Why Primitive Baptists are NOT Calvinists

Primitive Baptists are very commonly regarded as "Calvinists" by those who know a little bit about our beliefs. This is no doubt due to our affirmation of the doctrine of salvation by grace (TULIP) which embraces the biblical concepts of election and predestination.  Cautionary words regarding the use of the term "Calvinism" notwithstanding, I would say that while PBs and Calvinists (of the Westminster Confession of Faith / Second London Confession sort) share some beliefs in common, their respective theological systems are radically different in a number of very important ways. In the interest of helping people clearly distinguish between the two, and at the risk of painting with too broad a brush, I would categorize the differences as generally falling into the following categories:

Is "Limited Atonement" Problematic Terminology?

I cannot count how many times I have heard ministers who claim to believe in the five points of grace (TULIP) point out that the phrase "limited atonement" is either unfortunate, inaccurate, or otherwise less-than-ideal in describing the atoning work of Jesus Christ. This disclaimer seems to have become de rigueur among many who claim to teach  salvation by sovereign grace. For the most part I believe those who distance themselves from the phrase "limited atonement" fall into one of three categories. They are either purveyors of non-grace theology, baseless pontificators, or copycats.

Three Arguments in Favor of Limited Atonement

Limited Atonement - almost universally rejected by professing Christians today.

In a recent internet dialog I was asked to provide some examples of where I see the doctrine of limited atonement revealed in the scriptures. I believe there are numerous verses in the bible that support the doctrine of limited atonement, but I provided these three as good examples.
 

The Southern Baptist Convention's Teaching on Salvation

The purpose of this post is to examine the teachings of the Southern Baptist Convention in light of the teaching of salvation by sovereign grace taught in the scriptures. This statement of beliefs was pulled from the Bellevue Baptist Church website on 10/10/2010 as a representation of the beliefs held by SBC churches. I have added commentary below each section.  

Marc Driscoll on Hell and Salvation

This week I stumbled across an article on CNN's belief blog that asks the question:  Should we abandon the idea of hell?  Now when an outfit like CNN endeavors to grapple with matters of the Christian faith, one should approach their commentary with extreme skepticism and discernment.  In my experience, a major news outlet's handling of matters of Christian doctrine and practice is a bit like watching a chimp on a Steinway: amusing to watch but hard to listen to.  It their simian attempts at handling the truth, they juxtapose yea and nay on the abandonment of hell.  In the yea category is Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis Schaeffer, whose thoroughly unbiblical perspective can be fairly well ascertained by his closing quote, "We need 'hell' like a hole in the head. It’s time for the alternative of empathetic merciful religion to be understood."  I submit that the very fact that we would know almost nothing of the doctrine of hell were it not for the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ himself so strongly contradicts this "Frank" assertion, that such a quote deserves no further consideration among God's people.