Hold your nose and do whatever you please. I don't think that's what the OP is about. As Mohler sees church attendance declining, and his dreams for ongoing minority rule of the Republican party being dashed, either by a Trump defeat, or by Trump saying anything to get elected, thereby alienating the minority Mohler needs, it's a bit of panic mode. What will Mohler do if Republicans are forced to govern instead of just scaring people? Mohler might have to get a real job.

Uhhh, you know that Mohler does have a real job?

Jabin said:

---

Uhhh, you know that Mohler does have a real job?

---

I know. And he's been in it a long time, despite being woefully short of academic credentials. And while he's said many good things over the years, his tenure is so symbolic of the codependency between evangelicals and the Republican party. He helped get DJT elected, which led to the greatest victory for the pro-life movement in 50 years, but now he's pouting, as if it's some great shock that DJT isn't "one of us." Reminds me of Winston at the end of 1984.

So let me get this right from the rationalist Baptist who strip mystery from the faith.

Christians are going to vote for the infanticide and trans mutilation candidate or not vote against her because Trump who got abortion over turned does not make big Albert Mohler of the SBC smile.

Arrogance of Baptist Evangelical Leaders is what turns off the Christian voters, look in the mirror Albert.

Jabin said:

---

In what way is Mohler woefully short of academic credentials?

Also, how did he help get Trump elected? I know that Mohler is a strong social conservative, but I don't remember him as one of the evangelical leaders publicly endorsing Trump. He did say that he'd vote for Trump, but so did many, many others.

---

A 34 YO with his doctorate from the same institution was made President? He is, and always has been, a lightweight.

94chem said:

---

Jabin said:

---

In what way is Mohler woefully short of academic credentials?

Also, how did he help get Trump elected? I know that Mohler is a strong social conservative, but I don't remember him as one of the evangelical leaders publicly endorsing Trump. He did say that he'd vote for Trump, but so did many, many others.

---

A 34 YO with his doctorate from the same institution was made President? He is, and always has been, a lightweight.

---

1. Isn't that a bit different than "woefully short of academic credentials"? Your complaint appears to be that he shouldn't have his degree from the same institution that he runs and that he was promoted too early, not that he lacks the necessary degree.

2. Is early promotion all that uncommon in academia? Couldn't another view, equally subjective, be that Mohler's young age at his promotion was due to his brilliance?

3. And is it that uncommon for an academic institution's president to have their terminal degree from that same institution? I just looked and Harvard's current President obtained his PhD from Harvard (although he also has an MD which he obtained from Stanford). A previous Harvard President, Bacow, obtained all of his degrees from Harvard. And Dallas Theological Seminary's immediate past President, Mark Bailey, also obtained his doctorate from DTS.

4. Did Mohler actually endorse Trump and/or work for him? All I remember was that Mohler simply announced that he was going to vote for Trump.

One reason for me responding at length is that I've always kinda liked Mohler, but never followed him closely. My impression has been that he is a brilliant guy who has deep insights into worldviews and how Christians are negatively impacted by what's going on in our world today. However, I could easily be wrong and would like more detail to know if I am.

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

No offense doc, but that's not what's ripping the SBC apart. Look no further than the ERLC, Russell Moore, and his ilk as to what's splitting them now as they press further into egalitarianism and ordaining women (and parallel issues, such as a 'me too' movement of sorts in an attempt to upend the structure of what the SBC is).

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

No offense doc, but that's not what's ripping the SBC apart. Look no further than the ERLC, Russell Moore, and his ilk as to what's splitting them now as they press further into egalitarianism and ordaining women (and parallel issues, such as a 'me too' movement of sorts in an attempt to upend the structure of what the SBC is).

---

Maybe so. But my Baptist chaplain and pastor friends always bring up Calvinism as a divisive fairly recent new force in the SBC. And only one of them would I consider liberal.

To me, Calvinism is not compatible with traditional Baptist theology or soteriology. Traditional Baptist theology taught free will and a personal decision. And had a totally different view of pre destination and election.

https://soteriology101.com/2015/06/22/calvinism-in-the-southern-baptist-convention/

dermdoc said:

---

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

No offense doc, but that's not what's ripping the SBC apart. Look no further than the ERLC, Russell Moore, and his ilk as to what's splitting them now as they press further into egalitarianism and ordaining women (and parallel issues, such as a 'me too' movement of sorts in an attempt to upend the structure of what the SBC is).

---

Maybe so. But my Baptist chaplain and pastor friends always bring up Calvinism as a divisive fairly recent new force in the SBC. And only one of them would I consider liberal.

To me, Calvinism is not compatible with traditional Baptist theology. Traditional Baptist theology taught free will and a personal decision. And had a totally different view of pre destination and election.

https://soteriology101.com/2015/06/22/calvinism-in-the-southern-baptist-convention/

---

2015 was a different year (and I don't just mean that literally, that's right after obergefell). This may still be an undercurrent but it's only that, it's not the primary source of division at the meeting of messenger. It's ironic one of the actors is the same though.

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

No offense doc, but that's not what's ripping the SBC apart. Look no further than the ERLC, Russell Moore, and his ilk as to what's splitting them now as they press further into egalitarianism and ordaining women (and parallel issues, such as a 'me too' movement of sorts in an attempt to upend the structure of what the SBC is).

---

Maybe so. But my Baptist chaplain and pastor friends always bring up Calvinism as a divisive fairly recent new force in the SBC. And only one of them would I consider liberal.

To me, Calvinism is not compatible with traditional Baptist theology. Traditional Baptist theology taught free will and a personal decision. And had a totally different view of pre destination and election.

https://soteriology101.com/2015/06/22/calvinism-in-the-southern-baptist-convention/

---

2015 was a different year (and I don't just mean that literally, that's right after obergefell). This may still be an undercurrent but it's only that, it's not the primary source of division at the meeting of messenger. It's ironic one of the actors is the same though.

---

Again, I just go by what the fairly large number of Baptist clergy, especially chaplains tell me. I could be wrong. And some of these are young.

As a long time traditional Baptist, I frankly have no idea how Calvinists end up graduating from Southern Baptist seminaries. Seems more in line with Reformed like Presbyterian.

I agree with you Derm that Calvinism and So Baptism seem like oil and water. But, surprisingly, there's been a very strong Calvinistic/Reformed strain in Southern Baptist churches for decades.

Although by no stretch of the imagination am I Reformed, it doesn't seem to bug me as much as it does you. Perhaps its because I grew up in the heart of Calvinism in the South and knew many wonderful Christians who were Reformed. Most of them, however, didn't make that big a deal of it.

Jabin said:

---

I agree with you Derm that Calvinism and So Baptism seem like oil and water. But, surprisingly, there's been a very strong Calvinistic/Reformed strain in Southern Baptist churches for decades.

Although by no stretch of the imagination am I Reformed, it doesn't seem to bug me as much as it does you. Perhaps its because I grew up in the heart of Calvinism in the South and knew many wonderful Christians who were Reformed. Most of them, however, didn't make that big a deal of it.

---

Agree for the most part. My problem is what their theology and soteriology do to the character of God. Double predestination is completely anathema to traditional Southern Baptist theology and soteriology. Although to be honest, I do not think most Calvinists, especially older ones, even know that is their theology.

It is the "young, restless, and reformed" of the last 20 years or so who make a big deal out of it. Especially at supposed Baptist seminaries. Some will even deny they are Calvinists in job interviews for pastors.

And I might add, the most wonderful Christians I know do not make a big deal out of non salvific issues.

Quote:

---

Al Mohler - Trump in Grave Danger

---

Obligatory "Is there any other kind?"

94chem said:

---

https://www.newsweek.com/evangelical-leader-warns-trump-christian-voters-albert-mohler-1950127

No, Al. As an SBC faithful member, I know who's actually in danger. It's you, and your fear that a post-Trump Republican party will no longer be dominated by your decades of undue and overbearing influence. Allow me to say, good riddance. I am no more eager to see a post-Christian America than you are, but I won't miss the days of vapid evangelical leaders strong-arming their favorite political party under the guise of advancing the cause of Christ.

---

I agree that Trump is in some danger of losing full throttled support from Christians. Trump has no agenda...except power and money. He happened to find a niche group that if he said the right things they would support his first term. After losing 2020, he is now saying whatever it takes to get back in power, not because he believes with his heart and agrees with Christians. So now he's trying to garner more moderate votes by back pedaling on some things and being wishy washy. He hates unions but needs their votes, he did great by putting 3 conservative justices on the court who overturned R v W...but now he's backing off full on abortion bans.
The man lack integrity and as a Christian that concerns me greatly. He is the only nominee for what we hope is a continued conservative agenda, but I do not trust that he can make it happen.
I won't be surprised if many Christians leave the Presidential box blank and just vote straight ticket the rest of the way.

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

Virtually nobody cares about this.

Paige Patterson did go on a witch hunt a while back, but he's a grade-A jackass, sexual assault enabler, and bully. Good riddance to him, too. I will say that Mohler appears to be merely a political opportunist. Patterson was a wolf in sheep's clothing...or at least a sheep in wolf's clothing impersonating a sheep...

BluHorseShu said:

---

94chem said:

---

https://www.newsweek.com/evangelical-leader-warns-trump-christian-voters-albert-mohler-1950127

No, Al. As an SBC faithful member, I know who's actually in danger. It's you, and your fear that a post-Trump Republican party will no longer be dominated by your decades of undue and overbearing influence. Allow me to say, good riddance. I am no more eager to see a post-Christian America than you are, but I won't miss the days of vapid evangelical leaders strong-arming their favorite political party under the guise of advancing the cause of Christ.

---

I agree that Trump is in some danger of losing full throttled support from Christians. Trump has no agenda...except power and money. He happened to find a niche group that if he said the right things they would support his first term. After losing 2020, he is now saying whatever it takes to get back in power, not because he believes with his heart and agrees with Christians. So now he's trying to garner more moderate votes by back pedaling on some things and being wishy washy. He hates unions but needs their votes, he did great by putting 3 conservative justices on the court who overturned R v W...but now he's backing off full on abortion bans.
The man lack integrity and as a Christian that concerns me greatly. He is the only nominee for what we hope is a continued conservative agenda, but I do not trust that he can make it happen.
I won't be surprised if many Christians leave the Presidential box blank and just vote straight ticket the rest of the way.

---

I don't want to say what I'll do, but what you've expressed seems quite plausible.

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

Virtually nobody cares about this.

Paige Patterson did go on a witch hunt a while back, but he's a grade-A jackass, sexual assault enabler, and bully. Good riddance to him, too. I will say that Mohler appears to be merely a political opportunist. Patterson was a wolf in sheep's clothing...or at least a sheep in wolf's clothing impersonating a sheep...

---

Disagree. Google Calvinism and the SBC.

dermdoc said:

---

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

Virtually nobody cares about this.

Paige Patterson did go on a witch hunt a while back, but he's a grade-A jackass, sexual assault enabler, and bully. Good riddance to him, too. I will say that Mohler appears to be merely a political opportunist. Patterson was a wolf in sheep's clothing...or at least a sheep in wolf's clothing impersonating a sheep...

---

Disagree. Google Calvinism and the SBC.

---

Look, I know all this stuff. I just know that you believe that Jesus loses track of his stuff, so your analysis of Baptist theology doesn't weigh a lot.

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

94chem said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

My only problem with Mohler is that he has been openly divisive with his Calvinist theology.

It is ripping the SBC apart.

---

Virtually nobody cares about this.

Paige Patterson did go on a witch hunt a while back, but he's a grade-A jackass, sexual assault enabler, and bully. Good riddance to him, too. I will say that Mohler appears to be merely a political opportunist. Patterson was a wolf in sheep's clothing...or at least a sheep in wolf's clothing impersonating a sheep...

---

Disagree. Google Calvinism and the SBC.

---

Look, I know all this stuff. I just know that you believe that Jesus loses track of his stuff, so your analysis of Baptist theology doesn't weigh a lot.

---

No idea what that means. Never said anything about Jesus losing anything but you be you.

All I know is double predestination is anathema to traditional Baptist theology. And basically every theology.

For the record, I personally don't care. The Bible pretty clearly teaches that both are true. If I can believe that Jesus took my sins on himself, it's no real stretch to hold both positions. But at least I never had to experience the Church of Christ/Calvinist hybrid, a.k.a. the Puritans, where God chooses you but you can never know it.

Calling Al Mohler a lightweight is peak Texags. Disagree all you want to but the man is brilliant. He can be wrong and brilliant at the same time.

Church of Christ weighing in here. Not really on the theology debate or the Trump part. But wanted to say we recently had a young man at our church, a deacon who was very involved and raised (as was his wife), in the churches of Christ, flip to Calvinism doctrine. First time I had encountered that and caught me off-guard.

His decision has been a haymaker on his marriage and his family. They are working through their marital issues and evidently making good progress. Praise God.

TheCurl84 said:

---

Church of Christ weighing in here. Not really on the theology debate or the Trump part. But wanted to say we recently had a young man at our church, a deacon who was very involved and raised (as was his wife), in the churches of Christ, flip to Calvinism doctrine. First time I had encountered that and caught me off-guard.

His decision has been a haymaker on his marriage and his family. They are working through their marital issues and evidently making good progress. Praise God.

---

Prayers for their marriage. God is good.

And I do not understand the need for divisive theology on non salvific issues.

But it has plagued Christianity since its inception.

Just preach the simple Gospel.

I thought this was a good article from this year. It is a real problem.
https://baptistnews.com/article/southern-baptist-calvinists-crave-authority-not-baptist-theology/

Doc,

I don't know but suspect that the guy who wrote the article may not be your best citation for opposition to Calvinism in the SB denomination. For example, his approach seems to cast a much wider net than Calvinism:

Quote:

---

Southern Baptists have lost the ability to name and evoke a new reality because literalism and authoritarianism combine to shut down these rich possibilities.

---

He doesn't explain what he means by "literalism", but it would be interesting to see what his take is on many other issues plaguing the church.

He seems to be removing the Bible itself as a final authority; the only authority he seems to feel is valid is a true, democratic vote of the congregation where there has been no politicking. That seems to be a fantasy.

I'd like to ask him several questions, beginning with:

1. What sources of authority does he believe do exist?
2. What should a pastor do if he believes that the congregation is disregarding that authority?
3. What does he mean by Biblical "literalism", and what interpretive method does he think should be used instead?
4. What would be his take if the congregation majority wanted to adopt the strictest form of Calvinism?

Jabin said:

---

Doc,

I don't know but suspect that the guy who wrote the article may not be your best citation for opposition to Calvinism in the SB denomination. For example, his approach seems to cast a much wider net than Calvinism:

Quote:

---

Southern Baptists have lost the ability to name and evoke a new reality because literalism and authoritarianism combine to shut down these rich possibilities.

---

He doesn't explain what he means by "literalism", but it would be interesting to see what his take is on many other issues plaguing the church.

He seems to be removing the Bible itself as a final authority; the only authority he seems to feel is valid is a true, democratic vote of the congregation where there has been no politicking. That seems to be a fantasy.

I'd like to ask him several questions, beginning with:

1. What sources of authority does he believe do exist?
2. What should a pastor do if he believes that the congregation is disregarding that authority?
3. What does he mean by Biblical "literalism", and what interpretive method does he think should be used instead?
4. What would be his take if the congregation majority wanted to adopt the strictest form of Calvinism?

---

Fair enough. And this guy seems more liberal than me.

But as a Baptist, I respect his beliefs with civil disagreement. Which has been a hallmark of Baptist theology.

In my experience,and the point of this guy's article in my opinion, is that Calvinists are trying to force their theology on the SBC.

And Calvinist theology is not traditional Baptist theology which embraces free will and personal choice. I do not see the traditional Baptists or even "liberal" Baptists trying to force their views on the neo Calvinists.

I grew up in a Southern Baptist church and never heard of Calvinism in the SBC until about 30 years ago. And frankly, it shocked me as the theology is anathema to traditional Baptist theology.

And maybe it is just me, but this seems much bigger than the role of females, political leanings, types of music, etc.

This is a stark difference in theology and completely changes the character of God.

And my question is how did Calvinists end up in Baptist seminaries? Shouldn't they be in Reformed or Presbyterian seminaries?

Yep.

And to say something possibly heretical (would love feedback from others here), is it possible to study doctrine too much, with hyper-Calvinism being Exhibit A? In other words, are some areas of Scripture supposed to be mysteries and by trying to force interpretation, we end up forcing a meaning that God never intended?

Jabin said:

---

Yep.

And to say something possibly heretical (would love feedback from others here), is it possible to study doctrine too much, with hyper-Calvinism being Exhibit A? In other words, are some areas of Scripture supposed to be mysteries and by trying to force interpretation, we end up forcing a meaning that God never intended?

---

Exactly. But in my experience, neo Calvinists will not allow that stance.

Before my exposure to them, I had never heard people saying they knew certain people were hell bound. I always thought that was not for us to know.

And we are all heretics to somebody.

Edited to add that I have friends at the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. And I guy I went to hs with, Chuck Kelly, was president there.

It is a huge problem from what I hear.

Jabin said:

---

Doc,

I don't know but suspect that the guy who wrote the article may not be your best citation for opposition to Calvinism in the SB denomination. For example, his approach seems to cast a much wider net than Calvinism:

Quote:

---

Southern Baptists have lost the ability to name and evoke a new reality because literalism and authoritarianism combine to shut down these rich possibilities.

---

He doesn't explain what he means by "literalism", but it would be interesting to see what his take is on many other issues plaguing the church.

He seems to be removing the Bible itself as a final authority; the only authority he seems to feel is valid is a true, democratic vote of the congregation where there has been no politicking. That seems to be a fantasy.

I'd like to ask him several questions, beginning with:

1. What sources of authority does he believe do exist?
2. What should a pastor do if he believes that the congregation is disregarding that authority?
3. What does he mean by Biblical "literalism", and what interpretive method does he think should be used instead?
4. What would be his take if the congregation majority wanted to adopt the strictest form of Calvinism?

---

Baptist news global is run by northern baptists who do not hold orthodox beliefs (like mainlines).

Doc I'd recommend a source from within the SBC that's not 10 years old. Not that theological differences aren't there, but the vibe from the convention the past few years has not been about this but about race, church abuse (real or perceived), and egalitarianism lately.

AGC said:

---

Jabin said:

---

Doc,

I don't know but suspect that the guy who wrote the article may not be your best citation for opposition to Calvinism in the SB denomination. For example, his approach seems to cast a much wider net than Calvinism:

Quote:

---

Southern Baptists have lost the ability to name and evoke a new reality because literalism and authoritarianism combine to shut down these rich possibilities.

---

He doesn't explain what he means by "literalism", but it would be interesting to see what his take is on many other issues plaguing the church.

He seems to be removing the Bible itself as a final authority; the only authority he seems to feel is valid is a true, democratic vote of the congregation where there has been no politicking. That seems to be a fantasy.

I'd like to ask him several questions, beginning with:

1. What sources of authority does he believe do exist?
2. What should a pastor do if he believes that the congregation is disregarding that authority?
3. What does he mean by Biblical "literalism", and what interpretive method does he think should be used instead?
4. What would be his take if the congregation majority wanted to adopt the strictest form of Calvinism?

---

Baptist news global is run by northern baptists who do not hold orthodox beliefs (like mainlines).

Doc I'd recommend a source from within the SBC that's not 10 years old. Not that theological differences aren't there, but the vibe from the convention the past few years has not been about this but about race, church abuse (real or perceived), and egalitarianism lately.

---

This. Reformed Baptist churches are welcomed in the SBC. The SBC is a missions organization, not a doctrinal line in the sand. Perhaps the most prominent SBC pastor in America, John MacArthur is a Calvinist.

Regarding so-called hyper-Calvinism, it should be noted that Calvin himself would not be accepted as a Calvinist in those places.

94chem said:

---

AGC said:

---

Jabin said:

---

Doc,

I don't know but suspect that the guy who wrote the article may not be your best citation for opposition to Calvinism in the SB denomination. For example, his approach seems to cast a much wider net than Calvinism:

Quote:

---

Southern Baptists have lost the ability to name and evoke a new reality because literalism and authoritarianism combine to shut down these rich possibilities.

---

He doesn't explain what he means by "literalism", but it would be interesting to see what his take is on many other issues plaguing the church.

He seems to be removing the Bible itself as a final authority; the only authority he seems to feel is valid is a true, democratic vote of the congregation where there has been no politicking. That seems to be a fantasy.

I'd like to ask him several questions, beginning with:

1. What sources of authority does he believe do exist?
2. What should a pastor do if he believes that the congregation is disregarding that authority?
3. What does he mean by Biblical "literalism", and what interpretive method does he think should be used instead?
4. What would be his take if the congregation majority wanted to adopt the strictest form of Calvinism?

---

Baptist news global is run by northern baptists who do not hold orthodox beliefs (like mainlines).

Doc I'd recommend a source from within the SBC that's not 10 years old. Not that theological differences aren't there, but the vibe from the convention the past few years has not been about this but about race, church abuse (real or perceived), and egalitarianism lately.

---

This. Reformed Baptist churches are welcomed in the SBC. The SBC is a missions organization, not a doctrinal line in the sand. Perhaps the most prominent SBC pastor in America, John MacArthur is a Calvinist.

Regarding so-called hyper-Calvinism, it should be noted that Calvin himself would not be accepted as a Calvinist in those places.

---

Cool. Is double predestination bad theology?