The Schism in the Southern Baptist Convention

IN 27 I was responding directly to a post directed at me. And crabby and I have had discussions in other threads that I was referring to in this thread. The other two posts you mentioned are off base.

 

Translations are translations and you cannot make them something they are not.

 

I am not aware of any Bible that ever existed which had an Apochrapha.

 

My Oxford Study Bible includes the Apocrypha.

 

I think he was just being a "spelling cop".

 

Well, the Catholic Vulgate Bible is the best example. Oh, I see you were pointing out the error in spelling. Should be Apocrypha.

 

No, I was actually just replying to the statement about there not being any Bibles with the Apocrypha. Although, I really have to just grit my teeth sometimes at some of the terrible spelling and grammar I see here. ;-)

 

I understand...but I was actually not talking ABOUT you being a spelling cop. I was saying to you that I think gb93433 was being a spelling cop.....nevermind.....it isn't that important.

 

Is this the point where we're supposed to really go off at each other like "Yes, you did accuse me of being a spelling cop and I'm gonna tell the moderator" and "No, I didn't but actually you are a spelling cop..." - lol.

 

I guess. I'll tap out, though. You win.

 

FTR, Dr. J. B. Gambrell served four terms as President of the SBC during the years from 1916 thru 1920, and is the last individual in the SBC to have served more than three one-year terms as President.

Ed

 

"You are now busted for impersonating an officer, namely Language Cop!"

Signed, Language Cop

 

Language Cop says, "I fully agree with this statement. Were I to make all corrections, I would have time for nothing else."

"(Which fact might make some BB members very happy, when I happen to not agree with their sentiments, if I didn't have time to comment.)" :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

FTR, as regards the thread title, I did not notice any sort of great "schism" among the messengers to the SBC, this year, at least. In fact, the Convention seemed to be pretty much of one mind, on most things.

Some differences? Yes certainly, with over 7200 messengers, not all of whom agree on every singular particular.

In general, as to major differences being strong enough to cause any major split?

No. Not at all.

If such actually exist, they are certainly well hidden, IMO. The question of 'inerrancy' was the one I thought that might actually lead to this, but that seems to have been more of an 'academic' reaction, and not that of the "man and woman in the 'pew'" who are the SBC in actuality, and seem to firmly support 'inerrancy' from where I sit, at least.

Also FTR, I can and do fully agree with the gist of "the Chicago Statements", The Fundamentals (although they are now very dated), as well as the BF&M, in all three versions. Note that I did say "the gist", not all particular phrases and wordings. There is nothing that is "majorly unBiblical" in any of them, as far as I can see.

Ed