Romans 9:22–23 is often cited to demonstrate God’s sovereign choice in creating some people for eternal destruction so that he might demonstrate his wrath while making other people to be recipients of his eternal mercy. This understanding highlights God’s eternal, unconditional election. This way, God could put his wrath and mercy on display, which otherwise he would not be able to do. Those who hold this view do believe that God did desire sin and evil, and he created people that ultimately he damned to hell either by predeterminately creating them for such or actively or passively passing them by. Continue reading →
As mentioned in my previous article on Jacob and Esau (Rom 9:10–13), Calvinists use Romans chapters 9–11 as the undeniable evidence of Calvinistic soteriology, defending both unconditional election and reprobation. Regarding chapter 9, B.B. Warfield says, “It is safe to say that language cannot be chosen better adapted to teach Predestination at its height.” As I demonstrated, while the passage regarding Jacob and Esau does show God’s sovereignty, it has nothing to do with salvific election and reprobation, Calvinism’s doctrine of unconditional election. The same is true with regard to Pharaoh. Continue reading →
The 2019 SBC annual meeting met on June 11–12. The messengers adopted several resolutions, one of which was a resolution on Critical Race Theory (CR) and Intersectionality (IN). While I appreciate the Resolutions Committee seeking to speak to current issues from a biblical perspective, I think this resolution lacked due consideration. Continue reading →
Calvinists use Romans chapters 9–11 as the undeniable evidence of Calvinistic soteriology, defending both unconditional election and reprobation. A.W. Pink says, “Romans 9 contains the fullest setting forth of the doctrine of Reprobation.” John Piper says that Jacob and Esau “were appointed for their respected destinies before they were born.” In response, to give the context of the verses, Romans chapters 9–11 are about Israel, where Jews are considered nationally, both alone (Romans 9:1–5, 10:1–3, 11:1–10) and contrasted with the Gentiles (Romans 11:11–12). Everett F. Harrison notes that “election which is treated on an individual basis in 8:28–30, 33 is now viewed from the national perspective of Israel.”
Calvinists often refer to two particular events as evidence of God’s sovereign unconditional election and reprobation. These two are Jacob and Esau (Romans 9:10–13), and Pharaoh (Romans 9:17–18). They also quote Romans 9:22–23 to demonstrate unconditional election and reprobation as well. I agree that these passages illustrate God’s sovereignty over creation, a truth with which I wholeheartedly agree; however, they do not demonstrate that God unconditionally elects some to eternal bliss and others to eternal fire, reprobation, nor do they demonstrate the particular way that Calvinists define sovereignty. In this article, I look at Jacob and Esau (Rom (9:10–13). I will look at the other two passages in a following article on Pharaoh. Continue reading →
If you would like to listen to my interview with Leighton Flowers about my new book, “Does God Love All or Some?”, here is the link to the podcast on Soteriology 101. The interview is entitled, “Calvinistic Pastor of Thirty Years Recants Calvinism”.
“Does God Love All or Some?” includes thirty-four chapters that address Calvinist arguments such as libertarian freedom undermines God’s sovereignty, rejecting Calvinism requires a weak view of depravity, what about those who never hear the gospel? I show how we know God’s salvific love is Extensive, extends to every person, rather than limited to Calvinism’s exclusive group, the unconditionally elected. I establish how we know God gives every person an opportunity to be saved, and how human acts like prayer really can affect a person’s salvation, something which true Calvinism precludes.
I demonstrate true Calvinism is internally and biblically inconsistent by exploring such things as how the good faith offer is a really a bad deception, God is inescapably the ultimate cause of all sin, Calvinism’s commitment to compatible moral freedom means every prayer, act, or proclamation that even hints at being able to change outcomes or involve a choice between accessible options contradicts true Calvinism, faith does not precede regeneration in Scripture and the analogy of human death cannot be used to demonstrate it does, reprobation is not necessary to demonstrate God’s holiness, God does not have two wills, and the doctrines of grace do seriously affect evangelism.
“From the pen of a seasoned pastor and thoughtful former Calvinist—this book peels back the layers of obfuscation that often encrust the hard realities of what is entailed in Calvinistic theology. This is probably the most penetrating summary critique of the biblical, theological, logical, and practical incongruences inherent in Calvinistic theology I have read. Rogers goes beyond the surface level of criticism to the deeper layers of contradictions, exposing the soft underbelly of much of Reformed theology. Irenic, respectful, yet thoroughly probing, this is a must read for all who want to understand the issues more deeply.”
David L. Allen
Dean, School of Preaching, Distinguished Professor of Preaching
Director of the Southwestern Center for Expository Preaching and George W. Truett Chair of Ministry, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
“Does God Love All or Some?” should be required reading for all students preparing for ministry. Ronnie Rogers covers an array of topics that, unfortunately, are all-too-often neglected in theological education and personal conversations. From persuasively correcting the mythical narrative that one must be either an Arminian or a Calvinist to tackling the illogical fallacy of compatibilism, the author, with wit and balance, shares his personal theological journey and works through the maze of biblical complexities. I wish such a volume was available when I attended seminary years ago.”
President, Truett McConnell University, Professor of History and Christian Studies
“I highly recommend this latest work by Ronnie Rogers to you….His treatment of the extensive nature of the atonement also deserves attention because he has written it as a person formerly ensconced in the doctrines of grace. His familiarity with the issues relevant to those who really are trying to work their way through Scripture, theology, and ministry is apparent in individual chapters dealing with so many of the nuances involved in addressing the question.
President, Criswell College, Professor of Humanities
From the Foreword
Rogers’ work reflects careful thought, precise language, and a gentle tone. He appeals to those who affirm Calvinistic theology to consider whether their presuppositions and definitions provide clarity to their reading of Scripture or reinforce their theological framework into which they place and through which they interpret Scripture. From this position of theological inquiry, Rogers deftly probes key issues such as the nature of God, providence, the human condition, compatibilism, God’s desire for lost humanity, the order of salvation, grace, the gospel, and the dilemmas faced by Calvinists and Extensivists. Readers who desire to examine the distinctions between Christianity with Calvinism and Christianity without Calvinism will find this book to be a storehouse of perceptive theological inquiry and faithful exegetical analysis.
Adam Harwood, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Theology, McFarland Chair of Theology, Director of the Baptist Center for Theology & Ministry, Editor of the Journal for Baptist Theology & Ministry
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary
In this article I intend to highlight some of the spiritual dangers of our current psychological milieu. My comments are not intended to dismiss the contributions of psychology or psychiatry, but rather to offer information to enable us to be biblically discerning. Continue reading →
Salvation begins with God revealing himself to man. Man cannot find God unless he reveals himself to man. God’s love for his creation is why there is a way for people to be saved from their just desert (John 3:16). Christ came into the world to save mankind, which means he had to pay for man’s sins (John 1:29). He also had to initiate the salvation opportunity on a personal level since man on his own will never pursue God (Rom 3:11). He did this by enlightening every person (John 1:9–13) and by drawing and calling individuals to salvation (John 6:44; 12:32) so that a person can by grace, trust in the person and work of Christ, which is the will and work of God (John 6:29).
It is after God reveals himself and enables mankind to believe that he gives man the command and opportunity to believe, which man does not have to do (Matt 11:20–24). If man does respond in faith to the revelation of God, God will respond by creating a new person (2 Cor 5:17). The work of regeneration is totally a work of God, as was the first creation. The order of salvation is revelation, faith, and regeneration. Continue reading →
February 14, 2019
Mr. Steve Riley
The Houston Chronicle
4747 Southwest Freeway
Houston, Texas 77027
Dear Mr. Editor:
For 42 years, I have said to each graduating class, “If you have not settled forever the issue of sexual purity, take your diploma tomorrow and leave church ministry altogether.” I feel compelled to respond to the Houston Chronicle article in which I was cited. In the case of Darrell Gilyard, Dr. Keith Eitel (now a dean at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) and Dr. Danny Akin (now president at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) worked directly with me to uncover and confirm Darrell’s unfaithfulness to Christ. Dr. Keith Eitel has film of the proceedings of Gilyard’s discipline at the Criswell College, and Gilyard was consequently expelled from school. Dr. Akin accompanied me to Gilyard’s church to be certain that he resigned. I called as many places as I knew where he was scheduled to preach and asked them to cancel his invitation. Most did cancel, and he no longer speaks in Southern Baptist churches.
Further, letters exist in my file from the young woman at Southeastern thanking me for the way in which her situation was handled. She now (more than a decade later) claims to have been raped. According to Dr. Akin as quoted in a Baptist Press article, the term “rape” was not found in the report in her official student file, and there are no details of information being given to me or of my involvement in the matter. Dr. Akin did confirm that my vice presidents had handled the matter properly as this was during the transition of my presidency to Southwestern.
Fort Worth Police records show that within seconds of receiving an allegation of rape at Southwestern by a female student wit h her mother present, I called the police. They arrived in less than twenty minutes. The young man – also a student – was immediately dismissed from the school. The young woman was asked by me to file charges against him, and she refused. The Southwestern trustees even confirmed in a public statement, “evidence exists that Dr. Patterson has complied with reporting laws regarding assault and abuse.”
Houston Chronicle reporters have slandered and totally misrepresented me, and in so doing have significantly harmed my ministry. The events they report are tragic. However, there is no reason to punish the innocent with the wicked. I applaud SBC president Dr. J.D. Greear for doing all that he can to bring this abrogation of righteousness and justice to a halt. Anyone abusing a child, a woman, or any weaker person is wrong and marked by deviant behavior. Anyone claiming to be a follower of Christ who acts in such a way or who protects one who preys upon another is both opprobrious and ignoble. Anyone claiming to be a minister of the Gospel who is thus involved is reprehensible and should not continue in the ministry.
The facts are available to anyone who wishes to know the truth. A good investigative reporter should study existing evidence to identify and bring to justice those who are guilty, being careful not to accuse one who has been completely cleared of the charges alleged.
Until He comes,
CC: Mr. Shelby Sharpe, Attorney at Law
I have led churches to practice church discipline for over thirty years now, and I do not see the need for church discipline to be any less today than in years past. If anything, the need has increased.
Church discipline can be understood as the biblical attitude and actions of the local church that enable her to preserve her submission to the head of the church in holiness, fellowship, testimony, mission, and doctrinal purity, with the purpose of maintaining a conducive atmosphere for following Christ and experiencing His presence and power. Church discipline includes the following purposes: redemption, correction, protection, purification, and justice. On a practical level, I would further distinguish between non-formal and formal discipline. Non-formal includes all aspects of the biblical teaching and practical application of church discipline up to public involvement of the full church body in either seeking repentance of the sinning brother or sister or removal from fellowship. Continue reading →