Let's tone down the Calvinistic rhetoric
By Wyman Richardson, pastor, First Baptist Dawson
Published August 13, 2009

In the July 30 issue of The Index, George Owens, in agreement with Fred Gilmer from the issue before, sounded an alarm concerning the number of Calvinists in the SBC. Both men spoke of those who say “that the blood of Jesus was not shed for all of mankind,” a reference, I take it, to the Reformed doctrine of limited or definite atonement.

I have no desire to argue atonement theology here, or even to give my own opinion on the matter in this context; I’m merely writing out of historical interest. If these gentlemen are speaking of definite atonement, then they are speaking of the idea that Christ’s death effectively accomplishes its own end: the salvation of the elect, or of God’s people.

The other major position is general atonement, which says that Christ died potentially to save all, but that his death is effective only for those who come to Christ in repentance and faith.

As a historical matter, I would merely like to point out that both views have been present in Baptist life from our beginning 400 years ago, and that it should not be suggested that definite atonement is a new idea among Baptists.

In addition, it seems to me as I try to read and grasp Baptist history, that men holding both positions have been stalwart in evangelism, and some holding both positions have been negligent in evangelism. I mean, surely Bro. Gilmer and Bro. Owens are not suggesting that they regret the presence of William Carey, Charles Spurgeon, John Bunyan, J.P. Boyce, Patrick Mell, John Dagg, and many others in the Baptist family? All of these men held to definite atonement, which Bro. Owens calls “heresy.”

And this leaves me with a bit of a dilemma: would I prefer a Convention full of people who believed that Christ’s death was potentially salvific for the whole world but who largely do not evangelize, or would I prefer a Convention full of William Careys who believe that Christ died for the elect, but who, recognizing that only God knows who the elect are and recognizing that the gospel is the means through which God calls the elect, made it his mission to publicize the good news to the world and, in so doing, founded the modern missionary movement? 

Which is simply to say this: heresy is a strong word to slap on many of the heroes of our faith whose example, if followed, could very well lead to revival in the Southern Baptist Convention. I would propose for the sake of the health and future of our Convention that we study our history well, that we tone down unnecessarily incendiary language, and that we join arms with every Southern Baptist of good will who believes we should take the gospel of Jesus Christ to the nations.