A Response concerning Calvinism in the SBC

by   Eric Greene                                                                                                                                              Vol. XXII, No. 5, May 2009

[Editorial Introduction: When I decided to publish Dr. Elmer Towns’ “What should ‘Southern Baptist’ Have to Do with ‘Calvinist’?” in the March 2009 Baptist Banner, I anticipated that others would want to comment. Eric Greene’s article is the first such follow-up. TCP]

In the March 2009 issue of The Baptist Banner, Dr. Elmer Towns of Liberty University wrote an article concerning Calvinism and the SBC. As many Southern Baptists know the resurgence of Calvinism in the SBC has prompted spirited debate throughout all ranks of Baptist life from theologians to the average churchgoer. Numerous books have been written concerning the history of Calvinism in the SBC.

Furthermore, Christians have vigorously debated the elements of Calvinism throughout the history of the church back to at least the time of Augustine in the fourth and fifth centuries.

Within the six SBC seminaries we find schools that are considered to be 5-Point Calvinist (Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) and schools that are not (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) and schools that are in-between (Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary). Liberty University is not one of the six SBC seminaries. Dr. Towns admits the six SBC seminaries have various Calvinistic “leanings” when he writes that “Calvinists will take over the convention if the seminaries continue to indoctrinate graduates with Calvinistic teachings.” Recently, we have seen groups such as the Founders work to “build bridges” between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists within the SBC. Clearly the topic of Calvinism and the SBC is a relevant and serious point of discussion in Southern Baptist life today.

My response to Dr. Towns is not to provoke a theological or historical debate on the subject of Calvinism. No doubt Dr. Towns could out debate me on any topic and especially one about which he is so passionate. Rather, my concern with his article is the less than subtle division and strife it promotes.

It is no secret Liberty University abhors 5-Point Calvinism which it calls Hyper-Calvinism. The president of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Ergun Caner, greatly opposes 5-Point Calvinism and even mocks the theological system in an April 2006 sermon titled, “Why I Am Predestined Not To Be A Hyper-Calvinist.” By Hyper-Calvinist, Caner means 5-Point Calvinism. Furthermore in April 2007, the founder of Liberty University, the late Dr. Jerry Falwell, publicly and unashamedly declared limited atonement, the “L” of the famous acrostic “TULIP,” to be heresy. From that background, we have Liberty University co-founder and current dean of the School of Religion, Dr. Elmer Towns, writing an article specifically addressing 5-Point Calvinism by giving a lopsided analysis of it in the SBC as well as directing political maneuvering within the convention to minimize the effect of it in the SBC.

Let’s consider some of the comments written by Dr. Towns in his article. He writes the following concerning his encounters with Calvinistic students at Liberty University, “Over the years many (students) have attempted to engage me, debate me, and even convert me. If I have the time, I am usually gracious and take them to lunch. I discuss the whole plan of God with them, including the nature of God, the nature of regeneration, dispensationalism, and the mysteries of God that no human can explain. Usually my five point enthusiast wants to talk about five or six words they find in Scripture. I grant them that these words verify their narrow point of view; but there is much more scripture than just these five or six words. We arrive at true Bible doctrine when we look at all of the Biblical text.”

As one reads this section of Towns' article, his “take them to lunch” and “discuss the whole plan of God” response carries an air of haughtiness with which he approaches his students who disagree with him on Calvinism. Concerning a spirit of haughtiness, the Apostle Paul writes in Romans chapter one that it is an evidence of God’s wrath upon men given over to a reprobate mind. Interestingly, this wrath is in response to men claiming themselves to be wise yet they were fools. Rather than engage students in a spirit of haughtiness, professors should educate their students with a spirit of charity and gentleness. To be very clear, I do not believe Dr. Towns to be given over to a reprobate mind, and I firmly believe Dr. Towns cares for his students and aims to help them grow in their faith. If you have heard him teach, as I have on a number of occasions, you can see in him a love for God’s word and God’s people. Yet on the issue of Calvinism, he appears to portray a spirit not consistent with the rest of his Christian walk. Dr. Towns goes on to write the following, “Many Calvinistic churches take their place in the Southern Baptist Convention next to non-Calvinist churches, and commit themselves to winning souls, baptizing new converts, supporting church planting around the world. If that happens, then it is all right to be a Calvinist, and Calvinist churches will find a warm home in the Southern Baptist Convention.”

Dr. Towns writes as if Liberty University or Thomas Road Baptist Church founded the SBC and is allowing Calvinists to join in fellowship. Liberty University is not an SBC seminary (although it is affiliated with SBCV). Towns' home church, Thomas Road, did not join the SBC until the 1990's. On the other hand, Calvinists have had a long and distinguished history within the SBC dating back to its founding in 1845. Elmer Towns, Liberty University, and Thomas Road are relative newcomers to the convention. They did not found it, nor do they control its membership.

Several times throughout the article Dr. Towns introduces red-herrings to persuade his readers against Calvinism such as his mention of covenant theology and infant baptism. He writes, “They (churches rejecting Calvinism) will not be driven by covenant theology that sees baptism as an extension of circumcision, thus leading to the practice of sprinkling children.” He attempts to associate 5-Point Calvinism with infant baptism in the minds of the Baptist reader, thereby further seeking to promote strife and division against Calvinists in the SBC. He fails to mention the rich history of covenant theology in Baptist circles, but it is a Baptistic Covenant Theology (opposes infant baptism) not a Presbyterian Covenant Theology (supports infant baptism).

Another red-herring employed by Dr. Towns is the famous case of Calvin and Servetus. He attempts to link the execution of Servetus (who rejected infant baptism) to Calvinists today. While Servetus did reject infant baptism, he was executed in Geneva on two counts, the second being the rejection of the Trinity. Unlike baptism, the Trinity is an essential doctrine of the faith, the rejection of which places a person outside Christianity. Therefore, if Dr. Towns cares to associate himself with a heretic such as Servetus he is free to do so, but I choose to stand by those who hold to the essentials even if I disagree with them on other important, but not essential doctrinal beliefs. Dr. Towns’ use of logical fallacy to argue against Calvinism serves only to further confuse the issue of Calvinism and the SBC.

At the outset of his article, Dr. Towns seeks “sensible answers” to his pointed question, “Should or should not Southern Baptists attempt to purge themselves of five point Calvinism?” One such answer that Dr. Towns considers “sensible” is to give marching orders to his like-minded brethren with statements such as, “It is all right to vote against an exclusionary five point Calvinism” and “However, after five-pointers have had their opportunity to speak, it’s all right if the majority of Southern Baptists vote against them.” He even implies that 5-Point Calvinistic churches could be “dis-fellowshipped” from the convention. These are not statements which promote edifying theological discussion or build up the body of Christ. Rather, these statements are from a newcomer to the SBC (Liberty University & Thomas Road) and its desire to push aside one longstanding group (Calvinists) with a rich history of positive contribution to the convention. His “sensible answers” are anything but sensible.

In conclusion, Dr. Towns’ condescending remarks about Calvinism in the SBC, buttressed by the reputation of the school he helped found, Liberty University, serve only to further divide the SBC on this important theological issue. The Apostle Paul, through his message to the Ephesians' elders in Acts 20, warns us about those who seek to divide us for their own gain. We hope that such division is not the objective of Towns' article. While I disagree with Dr. Towns’ views on Calvinism, I sincerely respect him for holding to his convictions and look forward to his continued contribution to this important and serious discussion. Our convention is large enough for a variety of views on a number of important, but not essential Christian doctrines. Examples of essential Christian doctrines would include the Trinity, the inerrancy of Scripture, and justification by faith alone. Unlike Calvinism, essentials are not up for discussion. Instead of igniting a spirit of strife and division we should seek to search out the Scriptures together as one body in a spirit of brotherly love having grace towards one another as God has extended His sovereign grace toward us.