Seriously Flawed Logic

On his BLOG - The Reason For Hope, Wes Kenny posted a Book Review of David Dockery's title Southern Baptist Identity (http://weskenney.net/book-review-southern-baptist-identity#more-907). In that review he cites a comment made by Paige Patterson; copied below.

In an article first written at my request for another blog, and recently republished in Baptist Press, Paige Patterson addressed the relationship between Calvinists and non-Calvinists in the Southern Baptist Convention by pointing to the split that occurred between the General and Particular Baptists in eighteenth century England, and the disastrous results for both camps. The General Baptists lost their doctrinal emphasis and headed into universalism, while the Particular Baptists became anti-missionary hyper-Calvinists. The emphasis of each group balanced the other, and without each other, both became irrelevant in fairly short order.

If a Ph.D. student applied the logic in course work at SWBTS that Mr. Patterson applies in this quote, I am quite certain that they will be soundly criticized and rightly so. It is ludicrous to suggest that godly scholars remained true to their convictions (Particular Baptist) about the doctrine of Soteriology because they were 'balanced by another doctrinal perspective' (General Baptist). These leaders remained true to their convictions because that is what Scripture teaches. To claim that they became 'hyper-Calvinist' because they had separated from those who were General Baptist is the epitome of flawed logic. To assign causality in this manner is beyond academic credibility.

The two groups cited by Mr. Patterson became irrelevant because they abandoned the clear teaching of the Holy Spirit as recorded in the text and drawn out by precise, irenic and compassionate exegesis with accountability through life in community. William Carey did not go to India because he was balanced by the General Baptist. He went to India in obedience to the Great Commission. May his tribe increase!

The issue of Soteriology is an Essential, not a Distinctive in theological considerations. The Law of Non-Contradiction applies. God is not schizophrenic. His Word does not say one thing here and contradict that in another portion of Scripture. There is a definite substantive difference between understanding salvation as a monergistic rather than a synergistic work.

It is true that the portrait of history displays different perspectives on this question. Both cannot be true. As I stated in my response to the BLOG post cited above, the SBC claims to embrace Regenerate Church Membership but our precipitous decline tells the TRUTH. We have churches whose rolls are filled with unregenerate people. The nature of redeemed people is to gather together to praise and worship our great God. We claim to have 16 million members. 60% of this number never appear on the Lord's Day.

We need a good dose of valid logic. That logic says we have serious issues in River City and pretending this is not so will only serve to exacerbate the problem. Mr. Patterson gets an F- in logic. The jury is out on what the SBC will do on this issue but the prospects are dim if we continue to sing Kum-by-ya with our head in the sand thinking that the presence of one group is what preserves doctrinal fidelity in the other. It is not balance per se that we need. We need humble submission to Special Revelation with grace upon grace (Isa. 66:1-2).