Calling out White, Sproul, Morgan, and "The Founders"To The Calvinist Flyswatter readers:
In his comment below, Bob Ross calls out James White, R. C. Sproul, Scott Morgan, and any "Founders" brethren holding to the "regeneration before belief" view. Will they debate this issue? My prediction: Not a chance!
To Bob Ross:
Bob, I don't believe you'll hear as much as a squeak from any of them, especially "The Founders." They don't want their extreme Calvinism to be exposed to the rest of the Southern Baptist Convention, a Calvinism which is unlike that of Charles H. Spurgeon and the real founders of the SBC. A while back I posted comments on The Founders blog stating how "Dr." James White kept ignoring this issue only to have my comments deleted. The Founders will just keep floundering away trying to keep as many people in the dark as possible as to how they differ from confessional Calvinism.
The Founders claim to want to go back to the founders but as you have demonstrated, their "regeneration before belief" view is neither biblical nor Baptist.
WHAT ABOUT CARROLL'S IMPECCABLE SYLLOGISM?
Charles, I quoted the late Dr. B. H. CARROLL'S "syllogism," and I noticed that no one has ventured to dispute it.
Do you suppose it would furnish a good Proposition for a Debate with the HYBRID CALVINISTS who hold to the "pre-faith new birth"?
Wonder if James White, R. C. Sproul, Scott Morgan, and some of the Founders could perhaps pool their exegetical and theological brain-power to negate Dr. Carroll's syllogism in a Public Debate?
Dr. Carroll's view is summed up in the following syllogism, on page 287 of Volume 10, Part I on The Gospels, An Interpreation of the English Bible:
(1) Every one born of God has the right be called a child of God.
(2) But no one has the right until he believes in Jesus.
(3) Therefore the new birth is not completed without faith."
Perhaps you could start a new thread on this so as to give it very definite significance. -- Bob L. Ross