SBC Pastors and OSAS

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Michael Wrenn, Sep 10, 2012.

  1. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    This thread was inspired by the OSAS thread. I would like to get as many opinions as possible.

    Do you think it's possible for a person who does not believe the OSAS doctrine to be a Southern Baptist pastor?

    If there are Southern Baptist pastors who do not believe OSAS, do you suppose they can preach and teach against it?
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    Since the Convention does not dictate individual church doctrine and all churches in the convention are autonomous then yes it is possible. Not likely but yes possible.
     
  3. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seems like if a pastor taught against it, he wouldn't be able to find many churches to preach for. Or He might not be able to get ordained to begin with.
     
  4. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    Both of those are true as they would be found not to be orthodox.
     
  5. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Dale Moody, onetime professor at Southern Seminary, did not believe in the Perseverance of the Saints! Unlike many Southern Baptists who are 1 point Calvinist, he was a 0 point Calvinist!
     
  6. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Well OSAS isn't an issue of orthodoxy, but it is an issue of doctrinal importance.

    In my experience most SBC congregations hold to OSAS and will probably not ordain or employ pastors who don't affirm that doctrine. Historically most Baptists have affirmed OSAS. While no one can tell individual Baptist congregations what to believe it is possible to not accept OSAS and be Baptist. I actually have two friends who pastor churches who do not personally hold to OSAS.

    At my ordination council OSAS was a question that was pursued by my panel. I affirm OSAS.
     
  7. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    :laugh: :laugh:
     
  8. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    But do you think they could openly preach/teach against the doctrine in their churches?
     
  9. Bronconagurski

    Bronconagurski
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the SBC lets Elevation Church exist, then you have no worries.
     
  10. MorseOp

    MorseOp
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    0
    OSAS is different then perseverance of the saints. Many (not all) who hold to OSAS believe that a person can apostatize and still be secure in their salvation. Perseverance of the saints teaches that those who are truly saved cannot lose their salvation, and they will never apostatize. They may struggle with their faith but they will never leave it. Those who do apostatize prove that they were never saved to begin with:

    1 John 2:19 19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.

    Many Reformed SBC pastors hold to the perseverance of the saints, not OSAS.
     
  11. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780

    You are making a distinction without a difference. And I make no distinction and know no one who does and I know a lot of pastors.
     
  12. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    13,377
    Likes Received:
    728
    You are correct Sir,:thumbsup::love2::thumbsup:
     
  13. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    What's Elevation Church?
     
  14. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, Charles Stanley believes believes that a person can apostatize and still be secure in their salvation.
     
  15. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    This brings to mind why I was never able to seek ordination in the established churches: There was always one cardinal doctrine or point of government that I couldn't accept. With the Pentecostals/Charismatics, it was the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and initial evidence of tongues; with the Nazarenes, it was entire sanctification; with the UMC, it was infant baptism, their entire system of governance, and their new doctrine of baptism; with the Presbyterians, it was infant baptism and Calvinism; with the SBC, it was OSAS. I tried the Episcopal Church, but they went off the deep end about homosexual marriage and ordination. Those were the denominations with churches nearest to me.
     
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    It is all part of Millennial Exclusion. Very sad
     
  17. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had never heard of this until recently, and I thought I had read everything there was available about Calvinism and Arminianism. :)

    "The Free Grace or non-traditional Calvinist doctrine has been espoused by Charles Stanley, Norman Geisler, Zane C. Hodges, Bill Bright, and others. This view, like the traditional Calvinist view, emphasizes that people are saved purely by an act of divine grace that does not depend at all on the deeds of the individual, and for that reason, advocates insist that nothing the person can do can affect his or her salvation.

    The Free Grace doctrine views the person's character and life after receiving the gift of salvation as independent from the gift itself, which is the main point of differentiation from the traditional Calvinist view, or, in other words, it asserts that justification (that is, being declared righteous before God on account of Christ) does not necessarily result in sanctification (that is, a progressively more righteous life). Charles Stanley, pastor of Atlanta's megachurch First Baptist and a television evangelist, has written that the doctrine of eternal security of the believer persuaded him years ago to leave his familial Pentecostalism and become a Southern Baptist. He sums up his deep conviction that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone when he claims, "Even if a believer for all practical purposes becomes an unbeliever, his salvation is not in jeopardy… believers who lose or abandon their faith will retain their salvation." For example, Stanley writes:

    Look at that verse [John 3:18] and answer this question: According to Jesus, what must a person do to keep from being judged for sin? Must he stop doing something? Must he promise to stop doing something? Must he have never done something? The answer is so simple that many stumble all over it without ever seeing it. All Jesus requires is that the individual "believe in" Him.

    — Charles Stanley (p. 67).

    In a chapter entitled "For Those Who Stop Believing", he says, "The Bible clearly teaches that God's love for His people is of such magnitude that even those who walk away from the faith have not the slightest chance of slipping from His hand (p. 74)." A little later, Stanley also writes: "You and I are not saved because we have an enduring faith. We are saved because at a moment in time we expressed faith in our enduring Lord" (p. 80).

    The doctrine sees the work of salvation as wholly monergistic, which is to say that God alone performs it and man has no part in the process beyond receiving it, and therefore, proponents argue that man cannot undo what they believe God has done. By comparison, in traditional Calvinism, people, who are otherwise unable to follow God, are enabled by regeneration to cooperate with him, and so the Reformed tradition sees itself as mediating between the total monergism of the non-traditional Calvinist view and the synergism of the Wesleyan, Arminian, and Roman Catholic views in which even unregenerate man can choose to cooperate with God in salvation.

    The traditional Calvinist doctrine teaches that a person is secure in salvation because he or she was predestined by God, whereas in the Free Grace or non-traditional Calvinist views, a person is secure because at some point in time he or she has believed the Gospel message (Dave Hunt, What Love is This, p. 481)

    Evangelical criticism

    Both traditional Calvinism and traditional Arminianism have rejected Free Grace theology. The former believes Free Grace to be a distorted form of Calvinism which maintains the permanency of salvation (or properly speaking, justification) while radically divorcing the ongoing work of sanctification from that justification. Reformed theology has uniformly asserted that "no man is a Christian who does not feel some special love for righteousness" (Institutes), and therefore sees Free Grace theology, which allows for the concept of a "carnal Christian" or even an "unbelieving Christian", as a form of radical antinomianism. Arminianism, which has always believed true believers can give themselves completely over to sin, has also rejected the Free Grace view for the opposite reason of Calvinism: namely, that the view denies the classical Arminian doctrine that true Christians can lose their salvation by denouncing their faith."
     
  18. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    I don't know who wrote that but what 'Charles Stanley believes is called Millennial Exclusion.
     
  19. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    13,377
    Likes Received:
    728
    Perserverance of the saints...is because of perserverance of the Saviour. C. Stanley and others teach a denial of the Spirits work in sanctification because of His flawed man centered doctrine....


    ARES man....I agree with many of your posts i just step back and read when you or jbh, or archangel and others post because you men are most always on target!
     
  20. SovereignMercy

    SovereignMercy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    0
    X2. Plus Stanley is disqualified from ministry due to his divorce. But he is very wealthy and adored by the people whose ears he tickles.
     

Share This Page

Loading...