Posts
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Burleson's Hybrid Calvinism
Southern Baptists Didn't Need
A Hybrid Calvinist on the IMB
There is one thing about Wade Burleson which, in my opinion, disqualified him from ever even being appointed to serve on the IMB -- a doctrinal error which is much more significant than his antics about the alleged "Landmarkism" of the IMB baptism policy.
Burleson is an adherent of the Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrid Calvinist theology which teaches that one is "born again before faith." Basically, this is essentially the doctrine on "regeneration" of the Primitive Baptist or Hardshell Church which split from regular Baptists in the 1830s and has been an opponent of missions ever since.
My colleague on the Reformed Flyswatter, Ian Elsasser, called attention to this error on The Calvinist Flyswatter blog just a few weeks ago. Notice --
Ian's comment:
Mr. Burleson seems to affirm the "born again before faith" view common to many modern Calvinists. See "Please Don't Call Me a Calvinist, But..." -- [Quote from Burleson's blog below]
"Regeneration, the new birth and quickening are all synonyms for this heart surgery God performs. Before a man will ever repent of his sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, he must be born again. This miraculous act of God, called 'the new birth,' is a work that He chooses to perform, and it is without conditions".
Bob's comment:
This is the heresy spawned by Pedobaptists of the past and taught by many of the modern Pedobaptist (baby baptizers) who are for the most part "arm-chair theologians," conference or seminar speakers, and it is taught by some of their followers among the Baptists who describe themselves as "Reformed" -- such as Tom Ascol of the "Founders Ministries," Tom Nettles and Thomas Schreiner at Southern Seminary, James White, a "Reformed Baptist" in Arizona, and numerous bloggers on so-called "monergism" and "Reformed" web sites.
We have exposed this heresy in particular on The Calvinist Flywatter for the past three years (2006-2009), not to mention my long record of opposition to it dating from the 1950s when I first encountered it.
Unfortunately, Wade Burleson is infected with this heresy.
I don't believe Southern Baptists are benefited by having a Hybrid Calvinist on the mission board. Hybridism breeds more Hybrids, and Hybrids do not help the cause of evangelism and missions. The "Founders" have not planted a church in their entire history from 1982. They recently claimed they are planting a church in Florida . . . we will wait and see what becomes of the tender "plant."
In my opinion, Wade should never have been appointed, but after he was appointed, in my opinion he should have been given his walking papers on account of his advocacy of the "born again before faith" heresy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS?
ReplyDeleteI received the following email from
Smyth & Helwys, publishers of Wade Burleson's book:
Bob,
Received word that the book will be here within days. If you would like, you can purchase a book through our website ( http://www.helwys.com/books/hardball_religion.html) or by calling our toll-free number (1.800.747.3016). That will be the most expedient way at this point for you to be able to read Hardball Religion.
Blessings,
P. K. Gammons
Vice President
Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc.
Wade made a rather large use of my book on Landmarkism, ostensibly as if it applied to the policy of the IMB and the views of certain Southern Baptist leaders whom he named.
Now S&H invites me to buy the book so I can read how Wade misused my book!
Like Wade, they seem to be "courteous" and "generous" and are probably "grinning" all the way to the Bank!
At one time, S&H offered to send me a digital copy, and a couple of days ago I decided to accept their offer, but I have so far not received it. Maybe they will come thru in due time. After all, they did say that they want me to review the book, and reviewers usually are sent complimentary copies.
Bob:
ReplyDeleteIf Smyth & Helwys changed their earlier decision to provide you a digital copy to review the book, then it may be due to Mr. Burleson’s “regret expressed” to them that a former pastor had received a “free digital copy” of the book and “didn’t have to pay for privilege of slamming” him:
“The publisher of my new book, Smith & Helwys, contacted me today and told me this former pastor had requested that they send to him a free digital copy of my new book Hardball Religion so that he could "review" it before publication. They obliged his request and apologized to me today for not letting me know what they had done. As far as my thinking goes, the publisher has a right to do whatever they please to increase sales of the book. It is normal policy to send out pre-publication copies to multiple people for review. My only regret expressed to Smyth & Helwys was that this particular pastor didn't have to pay for the privilege of slamming me. Grin.”
S&H may have decided not to offend further the book’s author by following their common practice of giving complimentary pre-publication copies to reviewers. Then again, maybe they will send the digital copy, as they promised, but are also encouraging you to buy a hard copy. Time will tell.
See what grinning can accomplish.
THE GRINNING PARSON?
ReplyDeleteIan, thanks for the link to Wade's comment.
Did you notice in another article he says, "But SBC pastors usually only like to be photographed smiling - while we put the knife in from behind."
Is that a "clue" as to why Wade is so frequently
"grinning"? Suppose it is just a habit he developed as a SBC pastor?
About Wade and S&H ...
ReplyDeleteFrom my distant perspective, Ian, I don't think S&H could be pleased with Wade's use of my book after what I have put on this blog and what I have told them. They must recognize by now that objective readers will simply "laugh off" Wade's use of my book as completely irrelevant to the so-called "Landmarkism" which he attributes to the IMB.
Wade has really "split his britches" with this book, and I surmise he is already "reaching out" to the "mainstreamers" who opposed the "conservative resurgence." He might find a new "home" with the Dan Vestal CBF movement or even the Baptist General Convention of Texas. The BGCT lost a large percentage of their churches, are hurting financially, and continue to deteriorate in influence while the new convention, Southern Baptist of Texas Convention, continues to grow, with many churches leaving the BGCT for the SBTC.
Maybe Bruce Prescott of the Oklahoma
"mainstreamers" can make use of Wade in Bruce's ongoing discreditation of the SBC. That group will no doubt be the primary market in Oklahoma for Wade's book.
Since the passing of kingpins "Money Bags" Baugh and psychologist Reynolds, the decline of the David Currie's "Texas Baptists Committed," Charles Wade's fiasco in the BGCT which costs the BGCT big bucks, etc. I'm sure the "mainstreamers" would welcome Wade to their foxhole.
But since Wade is a Hybrid Calvinist, he might be more comfortable with Tom Ascol's "Flounders"
-- that is, if Tom can tolerate him.
More on Wade & S&H
ReplyDeleteMy colleague, Brother Elsasser, saw the following on Wade's blog:
Wade Burleson said...
Wow. Been out and about and just checked the comments. Interesting change of events, but not surprising.
BBC, I confess to be a little perplexed as to why Smyth & Helwys sent to Peter [Lumpkins] a digital copy of my book without him having to pay for it. It seems Peter led them to believe his review would be widely read. They knew nothing of his vendetta until after they sent the book. They apologized to me after the fact.
Pay for it!? Apologized!? With all the free publicity S&H is getting from Peter and the Reformed Flyswatter, they ought be paying Peter and RF! They will probably sell a few hundred extra copies just because we have discussed the book on our blogs.
This "little perplexed" remark by Wade probably explains why S&H has not sent me the digital copy they offered to me a few days ago. They may not want to ruffle the feathers of the "Okie from Enid" any more than they have already. (Hey, that might make a good song . . . about Wade. I'll see if I can come up with something when I have time. Store business has been hectic on this cold, rainy day).
Bob:
ReplyDeleteMr. Burleson’s complaint to Smyth & Helwys may have indeed led them to change their mind about sending you a digital copy to review the book since opposition and non-payment seem to be his concern with Peter receiving a copy:
“BBC, I confess to be a little perplexed as to why Smyth & Helwys sent to Peter a digital copy of my book without him having to pay for it. It seems Peter led them to believe his review would be widely read. They knew nothing of his vendetta until after they sent the book. They apologized to me after the fact.”
If Mr. Burleson drew upon your book to support his allegations of Landmarkism, then one would think S&H would want your review as an expert. Then again, you have already questioned his use of your book to support his allegations both to S&H and to the author. Since the author has communicated to S&H he is “perplexed” that an opponent did not have to pay for the book, S&H decided they should give in to his views and make you pay for the book. In this case, it comes across that the ‘review policy’ for Hardball Religion is now digital copies only to those who are not known to question the book and its author. Money, in this case, seems to trump truthful evaluation by the expert upon whom the Landmark claims are buttressed.
Bob said, “Did you notice in another article he says, ‘But SBC pastors usually only like to be photographed smiling - while we put the knife in from behind.’
ReplyDeleteIs that a ‘clue’ as to why Wade is so frequently
‘grinning’? Suppose it is just a habit he developed as a SBC pastor?”
Bob:
I did indeed read his comment and took notice of the “smile” with which he concluded the comment. He likes to conclude comments with “smile” though he has resorted to the “grin” of late.
I think the premise upon which he builds his comment is weak since it is common practice for those being photographed to smile. This is proven by any photo session where the subjects posing are told to “smile” or where the photographer calls upon the subjects to “say cheese” to illicit smiles. Are pastors, then, being dishonest in simply following photo protocol? Strange.