Southern Baptist Heretics; “Let em be Accursed.” Simply Amazing!

Here is a comment in the thread on “An Open Letter To Frank Page, Al Mohler, Danny Akin, Tom Ascol, Mark Dever, David Dockery and the Committee on Calvinism”

It is from a guy who identifies himself as gracealone1: This is a direct cut and paste…

gracealone1 says:
December 6, 2012 at 9:13 am (Edit)

If I had not read your “open letter” for myself I would be hard-pressed to believe that such vile wickedness could actually procede from the pen of one who claims to be a child of God. To be fair, I must confess that disgust overwhelmed me and I did not read the complete diatribe. Did you recant and repent in the final few words? I guess not. Being dead wrong on all the things spoken of here must be hard work. It’s bad enough that you don’t even understand the Gospel and all the glory that is due unto the Lord Jesus for what He has done, but you compound your error by lying about the men who are trying to recover what was lost (stolen by the Arminian crowd).

It’s bad enough that you preach another gospel, but now you would require those who believe the truth to dilute to impotency the real Gospel. The facade of righteousness that you hide behind is breaking apart and the real darkness showing. For those of us who know that if it were not for the sovereign choice of the Father in selecting us to be saved that we would forever be lost. Now you want to change all of that by injecting the fantasy that a man may choose or not to be “saved”. So whose will is supreme? Your’s or God’s? According to you, you are the sovereign of the universe and most especially when it comes to your eternal destiny Perhaps a quick review of Isaiah 14 would shed some light on the mindset of the Father in regards to such pride.

You need to be reminded that Gal. 1:6-9 is speaking specifically of you and those who preach as you do. It also should be noted that the Holy Spirit condemns the messenger, not the message. Since you know the truth concerning election and have refused it and rebeled against it, perhaps now would be a good time to seek forgiveness by repenting of this wickedness. There is no place for the will of man in the saving of his soul. You know John 1:13 and have chosen to ignore it. You also know Eph. 2:8&9 and have likewise chosen to ignore it. If, as you assert, a man can be saved by choosing to be so by an act of his will, then that man has no need of grace. Have you no need of grace Mr. sbcissues?

Here is his second comment.

gracealone1 says:
December 6, 2012 at 12:06 pm (Edit)

Thanks for proving my points-all of them. The wickedness is greater than I imagined. And, Mr. Bob Hadley, it is you who preaches another gospel, it is you who has rejected the clear Word of God, it is you that demand that I and others like me capitulate to your ungodly doctrines and demands. It is clear in the Word of God that I am to have no fellowship with those who walk in darkness, such as yourself. To be plain, the doctrines that you teach are HERESY. You have condemned yourself by refusing to bow your knee to the Almighty Sovereign God. It would be good if you were to repent of this evil, but even that is a gift from God. Or do you have the inate ability to repent as you claim to have to believe?

It is clear that you have no answer for the last question I posed to you, so I will ask again: HAVE YOU NO NEED OF GRACE, MR. SBCISSUES? It is interesting and quit a “tell” that you have no answer.

As per Eph. 5:11, Lord, glorify your Name and expose the evil.



Here is another comment in the same comment thread…

Nancy A. Almodovar says:
December 6, 2012 at 6:25 pm (Edit)

these two soteriologies are polars apart and therefore both cannot be true. It was the determination at the Synod of Dort that the Remonstrants beliefs were heretical and another gospel. I’ll hold to that. while I hold that some in semi-pelagian and arminian churches are amongst God’s elect, those who openly and fiercely fight against these biblical truths I cannot, nor am I biblically permitted to call them “brethren.” they are blights on our love feasts.
I come out of arminianism and pietistic movement church and I know the bondage of your false gospel, your anathema’d gospel. I will continue to warn against this other gospel as long as I have breath and the Lord gives me strength.

The complete dialogue which includes my response can be seen by clicking here…

May God bless the SBC for His glory and the benefit of a lost and dying world that desperately needs Jesus!



About sbcissues

Interested in bringing the issues facing The Southern Baptist Convention to light.
This entry was posted in Calvinism, SBC and Calvinism, SBC Issues, Transformed Theology and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Southern Baptist Heretics; “Let em be Accursed.” Simply Amazing!

  1. Les Prouty says:


    You know that you and I differ as really polar opposites on the doctrines of grace…TULIP. However, I regard you as a brother and surely not a heretic. I’m as Reformed as one can get. You are not. But you are my brother.

  2. Max says:

    “… these two soteriologies are polars apart and therefore both cannot be true.”

    Nancy’s delivery may not have been the best, but her words are correct. How can two opposing messages regarding God’s plan of salvation co-exist in a single denomination going forward? Mixture in the camp has tremendous ramifications regarding Biblical instruction to the next generation of Southern Baptists, as well as a consistent SBC message for global evangelism.

  3. Les Prouty says:

    Here’s the deal from my perspective as to why the non-Calvinist camp, the Arminian camp, etc. are not heretics preaching a false gospel.

    1. I am full blown Calvinist. I think it is the best expression of the gospel that we men (and women) can articulate as far as our understanding of HOW God works in the ives of sinners. I think it is what the scriptures teach.

    2. But, at the end of the day, all we are doing, Cs and NCs, is trying our best with the gifts and wisdom God has given us under the Holy Spirit. We are trying to give expression to the HOW of God saving people and the ramifications of what we see in the scripture…unconditional election or conditional election.

    3. Almost everyone I encounter in the other camp from me, in person or print or web, articulates the gospel according to the scripture the same way I do and the same way other Calvinists do. That is, both camps agree that only God saves sinners and usually that is after the sinner is given the gospel along the lines of, “God sent his Son into the world to save sinners and he is willing to save you right now if you will repent of your sins and place your faith in Jesus.”

    Now we can talk all day long about what our understanding behind that is (did Jesus atone for the sins of all or the elect only, etc.).

    But the power is in God to save. It is not in the exact words we use or our theological position behind the scriptures we employ.

    God saves sinners. We all agree!


  4. sbcissues says:


    I believe many in the SBC would be comfortable with what you have written. However, there is an over-ridding cloud that darkens this approach you mention here. There is this move among the Calvinist elite to mark Calvinism as the gospel. There is this Reformed attitude that the churches in the SBC have gotten away from “the gospel” and that “the gospel” needs to be reclaimed and this reclamation is being accomplished by the calvinist revival.

    While few will openly admit that there is this “decided difference” in the calvinist presentation of the gospel and those that differ, no one is really willing to say that the other is heresy. I do believe there is a foundational divide in both camps that would lean in that direction if pressed. One of the problems there would be, how far to one side is “too-far” and for that reason few dare to attempt to make that determination, at least publicly.

    I do maintain that the strict convictional calvinist will not like my salvific position any more than I like his from a Scriptural standpoint and that does create some very difficult ground on which to stand together.

    That I believe is the real tough part of this otherwise very difficult theological divide that has long existed and continues to make its presence known today in SBC circles.


    • Max says:

      “There is this Reformed attitude that the churches in the SBC have gotten away from “the gospel” and that “the gospel” needs to be reclaimed and this reclamation is being accomplished by the calvinist revival.”

      And no one more clearly presents this attitude than Dr. Mohler when he suggests that the Reformed faith is the only viable option for thinking Christians:

      “Where else are they going to go? If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going to end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this new Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there, and that’s something that frustrates some people, but when I’m asked about the New Calvinism—where else are they going to go, who else is going to answer the questions, where else are they going to find the resources they are going to need and where else are they going to connect. This is a generation that understands, they want to say the same thing that Paul said, they want to stand with the apostles, they want to stand with old dead people, and they know that they are going to have to, if they are going to preach and teach the truth.”

      • Les Prouty says:


        I remember reading this by Dr. Jerry Vines:

        “But, current attempts to move the SBC to a Calvinistic soteriology are divisive and wrong. As long as groups and individuals seek to force Calvinism upon others in the Convention, there will be problems. There is a form of Calvinism that is militant, hostile and aggressive that I strongly oppose. I have stated before, so it’s not new news, that should the SBC move toward five-point Calvinism it will be a move away from, not toward, the gospel.”

        First, do you agree with him about the “move away from the gospel” part?

        Second, specifically who is “forc[ing] Calvinism upon others in the Convention” and specifically how?

        Third, I know there are some Calvinists who are ” militant, hostile and aggressive.” I also know as many non-Calvinists who are ” militant, hostile and aggressive.” That really doesn’t prove anything.



      • Max says:


        (1) 5-Point Calvinism, when proclaimed as “the” gospel, is a move away from the belief and practice of majority Southern Baptists re: God’s plan of salvation; (2) Brother Hadley has identified the principal architects and approach re: the proliferation of Calvinism within SBC in his “Open Letter”; (3) Agreed.

      • Les Prouty says:


        ” 5-Point Calvinism, when proclaimed as “the” gospel, is a move away
        from the belief and practice of majority Southern Baptists…”

        As I said above what a man thinks affects not the power of God and the gospel.

        And, it is yet proven which leaders in the SBC are “forc[ing]
        Calvinism upon others in the Convention” and specifically how?


      • Max says:

        “As I said above what a man thinks affects not the power of God and the gospel.”


        You are so right! A lost and dying world doesn’t really give a big whoop about what any of us think. It’s what we know, not what we think, that counts. Much of this current SBC debate is being waged through man’s intellect, not spiritual knowledge. God’s power in our ministry, and the effectiveness of the gospel message through it, rests only on Truth as imparted to us by the Holy Spirit, not what we think about truth. When the Truth and the Spirit of Truth connect, it is a very powerful thing. It’s the difference between doing church and being the Church.

        Les, I come from a long line of very stubborn people. When I came to Christ, He began to pull me through a series of spiritual knot holes to teach me some things. What I know, I can’t un-know. What has been deposited in my knower, I must move forward with.

        I wish you the best in your ministry, Les.

      • Les Prouty says:


        Thank you for your gracious words. I’ve got some of that stubbornness in me as well.

        May we all be more diligent in proclaiming Christ as King!

        God bless you.


  5. sbcissues says:


    The whole point of this last series of articles is that Mohler and his tribe have positioned themselves in the entities of the SBC with the expressed purpose of using the influence of those entities to return the SBC to its Reformed roots… grey hair and all.

    That is a non-debatable fact. It is not that anyone is forcing calvinism on anyone. That is an incorrect statement. The more correct statement is, where the entities go so goes the convention and that is why these men have positioned themselves in the places of influence that they have. Of course there is one other small insignificant reason these men are in the positions they are in and that is the enormous budgets these entities control. Any good leader that is worth his salt knows to “follow the money,” Mohler is a very good leader.


  6. gracealone1 says:

    It is difficult to determine if your main interest here is correct theology or denominational power and control of money. After reading your ‘open letter’ and the comment above the only logical conclusion is power and money. Has a Calvinist been appointed to a postion in the SBC that you covet? It really seems to bother you that all those millions of dollars are in the hands of people that you now demand tender their resignation and not one of them will obey Bob Hadley. How dare them?!?!

    The real issue, however, is not money and power, but the bending of the knees to the Lord Jesus Christ. As a pastor is it safe to assume that you were educated in the ways of good Southern Baptists at one of their many facilities (no mention of any education on the “about” page, Manfred was correct)? That being said, it makes you without excuse when you deliberately ignore and/or twist to your own agenda the Scriptures that speak directly to the absolute sovereignty of the Lord Jesus Christ in all matters concerning all things and most especially that of the salvation of any man. Your gospel tells a man that the choice to be saved or not rests wholly upon himself. The real Gospel teaches that no one comes to the Jesus unless the Father draws (best translation is ‘to drag’) him (John 6:44) . Your gospel teaches that man has an innate ability to seek God without any help from Him. Scripture says that men are not righteous, they do not understand, and “there is none who seeks after God”(Rom. 3:10&11). So how wicked is it of you to tell a man that they can, of the own accord, seek God for salvation? Your gospel teaches that God offered Jesus so that it would be possible for a man to be saved if that man so desired. Scripture teaches that the crucifixion of Christ was for only those who the Father chose from before the foundation of the world. Romans 9: 1-33, yeah, the whole chapter. John 15:16, who chose who? Your jesus is weak and inept, incapable of doing anything unless a man grants him permission. The Jesus of the Bible is the One who takes a man, dead (DEAD) in trespasses and sins and gives him new life by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, Eph. 2:1. Your jesus waits for a man ( a DEAD man) to make his move toward God before he (your jesus) is allowed to do anything. The saving God of creation “PREDESTINED to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of HIS WILL.” Eph. 1:5. The real Gospel tells us in John 1:13 we were born [again] NOT by the will of man, but [the will] of God. You teach that man has the final say.

    There are a couple of hundred more verses that destroy this satanic notion that a man can approach God by making the first move and that salvation is intiated by man. It is also realized that the Holy Spirit is the only One who can open your eyes to this glorious and eternal truth. It is my prayer that you will reject the lies and heresies of Arminianism and all it’s trappings. Perhaps one day you will understand that Arminiamism is just another cult spawned in hell and rejected by all the authors of Scripture, most especially by the Holy Spirit.

    Acts 13:48. “Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” Will you dare to tell the Holy Spirit that what He meant here was that God “looked down the corridors of time” and saw the ones that would chose Him and based on their decision, God the Father decided to predestine Arminian style those men to salvation? Careful, be very careful, because there is no Scripture, not even a hint in the Bible that such a thing is so.

  7. sbcissues says:

    Has a Calvinist been appointed to a postion in the SBC that you covet?

    Your gospel teaches that man has an innate ability to seek God without any help from Him.

    You sir have no comprehension skills.


  8. gracealone1 says:

    Opps! Did I strike a nerve? So terribly non-responsive for the champion of Arminius.

    • Les Prouty says:


      While I’m a Calvinist and generally disagree with Bob on most things soteriological, you are definitely not demonstrating the grace part of your Internet handle. In fact, in my thinking, you are an embarrassment to the Reformed side of the discussion.

  9. sbcissues says:

    To date I have never banned anyone from making comments. You are coming dangerously close.


  10. ric peters says:

    i have yet to find a reformed baptist that is truly reformed

    • sbcissues says:


      Could you explain your statement in a little more detail?

      Happy New Year to you..


      • ric peters says:

        Sometimes my comments sound sarcastic, my apology.When the modern church chose to use modern versions of GODS word,which not only reword but take away the cutting edge, this to me was the beginning of the rot in reformed churches.I heard the other day ,a pastor reading from one such version where it says , GOD who cannot lie, this perversion says GOD who never lies. do you see a problem here?I know men of whom it can be said ,they never lie. but who in their right mind would say a man cannot lie?That is just a sample,there are many others that would try to take away the very Diety of Christ. Where is it Biblicaly wrong to sing the psalms in worship.These are not trivial matters as some say, since GOD has laid out in the scripture how He will be worshiped and as you well know ,the church adorns itself in the garb of idolatry at this season every year.With one exception, the baptist churches i have attended show a lack of reverence in worship.Our pastor is a thorough expositor of scripture the congregation comes together in a reverent problem with Baptist is ,they take more liberty than scripture allows and look on Presbyterians as to formal.I would truly like to see someone who is efficient to the work, do a comparison of modern translations, the Esv the Nasb since those are the ones commonly used and do an accurate work using the the Greek text in contexts ,not randomly choosing the first definition ,but a close study, to see which of the translations is most accurate. Then if we do not choose the best the accountability will fall on those who use a corrupt text.No one of the modern school seems to think this is an important matter.Most will use the one that modern scholars prefer without bothering to look into it.The puritans are often quoted and praised,but it is very doubtful they would have used these modern versions of the bible.Reforming means you have something solid to build on and an accurate bible would be ,in my mind ,a vital starting point.The argument that Arminians use the king James and pervert the gospel should not enter into the study of which is the most accurate , but for some reason it always comes up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s