Anti-Christ In Southern Baptist Acedemia

Certainly there was liberalism in the SBC at some of its seminaries. However, long before the conservative resurgence were a number of professors at SWBTS who had a steadfast commitment to the Bible. While at the same time that was not the case at SEBTS and SBTS.

Some of the poorest professors I had at SWBTS are still there. The best ones left or retired. Of those who left some have gone to DBU, Criswell and other SBC colleges and universities. The academics at SWBTS is nothing compared to what it once was. At some of the other seminaries I think they have improved while I believe SWBTS has gone downhill. SWBTS has a number of professors who are former graduates of DTS. Some professors have been hired with a D.Min. One recently came from Pat Robertson's university to teach at SWBTS.

 

Who is this ONE who is made to wonder? Did YOU write "putrid ulcers" and "anti-Christian poison" and "SB bloodstream" or is that from someone else? Didn't those who inflicted anti-Biblical views on the SBC begin their own group, the CBF? Isn't that old news? Rick Warren and his followers are engaged in a frontal assault on not only conservative SBC doctrine, but on every Christian institution.

 

I think it is good when SBs move towards liberalism away from the putrid ulcers of extreme fundamentalism and the anti-Christian poison in the bloodstream of conservatives full of hate which is antithetical of Christ.

 

web page

Gold,

Which part of Liberal Christianity do you think is good?

Joseph Botwinick

 

I have modified some of the above statements to highlight the parts I think are good.

An additional note that a "willingness to question" is different from a rejection.

 

I have modified some of the above statements to highlight the parts I think are good.

An additional note that a "willingness to question" is different from a rejection. </font>[/QUOTE]It is a rejection of the inerrancy of Scriptures and faith in the Word of God. That is the root cause of that willingness to question the very foundations of our faith.

Joseph Botwinick

 

It is a rejection of the inerrancy of Scriptures and faith in the Word of God. That is the root cause of that willingness to question the very foundations of our faith.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]I consider it a willingness to question the traditional understanding of God's holy and authoritive Scriptures towards the orthodox (right) understanding of it. Traditional understandings are not always right, but many times they are.

 

Are you talking about the traditional understandings of the Virgin Birth and the miraculous? I only ask because this is certainly what Liberal Theologians are talking about questioning:

Joseph Botwinick

 

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]I believe in the virgin birth and the mirculous, but I don't see a problem with challenging the traditional understandings of the supernatural. That doesn't mean something didn't happen or that it is any less amazing. It just means that someone from a different context may describe it in a different way.

 

What if I say that God is one who caters to all my wants and needs and kills anyone who disagrees with me? Who are you to say my own personal view of God is wrong? Be careful what you hope for, because you might get it. Perhaps, we would be better off with a conservative objective standard for truth and doctrine: The Inerrant Word of God.

Joseph Botwinick

 

What if I say that God is one who caters to all my wants and needs and kills anyone who disagrees with me? Who are you to say my own personal view of God is wrong? Be careful what you hope for, because you might get it. Perhaps, we would be better off with a conservative objective standard for truth and doctrine: The Inerrant Word of God.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]I did not include that point.

 

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]

 

I think it is good when SBs move towards liberalism away from the putrid ulcers of extreme fundamentalism and the anti-Christian poison in the bloodstream of conservatives full of hate which is antithetical of Christ. </font>[/QUOTE]I am also curious to know how you define "extreme fundamentalism" the hatred of conservatives which is "antithetical of Christ"? Is that pretty much anyone who disagrees with your liberal theology. I have noticed a trend for a while to label as extreme and hateful those who are merely standing for the Word of God. I am wondering if you might be doing the same.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I stand with all who stand for the Word of God. Some of those folks happen to be liberals who stand for parts of the Word of God that some conservatives don't.

People disagree with my theology on this forum all the time. I don't remember ever calling anyone an extreme fundamentalist or hateful conservative.

Westboro Baptist church are obvious starters. But there are many less extreme examples. I think hatred or extreme distaste instead of love for others who are different from them whether it is because of ideology, religion, theology, appearance or lifestyle (ie homosexuals, liberals, adulterers, muslims, catholics, communists etc) is a common characteristic.

 

Gold,

I agree with you about Phelps and others. I would, however, argue that you did not come to those conclusions based on liberal theology, as their is no objective standard by which you can judge right from wrong in a liberal theology that says what ever works for you. I would argue that it is a conservative theology that sets forth an objective standard of love and hate and right and wrong in the Bible, the inerrant Word of God. If one were to follow the liberal theology to its ultimate and true conclusion, you would come to anarchy and the kind of hatred espoused by Phelps (who basically has as his objective standard of truth being whatever he believes). He has set himself up as god of the Bible. True Conservatives do not do this since the Bible is the ultimate objective standard of right and wrong in all doctrinal matters.

Joseph Botwinick

 

They are not extreme fundamentalists or conservatives. They act as if there is no God and they are gods to themselves.

 

GB,

That is exactly correct. They are, I would argue, a lot more liberal in their theology than you might expect.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I agree. It is not based on liberal or conservative theology but the example of Christ.

You are welcome to that generalization of liberals which may be true of some. But that would be like saying all conservatives are like Phelps.

I would say it is Christ and not conservative theology that sets the standard.

I would say that Christ was the truest liberal and the truest conservative.

My point in this thread wasn't to promote liberal theology which I think has lots of problems. But I hope to keep conservatives accountable in their description of liberal Christians since there aren't very many around to balance out the views.