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 vs. BWA again

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by rsr, Oct 9, 2004.

  1. ballfan

    ballfan New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    0
    How many SBC churches will allow an openly unrepentant homosexual to take communion? I don't know of any. If one does they won't be in the SBC much longer.
     
  2. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ballfan, thank you for making my point before I could get to it.

    What is really disheartening to me Ben is that you originally attempted to say the CBF and the BWA are not "gay-friendly." When I provide you with one clear example that they obviously are, you attempt to push it to the side by alleging that there are probably some homosexuals within Southern Baptist churches. Two things about that:

    1. You provide no examples of any said homosexuals within Southern Baptist churches.

    2. You completely conceded defeat on your original point which was that the CBF and the BWA are not "gay-friendly" when the example of Glendale Baptist Church in Nashville, TN proves that they obviously are.

    I've never understood why some groups (CBF and BWA) and their supporters (much like yourself) don't want to portray those groups for what they really are! I would have MUCH more respect for the BWA and the CBF if they would just admit that they are not willing to deal with some member churches and groups who are in clear violation of the Bible and their own Constitution and Bylaws. That begs the question, "Why are these groups not willing to be completely honest?" My contention is that its all about the Benjamins (that's money to you old folks).
     
  3. Ben W

    Ben W Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    6
    Todd,

    I stand by what I said about the CBF and the BWA. I am a member of the BWA and I am not in anyway condoning of Homosex.

    The CBF took a resolution condmening it also, I have no details in the Glendale Baptist Church and how they are affiliated to the CBF and what action if any has been taken. As far as dealing with this church, how are you so sure that they are not in the process of doing that? How long has it traditionally taken the SBC to excommunicate a church for having homosexual members in ministry?

    My point about Homosexuals and communion is heading towards the fact that the same issues faced by the CBF have been faced by the SBC in the past.

    What I would like you to realise is that the "BWA" is all the people in the various Baptist Denominations that are members of the BWA, we are certainley in no way liberal or condoning of homosexuality.
     
  4. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ben, if things are like you say they are with the BWA, then why do they have some American Baptist associations in the Pacific northwest that condone homosexual behavior? Why have they not sought to disfellowship these groups if they have taken such a "hard stand" against homosexuality?

    You may think that these allegations of condoning homosexuality are without merit, so I will give you the proof. One such American Baptist Association is the Evergreen Baptist Association - a group of 31 churches that joined the ABC last year. Based in Washington State, the association has two churches that condone homosexuality and support same-sex marriage. When pressed to release a statement on the matter, a representative from the Evergreen Association said that while two of their churches are "welcoming and affirming, the association remains united with the goal of spreading God's love and peace." The pastor of one of the churches within the Evergreen Association, First Baptist of Seattle, preached a message on "Inclusive Sexuality" on Mother's Day of this year. He said that "being gay is good" and "being bisexual is good." Using 1 Cor. 6:20 as his text, Jones told those present that if "you're a lesbian...you glorify God in your sexuality," and that "if you are a questioning 14-year-old...you glorify God in your emerging sexuality."

    One week later one of the pastors of the Evergreen Association church, a praciticing homosexual, told members that "as a gay man, I say give us the right to marry." Another pastor subsequently told the congregation that the church would work to overturn Washington state's Defense of Marriage Act, which bans same-sex marriage in the state.

    Ben, this doesn't sound like a BWA that stands opposed to homosexuality. If they are opposed (as their resolution says they are), when are they going to disfellowship this assocation from the BWA?

    BTW, you can look at Glendale Baptist Church's relationship to the CBF for yourself. All you have to do is go to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of Tennessee website to find all the proof you need (www.tncbf.org). Once you access the homepage, click on the "About Tennessee CBF" link and then the "churches" link. That will take you directly to a list of member churches. There you will find Glendale Baptist Church. And as for the CBF being in the process of dealing with the church, the lesbian staff member has been on board at Glendale for two years now. Clearly, they've had more than enough to deal with the church but they obviously have no desire to do so.

    I ask that you take off the blinders and see the CBF and BWA for what they genuinely are.
     
  5. Jimmy C

    Jimmy C New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Todd,

    here is exactly what Denton Lotz the executive director had to say regarding the evergreen association issue:

    In his written report to council members, Lotz refuted charges leveled by the SBC committee that recommended withdrawal from BWA.

    "The BWA is not a liberal organization," he wrote. "It strongly affirms the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith as proclaimed in holy Scripture, which we accept as the authoritative Word of God.

    "The BWA does not promote women as pastors of churches nor does it argue against the practice," he added. "Since we affirm the autonomy of Baptist bodies, it is the prerogative of local churches and their member bodies to make decisions on ordination."

    Lotz also countered the SBC's charge of anti-Americanism. "The BWA is not anti-American," he wrote. "We are citizens of the Kingdom of God and loyal citizens of our own nations. ... We believe that Baptists should be good and patriotic citizens of their countries, but patriotism must always be limited to and judged by the Bible's call for ultimate loyalty to Christ who is above all."

    He also addressed a charge concerning a pair of gay-friendly American Baptist churches, a charge raised by former SBC president Paige Patterson during debate about the SBC leaving the BWA. "The BWA does not support homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, believing it to be incompatible with the teachings of Scripture," Lotz wrote.

    Emphasizing that BWA "affirms without reservation that marriage is a holy state and only between a man and a woman forever," he added, "There is not one BWA member body that affirms, promotes or approves of gay marriage."

    Despite the SBC's decision to withdraw from BWA, Lotz said BWA still "hopes for and will work for reconciliation with our Southern Baptist brothers and sisters and prays for their return to the historic and international Baptist world family."


    I dont know how he could be any more clear in his comments or in the rejection of homosexuality by thw BWA. No blinders, just the facts.
     
  6. Daniel David

    Daniel David New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ben, was the decision to be opposed to homos a unanimous decision by the CBF, or did it narrowly defeat the resolution?

    I already know the answer. Do you?
     
  7. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jimmy, you simply make my point. Everything you quoted from Mr. Lotz is nothing more than pseudo-religious rhetoric until the BWA is willing to do something. In the quotes you gave, you quoted Mr. Lotz as saying, "There is not one BWA member body that affirms, promotes or approves of gay marriage." I gave you one clear example of a church that is fully affiliated with a BWA "member body" that is in fact affirming of gay marriage, so this statement by Lotz is nothing more than rhetoric.

    My question is this, now that Lotz and his BWA buddies have been made fully aware of the Evergreen Association, when are they going to take a stand on their resolution and do something about the gay-friendly member body?
     
  8. go2church

    go2church Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Did the SBC have a unanimous decision when it passed the 2000 BF&M? That doesn't nullify the decision does it? Even in the choice to defund the BWA it wasn't a unanimous decision, that doesn't mean anything, there was enough to pass and that is all that is needed, BWA defunded. I don't know the last time the SBC had anything pass on a unanimous vote, do you?

    The fact of the matter is that SBC was going to defund the BWA, no matter what, which is ok that is their right. I just wish they had been honest about their motives. They didn't like the CBF coming in so they left. That is fine, just be honest about it, that is all. There are many groups that rely on the BWA for support and training and thankfully they will continue to minister around the world.
     
  9. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    go2church, you are dodging the issue here. You say the SBC's only motivation for leaving the BWA was their acceptance of the CBF, but the issue is much deeper than that. The reason the SBC opposed the admittance of the CBF is because the CBF has proven itself to be gay-friendly (see my previous posts for the proof). Not only that, but the BWA has welcomed other member groups that are affirming of homosexuals.

    You can relogate the SBC's withdrawl from the BWA to nothing more than a political move, but clearly the SBC wanted to withdraw from the BWA because they are not willing to take any firm stance on the Word of God, nor are they willing to deal with those member groups who are in clear violation of their own Constitution and Bylaws.

    Let's take off the blinders folks.
     
  10. Ben W

    Ben W Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    6
    Todd if we are genuinley serious about taking off the Blinders, what is the SBC going to do about profiting from investing in Carnival Cruise Lines, a company that openly promotes Homosexuality by conducting Gay Cruises?
     
  11. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder how many SBC churches accept heterosexual couples into their membership that are living together outside of marriage?

    I wonder how many SBC churches churches accept heterosexual into their membership who are involved in open fornication?

    I wonder how many SBC churches churches have members involved in open fornication but do not exercise church discipline?

    I am no fan of the CBF (Believe me!) but when we start throwing these accusations it can come back on you.
     
  12. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Kiffin, please continue to dodge the issues at hand and this conversation will get nowhere. This discussion is not about how the SBC deals with members or prospective members who are committing immoral heterosexual acts (and there are plenty I'm sure). This thread is about the proven "gay-friendly" stances of the CBF and BWA. Clearly, immoral heterosexual relationships in our local churches is a problem that crosses all denominational lines. The problems are much more numerous and much more complex because they often involve lies and many he-said/she-said details that take time to unearth.

    The issue of homosexuality is one that is very cut and dry. If the SBC, CBF, BWA, and all other Christian groups are not willing to take a stand on homosexuality, what gives you the slightest impression that we'll ever be able to do anything about the problems of immoral heterosexual relationships in our churches? Ben and Kiffin, your arguments are nothing more than cop-outs and attempts at avoiding admitting that the CBF and BWA are indeed gay-friendly. If you'll make that concession (based on the info I provided in my previous posts), then I would be more than happy to discuss these other important matters that you have raised. But please, let's focus on one issue at a time.

    Kiffin, here are the respective answers to your questions as they apply to my SBC congregation:

    1. This church has not and will not so long as I am Pastor.

    2. This church has not and will not so long as I am Pastor.

    3. This church has none that I am aware of, but if there ever are such folks, then I can assure that they will be confronted in a way that is consistent with the Word of God and the love of Christ.
     
  13. Ben W

    Ben W Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    6
    [QU
    The issue of homosexuality is one that is very cut and dry. If the SBC, CBF, BWA, and all other Christian groups are not willing to take a stand on homosexuality, what gives you the slightest impression that we'll ever be able to do anything about the problems of immoral heterosexual relationships in our churches? Ben and Kiffin, your arguments are nothing more than cop-outs and attempts at avoiding admitting that the CBF and BWA are indeed gay-friendly. If you'll make that concession (based on the info I provided in my previous posts), then I would be more than happy to discuss these other important matters[/QB][/QUOTE]

    The BWA are not in anyway "Gay Friendly". What more evidence do you want in addition to the statement already supplied re that particular resolution?

    The SBC however are certainley in no position however to attempt to remove a spec from their brothers eye, in regard to their own log. Why are they promoting Homosexuality by investing in Carnival Cruise Lines and profiting from Homosexual Cruises?
     
  14. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually it is not always "He Said, She said". I am not referring to hidden activity. If someone is as we say in the South "shacking up" with another person and they are received into the Church as a member OR if they are a member and are in engaged in this activity and no discipline is exercised IN BOTH CASES the Church is condoning it. This open activity is common in SBC churches and ignored so not to offend family members but in a sense it is no differant that the Alliance of Baptists receiving and having openly Gay members.

    As is open fornication in SBC churches being ignored.

    I am not a promoter or apologist for the CBF nor do I seek fellowship with them because of their weak view of Scripture. I also am not willing to take Patterson and Chapman's word on what the BWA believes. I want documentation.

    My Church however is a member of the SBC and your church if it is SBC is ignoring the fact that the SBC has churches that are members of the CBF. Should I withdraw from the SBC because of CBF churches in our mix? The logic would seem if I withdraw from the BWA because of the CBF then I should withdraw from the SBC because of the CBF.

    Could you provide documentation where the BWA officially endorses Homosexuality? I am not saying you are wrong but the arguments I heard from Patterson did not mention this. I am not a member of the BWA nor do I intend to be but I have heard many Asian Baptists all but plead for the SBC not to withdraw. If it was only because of the CBF, then why are not CBF churches expelled from the SBC? This is where I see the contradictions.
     
  15. ballfan

    ballfan New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean in your local church open fornication is just ignored?
     
  16. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most SBC churches do ignore it, including mine since 60-70% of Southern Baptists do not attend church and many of these so called "inactive" members" :rolleyes: engage in every type of sin but since they may have not been in church in 35 years it is ignored.

    You said something earlier,
    What can the SBC do to them? The SBC has no disciplinary power to remove a Church. Local and State associations can. I think the SBC should be a Confessional denomination that requires each church to agree to a common confession but the SBC is primarily united by the Cooperative Progran and not a Doctrinal Confession.

    Getting back to the BWA. The controversy with it did not begin until the CBF was allowed to join BUT a good many CBF churches are SBC churches. If we break with the BWA because of the CBF, why is the CBF tolerated in the SBC? Is not this a double standard? I woulf have been opposed to allowing the CBF join the BWA BUT it happened. Do we break ourself away from Conservative Asian, Russian baptists because of one bad apple or should be have sought some sort of peace?

    If the BWA is promoting a Liberal Gay agenda then I would appreciate documentation and will agree with my brothers who are for separation.
     
  17. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,531
    Likes Received:
    14
    Just read what Josh McDowell writes.
     
  18. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ben, have you not been reading my posts? I plainly demonstrated that the BWA has at least two member bodies (Evergreen Association and CBF) that allow gay-friendly congregations to become part of their associations, fellowships, etc. Let's cover this one more time: RESOLUTIONS ARE ONLY PSEUDO-RELIGIOUS RHETORIC THAT ARE WRITTEN BY FOLKS WHO ARE MORE INTERESTED TALKING ABOUT WHAT THEY BELIEVE RATHER THAN ACTING UPON SAID BELIEF. The proof is in the pudding. You can argue that the BWA and CBF are not "gay-friendly" because they post a resolution in a Constitution & Bylaws or on a website, but such resolutions are meaningless if there is no action to follow. Clearly, the BWA and CBF are not willing to take action against these gay-friendly groups, and thus they must be sympathetic with the causes of those groups.

    I'll hand it to you Ben, you are a master of diversion. Unfortunately, diversion doesn't work in a single court of law and it certainly holds no water in this debate or any debate for that matter. Diversion is always an admission of guilt. Does the SBC have a problem with Carnival Cruise Lines that needs to be addressed? Very well could be. Does that have anything to do with the CBF and BWA? Nothing at all. I can promise you this though - the SBC will do what's right with CCL if they find out there is a problem (just look at what they did with the Disney boycott - did they allow the scoffing of the world to stop them then).

    Kiffin, you are getting local church discipline mixed up with denomination integrity. The SBC can't do church discipline for the local church. What the SBC can do is disfellowship a church that is unwilling to deal with an obvious doctrinal error. Were the SBC to disfellowship every church that doesn't properly practice church discipline, they would probably have about 100 churches left! Rather than trying to eat the entire elephant in one bite, the SBC has chose to eat the elephant one bite at a time (eg. - take a stand against homosexuality and liberalism today, continue to raise the bar on a litany of other issues tomorrow and as long as Jesus tarries in His coming). You are still dodging the issue of "gay-friendly" members groups and churches within the BWA and CBF.

    You are making a blanket statement that doesn't even apply to a great majority of many of our SBC congregations. How can you possibly substantiate this statement? In my local association, I don't know of a single SBC church where "open fornication" is being ignored, though I can tell you of several non-SBC churches in which it is being overlooked. You are painting a narrow picture with a broad brush. My point still remains, if we can't even get things right on homosexual immorality, then how will we ever get things right in regard to heterosexual immorality?

    I have already provided plenty of documentation in previous posts. Have you simply not read them or just chose to ignore them? Can you please refute any of the documentation that I included in my earlier posts with some other viable documentation? If you can't, then this whole "gay-friendly" issue is settled!

    If this is your "logic," then I recommend you take a course in logic very soon. You are guilty of committing one of the most basic logical fallicies: comparing apples and oranges. Plain and simple - the BWA is in full cooperation with the CBF, while the SBC has absolutely no affiliation with the CBF. If you can tell me how those two are the same, I would be more than happy to know how that is. The only thing the SBC can do about the fact that some of its local churches choose to finance the bureacracy of the CBF is to disfellowship those churches. Who knows...the SBC may eventually do that. Personally, I would vote in favor of such a motion because "can two walk together unless they are agreed?" (Amos 3:3) SBC congregations that offer joint missions giving plans (SBC & CBF) are obviously divided houses, and if those churches are not willing to deal with the heresy of the CBF, then I would have no problem with those churches being disfellowshiped.

    My previous posts contain all the documentation you could possibly need. Read them.
     
  19. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,531
    Likes Received:
    14
    I am amazed at how some make such great claims about the SBC and its virtues. I wrote to one of the past presidents of the SBC and he would not even come close to making such great claims. My own personal experience have shown that at least one church I personally had experience with had regularly invited the Mormon bishop for at least 20 years to come and preach at local events sponsored and attended by them. Today their pastor is a former SBC state worker. They love him because he sits and listens to them. I know him and also know that he does not take a stand against them in their ways. When I was there, I told them it would stop. They didn't like me at all. They asked me if I was there to stir up the community. The fact was more came to Christ and were baptized in the 60 year history of the church. Nobody from the SBC would stand with me until I left. Then I had all kinds of offers to come and pastor elsewhere and work with students in the BSU. I told them I was leaving the SBC because of the hypocrisy I saw. I have heard from several pastors since and they see the same hypocrisy. The SBC claims to believe the Bible but when it comes time for them to stand up and say something they are no where to be found. What kind of Bible belief is that?
     
  20. Todd

    Todd New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    GB, again your personal memoirs have nothing to do with the issue at hand - are the BWA and CBF "gay-friendly" organizations that Bible-believing groups should consider partnering with? If you have something of merit to say about that question, I'd love to hear it.
     
Loading...