This Thursday from 11 a.m. – 1 p.m. Dr. David Allen, Dean of the School of Theology, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary is giving students (particularly Calvinistic/Reformed Baptist students) a chance to dialogue with him regarding the recent debate regarding Calvinism and the SBC that has been ensuing and his own views. (Ronjour Locke has a good run down of the recent events in his most recent post SBC's Calvinism "Debate" in Warp Speed.)
This is an open forum, so if you are in the DFW area and are interested in attending (or are a student at Southwestern), I highly encourage you to attend. It will be located in the Truett Conference Room on Southwestern's campus.
However, if you want to come to be contentious because you have a personal bone to pick with non-Calvinists (or possibly anti-Calvinists in your view), I would tell you not to come. The time for personal polemics must cease and we must be more concerned with engaging in biblical polemics according to 2 Timothy 2:24-26, 1 Timothy 1:3-7, i.e., debating doctrine vigorously but not contentiously (I will say more about that in another post).
I am very much looking forward to this dialogue for the very same reasons that the dialogue regarding the Doctrines of Grace is important for the Southern Baptist Convention and all of Christianity. The issue at hand is not an issue of Calvinism per se; rather, the issue at hand is a matter of the truth and faithfulness to Scripture which has vast implications for life and ministry.
I also want to say publically, in Dr. Allen's defense, that he is not anti-Calvinist and I affirm all that he said regarding not being "anti-Calvinist" in this post. Because I have gotten to know him and work with and for him, I believe that Dr. Allen does not engage in personal polemics and has not intended any of his statements as a personal attack on anyone. However, he does take issue with certain Calvinistic teachings, which he is free to do.
My view on biblical polemics and believing that Dr. Allen is not on a personal vendetta with a chip on his shoulder does not mean that I believe we should not have vigorous debate, nor does it mean that I don't think that Dr. Allen has flawed logic and conclusions. It just means that I am sitting down with family to talk about an important issue. And I plan to offer a few challenging questions that I hope will help the discussion and encourage the need for future dialogue.
Particularly, I mean to ask:
What did he mean when he said (at the John 3:16 Conference) that "a move toward 5 point Calvinism is a move away from the gospel." I believe this is the most damaging statement because it implies something that he may not mean to imply...but he might have meant to imply it…we will have to see.
I will keep you posted.
Jude 2-3,
Q
5 comments:
i personally want to be there but have to work!
Waaaa! Its now 12:38 p.m. and I am just now finding out about this debate.
I cant wait to find out what took place! Call me and let me know if you have time.
Quincy: I hope you'll give us a "report" of the dialogue. I also hope it proved to be a helpful time for all involved.
Hey Rev,
I hadn't planned to...but I should though...it would be fitting inbetween my current post and the next.
Thanks for stopping by...
Q
Hey Mike!
Good to hear from you bro. Well...it wasn't a debate, just a Q&A opportunity for students who had questions/concerns over the latest hubub and Dr. Allens past lectures on limited atonement and Hebrews earlier in the semester.
It was fruitful though...I'll probably post about it tomorrow.
Bless you soldier,
Q
Post a Comment