SBC to PCA

-
After an extended period of soul searching, I have decided to change religious denominations.
I have long self-identified as a “five-point Calvinist.” But I found myself avoiding the term in my Southern-Baptist home church because it was so often misunderstood. Recent conflicts in the SBC over Calvinism have left me even more disillusioned (see here and here).

I am simply tired of feeling like I must hide my beliefs in this area “under a bushel.” I am going to become a Presbyterian.

I have become convinced over recent weeks that I can affirm the beliefs held by The Presbyterian Church in America as expressed here and here. I have not decided for certain, but I can see joining that church in the near future.

This will begin an adventure, a whole-new phase of my Christian experience. I hope that you will hold me in your prayers.

Comments

Joe Blackmon said…
See, for me the thing is their deal with infant baptism. I can't affirm that. Their eschatology is a wee bit on the goofy side for me but I could agree to disagree on that.
June 20, 2009
Writer said…
Let me encourage you to try a different SBC church than the one you're in. There are a lot of Calvinst SBC churches. One place to locate many of them is http://founders.org/misc/chlist/.

Blessings to you and your family.

Les Puryear
June 20, 2009
Andrew said…
Will your everyday behavior change as a result of this? You're still a man after God's heart so I think not.
June 24, 2009
J. K. Jones said…
Joe, I am begining to think that the continuity of the covenant of grace requires infant baptism. If the church is the church, New Testament or Old, then the covenant sign would also be consistent. I welcome discussion as I can still learn much on this.

Les, in rural West Tennessee, there are no Calvinistic Baptisit churches, and I find my views unwelcome.

Andrew, thanks for your complement. Are you sure you don't have me confused with someone else? The only real day to day change is learning to be patient and loving toward some who do not understand what I am doing and make rude comments. This, of course, does not included any commentors on this blog so far.
June 24, 2009
Steve said…
Godspeed on your journey, J.K..

I'm a big R.C. Sproul fan.(Presbyterian, I believe)

I think you are moving much closer to the truths of the Christian faith, and into a much more Christ centered theology, which (in my belief) includes God's regenerative work in baptism...infant or otherwise.

May God bless you and lead you where He will.
June 24, 2009
LPC said…
Follow wherever the Word leads you.

Calvinists look at Baptism as covenantal.

Lutherans look at it as testamental a nuanced difference, as in last will and testament of Jesus. To baptize children is part of executing that last will and testament, since Jesus died for them too as a gift.

LPC
June 29, 2009
Anonymous said…
Newsflash: Person who worships figment of imagination decides to worship figment in a different way.
June 29, 2009
J. K. Jones said…
Newsflash: Anonymous comment made by coward who does not argue well.
June 29, 2009
bob said…
Mr. Jones, I read the "What We Believe" link you provided. Having been a believer myself for 25 years, holding membership in Independent Baptist, Southern Baptist, Presbyterian, and Wesleyan church's, and now, as an atheist for the past 9 years, I have to wonder, concerning the link - It establishes clearly WHAT they believe, but not a hint of "Why We Believe".
No, I am not asking for biblical references for each belief. I just wonder why, in all of the doctrinal disputes, questions, name calling and finger pointing, why don't believers ever ask them selves, "Why do I believe ANY of this"? It would seem to me that WHY you believe ANY of this is far more important than WHAT you believe.

I found your blog via Debunking Christianoity.

bob
August 02, 2009
J. K. Jones said…
Bob, thanks for your comment. It may surprise you to know that I share your concerns.

Many Christians do not ask "why" enough. There are good answers, good reasons to believe Christianity to be true. I have posted about many of those here and cI'mmented on them elsewhere.

You might try some of the labels to the right. Some is interest would start with "The Argument From...". I am working on a new series of posts that Are
more clear, but you might
find the ones under the search label "Nine Reasons Why..." to be helpful.

I hope to hear from you more.
August 02, 2009
J. K. Jones said…
Buy the way, my wife was 'reading over my shoulder," so to speak.

She would like to know why you chose to become an athiest, and so would I.
August 02, 2009
bob said…
J.K., thanks for the response. I will do some reading in your blog and links.

As for my change from bible believer to atheist, I don't think I actually "chose" to stop believing, or become an atheist.
I think it was a result of the misery and discouragement (mostly self induced) that was my life as a believer.
While in the midst of this crisis of faith, which lasted many years, the option of atheism never crossed my mind until it happened. Once I discovered that there were people out there (thank you internet) who used to believe as I did, but stopped, and they had good reasons for stopping, I discovered that I no longer had any faith in the God I had believed in for so long.

I kept a rather haphazard journal as a Christian. Perhaps reading it (probably 10 minutes worth of reading at most) will better give you and the Mrs an idea of what it was like for me, a completely miserable Christian. I keep an equally haphazard blog and my journal is the first entry:

http://i-smell-smoke.blogspot.com/2007_07_22_archive.html

I would enjoy reading your thoughts as well.

For what it's worth, many years ago, as a member of an Independent Fundamental Baptist Church, I began to consider, after doing some studying on my own, that infant baptism may very well be biblical. So, thinking for myself may have been the beginning of the end of my faith.

bob
r.u.reasonable@gmail.com
August 03, 2009
J. K. Jones said…
Bob,

I will read your blog ASAP.

However, I just accepted a challenge to a formal debate on the ressurection of Jesus with Spencer over at Debunking Christianity.

That may take up my time for awhile.

Talk to you soon.

JK
August 03, 2009
J. K. Jones said…
Two updates:

My formal debate with Spencer broke down when we could not agree on a format.

I am being seriously considered for ordination as a deacon in the PCA!
January 06, 2011
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Face of Terror

-
Osama Bin laden is dead. Since the rest of the internet is buzzing with opinions on that death, I thought I would weigh in. First, this is not the end of global terrorism. Like the Hydra of old, when one head is chopped off, two more take its place. We still need diligence in our fight against global terror. U. S. and allied Armed Forces still need our prayers. We still need a strong military and intelligence community. We have not yet cut off the Hydra’s immortal head. Second, the way to get to the ‘heart of the matter’ is with Christian missionary efforts. We must reach the people who make up those societies and population segments that produce terrorists . To tell a story I have told here before : Early in the twentieth century, Baptist evangelists preached through rural Mississippi and Alabama with such effectiveness that moonshiners could no longer sell their whiskey: All their customers were getting converted! In desperation, the whiskey sellers hired two men to murder on...
Read more

The Canons of Dort

-
I believe that the Canons of Dort are true. This is a statement that came out the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619. The Canons of Dort outline the system of theology known today as the “five points of Calvinism.” The problem I have with most “five-point Calvinists” is that the Canons of Dort contain much more than five points. Many explanations of the TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints) are gross simplifications of the Canons of Dort. [This is especially true of explanations given by those who oppose Calvinism. It is easier to knock down a straw man than it is to knock down a real man, and so it is easier to criticize an oversimplified Calvinism that the more robust form.] Some of those who teach the “five points” leave out some of the quotes below: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than ...
Read more

Intelligent Design

-
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement makes much of the argument from irreducible complexity. Dr. Michael Behe has become famous for a simple example, the mousetrap. He points out that the mousetrap will not perform its function without all of its parts. The wooden base, the metal hammer, a spring, a catch and a metal bar to hold back the hammer are all necessary parts. One component by itself will not catch a mouse. Mainstream evolutionary science has a counter-argument. To paraphrase Dr. Kenneth Miller, if you disassemble the mousetrap, each component can serve as something useful on its own. If we take away the catch and metal bar, we have something left that can serve as a paper clip. The spring could make a simple two-section key chain. The wooden base makes a paperweight. Evolutionary processes like random mutation and natural selection can combine and retain the useful parts as the complicated evolves to perform the complex function. The useful parts are combined into the mousetr...
Read more