Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by bobfrgsn, Apr 10, 2003.
I do. All of it.
Unashamedly. Every "jot" and "tittle."
All true, all literal, (some literal as well as allegorical, too, or with more than one meaning, like layers of an onion), all Inspired and Inerrant Word of God.
Ex: The Creation happened in 7 24-hour days.
The Great Flood happened.
Sodom & Gomorrah happened, too.
So did the Virgin Birth.
So did the fulfilled OT prophecies.
So did the Death, Burial, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
And some OT and NT prophecies are yet to be fulfilled. For starters.
I believe creation happened in 6 literal 24-hour days.
That's what I meant.
I believe the Bible too. I'm pretty sure most on this board do.
However, we should not see differences in interpretation and differences in application as not believing the Bible.
PS - What's a tittle?
 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
I always heard a jot was a period and the tittle was the small part of the T. That may not be exactly correct, but that's what I have always heard. Maybe a Greek scholar could fill us in if there is one on the Board.
Jot and Tittle are the two smallest parts of the written Hebrew. They are similar to the comma in size.
More "Mainstream" propaganda.
Priesthood of the believer simply means all people have equal access to God. There was never a debate over acceptance of creeds among Baptists. The 1677 Orthodox Baptist Creed of the General Baptists contained within it the Apostles, Nicene, and Athanasian creeds. The Mainstream model however is papacy of the believer. Ever believer himself is a pope. Hey Roman Catholicism has one pope...Southern Baptists would have over 15 million popes following the "mainstream" model.
Once again Priesthood of the believer does not mean Papacy of the believer. Take these statements to their logical course and there is no need for any Church authority in teaching the Word. Every one can believe what they want under the "mainstream" model. Note what early Baptists believed,
1610 General Baptist Confession
The doctrine which by the foresaid ministers must be proposed to the people, is even the same which Christ brought out of heaven, which he, by word and work, that is, by doctrine and life, bath taught, which was preached by the apostles of Christ, by the commandment of Christ and the Spirit, which we find written (so much as is needful for us to salvation) in the Scripture of the New Testament, whereto we apply whatsoever we find in the canonical book of the Old Testament, which hath affinity and verity, which by doctrine of Christ and his apostles, and consent and agreement, with the government of his Spiritual Kingdom.
1644 London Confession
That being thus joined, every Church has(1) power given them from Christ for their better well-being, to choose to themselves fitting persons into the office of(2) Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, being qualified according to the Word, as those which Christ has appointed in His Testament, for the feeding, governing, serving, and building up of His Church, and that none other have to power to impose them, either these or any other.
1) Acts 1:2; 6:3; 15:22, 25; 1 Cor. 16:3
2) Rom. 12:7, 8; 16:1; 1 Cor. 12:8, 28; 1 Tim. 3 chapt.; Heb. 13:7; 1 Peter 5:1-3
1656 Somerset Confession
THAT the authority of Christ in an orderly ministry in his church, is to be submitted unto (Heb. 13: 17; 2 Thes. 3: 14.)
1660 Baptist Standard Confession
That the true Church of Christ, ought after the first and second admonition, to reject all Hereticks, Tit. 3. 10, 11. and in the name of the Lord to withdraw from all such, as profess the way of the Lord, but walks disorderly in their conversations, 2 Thes. 3. 6. or any wayes causes divisions or offences, contrary to the Doctrine (of Christ) which they have learned, Rom. 16. 17.
These Historic confessions make it clear that Pastors and Teachers are given authority by the Church to teach the truth's of God word. Those who reject the Church authority and that doctrine can lead to excommunincation. It is the "Mainstream" Baptists who are truly out of the mainstream of Baptist history.
But Kiffin, doesn't this turn the pastor/minister into a 'Pope'? If you are not careful you just ditch one form of Papacy for another. This site has another slant on the last quarter century in the SBC:-
Baptist Observer - the relevant portion is as follows:-
"The Southern Baptist Controversy
Finally, the 1980s to the present have witnessed a new fundamentalist controversy (also often referred to as a "political" and "biblical" controversy) within the largest Baptist denomination which has altered the course of Southern Baptist history. The minority fundamentalists, now firmly in charge of the national Southern Baptist Convention, have changed the direction and nature of the Convention, resulting in the first statistical decline of the denomination in some 75 years. They have sought to re-fashion Baptist history to validate their theology and their insurgency, and as a result have caused much confusion about Baptist history among Baptist laity.
Whereas Baptists have historically been non-creedal, the fundamentalist leadership of the SBC is forcing creedalism upon Southern Baptists through the forced implementation of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. Whereas Southern Baptists have traditionally believed in the Priesthood of all Believers, the fundamentalist leadership positions pastoral authority above the Priesthood of Believers. Whereas Baptists have historically held to the authority of Scripture and looked to Jesus and the Holy Spirit as the criterion for interpreting the Bible, the fundamentalist leadership claims that looking to Jesus and the Holy Spirit as the authority for faith is a liberal position. Instead, they have positioned the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 as the only valid way in which to approach Scripture.
As such, the fundamentalist leadership of the SBC is bent upon refashioning Southern Baptist doctrine and polity into the historical Roman Catholic model of creedalism and religious hierarchy. This agenda continues to cause much division among Baptists, including splits on the state level of Baptist life. Currently, Texas, Virginia and Missouri each have two competing Baptist conventions, with one convention in each state pledging loyalty to the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, and the other convention in each state contending that the Bible supercedes any human creeds.
For more information on current events in this ongoing struggle, visit BaptistLife.Com, The Baptist Standard or Baptists Today.
A chronology of this history-in-the-making can be found by clicking here."
Now, whilst I do not agree with all it says (for example they are wrong in saying we're not a creedal people -most Baptists I know accept the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creeds and the Chalcedonian Definition, plus we have the two London Confessions of the 17th century etc), i do agree that the developments in the SBC represent a departure from the traditional Baptist position, and I don't think this can be dismissed as mere "Mainstream propaganda". Concepts such as fundamentalism and the dispensationalism espoused by some would have been alien to our forebears.
IMO there needs to be a system of checks and balances (like a constitution) in a church between the individual and his or her reading of the Scriptures (too much that way and you get either anarchy or heresies creeping in) and the church (as manifested not just by the pastor but also by the elders and deacons and church meeting; too much that way and you get authoritarianism). I've seen both extremes in my sojourn in the charismatic movement - kooky doctrines such as Christian Zionism and Prosperity theology espoused by individuals seekiing to sway others to their agendas on the one hand and OTOH heavy shepherding wielded as spiritual abuse by church leaders. Baptists should shy away from both extremes.
Yours in Christ
Yours in Christ
Mainstream? Doubt it very much. 40 million baptists in the world and WAY MORE than 1/2 would be conservative/fundamental. It is the whiney liberal minority that want to paint their leftist views as mainstream.
Feel ashamed that people would attack the resurgence of fundamentalism within the SBC (it's about time) and parallel it to the pope?
Have you no shame?
In fact, I never met a "liberal" Baptist until I joined this Board. I was raised a Baptist PK & in 50 something years have gotten to know thousands - who all believe like I do - God, country, (traditional) family, and apple pie.
Is it not imperative to define one's faith, to be able to declare, "This we believe", and "This is Why We Believe This"?
I see nothing much contrary to the basic tenents of the Christian faith, in quickly perusing the "Baptist Faith and Message", but can understand where liberalism might squeel. It would appear that the SBC is seeking to preserve their faith from the inroads of apostasy.
A servant of Christ,
I applaud their clarity as the new version is contrasted with the version of 1925:
VI. The Church
A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its scriptural officers are pastors and deacons. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.
The New Testament speaks also of the church as the body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.
Matthew 16:15-19; 18:15-20; Acts 2:41-42,47; 5:11-14; 6:3-6; 13:1-3; 14:23,27; 15:1-30; 16:5; 20:28; Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16; 5:4-5; 7:17; 9:13-14; 12; Ephesians 1:22-23; 2:19-22; 3:8-11,21; 5:22-32; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:18; 1 Timothy 2:9-14; 3:1-15; 4:14; Hebrews 11:39-40; 1 Peter 5:1-4; Revelation 2-3; 21:2-3.
Historic version: adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention 1925
[ Contents | Previous Section | Next Section || Guestbook | Versions ]
XII. The Gospel Church
A church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ, governed by his laws, and exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by his word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Its Scriptural officers are bishops, or elders, and deacons.
Matt. 16:18; Matt. 18:15-18; Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:2; Acts 2:41-42; 5:13-14; 2 Cor. 9:13; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 4:14; Acts 14:23; Acts 6:3,5-6; Heb. 13:17; 1 Cor. 9:6,14.
It certainly has no comparison to the apostasy of ROME as bobfrgsn has tried to claim.
A servant of Christ,
My experince tells that the majority of Baptists are moderately conservative, "somewhat right of center". The problems is, to a more die hard conserative, that person is a liberal.
I think a lot of people define liberal as "not as conservative as me".
Most would be mainstream, just look at the last election, a huge "baptist influenced" state like florida was 50/50, sounds pretty "mainstream" to me. The shell games that fundamentalist play to create a majority are almost as funny as the hide and seek games liberals play with their theology.
Dr. Bob, I have the greatest respect for your opinions, after reading many of your messages on this forum. Will all due respect, however, I find myself in disagreement with you on this issue if I am understanding you correctly.
In another thread on this board, I stated that I was becoming very uneasy with the direction of the SBC as of the past few years. Instead of the historical position of the local congregation holding authority in matters of faith, it appears that the SBC is trending towards a "top-down" theological stance, with the convention itself being endowed with authority over the local body of believers. This is wrong! Baptists have never considered themselves to be under authority to anyone but God himself.
The local congregations have acted in cooperation with one another to do specific things - such as missions. That is why there is a Southern Baptist Convention. But I do not believe that it was ever intended for the denominational convention to exercise authority over the local body of believers - and I am sincerely afraid that we are moving in that direction. For literally decades, Southern Baptist ministers have preached on the evils of the Roman Catholic oligarchy, but now it seems that the SBC itself is considering this denominational form for its own use. I find this not just ironic but also appalling.
I myself am considered "conservative" by most of my Christian friends. And I definitely do not agree 100% with the Mainstream Baptists. But I find myself more in agreement with them over time than I do with the current stance and apparent plans of the SBC, if things continue in the current fashion. This is a very unhappy state of affairs for one who has always been Southern Baptist, and comes from a long line of Southern Baptists.
I live in this state and love it but I would not say that baptist have a huge influence in Florida. Most of our people come from the Northeast, midwest or outside of the U.S. and most are not Baptist. I would say most are RC's, back when I was in school in the 50's your statement would be right. Now don't get me wrong their are alot of baptist maybe 30% of the folks down here who say they are christians. Our Baptist are from the far left to the far right. I'm to the far right, but such is life!
You understand me, Ruth, but think you're missing something about the SBC! They have finally realized that to have a meaningful and coopreative fellowship, they must be "fellows" in the same "ship"!
What the SBC is saying is "XYZ is our basis for theological unity and work". Your local church is 100% autonomous and independent and may agree or not with that position. If you AGREE, you may be affiliated with us for unity and work. If you DISAGREE, you may still be "good ol babdist brethren", but not in OUR fellowship.
IT'S ABOUT TIME! I am proud as punch that the SBC has taken this strong step in weeding out those with whom there is little/no agreement on faith and practice. If you want to be called SBC, then you have to believe the same basic tenets.
We have liberal CBF/SBC posters on here and I find myself irritated that they even call themselves "baptist" and sully the sweet heritage of our faith. Yet the "baptist" umbrella is broad; all the SBC are doing is saying that they, as a fellowship of churches, will not participate in that broad range, but will narrow it down by doctrinal stance.
Illustration: You cannot be a member of my home church without being immersed as a believer. That is a strong, harsh, unbending rule. Many want exception/exemption but it will not happen. Why? WE HAVE THE RIGHT to set the rules for whom we fellowship with. Does that make the people we will not allow in "bad"? Does it change their status in Christ? Of course not.
So the SBC. They want to jetison the doctrinal charlatans . . and I applaud them!
I think it is very, very important to believe what God says in the Bible.
It is just as vitally important to believe God.
Unfortunately, to some people, there is a difference between believing God and believing the Bible, because they violate the 2nd commandment by worshipping the Bible instead of Him.
I work in a store that sells bras. We specialize in three kinds. Catholic bras, Salvation Army bras, and Baptist Bras.
Catholic bras are for the masses.
Salvation Army bras are for the fallen.
Baptist bras make mountains out of mole hills.
I am an independent, fundamental, Baptist and I believe the Bible with every fiber of my being. I am not only betting my life on it I am betting my eternal soul on it. There are many just like me (and some even better).