1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

SBC Prof & Landmarkism

Discussion in 'Baptist Colleges & Seminaries' started by Rhetorician, Feb 8, 2006.

  1. Rhetorician

    Rhetorician Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +5
    Faith:
    Baptist
    To all who have an ear to hear:

    There is a new article out about a prof @ The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary who is a Landmark Baptist and his view on the International Missions Board's policy about their appointees.

    It is worth the read. It connects two recently controversial issues on the BB in one; Landmarkism & ministerial higher education.

    I have no questions or comments at this time. I am only wanting to see what my fellow minister colleagues think along these lines.

    Go to:

    http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=6938

    Let me hear what your opinion is please.

    sdg!

    rd
     
  2. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Ratings:
    +0
    Rhet, I am curious where the article states that the prof at SBTS is a "Landmark Baptist." I must have missed that part?
     
  3. Rhetorician

    Rhetorician Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +5
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Pastor SBC,

    I did not mean to mislead. It is more implied than squarely laid out.

    rd
     
  4. Rhetorician

    Rhetorician Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +5
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Pastor SBC,

    I did not mean to mislead. It is more implied than squarely laid out.

    rd
     
  5. Rhetorician

    Rhetorician Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +5
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Pastor SBC,

    Sorry for the double post above.

    Maybe I should have said "Landmark leaning!"

    Sorry for the confusion.

    sdg!

    rd
     
  6. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,355
    Ratings:
    +35
    This isn’t the issue Mr. York. No one disagrees with this. It seems Mr. York has brought his IFB legalism with him when he joined the SBC.

    Here is the Pastor in question and his sermon regarding his position:

    http://www.emmanuelenid.org/sermons/Principles.htm

    Here is his blog:

    http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2006/02/political-conservatives-vs-cooperating.html
     
  7. Rhetorician

    Rhetorician Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +5
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Grasshopper,

    In the "for what it is worth" file; Dr. York is a MABTS grad. MABTS is a thoroughgoing SBC school (whether one thinks it is or not!). I know Dr. York. He is a faithful preacher of our Lord's Gospel. He loves the SBC, missions, evangelism, the Lord's Church, et al.

    I am not sure it is fair to say that, "It seems Mr. York has brought his IFB legalism with him when he joined the SBC."

    Can we not give someone a litte grace even when people may not agree with the way we (I or Me) cross "T"s and dot "I"s?

    sdg!

    rd
     
  8. bapmom

    bapmom New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Ratings:
    +0
    Grasshopper,

    is your contention really that saying that baptism is by immersion only is some sort of legalism? This is a basic Baptistic tenet, one which far more than just IFBs hold to. And when are we going to get over the habit of linking IFB hand-in-hand with legalism?

    It would be just as offensive if I came in here and said "How sad, a good IFB preacher has gone over to the liberal side by joining an SBC organization."

    (calm down, I said "IF"....Im not saying that...)
     
  9. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Ratings:
    +0
    A pastor who had retired (SBC), but had been involved in at least two churches that split (I'm not accusing him, just stating fact.) He started attending our church and has become real active in supporting the regular pastor and also filling in and teaching discipleship training.

    I walked into a room next to where he was teaching one night and he was giving the link on the internet where people could download the GREAT document "Trail of Blood" from a Landmark Church Website.

    I do not know how much formal training he has considering that we are a relatively small church. Our regular pastor does, but a lot of the older pastors from small churches didn't have much, in fact they often frown on it claiming modern liberalism in the Seminary's.

    Thoughts?
     
  10. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree. I see where the article is trying to tie the two together, but the real issue is the clarification rule issued by the IMB on Baptism. I see no place in the article where it is mentioned that the Professor is espousing Landmarkism as a fact or even theory.

    Many Southern Baptists are backing the IMB in their published rules, and many are not, but what does this have to do with Landmarkism. Being a pastor at a Landmark church does not qualify one for preaching it while in the SBC denomination.

    Did I read this wrong?
     
  11. Rhetorician

    Rhetorician Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +5
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Phillip,

    No you did not read it wrongly.

    In my "Adult ADD" state I cast it wrongly.

    I did go back and add a caveat to that effect.

    For that I apologize again.

    I think you are right on topic.

    sdg!

    rd
     
  12. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,355
    Ratings:
    +35
    Sure, too bad he doesn’t want to give it to missionaries on the mission field. There are Missionaries right now that would be required to be re-baptized because of the new “rules”. Despite the fact that their local Church recognizes their baptism as scriptural.

    No. Evidently Mr. York is under the assumption that immersion is the “hang up”. Immersion is not the issue. No one disagrees with his statement that I quoted.

    That is a fair criticism. I just go by personal experience so perhaps I paint too broad of a picture. Here is the portion that led me to my statement:

    Before joining the faculty of Southern Seminary, York served 14 years as associate pastor and pastor of Ashland Avenue Baptist Church in Lexington, Ky., long an Independent Baptist church that re-entered the Southern Baptist fold in 1996.

    The church holds the copyright to a booklet titled The Trail of Blood, written in the 1930s and popular among fundamentalists holding to a view of Baptist origins introduced on the 19th century American frontier called "Landmarkism."

    Here is Wade Burleson’s problem with the new rules. I agree with him as I’m sure many do:

    http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2005/12/old-imb-policies-compared-to-new-imb.html
     
  13. bapmom

    bapmom New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Ratings:
    +0
    Grasshopper,

    thanks for your clarification. I didn't realize that Ashland held the copyright for that booklet, but I know we were taught it at Maranatha BBC....

    Is Landmarkism considered wrong by most people here?
     
  14. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,499
    Ratings:
    +10
    If the man believes there must be a proper authority as in a proper Baptist, then Jesus' and the apostles baptisms are null and void. Baptisms of believers until the second Baptist must be also null and void.

    Being baptized in a Baptist church building is nothing like getting baptized in the ocean in front of many non-believers in the community.

    Baptist understandings of doctrine have changed throughout history but the Bible has not and neither has the genuine biblical view.

    Can you just imagine any of the apostles asking which Baptist church the people were baptized in before they let them become a member. [​IMG]

    I wonder what they would say to me? I was baptized in a non-denominational Bible Church by an IFB pastor.
     
  15. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,355
    Ratings:
    +35
    I'll speak for myself and say YES! My understanding is that if you were baptized in a church that is not a Landmark Church, they do not consider you to be scriptually baptized. Perhaps someone can correct me if I am wrong.
     
  16. bapmom

    bapmom New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ok, so the problem with what we are calling Landmarkism is their extreme views about baptism? I haven't looked into it much at all....but Im going to venture that just using the "Trail of Blood" does not make one an extreme Landmarker.
    In fact, we used it as an integral part of our Baptist History course at Maranatha, and Id never even heard the term Landmark back then. This was over ten years ago, so I don't know what they currently use. We certainly wouldn't claim that someone had to be baptized in a Landmark church in order to be scriptural.

    I do believe what I was taught about the origins of the Baptist church, though.
     
  17. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't know how it is elsewhere, but in my part of Western Kentucky, there are Baptists who hold to Landmark views; there are Baptist Churches who do the same. I know none of them who ever made it a test of fellowship with other churches. Forty years ago, there were few non-Landmark Baptist churches in Western Kentucky. Not so today. But even so, as far as I know, the Landmarkers and the non-Landmarkers exchanged letters. And of course, one who was baptized post-salvation, by immersion, non-sacramental, eternal security-believing churches (Baptist, of course) was considered scripturally baptized, whether it held to Landmark views or not.

    Tom Butler
     
Loading...