Good for these gals!
I hope there are some committed evangelicals among the group. I also hope this sends a message the the SBC. In a hundred years, Baptists will be embarrassed and ashamed about this.
I'm not so worried about the fact some people are committed complementarians who have studied the text faithfully and feel that is where they have to be. It's another thing entirely for a body, particularly a Baptist body, to do everything they can do to eradicate it and imply that those who disagree are just clearly wrong and not listening to Scripture. Nothing can be further from the truth.
Good for Baptist Women; SBC Still Not Listening
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by jaigner, Jun 23, 2011.
Page 1 of 7
-
-
Good for the SBC
-
Sorry, friend. I thank you for the respect you offer, but the issues you brought up really aren't even up for debate. -
-
peace to you:praying: -
Most in-depth theological reading will only confirm this. I could recommend some titles for you, if you'd like.
Liberals deny the historicity of the supernatural in Scripture. Those who disagree with most theological conservatives are not necessarily liberal. They just have different convictions about this or similar issues.
I believe in the Bible as the very Word of God and that it is the final authority. I believe Christ was God and human, was free from sin, died and rose. I believe he healed the sick and raised the dead. There is not a theologically liberal bone in my body.
Unfortunately, because of sin and finiteness, we can't come to a complete consensus on any of this. Just check out all the other issues over which committed Christians disagree. This is one of those. -
I'm with the others. This is Biblically wrong. Yes, there are going to be those who rebel against the Scriptures and I will never ever be under their leadership.
-
-
But there were, however, those who said the same thing about slavery 150ish years ago. There were those less than 50 years ago who said the same things about civil rights issues. They were authentic believers, at least most of them, but they, like many, couldn't escape the unfortunate biases of their culture.
And, I'm sure, if I'm still around 50 years from now by God's grace, which I hope I am, I will probably be embarrassed about something in the same way.
I'm pretty sure it won't be this issue, but not so sure that I feel I can question the depth and heartfelt authenticity of other believes, such as you, who disagree.
Whatever the case, thanks again for always being charitable, even in disagreement. -
preachinjesus Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Whether a church recognizes female clergy doesn't mean anything for it's status as "evangelical." Since evangelicals have been around this issue has been in flux.
As for the actual issue of female ministers, the SBC isn't on the wrong side of this. I'm all for ministries that utilizes the gifts and talents of both genders. That said I'm also for a male clergy. You can't make a sensible case from Scripture for the inclusion of women in ordained pastoral ministry. -
preachinjesus Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
You know just because someone disagrees on a point of theology with me doesn't mean they are automatically a "liberal." It's a pretty shallow theology which attempts to do that.
-
Just taking the article in question, you have to think the article is only referring to liberal groups. The one woman pastor mentioned praised the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, not your "evangelical" groups, but a group who rejects the historic understanding of the Bible and embraces other deviant understandings of the Bible.
If this article was an example of a new movement of evangelical women pastors, it radically fails.
The question, however, is not whether they can be evangelical, but whether they can be Biblical in their leadership. They cannot. -
Iconoclast Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
This is apostacy from the truth of God....make no mistake about it. -
SBCPreacher Active MemberSite Supporter
-
And, in this case, you've been sadly misled, and I'm not even talking strictly about whether women should be pastors. You've been misled to think that this issue, either side of it in fact, is apostasy. That's just not the case.
Is it apostasy when women pray with their heads uncovered. Is it apostasy when one believes in the Christus Victor model of atonement instead of "penal substitution?" Is it apostasy when one believes that witnessing is the true central focus of the Church, instead of worship, as others believe?
The answer to all these is a resounding "no!" Oh, for sure, one may be right and one wrong. We'll know that on the renewed earth. For now, we must hold Scripture in high esteem, pray earnestly and rely on God's Spirit to help us with this stuff. We need as much help as we can get. -
Liberalism (theologically) is defined by a redefinition and reinterpretation of scriptures based on new discoveries, or new cultural norms. The classic example is Fosdicks sermon, "Shall the fundamentalists win?" in which he attacks literal interpretation of scripture, and insists on toleration of those who would subject scripture to worldly limitations of morals and knowledge.
That is exactly what allowing woman pastors is... subjecting the Bible to feminism. God gives clear roles for men and women, and He expects us to follow them. -
He commanded that only men should be Pastors of His church. Its His church; He gets to make the rules. -
Oops. Don't Southern Baptists Mohler and Dever serve on the council of The Gospel Coalition alongside members whose churches have female pastors? Are those churches "liberal"?
-
It doesn't work to just "God commanded it," man. Look, I know you're intelligent, more so than most who want to weigh in on this issue. And I respect your Christian commitment. So to weigh in with a "Mohlerian" certainty on this issue isn't being very gracious to those of us who believe basically the same thing about that Bible as you do, but who have different convictions on some points, and some fringe points, at that.
Page 1 of 7