Are Bapticostal welcome here.

Thanks, Dr. Bob!

 

Is not KJVonlyism a false Biblical doctrine? I don't see any scripture that says I can only have a KJV Bible and no other translation. Dr. Bob, I think you should work at shutting down false doctrines. Yes. . . yes......I do!

 

Now this IS an oxymoron! A doctrine can NOT be both false and Biblical.

As for the KJO sect, it is my personal opinion that this sect has done more harm to the Baptist faith than all the other pseudo-Christian doctrines combined. Most of these other pseudo-Christian doctrines have at lease some Biblical basis, however distorted it may be, but KJOism has NO Biblical basis and is, in fact, based exclusively upon superstition, falsehoods, willful lies and distortions.

Bapticostalism, although not my favorite doctrine, is based on interpretations of Scripture that, while different from mine, are held by many scholars of the Bible to be true. KJOism is not held to be true by even one sane scholar of the Bible and is bringing more reproach upon Baptists than any amount of Pentecostal infusion ever could.

Question: Is a doctrine that is based exclusively upon superstition, falsehoods, willful lies and distortions a Baptist doctrine? Bapticostalism is, as its name implies, a mixture of two streams of Christian theology. KJOism is, as its name implies, exclusively false doctrine.

 

Out of line, FE. I don't see Dr. Bob as "squelching" anyone. Choose your words more carefully, please.

 

I find no problem with people believing that they have been baptized in the Holy Spirit as a distinct work of grace when their personal testimony backs up their theology; but when their personal testimony refutes their theology, I have a very big problem with that.

 

Your characterization of Dr. Bob is highly inaccurate. He is a bit narrow minded and obstinate, but as an administrator he allows those who believe differently to post freely as long as they do so in at least a semi-Christian manner. And when these people treat him with the respect that he deserves, he treats them with respect also . . . well, most of the time . . . he does have at times a dry sense of humor . Dr. Bob is an excellent moderator, and we need to give God thanks for him rather than tear him down.

 

FE, it seems to me that there's plenty of judging on both sides of the argument here. Please, take it from someone who knows, don't reply in the heat of the moment... you might regret what you say when you're wound up. I don't always agree with the good doctor either, but I try not to attack like some are doing here. Just a thought.

In His Grip,
joshua

 

I said what I meant, and I meant what I said.

 

Dear Fat Eagle:

I concur with all that you are more than welcome, and if you do not feel welcome stick around anyway. I do.

I am a Baptist, fifth of the last seven generations on my father's side to be seminary trained and ordained. I am a product of two Baptist colleges and have a degree from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, the oldest of the six seminaries serving the SBC. I am no longer Southern Baptist because in my humble, but very well educated opinion, Southern Baptist stopped being Baptist officially in 2002.

It has been my experience with this particualr discussion board to discover that many who post here define what it means to be Baptist by all the wrong criteria. Many are good at defining Fundamentalism, and confusing it with what it means to be Baptist. Others do the same with their Calvinism. There are various types of Baptists, and you are one of them.

The autonomy of the local church is a distinct Baptist hallmark. If your particualr church is led by the spirit to practice the gifts of the Spirit as they are described in 1 Corinthians, this does not make your church un-baptist. It simply means you are Baptists who are not afraid to exercise those gifts. The same crowd that will tell you on this board that God intends for women to stay in their place and remain subserviant to men will use passages from the very same NT Books that give you permission to speak in tongues.Yet they will tell you that those passages are not in force for the modern church. Their blatant inconsistency is obvious to all, so don't let them intimidate you.

Dave

 

DavidFWhite3 wrote,

“very well educated opinion”

“Southern Baptist stopped being Baptist officially in 2002.”

“There are various types of Baptists, and you are one of them.” (He's a Southern Baptist)

“Their blatant inconsistency is obvious to all, so don't let them intimidate you.”

 

First off, Dave, you give this long history of Southern Baptist life, then you turn around and reject it.

What happened in the year 2002 that had anything to do with SBC leaving Baptist doctrine behind.

I thought you might have meant the conservative ressurgence, but that occurred before 2002, because obviously if you believe that the Holy Spirit is now giving a church the gift of tongues as practiced by the Pentecostals, you yourself sound quite liberal.

I have YET to see anybody speak in a real foreign language, or someone using a foreign language to understand a person speaking in another language as "tongues" were used in Acts.
So, therefore, I conclude that the jibberish of pentecostals, is just that, jibberish. Since healing and true prophecy is not practiced today, you would think they would be the major gifts since Paul indicated that speaking in tongues was self-edifying compared to the other gifts. Only TV evangelists seem to preach that the Holy Spirit will heal people through them.

Where does the New Testament give US permission to speak in tongues. I believe, if I am not mistaken, that Paul was talking to a church in Corinth in the first century? I believe that Paul was correcting that church for false doctrines, including the mis-use of tongues? Am I missing some scripture?

So, do you too believe salvation is not forever? Do you too believe that baptism by the Holy Spirit occurs sometime after salvation as shown "usually" by the speaking of tongues or some other emotional outburst?

Yes, Baptist churches are autonymous; this doesn't mean that they can vote to worship Satan and still call themselves Baptist. Because if they do, they CAN call themselves Baptist, but they are not truly Baptist. Duh!

 

Actually it makes the church Charismatic, which indeed, is un-Baptist. In spite of all your "Baptist" credentials that you have listed, I find it odd that you go to a Community church. Is that also Charismatic?
DHK

 

Charismatic Lutheran Churches are Lutheran Churches
Charismatic Episcopal Churches are Episcopal Churches
Charismatic Roman Catholic Churches are Roman Catholic Churches
Charismatic Baptist Churches are Baptist Churches . . . whether you like it or not.

A Ford is a Ford regardless of the driver!

In my personal opinion, fanatical charismatic churches are a real drag . . . but fanatical anti-charismatic churches are even worse of a drag. And I would rather see a bit of charismatic fanaticism in a Baptist church than a Baptist church pastored by a man who is not able to discern the work of the Holy Spirit when it is right in front of his face.

 

Very many Baptist Churches have found it desirable, if not necessary, to drop the adjective "Baptist" from their name because of the reproach brought upon them by extremist fundamentalist "churches" that use that adjective to describe their own private circus of KJOism and other isms.

 

Making faces is something we used to do in kindergarten and elementary school. How old are you Craigbythesea?