New CBF statement

Evidently the driving force behind this statement is the CBF's attempt to join the Baptist World Alliance. If I remember correctly, wasn't the CBF in its beginnings very adamant that they were not starting another "group" of Baptists, but were rather just providing resources for the disenfranchised? I have been receiving their monthly magazine for years, and that is the way I remember it.

 

That's the way I remember it as well. Of course the SBC leadership doesn't want the CBF to do that so the CBF people essentially have two choices: (1) line up with the politics of the SBC leadership or (2) leave.

It looks like the leadership is pushing for the second choice.

[ January 25, 2003, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

I know all about it. Many churches in the Raleigh/Durham "triangle" and the Greensboro/High Point/Winston Salem "triad" have ceased supporting the SBC in recent years--and probably many more will follow

 

Hello Jimmy,

I live in the Raleigh/Durham area. How many churches would you say constitute the "many" that have ceased supporting the SBC?

Also, I have a question regarding the CBF Statement that started this thread. If the CBF has now declared that it has separated itself completely from the SBC why did it have a booth that the SBC NC State Convention last week?

[ January 25, 2003, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

So let me see if I get what you are saying. According to the CBF statement quoted at the beginning of this tread the CBF is completely unaffiliated with the SBC. However, the CBF, while not affiliated in any way with the SBC, is free to host a booth at SBC State Conventions. That sounds to me like the CBFers want to have their cake and eat it too. If they are not part of the SBC then they have no business at an official SBC function. If we follow this line of reasoning it would be logical to expect to see a booth hosted by the United Methodist Church, or the LDS, etc. welcomed at SBC State Conventions.

[ November 23, 2002, 06:03 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

As most Southern Baptists in NC are aware that the Biblical Distorter, I mean Biblical Recorder , leans in favor of our state's more "moderate brethern" and the CBF we tend not to put much stock in its continued digs at the SBC.

However, I am encouraged by the CBF statement that leads off on this thread. Now they need to just learn to stand on their own and quite troubling the conservative SBC. In other words if they can't cooperate and learn to compromise with the majority of conservative Southern Baptists then they are free to pick up their toys and go home.

[ November 26, 2002, 06:05 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

Good BBII. Then you won't mind if we take Southeastern back.

Joshua

 

When Ahab saw Elijah, Ahab said to him, "Is it you, you troubler of Israel?" He answered, "I have not troubled Israel; but you have, and your father's house, because you have forsaken this commandments of the Lord..."

1 Kings 18:17-18

 

BibleboyII, I don't have any precise #s. But I do know that many "big-name" churches in North Carolina have stopped formally supporting the SBC. For example Millbrook in Raleigh, First in Raleigh, First in Henderson, College Park in Greensboro, First in Asheville, to name a few

 

You are more than welcome to try. I don't think you'll be successful. However, the liberals may learn a thing or two about the inerrancy of the Scripture while on campus here at SEBTS. So I say come on in our doors are always open (at least during normal business hours). Right now I'm the only one here but I think between the Holy Spirit, my Bible, and me that we can hold down the fort.

[ November 24, 2002, 01:03 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

Hello Baptist Believer,

Let me see... Ahab = Liberal CBF and its rejection of the inerrant Word of God, and Elijah = Conservative SBC standing for the truth of the inerrant Word of God... No that can't be what you meant. But if we switch the characters/organizations the analogy quickly breaks down thus revealing the problem of quoting Scripture out of context and attempting to twist the Word of God to your own ends.

[ January 25, 2003, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

Hello Jimmy,

Thanks for the reply. One thing to keep in mind is that a handful of "big-name" churches that support the CBF does not constitute "many" NC Churches. Remember that the average size Baptist church in the U.S. is actually quite small in number with membership between 50 and 150. It is the combined effort of many of these "average sized" 50 to 150 member churches that makes the SBC so strong.

 

Hmm... I didn't apply or twist scripture -- I just quoted it.

You mentioned that the CBF is "troubling" the SBC. I just quoted a verse or two where I've heard a similar statement. I just find it interesting that you see the CBF as the "troubler" of the SBC. I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

[ January 25, 2003, 05:59 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

Ah, but you quoted it for a reason, right?

I find all Christians who reject the inerrancy of the Bible and who embrace liberal theology troubling because they distort the Word of God. You know, kind of like the way that Paul and the other Apostles and early church fathers found false teachers troubling and sought to warn against their heretical teachings.

I find it interesting that in the context of the discussion that we are having that you chose to quote my statment with the words "...quit troubling the SBC...." followed by a quote from the Bible that said that Ahab falsely accused Elijah of being "the troubler of Israel" with no other comment. Did you not mean to imply or draw the conclusion that either I or the SBC in general equate to Ahab and the CBF equates to Elijah being accused as a troubler? It certainly looked that way. If that was not your intent in making the post with the quote of my statement followed by the 1 Kings passage would you mind explaining exactly what you did intend or what you hoped to accomplish?

[ January 25, 2003, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: rlvaughn ]

 

In my opinion, I find the claim that the 'CBF is the troubler of the SBC' to be ludicrous since the SBC (especially Baptist Press) spends an enormous amount of time bashing the CBF and the CBF has essentially been ignoring the SBC for the last couple of years now. That perspective on your allegation, coupled with the use of the word "troubler" (not a common expression in my world), immediately brought to mind Ahab's accusation.

I merely wanted to point out how ludicrous the statement was by presenting a classic case of an unjust accusation of being a troublemaker.

The reason I posted without comment is that I wanted you to struggle with the verse a bit and consider it from all possible perspectives and see if "the shoe fits".

No, the SBC does not necessarily correspond to wayward Israel, you as Ahab, and CBF as Elijah except in the sense that I think you are making the same false assessment of blame. I've been following the CBF fairly closely for the last five years and the only time they really have anything to say about the SBC is when they have to respond against false charges or false/twisted charges in Baptist Press.

 

The CBF and the Mainstream Baptist Network consider one another to be "Friends and Allies" in their common struggle to oppose the conservative majority of the SBC. As I have noted elsewhere on these forums the Mainstream Baptist Network lists the CBF on its website under the heading "Friends and Allies."

The Mainstream Baptist Network organization in the state of North Carolina is called Mainstream Baptists of North Carolina (MBNC). Recently Texas moderate David R. Currie sent a memo to members of North Carolina CBF/MBNC. Mr Currie's memo is quoted in full below:

Source: The Conservative Record, Volume XV, Number 1, September 2002. This information may be found on-line at http://www.ncbaptist.com then see the news archives link for October 2002.

So now we see that Mr. Currie refers to those of us who contend for the inerrancy of the Bible and the fundamentals of the faith as holding to a "perversion of the gospel."

I would also encourage you to visit http://www.ncbaptist.com and read the current November 2002 on-line issue of The Conservative Record in its entirety for a further analysis of what is happening in Texas, Missouri, and Virginia that is affecting Baptist life outside of North Carolina. By doing so you will gain an understanding of how the CBF/Mainstream groups are attempting to influence the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina (BSCNC) with their moderate/liberal agenda. These are the troubles that I maintain that those who embrace the CBF and Mainstream Baptist Network and liberal theology cause in SBC life.

[ November 25, 2002, 04:09 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

In response to the BWA rejection of its application for membership the CBF made the following statements:

"The CBF council responded with a statement listing 20 indicators that the Fellowship is "no longer integral" to the SBC, including the fact that the SBC has in effect recognized CBF as a separate entity by refusing to accept funding from the Fellowship for the past seven years.
The CBF also has its own organizational structure, missionaries, foundation and benefits board and endorses chaplains, according to the statement. More than 150 CBF churches have no formal membership in the SBC. The United Nations recognizes the CBF as a non-governmental organization, and several Baptist state conventions allow churches to give to CBF through their budgets.
Consistent with earlier statements, however, leaders of the Fellowship insisted the moderate breakaway group is not a denomination.
'Though fully independent of the SBC or any other union, we do not declare that we are a denomination or convention,' the statement says. 'Rather, we are Baptist by conviction, and we are a partnership of churches and individuals by philosophy. We have chosen instead to define ourselves as a "fellowship," which means that we are a "Baptist association of churches and individuals" in partnership for the advancement of God's kingdom.'" Source: http://www.baptiststandard.com/2002/10_28/pages/cbf.html .

Again, I must ask if all of this is true and the CBF claims that it is completely and entirely unconnected to the SBC why does the CBF actively participate by hosting booths and asking CBF affiliated churches to send as many messengers as possible to the various state conventions, which support the SBC, as indicated by the memo from Mr. Currie quoted above? If the CBF is it own organization then let it now stand on its own.

[ November 26, 2002, 07:38 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]