A Southern Baptist Chaplain Ministering Christ

The better question is why is he talking like the SBC is his enemy.

 

Why can't you answer the question?

 

My answer to your question is that is your distorted perception.

 

Then why such the harshness towards him? Do you realize you probably have more in common with him on essentials, and you talk about him like this?!

 

Inerrancy is inerrancy.


I

He said it just in the last couple of posts.

Really. What reason do you think he resigned?

I certainly don't have a problem with them. You dont really seem to have a coherent argument for his resignation.

His post here:

http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2007/01/sheri-klouda-gender-discrimination_17.html

He presents the situation as if Klouda was all of the sudden thrown out on the street in 2006. But the truth is she was offered another postion with the same compensation. She is the one who chose to resign.

Here is the specific quote:

"Through a series of broken promises that eventually led to Patterson quietly not assigning her teaching responsibilities for the fall of 2006 because of her gender, and then seeking to terminate her contract and benefits in December by 2006 (the middle of an academic cycle, and the worst possible time for an academician to find a job), this popular Hebrew professor found herself being phased out."


Also Burleson stated that Klouda was promised tenure. But this is false. According to Dr. Pattersons deposition he never promised her future employment.

Yea I wonder who defines what is is? Just how have I and Dr. Patterson defined conservatism?

 

Like this? I am not sure what that is other than I certainly disagree with him and clearly he has been wrong. I do not find the use of the word liberal harsh. He is what he is. I will say also that there appears to be an attempt to redefine what a conservative is since the libs in the convention cannot seem to make any inroads to revert the convention back to its former and shameful time where they controlled everything.

He uses double speak in his posts quite regularly. He intentionally and knowingly misrepresnted the Klouda situation which makes it likely he did the same with regards to the trustee meetings. He went to the secular press over the Klouda issue. It isn't just one liberal position with him. It is quite a few. Holding to essential issues is not enough to be conservative. There are many issues that are quite important (though they may be non essential) .

 

Gee, that clears up the issue.

Are both of these scriptures inerrant?

2Ch 9:25 And there are to Solomon four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen, and he placed them in cities of the chariot, and with the king in Jerusalem.

1Ki 4:26 And Solomon hath forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.

This from Burleson’s Church page:


The Bible is uniquely, verbally and fully inspired by the Holy Spirit, and it was written without error (inerrant) in the original manuscripts.

But continue your false accusations if you must.

Here is some of what he said:

This statement is clear. Whether or not one agrees with the premise, it should be granted that the 2000 BFM prohibits women from serving in the office of pastor ; which is defined in Article VI as an office within a church. There is no prohibition regarding women serving as Hebrew professors at our seminaries; there is no prohibition regarding women serving as Vice-Presidents or even Presidents of our Southern Baptist agencies; there is no prohibition regarding women serving as Strategy Cordinators with the International Mission Board; there is no prohibition regarding women teaching men; and as and there is no prohibition regarding women serving as chaplains. The only confessional prohibition is that women cannot serve in the 'office of pastor.'

My goal is neither to revise or amend the 2000 BFM; I desire to show Southern Baptists how the phrase 'office of pastor' has now been taken by hard-line complementarians in the Southern Baptist Convention and used as the basis for the removal of women from performing any Christian function or ministry that involves men.

Besides Josephine Skaggs, Southern Baptists have had women like Lottie Moon and Bertha Smith, women whom leaders of the Conservative Resurgence claim as some of their heroes. These women constantly ministered among men, taught men in seminary classes, preached behind the pulpits of some of our greatest Southern Baptist Churches, and led thousands of people to faith in Christ. These women, were they alive today, would be faced with the horrible possibility of not even being recognized as true, gifted and powerful servants of God.

Well, if you read his blogs as you say you do, you would have seen why:

"Again, my statement of apology was deemed unacceptable by the Executive Committee of the IMB. The board seemed to accept the Executive Committee's recommendation that my apology was unacceptable because no board member made a motion to reverse the Executive Committee's decision not to accept my statement.

It became crystal clear to me tonight that it would be impossible for me to continue as a trustee of the International Mission Board. The appropriate forum for my continued service to the Southern Baptist Convention is now outside the IMB Board of Trustees. I deem it better to be censured by man than to be condemned by conscience. It is my decision to resign, effective immediately, from service as a trustee of the International Mission Board. I will continue to work to effect change within the Southern Baptist Convention and will post later this week my plans for the immediate future."

Obviously. So, let’s make policy behind closed doors and bind all Southern Baptists with it without as much as open discussion or a vote. Right up Paige’s alley. Hile Paige! Hile Paige!

I just gave it to you.

At that closed door meeting in September 2003, Paige gave personal assurances to faculty that their jobs were safe, regardless of gender. Sheri acknowledges her concern at the time, but after the faculty meeting, and the personal assurance by Dr. Patterson that her job was secure, she relaxed and continued in her commitment to invest her life and service in the school she loved.

A little over a year after Sheri received the personal assurance that her job was secure, she was called to attend a meeting in June, 2004, where she was informed that she would not be granted tenure because 'she was a woman.' Ironically, Dorothy Patterson was serving as Professor of Theology in Women's Studies, but unlike Sheri, Dorothy 'only taught women’. Though it was often said by Paige and Dorothy that Dorothy worked ‘officially’ under the auspices of the School of Education at Southwestern, she was listed on the school’s web site as teaching in the School of Theology. As of January 2007, Dorothy Patterson’s name continues to be listed on Southwestern’s official web site as teaching in the School of Theology.

You define it by what is "not a conservative position". You indicate Criswell was a conservative yet say women who teach men is not a “conservative” position. Therefore if you believe women can teach men in Sunday school, or Hebrew in seminary, you are a liberal. So I ask for the third time, was WA Criswell a Liberal?

Shall I repeat your mantra:

Because of the offense of the opprobrious epithet "liberal," today they call themselves "moderates. But a A skunk by any other name still stinks! Dr. W. A. Criswell

 

Sounds like you're concerned about things that aren't worth it. Who cares how he defines conservative or liberal?

Stop living in the past when people had to be defined by one of those two words, according to one side's definitions of them.

 

So Jesus was a liberal when he picked grain on the sabbath?

 

I suggest you be careful how you talk about your King!!!

 

Oh the things that we say about our fellow Christians over a non-personal space. This is one of the exact issues so many of my unchurched friends take point with when we discuss their disbelief.

Why do we think this kind of tearing down, a completely baseless accusatory nature, does justice for Christ? Who do we think we are to question a man of God?

Such horrible labels with no base at all.

 

I was being sarcastic.

Remember who thought they prefect religion and criticized Jesus for picking grain on the sabbath. Isn't that like some who claim to have perfect theology today? It kind of reminds me of what Henry Blackay said in a sermon a few years ago. He said that one can have conservative theology and live like a practical atheist.

 

Could you give some documentation in support of your viewpoint.

You do know that Henry Blackaby said about some who have conservative theology. He said in a sermon a few years ago that people may have conservative theology but live like practical atheists.