The SBC: S-lowly B-ecoming C-atholic?

The facts are you cannot paint the entire SBC with either the heretical spiritual disciplines or the charismatic movement. These movements are small and most SBC folks have no idea about them in the least. The average SBC member in the average SBC church couldn't care less what Beth more and Dallas Willard are doing any more than they care what charasmatic nutcases are doing.

 

If this were limited to a few isolated cases, I would say you're right, but the growing acceptance that I've observed is significant enough to begin defining the convention.

 

There are some who say that, but I must conclude that you don't know many Pentecostals or Charismatics.

 

Here it is again. In general, pentecostals do not believe you have to speak in tongues to be saved. The large pentecostal denominations (i.e. Assemblies of God, Pentecostal Church of God, Foursquare, etc.) do not believe you have to speak in tougues to be saved.

The only pentecostal denomination of any size that believes you have to speak in tongues to be saved, is the Oneness Pentecostal denomination. Both the SBC and the other pentecostal denominations consider the Oneness Pentecostal Denomination to be a cult. Unfortunatly, the Oneness Pentecostal denomination people are very vocal about this and some Christians just broadbrush their beliefs to include all pentecostals.

 

Please provide the numbers of those who support and do not support your claim?

 

There are over 40,000 Sbc churches. I am actively involved in our state convention and do not see any kind of move towards catholicism.

Spiritual disciplines may be a cover word for some, but I am not going to give up a good concept just because someone else changes the way they are using it. Prayer, fasting, meditation are ALL biblical concepts and commands.

 

And the context of that word is important. And in this case the context is not so good.

 

Brother, they may say you don't have to speak in tongues to be saved but in my experience with Pentecostals (Assembly of God, Church of God, etc.) they consider you suspect if you haven't spoken in tongues. You are an incomplete Christian at best. I do know that you cannot join a Church of God church unless you have spoken in tongues.

 

Hmmm, my only firsthand experience is with my local foursquare church, which recognizes speaking in tongues, but it certainly isn't a requisite for membership or as a sign of faith for them. Foursquare churches, like Baptist churches, vary greatly from congregation to congregation, so this might not be everyone's experience.

 

Tom, the SBC is on the slippery slope of creedalism ... requiring, in essence, a signed pledge by seminary professors to be hired or to be retained that they agree totally with the Baptist Faith and Message. Also same for missionaries.

The defunding of anyone who does not agree with the with the BFandM and/or allow control of the spending of all funds by a group or institution by the SBC. The SBC defunded the seminary in Prague primarily over the fact that the seminary would not allow the SBC to have blanket approval of all funds spent by the institution. They wanted a man placed from the SBC on the staff to whose job was to be to approve or deny all expenditures.

The same is basically true with their defunding the Baptist World Alliance and the European Baptist Federation. Publically the SBC claimed it was because these institutions were liberal. However, Europeans say it was primarily over the control of money.

The SBC, Nashville ... the hierarchy ... is not really Baptist except in name only. Now it is about money and power with these men. Naturally the cover this with a smoke screen of catch phrases ... all good politicians do this.

I totally agree with you on disciplines.

 

That's hardly "creedalism", it's simply denominationalism. The SBC adheres to the BFM, and it's not unreasonable to require organizations wishing to be SBC to likewise adhere to the BFM. In short, it's not unscriptural to belong to a denomination.

 

No, that was anathema to Baptists for centuries. To make a man made document such that missionaries and professors have to sign it ... I bet some churches do the same with potential pastors, but I am not sure of this, makes that document a creed.

I agree it is not unscriptural to belong to a denomination. That is not the point. The point is that for centuries Baptists adamantly refused either to sign a statement of faith or to require them to be signed. In fact, some were put to death for refusing to do so.

 

I disagree totally about this. If Bible believing churches are going to send their money, they have a right to know that those who don't believe in the BF&M or accept it with endless caveats are not getting that money. I have voted to accept the defunding of those organizations that are Bible believers in name only.

 

Seems this applies to some people who are SBC and not the whole SBC, not endorsed or offically taught in SBC, makes the op title misleading.

 

What they were put to death for was not because they would not sign any creed, but because they would not sign a creed that went against Scripture.

 

Cna I quote you the next time someone makes a big deal about the Manhattan Declaration? That, imo, is probably a better example of creedalism.

True, but "we've always done it that way" isn't necessarily a consistent argument. If the question is "why have we always done it that way", then you have a point. But in regards to beliefs, whenever I hear a church say "we believe in the Bible", I find that to be incredibly broad, and often noncommital. If, OTOH, they say "we adhere to the Baptist Faith and Message as our standard of application", now that means something concrete.

 

Amen and amen!

 

It's quite evident right here on the Baptist Board that those who naturally disagree with the BFM 2000 are going to call it creedal. It's a tired old worn out argument. You have the CBF why stay there and quit crying over spilled milk.

 

sag38 makes a valid point.

 

Misleading, and all the other pernicous accusations are un-called for and immature.

This is the impression the SBC is giving me. And it was sad for me to see. I would be overjoyed to learn that my initial impressions are wrong.