Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

My Photo


    Seeking writers with positive stories, anecdotes, essays, announcements, posts and experiences involving the SBC. WHAT'S GOD UP TO IN YOUR CHURCH? YOUR SCHOOL? YOUR VOCATION? YOUR MISSION FIELD?

« WASTED WITNESS, WORDS AND WHIMS | Main | Sometimes We Encounter Attacks »

June 30, 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I don't think using the phrase AntiTrads is going to go over so well. Of course the people who will have a problem with it are the ones who use the term antiCavlinist.

Can you imagine what would have happened if our friend in Georgia had claimed "some people were forced to sign..."

but here I am in the flesh. Can I blame the heat?


Ya think? I don't see why not. We are called non-Calvinists and anti-Calvinists and we're not suppose to be offended. And when we shared our thoughts on it, they said that is what we were, so I thought that a non-trad and an anti-trad fit pretty well. sigh...see? nothing I say is good enough. And here you are a friend. selahV


I had not seen that Ascol said some were forced to sign the document. That does not sound like our free church tradition at all. It does sound like Calvinist Geneva, though. :o)



"When a Presbyterian reposted my comment and added his admonishment: "Nice. Not.", I first wickedly chuckled. Then I saw the error of my choice of verbiage and once again, recomitted myself to reading more than writing.

Unfortunately, some of the Anti-Traditionalists have left me wondering if there is anything I could ever say that might pass muster and scrutiny for value, worth, or theological correctness."

Well just to give Baptists credit where credit is due, I am not only a Presbyterian, I'm a Baptist too.

But to your second part here, wondering if you can ever say anything that could pass muster, I have read enough of your comments to have a pretty good idea that yes, you can.

I think that everyone, me included, involved would be better served to tone down the rhetoric. Calvinists like me should refrain from using "anti-Calvinists" to describe those who differ with us and those on the other side should refrain from using "anti-traditionalists." We need to continue to need to try to focus on the particular debate and not appear to attack the integrity or "smarts" of the person.

It won't be easy, but it is possible. I quoted Spurgeon a few days ago over at Voices. It is something I'm working on.

"As we grow in grace, we are sure to grow in
charity, sympathy, and love. We shall, as we
ripen in grace, have greater sweetness towards
our fellow Christians. Bitter spirited Christians
may know a great deal, but they are immature.

Those who are quick to censure may be
very acute in judgment, but they are as
yet very immature in heart.

He who grows in grace remembers that he is
but dust, and he therefore does not expect his
fellow Christians to be anything more.

He overlooks ten thousand of their faults,
because he knows his God overlooks twenty
thousand in his own case. He does not expect
perfection in the creature, and, therefore, he
is not disappointed when he does not find it.

When our virtues become more mature, we shall
not be more tolerant of evil; but we shall be more
tolerant of infirmity, more hopeful for the people
of God, and certainly less arrogant in our criticisms.

Charles Spurgeon. Ripe Fruit, sermon #945 on Micah 7:1"

God bless. Les


I hope I'm your friend. First I think this is an excellent post and perhaps I should have explained what I was saying a little better.

Using antiTrad is going to be attacked as divisive and name calling and it will probably be done by the people who use the word antiCalvinist. Thus showing that these people are antiTrads because they have to apply double standards so as to find a reason to attack. Calvinists own words and get to decide who gets labeled what. So when when you turn around what they've been saying - they don't like it so much.

Just using the phrase Traditionalists is making heads explode because the Calvinists believe they own the SBC and all it's traditions, but to now show that what we really have are a group of people who are anti - against those of us who are Tradtionalists - well can heads explode multiple times?

I actually laughed when I saw the title of your post - suprised I hadn't thought of it myself that now that we have a lable for ourselves we can now put a name to those who wish to push us out of the SBC.

But please accept my apology if I gave the impression I was calling you out. I'm the last person to be doing that and it was the last thing I would do. I think everything you wrote is spot on as usual and I was simply making an observation about the grumbling that will surely occur. But grumblers cannot complain without showing their hypocrisy when the term antiCalvinist has become common and accepted.


Lydia, yeah...he did. And I just think it is a bit silly to say that without evidence. After all, that is what they are constantly saying to the Traditionalists. "prove it", "prove it". However, I suppose stating "facts" not in evidence is permissible as long as it is not Traditionalists doing it. You have the funniest nicknames for folks. selahV


Hello Les,

Welcome and thanks for dropping in. I know you are a baptist/Presbyterian. Maybe we should report you to the convention as one of the AWOL Southern Baptist that everyone is always wondering about. :) I tend to believe there are a lot of our SB people infiltrating other churches: Independent, non-denominational, general bpts., Presbyterian, Lutheran, Church of Christ, AoG, Mormons, Methodists, Episcopalian, and Catholic, etc. I know some in every group.

While I understand your concern regarding the anti-Trad label, it seemed appropriate given how many times I've read anti-calvinist and non-calvinist in describing Trads since long before the Trad statement came out and all the more still. Having been called an anti-Calvinist and repeatedly been ignored when I disagreed with the term for myself, I've determined that to the Calvinist it must not be a pejorative term. I just supposed it helps people address the issue and those we are discussing more clearly. If I were to use that term in a setting outside the blogs, most folks wouldn't know what I was talking about.

However, when "free-will" choice came up this a.m. in Sunday School, I found it quite interesting how folks quickly responded to the idea that some say we have no choice in the matter of our "elect" status and predestination. So I knew, right off, if I further explain to them what was going on in the SBC, I would have had about 50 or so signatures within moments. I decided, it might be a good idea to copy the statement and bring it to church next week.

As to growing in grace and being "kind" in the face of adversity, I already plead no-contest to using a goofy description of the mind-boggling Q & A. Spurgeon's always a great source of wisdom, though; thanks for the quote. selahV


Hello again, Mary, my friend.

No no, you didn't leave me wondering how you thought. I've read enough of your comments to know from whence you speak, my love. I was just being my sarcastic little self. Ha.

I do know how the "anti"-Trad may be interpreted by those who could easily be described as such. I know that some folks seem to think they have a corner-market on all words, phrases, and definitions of same. However, if non-C and anti-C are going to keep coming up in the streams when being addressed, I felt it necessary to be as clear and succinct to those who do not hold to the 10-Articles of the Trad Statement. At least I am not calling them semi-Pelagian or heretics. So, I think it's probably the way Calvies want to be distinguished from us. Time will tell, I suppose. :) selahV


Well, I loved what you said and don't think you need to apologize in the first place. Let your words stand. Hope you don't take offense but I could never join a Baptist church. These SBC blogs kinda say it all. Too much inhouse fighting, bickering, debating, and trying to prove one tradition against another; one doctrine against another - what a waste of precious life. I don't frequent blogs very often anymore but the SBC writings/rants remind me why. Baptist politics = feud, feud, feud. What does it accomplish? You are wise to step away from it all. Man doesn't know everything about God. God doesn't need us to defend Him, either. jesus is our defense. In Him alone! God has already accomplished every spiritual thing for man - it's not even about us measuring up or agreeing or arguing to keep the faith. I just wanna see people get on with living life as His beloved. you know what a real heretic is? It's a Baptist trying to live *for* Jesus...think about it...when we put so much effort into, well, our "efforts"'s all about us, not Him anymore. Thanks for letting me rant :-)


hello Caryn, well my love, I really understand where you can get the impression that all we do is argue given the blogs. yuk.
sadly that is the picture a great deal of the world gets, too.

I'm grateful to attend a wonderful fellowship of Baptist Believers who have been true to the Gospel of Christ in service and love. Their generosity when I lost my son, when my husband had 5 by-pass open heart surgery, and the way they supported us through it all still humbles me to think on it. through all the dust-ups on the internet I've encountered I stand amazed at the merciful, tolerant and steadfast God we have. Thank you, Caryn for logging on. I needed to hear these words tonite. Come by and rant, anytime. selahV

The comments to this entry are closed.

Hey! Why Not...

Blog powered by Typepad