The "Traditionalist Baptist Statement" IS and IS NOT

I've noticed a growing consensus of opinion on the statement, while reading the multiple comments on various blogs in regards to the "Traditionalist Statement" that was originally posted at SBC Today.  Folks seem to be confused.  They keep saying that the statement is mischaracterizing and misrepresenting Calvinists.  I cannot speak for all the other signatories, but I am not trying to mischaracterize or misrepresent Calvinists.

My understanding is that the Traditional Baptist Statement IS: "A Statement of Traditional Baptists Understanding of God's Plan of Salvation".

That is what my husband and I signed.

The Traditionalist Baptist Statement IS NOT: a denunciation of Calvinists as Southern Baptists.  It seems several arguments posed against the articles (especially in the denial category), is that Calvinists do not agree with that denial.

My husband and I did not sign a denunciation of Calvinists.

I do not believe anyone is saying Calvinists should agree with our denials.  Nor would we expect that would Calvinists agree with our affirmations, I suppose.  It would be nice, but that is not the purpose for the statement as I see it.  I had a fella comment on my previous post, who wrote: "Please be reformed".  I replied that I'd already been reborn, wasn't that sufficient?  He hasn't answered me yet.  But I write this post to say, I am not asking or desiring that Calvinists be UN-reformed.  And from all I read on hundreds of comments of a post by Dave Miller's question at SBC Voices on "What is the Gospel", we're all pretty close to understanding that the gospel is the good news of Jesus Christ and His death, burial and resurrection.  That He died to save us from our sins and His death paid our penalty for our sin so we who believe in Him and repent, will be filled with the Holy Spirit and make Him Lord of our lives.

The whole idea of the statement was to put forth a concise, clearly worded, scripturally based explanation of what most Southern Baptists believe about God's salvation for man.  The statement was not put forth to say what Arminians believe about soteriology.  And the statement was not put forth to say what most Southern Baptists think Calvinists believe.  Calvinists have a system of belief on soteriology, at least, I thought they did.  Calvinists believe in the Doctrines of Grace.  And those doctrines as I understand them, are what Calvinists affirm and embrace as the way of salvation.  And also, as I've discovered in conversations, some things remain a "mystery".

When folks ask me what Calvinists believe, I tell them what all the Calvinists told me, read the Doctrines of Grace.  That's what they believe.

Maybe I understand the Calvinist system of soteriology all wrong. Is the Doctrines of Grace what Calvinists understand their soteriology as being?

It seems that some Calvinistic Baptists are taking the Traditionalist Baptist Statement to mean, "Traditional Baptists believe THIS and Calvinistic Baptists believe THAT."  If that is true, then I think it is a misunderstanding of the document itself.

Just wanted to clear this up.  And if any of the wiser, more learned signatories do not think I am correct in my understanding of the purpose of the statement, then I sure would love for them to correct me wherein I am wrong.  selahV

Comments

[Anon]

The preamble goes directly against your assurances this document is not addressing "New Calvinists."

You may feel this way, but the document does not agree with you.

[Cole]

I would feel that way too, if it had only stated the 10 articles and not the particular preamble and introduction, naming new Calvinism. Seemed it picked a target, as where it could have just stated the plan of salvation without setting it against Reformed Theology. Not to mention it confirmed and denied what they believed was the plan of salvation. Why not just state the beliefs?

[Cole]

Well it simply talks about Calvinism alot in it. Also seems it has only created division, when we should be rallying around the Gospel in unity.

[Cole]

I apologize for my most recent repetitive comment, misunderstanding on my part. I still would like to see more unity around the Gospel itself and not our particular plans of salvations.