Falwell Defines Me Out

For quite some time, I have noticed some of the bigger names who are associated with the Southern Baptist Convention preaching against Calvinism. Names like Adrienne Rogers, Johnny Hunt and now Jerry Falwell seem to be aiming their sites at those who would hold to the London Baptist Confession of 1689. I assume they especially despise the Founders Conference within their own denomination.

According to this 2 minute clip, Jerry Falwell is now defining what a true Baptist is. Now that is fine. He is a well known minister and has every right to speak his mind. But why should he be allowed to redefine historical terms without challenge. Simply because he is well known doesn't grant him immunity from remaining accurate to Biblical truth and theology.

He starts by defining a Baptist as someone who believes in the Infallibility of the Bible and then the Deity of Christ. Things all Baptists have agreed upon were stated. But then he said that to be a Baptist one must believe that Jesus died a Substitutionary death for every individual ever. This is nice. It is emotionally exciting. It is something we wish God would really do. Who wants to see anyone go to hell?

We must however define what Substitutionary Atonement means. I agree that Jesus' death is not restricted to some tiny "select" group of people. The Bible does tells us that Jesus dies for the Elect. Why? Before the foundation of the world, God has joined a people to Christ. They are in Union with Him. This is not some theoretical idea. It is a reality.

Can you imagine that a person in hell can truly say with the Apostle Paul, "I have died with Christ."? To make Jesus' work theoretical on the cross is to limit His work. When Jesus died, He actually took the sins of His people. To say otherwise is to believe in Universal Atonement or no one was saved at all.

Substitutionary Atonement has a historical meaning, and no one should be allowed to define opponents out of a debate by redefining terms. This is what the Cults do. I expect more from Falwell. But it seems a thoughtful debate on the subject (according to Falwell's own words these things are not debatable) is not forthcoming. Not if he has anything to do with it.