A tale of two conferences

Founders Ministries Blog: A Brief Response to David Allen's Explanations and Rejoinder

The Building Bridges conference, an open discussion between Calvinist and Arminian leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention, brought together parties with a variety of views and spoke openly and graciously about a major point of doctrine. Both sides were given a forum, there was a back and forth and the entire conference was quite enriching for the theological life of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Contrast that with the “John 3:16 Conference”, so named in the ridiculous assumption that John 3:16 somehow exposes the “errors” of Calvinism. When the conference was announced, I and many others feared that it would be a hatchet job, replete with misrepresentations and unfortunately it sounds as if that is precisely what happened. The speakers were, by all accounts, uniformly hostile to Calvinism and in some measure to those who hold to the Doctrines of Grace personally. In the spirit of full disclosure, I have not listened to the talks from the John 3:16 conference, but I have listened to all the talks from both sides from Building Bridges and I have read some of the interplay between Tom Ascol of Founders, Phil Johnson and James White on the one side and several of the presenters from j3:16 on the other. The discussions have devolved quickly (in my non-partisan opinion primarily from the Arminians!) into name calling and attacks. The hypocrisy of the Arminian crowd is incredible. A one sided conference attacking Calvinism and slandering many a Calvinist is OK, but a balanced discussion between two parties is not? Please!

What is really troubling is the way in which Founders is described as a “non-SBC entity”. Given the loose structure of the SBC, wouldn’t a ministry made up almost entirely of SBC pastors and churches qualify as an SBC entity? Or do only those groups officially given the stamp of approval make the cut? If one is a conservative Baptist but not in an SBC affiliated official capacity, does that make the conversation moot? Thus we see the danger of denominationalism. What next, kissing the ring of the President of the SBC when granted an audience? (That is over the top and I know it, but go with it)

It is way past high time for people serious about the sovereignty of God in salvation to jettison the Southern Baptist Convention. The hostility towards Calvinism is growing, the denomination is growing ever more political and the conversations are more and more shrill. I think it is no longer productive to have “discussions” where accusations fly and people talk past one another. Instead we are left with two parties, unconvinced and bitter toward one another. Better to shake the dust off your sandals and leave the squabbling over how many unregenerate people you can baptize to those for whom the Gospel is a means to an end.