Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Baptist Colleges / Seminaries' started by Revmitchell, Mar 11, 2010.
In SBC Seminaries when they hold to doctrines contrary to the Bf&M?
I started this thread because I have asked the other one be closed since it has fallen off topic.
Absolutely not. Why would we want our young men indoctrinated with false doctrine? A Seminary is train young men in proper doctrine; there are simply too many excellent Southern Baptist professors, to allow such a thing.
I have to say I am rather shocked that one who holds to annihilation would be allowed. I wonder if he taught that heresy.
uhhh no. It's an SBC seminary, not a generic seminary. I understand the need for generics, but one of the primary purposes of a denominational seminary has got to be to train folks specifically for that sponsoring denomination.
FWIW, when Brandon was at SWBTS, I was surprised at the number of non-SBC students attending. This is just a statement. I expected almost everyone there to be SBC.
Agreed. If there is a confession/doctrinal statement required of professors, they must abide by its LETTER.
If not, why would I want to send a nickel or a student to such a place?
The implementation of the BF&M was to cull out the liberals (called "moderates" by genteel SBC'ers) in the mission field or schools.
My ifb seminary did NOT require every student to be a "Baptist", but all had to sign fidelity to the general doctrinal statement.
Book 'em, Dano. Murder (of theology) One.
Nope! Why would they even be considered in the first place?
==While this issue must be decided by each seminary and their board of trustees I would argue no. If someone does not agree with the Southern Baptist Faith and Message they should not teach at a Southern Baptist seminary. After all, the Baptist Faith and Message is somewhat generic. If someone took issue with it I would be concerned about their general orthodoxy.
So... I'm scanning new thread titles and come across, "Should College Professors be allowed to teach".... Nice.
Btw, I vote no. People who want a doctrine specific education should get their money's worth. Anything less is bait & switch or, plainer!, fraud.
I meant to vote no, but the cursor slipped, so subtract a yes vote from the poll.
However, at the Baptist university where I am a trustee, we do have a few non-Baptists on the faculty, all in the College of Arts and Sciences. In the College of the Bible, all faculty must subscribe, in writing, to the B F & M, and must be members of a Southern Baptist congregation. . In the College of Arts and Sciences, non-Baptists must agree, in writing, not to teach contrary to the BF & M.
The university in question is thoroughly Southern Baptist and Kentucky Baptist, but is not an arm of either convention.
So professors who hold to things like annihilation and the ability to lose one's salvation should not be able to teach in SBC Seminaries?
Why in the world would we want seminary students to be indoctrinated at all? Certainly we need to have supportive professors who help students learn the scriptures, but indoctrination is not education.
I disagree. The seminary is the place to teach students to think theologically and biblically, and to learn how to become lifelong students so they can teach themselves and others. That being said, yes, the seminary also exists to help students build a strong doctrinal foundation for their ministry, but unless you give the opportunity for students to examine multiple points of view and wrestle with the real historical, philosophical, and theological issues Christians have dealt with over the last 2,000 years, you have not provided an education for the student. Until students can work through theology to discover what they personally believe about a thing, they don't own it as a part of their lives.
Disclaimer: I have faced indoctrination from both the left and the right many times over the years in disciplines such as politics, religion, sociology, psychology, science and philosophy. Every time it alienated me from the professor's point of view. When I was in college working on a theology degree, the Texas Baptist school I attended made a point of having religion professors from across the spectrum of Baptist life on staff to teach classes. (Yes, we had a real-life Bultmann-style liberal professor who like to "demythologize" everything.) An interesting thing happened... While more fundamental-style Baptists outside the school where railing against the school having that kind of professor on staff (for fear that students mindlessly believe everything they are told in class), students tried to take the professor seriously and would ask probing, penetrating questions to discover that there was very little substance to his position except for a modernistic anti-supernaturalist bias. In the presence of theological diversity, students are required to think, and as a result, they tend to ask the hard questions. By asking the hard questions, they take responsibility for their beliefs and are much less prone to "losing their faith." When I later went to seminary, the uniformity of positions in the faculty actually made the classes duller and less helpful. Since everyone was pretty much walking in lock-step, there was no reason to struggle with many issues or treat them as something other than something that needed to be regurgitated for an exam.
Paige Patterson didn't seem to mind.
Ellis' views were public knowledge. One of his masterworks, Christ and the Future in New Testament History (Supplements to Novum Testamentum, V. 97) deals with the issue.
Although I didn't have him for seminary classes, it is my understanding that it was one of the viewpoints discussed in some of his classes.
The way I found out about his position was in a small class being taught at our church. He was doing an overview of the scriptures type class over the course of six weeks on Sunday night. One of the nights he mentioned something about the final destruction of the wicked that prompted me to ask him privately about his views.
I don't know of anyone who believes that one can "lose" their salvation teaching at any SBC seminary. Are you thinking of someone in particular?
Then while his passing is unfortunate for his family we are blessed that he is no longer teaching such trash in our Seminary.
K. Owen White
Pastor, Fist Baptist Church, Houston
President, Southern Baptist Convention, 1964
If the appeal is made for "academic freedom," let it be said that we gladly grant any man the right to believe what he wants to – but, we do not grant him the right to believe and express views in conflict with our historic position concerning the Bible as the Word of God while he is teaching in one of our schools, built and supported by Baptist funds.
--"Death in the Pot" Baptist Standard, Jan. 10, 1962
Just for discussion:
What if someone is a master textual scholar and he does not teach his views. Does he then have this right?
I'm thinking that there are some very fine men who would stand in opposition to the BFM. Sinclair Ferguson comes to mind. Derek Prime. Eric Alexander. First rate inerrantist scholars who could not join most Baptist churches because of paedobaptism and presbyterianism.
Isn't the reformed theology of today closer to presbyterianism than the baptist theology of 100 years ago?
I just have to ask, why fly the flag upside down?:thumbs:
Not really. Obviously, ecclesiology would be different as well as aspects regarding the ordinance of baptism