Demise of the "Big Six?"

To do otherwise would be ridiculously stupid and unbiblical. Where does Jesus say "Yea, and the false teachers should be allowed to run rampant, and subvert the flock; but you will keep your mouth shut and not respond."

That is just crazy!

It is the only way. Good for him. But I am glad now that I see your problem is with people who take God at His word, not Mohler in particular.

I CERTAINLY hope not! If you don't trust God over Atheists, you don't get to teach.

None of this is even remotely true. Certainly women shouldn't be training pastors; nothing Biblical about that! "Mega" has not replaced meaningful, either. Southern is not only well thought of by those inside, thanks to Mohler, it is one of the most respected (if not the most respected) conservative (Bible believing) Seminaries, even amongst Non-Christian Colleges and Universities.

 

goto did you presonally lose a position of power, of prestige, etc., during the conservative resurgence? Were you staff member at an SBC institution but were booted because you couldn't agree with the BFM 2000? Did you have friends you agreed with who wanted to speculate on the Bible rather than teach it who were removed from their position? Did an organization you liked decide to elect its own trustees get dropped by the convention? Did a favorite liberal seminary professor get the boot? Why is it that every time something SBC comes up you are always negative?

 

Ultimately, the issue still remains... there are those who believe the Bible is in error and cannot be trusted. This is not a far distance (if there is any distance at all) to saying the Gospel is in error. To such people, they should never teach at any Christian school and if they do, should be fired immediately. Only those who believe God's Word is not in error should be those teaching in Christian Schools. Christ made it clear, those who do not believe His Word are not His followers.

 

No and they shouldn't. Such was a big part of the conservative resurgence.

 

Again you're entitled to your opinion, I don't share it.

 

Yes, people I know were forced from their places of ministry, I didn't lose a position personally since I never worked for an SBC institution. I don't agree with the content of the BF&M 2000, nor how it was/ is used in SBC circles today. What is negative in your eyes is balance, especially on this board, in mine. In my eyes the SBC leadership is Baptist in name only, not action.

 

Not interpreting literally is not the same as believing the Bible is in error.

 

Atleast they are Christians... people who do not believe the Bible is in error. Baptist or not is a moot point. The point is whether they are Christians.

 

I don't question their Christianity, but they claim to Baptist, so it can't really be a moot point, can it. If you don't want to be Baptist or don't think it's important I am totally fine with that, but do us Baptists in the historic family of Baptists a favor, quit using the name. Again, "not literal" is not the same as "in error".

 

First, I hold to the London Baptist Confession written in 1689 in which Pastors had to adhere to. You say yours is historic, I know having people to adhere is also historic. The Philadelphia Baptists said as much that if you didn't adhere to their version of the London Baptist Confession, you should either remove yourself or be removed. That is Baptist! Maybe not your type of Baptist, but it has precedence.

Secondly, saying the Bible is not perspicuous is saying it is in error, which is basically the liberal's stance. Saying Moses didn't write the Penteteuch is saying the Bible is in error. Saying Genesis 1-11 is a myth is saying the Bible is in error... saying Melchizedeck was the God of Baal is saying the Bible is in error. These are clear examples of people calling the Bible error in the Southern Baptist Convention in prior years. Would I fire such a person who believed any of these things? Yes! Would I still be a Baptist? Yes!

No one even tried to talk about literal or not. The issue is whether they believe it is in error or not. I believe it is clear, they believed it to be in error.

 

Huh?

You must have graduated pre-resurgence. I can't imagine a student after the conservative resurgence arguing as you do. Guess it is possible, but not probable. You do make a good case for why the resurgence was necessary, however.

Pre-resurgence, SBTS did have profs that held a non-literal view of Genesis 1-11. They, in fact, were part of the trigger that let the messengers to the annual SBC convention know that it was time for change.

About women, you are obviously wrong. Reading too much liberal Baptist press? FWIW, there are still many women involved in the seminaries. A discussion about that is fodder for a different thread.

Is the Bible God's Word or is it something from which we can pick and choose? You seem to prefer the latter...

 

And now we see why our seminaries are doomed...

 

Seminary education for women was once a high priority among Southern Baptists.

Mrs. Paige Patterson now has the spanking new "Horner Homemaking House" at SWBTS:
http://www.swbts.edu/homemakinghouse/

And at Southern, ladies can now learn "hospitality" at the feet of Seminary Wives Institute founder/director Mrs. Albert Mohler:
http://www.sbts.edu/women/seminary-wives-institute/

 

You utterly misunderstand the nature of the programs that you are referencing. I'll only speak to the SBTS program because I am VERY familiar with it, my wife being one of the program administrators for over 5 years.

The Seminary Wives Institute founded by Mrs. Mary Mohler is NOT part of the SBTS M.Div (or other graduate program). It is a stand-alone program of education under the auspices of Boyce College, the undergrad program of SBTS and the program is designed SPECIFICALLY for the wives of those studying under the under-grad or graduate programs at Southern who otherwise would not be a part of the seminary experience.

The course of study is real, it is taught by actual seminary professors and/or their wives, Mrs. Mohler, and others (including myself). There is a core curriculum that includes standard items such as evangelism, Baptist history, leadership, teaching skills, biblical interpretation, etc. Each class takes 12 weeks to complete. There is actual course work, quizzes, reading, and testing involved. At the end of a complete program of study, the equivalent of an Associates Degree is awarded to the women during one of the SBTS official graduation exercises.

Note some of the profs in the brochures below:

http://www.sbts.edu/women/files/swi2010-2011.pdf
http://www.sbts.edu/women/files/swicourse-descriptionssp11-term-iii.pdf
http://www.sbts.edu/women/files/swicourse-descriptionssp11-term-iv.pdf

Anyone who is against such course work -- offered for a VERY low cost to the wives of regular students is either a complete idiot or worse...

Such misplaced and misinformed hatred... Wow...

 

Ah yes the proverbial "Hi pot, this is kettle...guess what? you're black!"

 

Clearly you all continue to be impressed with what has happened at the SBC seminaries, fine and dandy. I think they are a big waste of money and time.

You think women are second class citizens in the Kingdom of God and should be kept in their place, I don't.

I understand my (or yours for that matter) salvation is not based on a literal understanding of Genesis 1-11, you think Adam walked with dinosaurs a-la Fred Flintstone.

I am believe the Bible is final authority for all matters of faith and practice and that Jesus is final criteria for interpretation, you think the written word is more important or at least equal to the Living Word.

I don't think one church should tell another church what to believe or how to act, you believe it is an obligation to stick your holier then thou nose into other peoples business

I could go on but why? Your wrong, I'm right (at least that is what we each think). If you want an SBC indoctrination go ahead, full steam ahead.

 

And, the mockery of continues. And, based on your posts I'm glad that you and your friends no longer identify with the SBC.

 

pre-resurgence LOL you mean Pre-Al Mohler dont you :laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

Wonder why I like small independent churches

 

Now if we could just get the SBC to quit calling themselves Baptist, then we would have something!