Comments on: Interview with Dr. Jerry Vines http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=interview-with-dr-jerry-vines A forum for Baptists to dialogue about how best to fulfill God’s calling in our lives. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:33:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Rory http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1942 Rory Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:14:13 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1942 "Are you saying that someone should not speak in another person’s pulpit unless there is 100% agreement? Are you saying that if one disagrees with someone and goes to speak in their pulpit, then they are advocating everything the person has done, or is doing–even though they do not know it?" Paul rebuked Peter publically about his behavior. He did not go and act as if nothing happened. Did Vines rebuke Gilyard when he spoke there? It is amazing what you guys will 'overlook'. But what they hey, the victims are JUST women. “Are you saying that someone should not speak in another person’s pulpit unless there is 100% agreement? Are you saying that if one disagrees with someone and goes to speak in their pulpit, then they are advocating everything the person has done, or is doing–even though they do not know it?”

Paul rebuked Peter publically about his behavior. He did not go and act as if nothing happened. Did Vines rebuke Gilyard when he spoke there?

It is amazing what you guys will ‘overlook’. But what they hey, the victims are JUST women.

]]> By: Scott Gordon http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1941 Scott Gordon Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:11:30 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1941 ABClay, Mercy has been shown...by grace alone! Sola Gratia! ABClay,

Mercy has been shown…by grace alone!

Sola Gratia!

]]> By: ABClay http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1940 ABClay Sat, 23 Feb 2008 05:23:18 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1940 To all: Sorry bout the double post. This is undoubtedly due to my inability to navigate properly around cyberspace. Perhaps the moderator will show mercy to me and delete one of them. Chris, I do not understand exactly what you mean by that. I do not recall taking anyone to the woodshed, though my father and I were very familiar with this place when I was a boy (and I can't think of ever not deserving what was coming to me). If, by the tone of my post, you perceive me to be antagonistic, you have my apologies as it was not my intention. Building on the Rock... To all: Sorry bout the double post. This is undoubtedly due to my inability to navigate properly around cyberspace. Perhaps the moderator will show mercy to me and delete one of them.

Chris,
I do not understand exactly what you mean by that. I do not recall taking anyone to the woodshed, though my father and I were very familiar with this place when I was a boy (and I can’t think of ever not deserving what was coming to me).
If, by the tone of my post, you perceive me to be antagonistic, you have my apologies as it was not my intention.
Building on the Rock…

]]> By: Chris Johnson http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1939 Chris Johnson Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:53:35 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1939 Wow AB, Who else did you drag behind the "Woodshed" ? :) -Chris Wow AB,

Who else did you drag behind the “Woodshed” ?

:)

-Chris

]]> By: ABClay http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1938 ABClay Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:25:14 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1938 Greetings all, Let me start off by saying that I am what is commonly referred to as a "Calvinist" and I would like to mention a word or two about this interview. It is unfortunate that Dr. Vines used the term "militant Calvinist", but I think he sort of defined the term when he said that they "cause problems in the church" and "kill evangelism". I will try to address the latter statement first. How does a Calvinist "kill evangelism"? The only two things that I can picture here is either a "hyper" killing, or a killing that takes place when the number of baptisms go down. In a day and age where a successful sermon is measured by how many people "come down front" and perform a "Romanesque" ritual of saying a prayer and being baptized into the church, it is obvious how Dr. Vines could somewhat be vindicated in stating that Calvinists "kill evangelism". As for the former statement of "militant Calvinists" causing "problems in the church", this one is a bit more difficult to understand. I look around the landscape of our convention and the problems that I see in our churches are not "Calvinistic" in nature. How can "militant Calvinism" be blamed for a "wide gate" easy-believism that causes our Church rolls to be filled with many people who show no signs of the Holy Spirit working in their lives to bring them to conformity with Christ? How can "militant Calvinism" be blamed for the near absence of doctrine in the preaching, for it has been replaced by "sermonettes for Christianettes" that more closely resemble a speech from Joyce Meyer than a sermon from Whitefield, Wesley, or (insert your favorite bible teacher here). How can "militant Calvinism" be blamed for the lack of church discipline that causes many Southern Baptist Churches today to more resemble the Church at Corinth than the Church at Philadelphia? If any of you squirm at the thought of church discipline, I need it. I need brothers and sisters in Christ who will lovingly correct me and show me how I am violating my liberties in Christ or being unloving to my neighbor. This CANNOT take place in a church that is, to a great degree, unregenerate. Maybe the problems that Dr. Vines is speaking of are related to the almost inevitable departure that the Calvinist must make from his church once he embraces the doctrines of Grace. It usually goes like this: The "militant Calvinist" actually begins to read the notes that are in his MacArthur Study bible and compares them to what his pastor is saying from the pulpit. It isn't long before the "militant Calvinist" begins to ask questions about what is being preached and how it stands in light of what the scripture actually says. Soon the "militant Calvinist" begins to read about the reformers, the great evangelists and missionaries of the past, and visit the (dare I say it) Desiring God website. Then the "militant Calvinist" begins to be called names, like "hyper-Calvinist" and told that he needs to rid himself of his "intellectual pride" and repent for questioning the "man of God". It isn't long before the "militant Calvinist" cannot stand to attend services any longer because of the taste of vomit that he gets in his mouth every Sunday at church. Thus the plight of the "militant Calvinist". If my pastor were an Arminian and told me, "You are wrong, I love you, and know that every time you come to church you will hear a message based upon a system of synergistic soteriology and I will not cease to try and convince you that I am right", I could handle that. At the very least, I can admit that Arminianism, when taught properly, is congruous in its thought and logical in its conclusions. (though I believe it is wrong) This is not what we see, however. What we see in most cases (Thanks Dave Hunt, Norm Geisler) is a muddling of the two systems, and the resultant doctrine is one that can only make sense to the most undiscerning listener. In a desire not to be "labeled", these "Southern-Baptist, Evangelical-Christian, Bible-Inerrancy affirming, Pro-Life, God-Fearing preachers" only confuse their flock with things that leave the layperson with no ability to provide a defense for the hope that is within them. Oh, and if Dr. Vines happens on this blog, with all due respect I must ask him this. How does the "whosoever will" portion of John 3:16 deal with Calvinism? I am a Calvinist and I would not be saved if it were not through the grace of God allowing me to be one of the "whosoever will". I personally rest in the affirmation that Jesus died for "whosoever will believe". Praise be to God. My grammar is not the best, and my understanding is not as great as most all of you, but I hope I have not confused anyone. May God grace us by ridding us all of our faulty understandings of His Word so that we may all be able to worship without any type of corruption in our understanding of who the revealed God of the Bible truly is. To God be the Glory forever. Greetings all,
Let me start off by saying that I am what is commonly referred to as a “Calvinist” and I would like to mention a word or two about this interview.
It is unfortunate that Dr. Vines used the term “militant Calvinist”, but I think he sort of defined the term when he said that they “cause problems in the church” and “kill evangelism”.
I will try to address the latter statement first. How does a Calvinist “kill evangelism”? The only two things that I can picture here is either a “hyper” killing, or a killing that takes place when the number of baptisms go down. In a day and age where a successful sermon is measured by how many people “come down front” and perform a “Romanesque” ritual of saying a prayer and being baptized into the church, it is obvious how Dr. Vines could somewhat be vindicated in stating that Calvinists “kill evangelism”.
As for the former statement of “militant Calvinists” causing “problems in the church”, this one is a bit more difficult to understand. I look around the landscape of our convention and the problems that I see in our churches are not “Calvinistic” in nature. How can “militant Calvinism” be blamed for a “wide gate” easy-believism that causes our Church rolls to be filled with many people who show no signs of the Holy Spirit working in their lives to bring them to conformity with Christ? How can “militant Calvinism” be blamed for the near absence of doctrine in the preaching, for it has been replaced by “sermonettes for Christianettes” that more closely resemble a speech from Joyce Meyer than a sermon from Whitefield, Wesley, or (insert your favorite bible teacher here). How can “militant Calvinism” be blamed for the lack of church discipline that causes many Southern Baptist Churches today to more resemble the Church at Corinth than the Church at Philadelphia?
If any of you squirm at the thought of church discipline, I need it. I need brothers and sisters in Christ who will lovingly correct me and show me how I am violating my liberties in Christ or being unloving to my neighbor. This CANNOT take place in a church that is, to a great degree, unregenerate.
Maybe the problems that Dr. Vines is speaking of are related to the almost inevitable departure that the Calvinist must make from his church once he embraces the doctrines of Grace. It usually goes like this: The “militant Calvinist” actually begins to read the notes that are in his MacArthur Study bible and compares them to what his pastor is saying from the pulpit. It isn’t long before the “militant Calvinist” begins to ask questions about what is being preached and how it stands in light of what the scripture actually says. Soon the “militant Calvinist” begins to read about the reformers, the great evangelists and missionaries of the past, and visit the (dare I say it) Desiring God website. Then the “militant Calvinist” begins to be called names, like “hyper-Calvinist” and told that he needs to rid himself of his “intellectual pride” and repent for questioning the “man of God”. It isn’t long before the “militant Calvinist” cannot stand to attend services any longer because of the taste of vomit that he gets in his mouth every Sunday at church. Thus the plight of the “militant Calvinist”.
If my pastor were an Arminian and told me, “You are wrong, I love you, and know that every time you come to church you will hear a message based upon a system of synergistic soteriology and I will not cease to try and convince you that I am right”, I could handle that. At the very least, I can admit that Arminianism, when taught properly, is congruous in its thought and logical in its conclusions. (though I believe it is wrong)
This is not what we see, however. What we see in most cases (Thanks Dave Hunt, Norm Geisler) is a muddling of the two systems, and the resultant doctrine is one that can only make sense to the most undiscerning listener. In a desire not to be “labeled”, these “Southern-Baptist, Evangelical-Christian, Bible-Inerrancy affirming, Pro-Life, God-Fearing preachers” only confuse their flock with things that leave the layperson with no ability to provide a defense for the hope that is within them.
Oh, and if Dr. Vines happens on this blog, with all due respect I must ask him this. How does the “whosoever will” portion of John 3:16 deal with Calvinism? I am a Calvinist and I would not be saved if it were not through the grace of God allowing me to be one of the “whosoever will”. I personally rest in the affirmation that Jesus died for “whosoever will believe”. Praise be to God.
My grammar is not the best, and my understanding is not as great as most all of you, but I hope I have not confused anyone. May God grace us by ridding us all of our faulty understandings of His Word so that we may all be able to worship without any type of corruption in our understanding of who the revealed God of the Bible truly is. To God be the Glory forever.

]]> By: Scott Gordon http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1937 Scott Gordon Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:04:28 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1937 Stuart, True. Stuart,

True.

]]> By: stuart http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1936 stuart Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:10:48 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1936 Scott, Thanks for that response. It's basically my sentiment too. I just find it equally unfortunate that often "militant" isn't explained so thoughtfully or labels like "Hyper" get applied erroneoulsy, which can't help but lead to the fear you referenced in your follow-up question. Scott,

Thanks for that response. It’s basically my sentiment too. I just find it equally unfortunate that often “militant” isn’t explained so thoughtfully or labels like “Hyper” get applied erroneoulsy, which can’t help but lead to the fear you referenced in your follow-up question.

]]> By: Scott Gordon http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1935 Scott Gordon Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:42:05 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1935 Stuart, I cannot speak for Dr. Vines, but I can speak for myself. I would concur with Dr. Vines about those I consider being militant Calvinists. This goes back to the time when I was settling for myself what I believed the Bible taught about salvation, sovereignty, and responsibility. I landed solidly in the reformed camp, but I soon became annoyed with at least one of my friends who espoused the same conviction but regarded anyone who disagreed with him as a heretic. That was precisely the term he used. I have no toleration for the Calvinist crusader who considers it his mission to stomp on all non-Calvinists and denigrates them by classifying them in the same boat as Benny Hinn or Charles Capps. I prefer to have the same relationship with my less/non-Calvinistic brothers as Whitefield had with Wesley...one of deep respect for the godliness of character I see in so many of my brothers. Sola Gratia! Stuart,

I cannot speak for Dr. Vines, but I can speak for myself.

I would concur with Dr. Vines about those I consider being militant Calvinists. This goes back to the time when I was settling for myself what I believed the Bible taught about salvation, sovereignty, and responsibility. I landed solidly in the reformed camp, but I soon became annoyed with at least one of my friends who espoused the same conviction but regarded anyone who disagreed with him as a heretic. That was precisely the term he used. I have no toleration for the Calvinist crusader who considers it his mission to stomp on all non-Calvinists and denigrates them by classifying them in the same boat as Benny Hinn or Charles Capps. I prefer to have the same relationship with my less/non-Calvinistic brothers as Whitefield had with Wesley…one of deep respect for the godliness of character I see in so many of my brothers.

Sola Gratia!

]]> By: Tone http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1934 Tone Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:04:40 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1934 Stuart, you said... "...the commnets–even if historically accurate–quite possibly made advancing the Kingdom in that part of the world more difficult?" Even though I do believe the comments to be 100% accurate, I certainly can see the concern about causing problems in that part of the world for missionaries. On that we can agree. I don't think he or anyone would <i>intentionally</i> want to cause problems for our missionaries in any part of the world. Stuart, you said…

“…the commnets–even if historically accurate–quite possibly made advancing the Kingdom in that part of the world more difficult?”

Even though I do believe the comments to be 100% accurate, I certainly can see the concern about causing problems in that part of the world for missionaries.

On that we can agree. I don’t think he or anyone would intentionally want to cause problems for our missionaries in any part of the world.

]]> By: stuart http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1933 stuart Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:11:25 +0000 http://sbctoday.com/2008/02/13/interview-with-dr-jerry-vines/#comment-1933 Scott, More to the point of the interview, I wish you would have asked for an example or two of the "militant Calvinism" of which he speaks, especially since phrases like that could likely contribute to the "fear" you referenced in your follow-up question. Scott,

More to the point of the interview, I wish you would have asked for an example or two of the “militant Calvinism” of which he speaks, especially since phrases like that could likely contribute to the “fear” you referenced in your follow-up question.

]]>