Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Boyce vs. Caner

I am taking a class this semester with a Pastor friend of mine on Systematic Theology. I just received one of my textbooks today by James P. Boyce, Abstract of Systematic Theology. Whenever I receive a new Hard Cover book, I always break it in. I happened to turn to chapter 30, which deals with Reprobation. Note the first page:

THE doctrine of Election is intimately associated with and involves that of Reprobation. The latter has met with even greater opposition, and misconstructions of what the orthodox teach on this subject have been even more numerous.

The Scriptural statements as to Reprobation are that God, in eternity, when he elected some, did likewise not elect others; that as resulting from this non-election, but not as efficiently caused by it, he passes by these in the bestowment of the special favours shown to the Elect, and, as in like manner yet further resulting, condemns men, because of sin to everlasting destruction, and while they are in the state of sin and condemnation, he effects or permits the hardening of their heart, so that his truth is not appreciated, but actually rejected.

According to this statement there are four points involved in the decrees as to Reprobation:

1. The decree not to elect.

2. The decree to pass by in bestowing divine grace.

3. To condemn for sins committed.

4. To harden against the truth all or some persons, already sinners, and to confirm them in sin.

In considering this doctrine we are met by the difficulty arising from the want of knowledge of God's purpose in action. It may he questioned whether we can arrive at this at all; yet to understand this subject fully, we must know that purpose. If, therefore, we cannot learn it, we see with what propriety we must submit simply to accept what God says.

There is simply no way for non-Calvinists to agree to such things. Yet, within the walls of the SBC, there seems to be the idea that the original Southern Baptists were not Calvinists. For instance, Ergun Caner has had Liberty Seminary’s name changed back to Liberty Baptist Seminary. You may be saying, “So what?” Well, read this quote from this post on his site:

“Too many schools have Baptist in their name but not in their doctrine. Some have drifted into liberalism and cultural relativism; still others remain orthodox, but have drifted toward non-Baptist reformed doctrine and cultural isolationism. For us, this was our line in the sand.”

Apparently, Caner thinks Reformed Theology is akin to Liberalism and “non-Baptist”.

Now the above quote by Boyce should cause one to ponder this claim by Caner. Is James P. Boyce just some individual Baptist that we may all ignore? Hardly! The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS) uses a confession called The Abstract of Principles. This confession was written by…guess who? Here is the opening paragraph:

When the original charter of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary was adopted in 1858 it contained the following statement which constitutes as a part of the "fundamental laws." "Every professor of the institution shall be a member of a regular Baptist Church; and all persons accepting professorships in this Seminary shall be considered, by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down, a departure from which principles on his part shall be grounds for his resignation or removal by the Trustees."

SBTS was also founded by Boyce, who was, as this article states, “Like most Baptists of the south, Boyce was already a committed Calvinist when he arrived at Princeton.”

History and truth just have a way of catching up with those who live in denial.

No comments: