An interesting colloquy on the SBC

Of all people, Mohler ought to know enough that the SBC is not a denomination but a convention. There is a difference.

 

It it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

 

A lot of big words in that article. Difficult reading for a huckleberry like me...

 

The article, "Many of the members . . . don't even know they are Southern Baptist, since they have only a vague awareness of what a denomination is."

Thats the spooky part---its sorta like driving a Cadillac not knowing what you're driving!---"Do you know what kind of car you're driving?" "I have no idea!" See?

To sustain the SBC---SBC history and linage has to continually be "brought forward" with the rest of the Convention's progress---its history has to be kept alive and brought forward with it day by day by day!

 

All the history Blackbird or just the parts we happen to agree with?

 

All of it---I'm not ashamed of it! You??

Save that part where the denomination began over the issue of slavery---folks need to know that, too! and they also need to know that it wasn't that long ago that the SBC issued a decree asking forgiveness for that atrocity! Asking forgiveness is the easy part! Giving forgiveness is the hard part! Asking forgiveness has been done----giving forgivness is ongoing!

But, no! I'm not ashamed of the SBC's history!

Brother David

 

Do you support the SBC's history hiding behind the cloak of scripture, justifying their stealing of human lives for their own greed and advantage?

I believe it was 1965 that W.A. Criswell spoke out against the pracice of separation at First Dallas.

In 1995 a friend of mine from seminary was the youth pastor at a local SBC church and let a youth to Christ during the week. He invited the youth to church and the deacons told the youth he was not welcome all because his skin was not the right color.

 

We must teach our history so that we do not repeat the mistakes, but our focus should be on how to reach the world for Christ.

gb93433, as a deacon in a progressive, conservative SBC church (as you know from our private conversations) I urge you to knock that chip off your shoulder and understand that the horrific, inexcusable actions of total morons who call themselves Southern Baptists, are not the norm. In an appropriately managed Southern Baptist Church, deacons serve, not rule, and they follow scripture, not ridiculous human stereotypes and biases. I am outraged at the story you cited, but that is not the norm in the SBC, and unfortunately these types of stories will be found in any group comprised of millions of imperfect people.

 

Dispensationalism infiltrating Baptist institutions should garner the same outrage as racial prejudice within church leadership????? Give me a break!

I do agree with your point regarding dispensationalism, but I see nothing wrong in affiliating with non-SBC individuals and entities if they hold to our same views of the essentials of the faith. But if they espouse doctrinal views contrary to our core doctrines, that is wrong.

The purpose of my post was simply to ask you to keep to the point and stop flamethrowing. You do not like the SBC. We got the point. Some of us stayed to try to change it, and it is changing.

Sorry moderators, and everyone else involved, I am done...

 

Technically SBC is a great all around church I have many friends in many differant SBC churches and they are all very happy and love there churches. IFB KJVO churches are the ones in the south who really show racial discrimination. I know some that would ask a person of color to leave.

 

If it walks like a duck...

As an SBC member myself, we can call it a convention all we want, but it's a Baptist denomination, no matter how you slice it. These arguements are the same ones that many Calvareans use when they falsely assert that Calvary Chapel is not a denomination. It is indeed a denomination.

 

It is more normal then you think!

 

There is a vast difference between regional prevalence and normalcy. In other words, there may be regions in which such behavior is considered acceptable, and in those areas there may exist churches that follow that same nonbiblical viewpoint, but when you look at mainstream SBC churches run in a biblical manner, such behavior is considered inexcusable and people with those prejudices would never even be considered for any position of leadership. Again, this is coming from a deacon who has served in various lay-ministry positions under the current (until tomorrow) president of the SBC for 15 years.

 

Liberal revisionism is slowly but surely being purged from SBC Churches. Those that are liberal are fleeing to the arms of the COOPERATIVE BAPTIST FELLOWSHIP(CBF). There are very few corners in the CBF house.

Excuse my ignorance in the matter...but what is SBC orthodoxy? Covenantalism? Historical Pre-millenialism? The Blessed Hope?
Dispensationalism is not necessarily a bad thing is it? Doesn't the influence/infiltration of DTSers on the SBC churches probably have a good impact? I know that most dispensationalists take a 'high' view of Scripture. Most of them choose the path of the BIBLE Church. But more & more are going the SBC way. Dispensationalists are not necessarily cookie-cutter produced from the seminary on Swiss Ave. in Dallas. I had thought that most(if not all) graduates from DTS would hold to the STEWARDSHIP belief of GRACE GIVING(cheerful, proportionate, as purposeth in your heart). I was quite surprised the other day to find a DTSer that subscribes to the STEWARDSHIP concept(Abram tithed to Melchizedek before the LAW was given to the Hebrews), never explicitly done away by Christ Jesus) ) of tithing.

Dockery mentions 'confessional boundaries'. I think I agree with that? Jesus is the only way to salvation? Right? Born of a Virgin. Head of the Church. No POPE necessary. Christ Jesus is our High Priest. Water baptism & Lord's Supper are the ordinances. We don't belive in the seven sacraments. The ordinances are not sacraments. Holy Spirit lives in the heart of each believer. There are Christians that God saves 'even' outside of the SBC und the Baptists.
Confessional boundaries....I think there are about a thousand more that I could mention.

I realize of course that there are some 'confessional boundaries' that may be minor. I am a SBCer that realizes that most of my fellow worshipers do not know if they are Armininian or Reformed. They do not know the various forms of church govt.(Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Congregational, & the literally thousands of hybrids) & do not care. Should women become Deacons? Should women wear a head covering? Is grace giving or tithing the Financial Stewardship standard? How many times should services be held on Sunday? Is a Sat. night service Scriptural.
Are the words of O.T. in full effect for the New Covenant Christian? Are altar calls Scriptural? Or is an altar call a 'Baptist' confessional booth? Clerygy / laity divide? Scriptural?

As the third respondee said..lots of big words in there.

 

Concerning the issue of folks of "another skin color" coming in to SBC churches---here's my stand---

I as pastor---leader of church

If the person of "another skin color" is asked to leave my church--by the deacons---I will personally be the second person to leave---there's absolutely no excuse whatsoever for anyone to be asked to leave a church simply because of skin color---absolutely none!!

And on my way out the door--I will make sure of two things

(1) I wipe the dust off my shoes and not look back

(2) I'll make sure to etch the words "Ichabod" in my mind---stateing that "the glory has departed" that particular church when I left!!

Brother David

 

AMEN!!!

 

It is more normal then you think! </font>[/QUOTE]Nonsense!

I suppose you'll provide some proof of that...you are claiming that it is the norm for SBC churches to discriminate based on color of skin, that is a big charge.
Your hatred of the SBC is very evident, I'm sure that doesn't skew your "proof" or "facts" at all.