Old School Baptist Doctrinal Debates

We had upper-50s today. It actually got a little too warm in the church for me.

We had ice, freezing rain, and sleet on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday this past week. My cousin works for the Highway Dept. and he worked 3 straight shifts without a break. His girlfriend has been in the hospital too, and he told me he'd only been home for about 10 minutes total all last week. I could smell him through the phone.:laugh:

I'm glad we don't get weather like that very often. We're pressing it if we freeze a few times a year, rarely with snow and/or ice.

Hope it'll be bright and shiny for you next weekend.

 

Well, there is no post here that says if the spouse has remarried, the other spouse cannot be accepted back into membership.

Also, there is no individual decision here. These are corporate decisions, church decisions.

An individual member may not be in favor of excluding either spouses, or accepting back either or both spouses, remarried or not, but if the church votes contrary to his wants, then the church decision is adopted and he must abide by that decision.

It's easy to say that and judge because the topic is about heterosexual affairs.
Let's take homosexual affairs as an example.
Suppose one married spouse suddenly divorces his wife or husband because he or she is "gay" (I hate using that word to describe these abnormals) and shacks in with a new partner, would your church keep them ?
I suppose the answer is no.

 

If they have changed the order I have no knowledge of it but I do not think so. If I have been told correctly, the one who made the move to put the order in, was excluded for having another woman, other than his wife. Also, the one who make the move to make it our order was at the very time he made the move, mixed up in adultery and was excluded.

"Old School Doctrine"? Seems it depends on the issue at hand. We lost one church over it which included Bro. Edwin and with orders like that, what is the purpose of an association?

Don't get me wrong, this is not the first time such an order, to keep all together at all cost. We have an order on "pant wearing" which don't say nothing and those who wrote it should of been politicians. It makes us look like school children who have to accept it.

 

Brother Sloan, that's a nice web site. I've been listening to downloads all morning.

I grew up in the South Alabama/NW Florida area. I never heard of Old Regulars till I came to this board. But we had plenty of PB's around.

 

I haven't listened to that one yet. My church does not have a stated position on that issue and neither do I, so I'll observe this conversation as a student. Do I understand that you hold that a remarried divorcee should leave the second wife and return to the first? I think the bible prohibits that somewhere.

 

I believe it says something along these lines in Leviticus, I think that's the book anyway.

Some elders were "hardshelling" about this about a year ago, or more, but I was not tuned into the conversation well enough to remember exactly where they were reading.

 

Bro. Slone,
Who is the addressed to?

If me, I would say I agree with you. I hope I didn't give any other impression.

If a man is still taken in adultery, which I do believe can be a state of living rather than only a singular act, and excluded from the church, then he has no right to restoration if he is still living as an adulterer.

Now, if a man is excluded for adultery and comes back to the church later and confesses his sin, repents, and shows fruit thereof, and is no longer living an adulterous life, the church should take him back. He is manifesting the mercy, love, and forgiveness of God by fleeing from his sin of adultery and coming back to the fold for forgiveness of his brethren.

How many times shall we forgive our brethren? Jesus tells us 70 times 7. I believe that is applicable to our daily lives as well as our church lives. Forgiveness doesn't mean there is no chastisement and/or consequences for the trespass, but it does mean you move on in love and don't dwell on the matter.

God bless.

BJR

 

I've heard that somewhere before, too.
But wouldn't that compound the errors ?
I hold, personally, that divorcing a spouse is error.
However, once done, and the state or the law rules the divorce final and executory, and one of the spouses marry another, then that marriage is legal before the law.
If he leaves the second wife, to go back to the first, doesn't that violate the Scripture that says submit to the authorities ?
Now, error is compounded.
As an aside, I don't recall having read of a Bible character having divorced his wife, or maybe I just missed one.
Any of you know of one ?

 

Another old school Baptist proscription is physical relations before marriage because it might lead to dancing.

 

I'm an Old School Baptist, and I love to dance. My grandmother, mother, and aunt, all of them PB, taught me how to dance. How is that connected to fornication?

 

Bro. Mike;
On the way home from church Sunday this very issue came up and my wife and my sister said "well, we don't do that at our home church".
I ask them if that really made a difference being we fellowship it at all the other churches we go to?

Do you think it makes a difference if we fellowship that which we do not believe in and was practiced and preached in the Old School?

 

I think it has something to do with the gyrating and hip swiveling and the temptations that come with watching a female body quivering and quaking and all that jazz.
And the touching of cheeks and sometimes brushing of the woman's breast on the man's chest and stuff.
At least that's what my old pastor in the Philippines said.

Heck, I love to dance, and I love watching ballroom dancers.
I most especially love Spanish and Latin dances.
I see no malice. Just graceful movements.
I guess it all depends on the one watching, or dancing.

 

If I chose, I certainly could defend my position. I choose to not discuss this on the board.

I know the Sardis has been very loose on the pants issue for along time, (maybe where you visited but don't paint with such a broad brush.) You must of not been in KY. Of course, even they have given in a lot now, still don't make it right.

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Now, I wonder who you mean by that Mike?

You say the seven churches of Asia were judged individual. Does that mean there was a Gospel for each of them?

 

All I am saying is if Narrows Branch fellowshiped Mt. Zion and worshiped with them then we would be held responsible for what Mt. Zion does for it is not the name over the church but how we worship God together and he plainly told us with those who walk disorderly to not take part with them, not bid them in your house or bid them God Speed.
I am not saying this to you in particular Bro.Mike, I am saying we are all going to be held to these standards and we better get it right if we can. Of course we all have to give as much as possible without leaving the doctrine, to have fellowship with churches and then associations but lets us not give to the point where we have fellows like Haggard all over the place and I have your orders here in my hand and know that you believe what I just said. That is why, I am a little surprised to learn you in particular wrote that order being you hold so strong where you are at now.

 

I know Bro. Mike and really do understand. When I was speaking above, I was talking to myself as much as you, for I too have had to do some of what you did, to keep us together. As a matter of fact, I had to swallow that order we are talking about, or leave one, and I decided to stay. There have been other things ,and will be more and I hope to be able to stay until I die, which at the rate my health is, that don''t look like it will be that long. The reason I stand it, I know the lord knows what I do, and when I stand before Him, I can say Lord I tried. I have been, and still are left out of some of the meetings anymore you speak of, and think its because I might be to hard headed but not sure. I do understand though Bro. Mike, and I am sure you did the best you knew how. Maybe it was the right thing after all, who really knows for we have the double marriage problem, whether we like the order or not. I have studied that issue problem more than any other and can not find a scripture that lets me agree to let it pass. To be honest, I really wish I could. It would be so much easier. Blessings,

Sometime I really would like to meet you at Shoney's in Pikeville for breakfast, if you are ever in this area. Call me and I will meet you there. I am a breakfast man myself and I love Shoney's breakfast bar.