Tags
Al Mohler, Calvinism in the SBC, Gospel Coalition, Gospel Driven, Gospel Sanctification, New Calvinism, New Covenant Theology, SBC, T4G, Tom Ascol
by Paul Dohse
Part 2:
Part 3:
New Calvinism 101: The SBC Connection
20 Monday Feb 2012
%d bloggers like this:
Frankly, what is presented ought to be reviewed by all Reformed Seminaries, especially Reformed Baptist and Southern Seminary professors for a formal response, as well as the Association of Reformed Baptists or other non-affiliated Reformed Baptist congregations. There is now too much at stake to remain silent or neutral with the facts laid out. Any professor or class in Contemporary Church History ought to consider what is presented here as well as classes on Doctrine. The influence of the New Calvinist movement and its very peculiar teachings (aberrations) now require immediate evaluation upon which this thesis is at least a starting point. How could any seminary or affiliated denomination be so irresponsible anymore as to not be Bereans, who examined even the apostle Paul “to see if these things be so”, or neglect to consider its tremendous influence upon their own church members?
Neither avoidance, neutrality, silence nor willful ignorance of this subject are responsible options. “Examine everything” and “test every spirit” are commands of the apostle Paul and it is required of all pastors and churches. Let impartial consideration begin by those who hold church offices (and church members) who are to be faithful shepherds to their flocks which includes warning them to avoid false teachers (and “mark them”) and their pernicious doctrines.
Let serious examination and debate begin.
Until a definition of “New Calvinism” is available on this site, identifying such as Tom Ascol and Al Mohler as New Calvinists is mere name calling. What is it and what have they taught that aligns with it?
My connotation of New Calvinism would be the mixture of Calvinistic soteriology with cultural relativism, with Mark Driscoll being the poster child for it.
Not name calling Manfred, did you watch the videos? There is pertinent history there. Definitions are coming, and are more challenging than you may realize.
Joel – have not taken the time to watch the videos, and will not decide if I will until I know what ya’ll are coalescing against. Seems to me defining the object of your opposition should have been of the first order.
I understand, but, if you had watched the videos, you would not have asked the question!
The links don’t work?
I wonder sometimes whether the merging together of justification and sanctification could work at all without the doctrine of “the total depravity of the saints” or with a stronger emphasis on regeneration? Could it be that the reason “new calvinists” advocate so much passivity in sanctification is because they genuinely believe we can do NOTHING? If we can do nothing, then I suppose God must do it all for us by way of hearing the Gospel–again, and again, and again. I’m really just starting to dig into all this stuff, but this is my initial impression. Well, back to reading