Soul Liberty vs. Political Correctness?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by dianetavegia, Nov 28, 2003.

  1. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I can't find the thread now but the concept of soul liberty was being discussed under another topic this week.

    My question is: When does Soul Liberty end and become distorted with Political Correctness?

    I did a search on soul liberty and found mostly churches quoting Roger Williams: And Roger Williams would vehemently counter that the New Testament forbids "imposing upon the soul of the people a religion, a worship, a ministry." The state, he would say, must do everything possible to protect "soul liberty," the freedom of each individual to follow his or her own conscience in matters of faith.

    Where does soul liberty end and my responsibility to stand firm on God's word begin? When are we to draw the line when one group endorses something we clearly, as fundamental Baptists, see as contrary to God's word?

    Has soul liberty become distorted and now being abused to make fundamental Christian's look like the bad guy?

    Diane
     
  2. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't this also have to do with another Baptist 'distinctive' - separation of church and state?

    Yours in Christ

    Matt
     
  3. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    The heart is deceitful. We must expose our theology and be open for correction by others. If we claim to have all the right answers Paul writes we know nothing.

    Soul liberty never conflicts with the sound teaching of scripture. What I find is that those who so often claim to have so many answers that others do not claim that they have a voice from God that nobody else does. It amazes me how many ignorant people seem to say that that the scripture is so clear on something that those who have studied well do not see that same thing quite as clearly.

    I think it is important to do as Hebrews 13:7 says, "Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith."

    I want to see the outcome of the person who make claims about scripture first.
     
  4. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think, by way of answer to the OP, that we have every right to state what we believe to be true and Truth, but without coercion or legal sanction ie: we can and should persuade but not impose.

    Yours in Christ

    Matt
     
  5. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Soul liberty" has been used to justify all means of heresy, and as Diane points out, "PC".

    I have debated this with a member of the BB, I think last year, on the issue of homosexuality. He was "personally convinced" that the Scripture condemns it, but tried to claim that others have "soul liberty" to disagree. That, IMO, is placing "Baptist-ism" (the "soul liberty" distinctive) above the scriptures, a grevious sin.

    Another point...when speaking of liberty, we must draw careful boundaries. Diane raises the point made by Roger Williams. A critical question is: are we talking about liberty between:

    Ourselves and God?

    Ourselves and the Church?

    or

    Ourselves and the Government?

    Government has very little right to affect our religious perspectives. The Church, however, can make certain primary doctrinal points a condition of membership and disclipline. God is the ultimate Judge and we are individually responsible to seek His will and mind.

    Just my 2 cents.

    -PA Jim
     
  6. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,126
    Likes Received:
    320
    People were busy becoming heretics long before the distinctive was formulated.

    Originally it was a response to the massacres perpetrated by the Church of Rome.
    People should be free to believe and/or worship whatever and however they please without fear of death.

    From the GARBC site: http://www.garbc.org/garbc_home/baptdist.shtml

    HankD
     
  7. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    People were busy becoming heretics long before the distinctive was formulated.

    Originally it was a response to the massacres perpetrated by the Church of Rome.
    People should be free to believe and/or worship whatever and however they please without fear of death.

    </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry if my post implied otherwise (did it?). I agree with you. I was just making the point, in answer to Diane's question, that the idea can be mis-used.
     
  8. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,126
    Likes Received:
    320
    Oops, I thought it did, I assumed reverse logic, I am sorry.

    HankD
     

Share This Page

Loading...