with the IMB or NAMB, or if you believe these agencies need to change to fully represent all churches of the SBC I believe the SBC needs to hear what you have to say…???

Grace Always

The Power of Giving

Dear _______,

I know you did not give the six large boxes of books in order to receive the praise of man...

But I would be remiss if I did not tell you how much of a blessing your gift of these books is to our small fellowship of believers.

The Elders have been pouring over them like little children on Christmas morning… time and time again I have heard the word “Wow” escape their (and my) lips as we eagerly dig into another box.

Your generosity in being willing to give away what clearly cost you a significant amount of time and money to acquire is very humbling to me and all our Elders. You have challenged each of us to examine our attachment to the things of this world (and that is a good thing for all Christians to do from time to time).

The timing of your gift (within just a few days of our bookcases being installed for our new Library) is nothing less than God’s affirmation of our decision to start a Library ministry for those under our care. Please know that most, if not everything, you have given will be a blessing to our church for many years to come.


Thank you so much!


Pastor Greg

Battle for the Baptist Faith and Message

With the momentous resurgence of Passionate Missionary Calvinism within the Southern Baptist Convention over the last few years, I guess it was just a matter of time before those who oppose this resurgence of Calvinism within the SBC began to question the strongly Calvinistic Statement of Faith of the SBC; the Baptist Faith and Message 2000.

Peter Lumpkin’s, an often vocal and aggressive critic of Calvinism on the blogs has recently posted an article titled Calvinists Critique Morris Chapman's Clarification: Part II in which he mostly criticizes Timmy Brister for his critique of Morris Chapman’s (somewhat infamous) comments to the convention this year in Louisville, KY where Chapman felt obligated to (once again) take a broad swipe at Calvinism in the SBC.

Now Peter, who is fast becoming known as an aggressive Anti-Calvinist and Anti-Alcohol “watch-dog” in the SBC, wasted no time in this article in going after Timmy Brister with both barrels blazing. Ironically, or should I say in typical fashion, in this article Peter is guilty of exhibiting toward Brister the exact attitudes he has accused Timmy of having toward Chapman. It appears that Peter is willing to allow himself the freedom to be critical of others in the SBC but would very much like to muzzle all other voices, especially those who speak out against those who abuse their positions in the SBC to advance their personal Anti-Calvinist or Anti-Alcohol agendas.

However, if Peter (who repeatedly refers to Brister as a “strict/stern/hyper Calvinist” and his Calvinism as “skewed”) wishes to engage in this tactic of “attacking” those who disagree with him, instead of debating the issues… well then he should not be shocked when others go after him in like fashion.

But more to the point of this post is something very disturbing that Peter says about the Southern Baptist statement of faith; The Baptist Faith and Message 2000. Now, Peter is notorious for (how shall I say this…) displaying “Extreme Gymnastic” skills in twisting the meaning of the English language, and playing “Fast and Loose” with his reinterpreting the meaning of words, grammar, and sentence structure as seen in his comment below.

“ And, so far as the BF&M is concerned, Timmy wants it to definitively teach regeneration precedes faith. I’ll bet that would be a new one on Adrian Rogers, Jerry Vines, and all the other non-Calvinists who worked on the revision committee.

Personally, I think the BF&M is rubbery enough to include strict Calvinists, modified Calvinists, and non-Calvinists among its supporters. For Brister, however, non-Calvinists and even modified Calvinists like Akin find no support there. It definitively teaches the theological tomfoolery that there exists an animal others have called a born-again unbeliever. ”

Here is what the Baptist Faith and Message actually says:

“ A. Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Repentance and faith are inseparable experiences of grace.”

Peter appears to be reading this portion of the BFM2000 with blinders on, so I will put the part he appears to have a hard time reading in bold print.

"It (Regeneration) is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ"

That any man, with any degree of integrity, would attempt to tell Southern Baptist that our statement of faith does not in fact teach that regeneration precedes repentance is either a display of intellectual dishonesty, or crude arrogance… or both.

Peter’s strict/stern/hyper bias against Calvinism and all Calvinist is on full display in this article. And this salvo from the pen of Peter Lumpkin is a clear indication that the long war on Calvinism in the SBC is far from over, and in fact a new chapter in this war has just began; “The Battle for the Baptist Faith and Message”.

Grace Always,

Have Southern Baptist invaded the UK?

Click here to find out…

Even Peter Lumpkins can smile at this news.

Grace Always,

Passionate Missionary Calvinism – Follow up

For many in the SBC the phrase “Missionary Calvinism” is considered to be an oxymoron and dismissed offhand as pure rubbish. However, the historical fact that Calvinism can lead, and indeed has lead, many young men and women throughout history to become not only Missionaries and Church Planter, but to become “Passionate” Missionaries and Church Planters is undeniable. Yet, for many who grew up in the SBC, having been exposed from the cradle to the rhetoric of such notable SBC Anti-Calvinist as Jerry Vines, this truth seams to catch them of guard.

Still, the fact remains that not only did Calvin preach evangelism his Church in Geneva became a hub for mission activity under his leadership, as can be seen in Ray Van Neste article in the Founders Journal titled: “John Calvin on Evangelism and Missions” and an article by “The Thirsty Theologian” (you just got to love his Blog name) titled: “Calvin the Evangelist”.

Any discussion of “Missionary Calvinism” would be incomplete with mentioning such Calvinist missionary giants such as: George Whitfield, Charles H. Spurgeon, David Brainerd, Jonathan Edwards, Adoniram Judson, Luther Rice, Lottie Moon, Andrew Fuller, and the father of modern missions; William Carey. Yet, sadly we find that the vast majority of Southern Baptist do not even know that these great missionary men and women were even Calvinist.

Turning toward the New Calvinist of today one would almost need to have their head in the sand not to know that Calvinism has caught fire among the current generation of evangelicals, including Baptist. In an article “Even at 500, Calvin isn’t slowing down” posted on “The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life” Daniel Burke writes:

"His theology is the hottest, most explosive thing being discussed right now," said Justin Taylor, 32, a self-described Calvinist, and an editorial director at Crossway, a Christian publisher in the evangelical heartland of Wheaton, Ill. "What he taught is extraordinarily influential right now."

Young evangelicals are scooping up books by neo-Calvinist authors, packing churches and conventions led by Calvinist preachers and studying at staunchly Calvinist seminaries. They're blogging their way through Calvin's behemoth "Institutes of the Christian Religion," setting up Facebook fan clubs and opening Twitter feeds.

Many proudly bare their fidelity to Calvinism's "five points" of predestination as if they were stars on a general's chest. Earlier this year, Time magazine served notice that "The New Calvinism" is one of "10 ideas that are changing the world right now."

In other words, Calvinism has moved out of the Puritan meetinghouse and into the megachurch.

The rise of this new “Passionate Missionary Calvinism” in the SBC is perhaps best on display at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where, under the direction of her president, Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., himself a devout Calvinist, we witnessed the establishment of “The Billy Graham School of Missions, Evangelism and Church Growth”. If you are still not convinced that this new generation of Calvinist in the SBC are genuine in their passion for missions and evangelism I invite you to go to their website and spend some time reading some of their comments and discovering first hand their heart.

The old, stale, and warn out accusations of the Anti-Calvinist that claim Calvinism kills evangelism and missions have, by the actions of this new generation of Passionate Missionary Calvinist, been proven a lie… and with each graduating class from The Billy Graham School of Missions, Evangelism and Church Growth that head out into the world to do missions work, those in the SBC who continue say Calvinism kills evangelism and mission only succeed in destroying their own integrity and reputation.

Grace Always,

The Rise of Passionate Missionary Calvinism in the SBC

Image via Wikipedia

Morris Chapman in his Executive Committee’s Presidential report (see here) presented on 6/23/2009 at the SBC Convention made the following comments expressing his concerning over the rising influence of Calvinism in the SBC and the negative effects on evangelism and missions that he fears this rising influence of Calvinism will have on the future of the SBC.

The Southern Baptist Convention is experiencing a resurgence in the belief that divine sovereignty alone is at work in salvation without a faith response on the part of man…

Some are given to explain away the “whosoever will” of John 3:16…

The belief that sovereignty alone is at work in salvation is not what has emboldened our witness and elevated our concern for evangelism and missions through the ages. This is not the doctrine that Southern Baptists have embraced in their desire to reach the world for Christ.

If there is any doctrine of grace that drives men to argue and debate more than it drives them to pursue lost souls and persuade ALL MEN to be reconciled to God – then it is no doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Let me begin by saying that in the face of a young Calvinist movement in the SBC that is absolutely on fire for evangelism and missions these were most unfortunate comments coming from the President of the Executive Committee of the SBC, and that Chapman has seriously misjudged the current mood of cooperation in the convention. Yes, there is indeed great apathy toward evangelism and missions among many in the SBC; however it is among the Non-Calvinist that we see this sad form apathy toward the lost and not among this young generation of Calvinist in the SBC.

The issue of the rise of a passionate, missionary, form of Calvinism in the SBC and the long term apathy of many Non-Calvinist in the SBC toward evangelism and missions is one that I believe will occupy volumes in the future history books of the SBC.

In one very real sense the rise of this passionate missionary form of Calvinism in the SBC, that has lead to us now seeing a vastly disproportionate number of young Calvinist in the SBC becoming missionaries and Church Planters, is due to the fact that for many years these young Calvinist have suffered a constant barrage of criticism from the Non-Calvinist of the SBC (especially from the older generation) that Calvinism kills evangelism and missions. This criticism appears to have had an unintended effect on these young Calvinist. Instead of turning them from Calvinism, as the Non-Calvinist critics had hoped, it spurred these young Calvinist to become the most passionate and dedicated missionaries and church planters the SBC has seen in many generations.

So while many of the Non-Calvinist churches in the SBC have become apathetic toward evangelism and missions, the Calvinist are on fire for evangelism and missions. This is absolutely fascinating!

I would like to add that the Calvinist emphasis on regenerate church membership, and the Non-Calvinist lack of emphasis on regenerate church membership, has played a fundamental role in what we now see going on in the rise of this generation of passionate missionary Calvinist in the SBC. Simply put, those who are not regenerate have no passion for either evangelism or missions. So no matter how hard you preach evangelism and missions to them they simply pay no attention. Yet, if at the same time we see the Calvinist gathering more regenerate (though less numbers of) members in their churches there will be more passion for evangelism and missions among these smaller Calvinistic Churches than we see in some of the larger mega-churches that we often hear so much about from the older generation of SBC Leaders like Chapman.

In a very odd twist of fate the Non-Calvinist, by their harsh criticism of Calvinism, have fueled the rise of the passionate Calvinist Missionary, and Church Planter, we now see in the SBC. As I said earlier, this is absolutely fascinating!

Grace Always,