Dan Chapa

Article two of the traditional understanding of the SBC view of God's plan of salvation ( link ) has been called Semi-Pelagian   here ,  here  and  here .  What is semi-Pelagianism?  The short answer is the denial that we need grace in order to believe in Christ.  The longer answer is that semi-Pelagianism is probably best defined in the Cannons of Orange (529AD) that condemned the view. ( link )  Here's the article that gets accused of Semi-Pelagianism: Article Two: The Sinfulness of Man We affirm that, because of the fall of Adam, every person inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that every person who is capable of moral action will sin. Each person’s sin alone brings the wrath of a holy God, broken fellowship with Him, ever-worsening selfishness and destructiveness, death, and condemnation to an eternity in hell. We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any perso...

Understanding statistics and Calvinism are two good but painful things to do in Baptist life.  There have been a bunch of recent studies among pastors on Calvinism and here are some key data points.   Among SBC pastors, 5-Point Calvinism has grown 10% per year from 2006 to 2012. ( 2006 LifeWay Study ) ( 2012 LifeWay Study ) This is in stark contrast to the 2010 BARNA study which shows Calvinism is not growing amoung Protestants.   In other words, while Calvinism is not growing in other Protestant churches, it is growing in the SBC.  The reason Calvinism is growing in the SBC is shown by the 2007 NAMB study - SBC seminaries are cranking out 5-Point Calvinists at a growing rate.    Additionally, SBC Pastors are more likely to hold to double-predestination and limited atonement compared to protestant churches generally.  ( 2011 LifeWay General Protestant Study )  ( 2012 SBC Specific LifeWay Stud...

Article two of the traditional understanding of the SBC view of God's plan of salvation ( link ) has been called Semi-Pelagian   here ,  here ,  here  and here . Here's the article: Article Two: The Sinfulness of Man We affirm that, because of the fall of Adam, every person inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that every person who is capable of moral action will sin. Each person’s sin alone brings the wrath of a holy God, broken fellowship with Him, ever-worsening selfishness and destructiveness, death, and condemnation to an eternity in hell. We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned. While no sinner is remotely capable of achieving salvation through his own effort, we deny that any sinner is saved apart from a free response to the Holy Spirit’s drawing through the Gospel. The most criticised phrase is the denial of incapacitation of anyone's fr...

A large group of Southern Baptists recently signed a statement that defines their beliefs and opposes Calvinism. ( link ) It takes the name “Traditionalist” which ruffles feathers with Calvinists in the SBC, but at least provides a helpful title other than non-Calvinist. Overall, this may help slow the spread of Calvinism within the SBC by putting names and faces to the opposition to Calvinism and providing an alternative. So overall I think the move is helpful and a good thing. However, I find my own understanding of scripture somewhere in between this traditionalist statement and Calvinism. For example, Article 2’s statement says: “ We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned .” I do hold that we were condemned in Adam. The denial of “incapacitation” was carelessly worded but based certain statements about the need for grace through the rest of the document; I will give the trad...

Strange Baptist Fire contends that Moral Government Theology (MGT) is linked to A) denying original sin, B) denying total depravity, C) denying penal substitution in the atonement and D) affirming open theism. ( link ) and ( link ) First off, I don’t hold to MGT, even though I appreciate the point it makes. So in the big picture, I suppose I agree with Strange Baptist Fire. Additionally, I appreciate the fact that Strange Baptist Fire digs into source materials to discover Arminius and Wesley’s views on original sin, depravity, the atonement and God’s foreknowledge. However, except for point “C”, I don’t see the relationship between MGT and denying original sin, depravity and also affirming open theism. Hugo Grotius was perhaps the first to articulate MGT and he was a remonstrant. He held to the five points of the remonstrants , which affirm original sin, total depravity and God’s foreknowledge. So if the founder of MGT didn’t commit the errors that Strange Baptist Fire says are ...