http://www.abpnews.com/abpnews/story.cfm?newsId=3349
Any Virginia Southern Baptists care to comment?
Virginia Baptists
Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by rsr, Nov 15, 2002.
-
-
Clint Kritzer Active MemberSite Supporter
It's a sad state of affairs. I was unable to attend the Virginia Beach conference but was at the preliminary meeting in Charlottesville last May.
http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000216
My offerings will be specifically designated from here on out unless I can talk my church into not supporting the BGAV. Somehow, people got this notion that evangelism is a numbers game and that we need to spread the word no matter what the costs. Somehow in all the hub-bub we forgot the message of 1Timothy 4:16. -
According to the article, "But the "World Missions 2" track, the one favored by a majority of BGAV churches, was modified to include new funds for Kingdom Advance initiatives. That leaves 12.5 percent less in that particular track that will go to the SBC International and North American Mission boards and the Annuity Board next year.
That change drew criticism in a breakout discussion from a messenger who said such reduction of funds to the SBC was driving churches to seek affiliation with the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia, a group formed in 1996 that is solely aligned with the SBC."
My advice to all Southern Baptists in Virginia, who want to be sure that their missions offerings go to SBC missions work, would be to either designate their offering specifically to the SBC/IMB or call on your church to affiliate solely with the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia. Let the BGAV line up with the liberal CBF and die (sorry if that sounds harsh).
[ November 17, 2002, 02:53 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ] -
Clint, is your concern that funds will go to nonBaptist organizations, rather than through the SBC and CBF? And that will lead to dilution of the Baptist message?
-
Baptist Believer Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
SBC advocates are fond of saying that is a group is not going to play along with the latest whims of the SBC leadership that they are going to join the CBF. :rolleyes: They've been saying this nonsense for years about the Baptist General Convention of Texas. Many Texas Baptists don't feel comfortable with the SBC or the CBF, so we are choosing our partnerships carefully. It is also my understanding that a Baptists of the Americas association is in the works that Texas Baptists, Virginia Baptists and other alienated conventions and churches can join to cooperatively carry out the Great Commission.
If nothing else, the BGCT is proof that a state convention can follow Christ apart from the control of the SBC without "joining the CBF". -
Yes, but that's pretty foreign to the folks who either 1) were ousted from a fairly strong denominational structure they had helped to build or 2) hoped to inherit a strong denominational structure when they gained the upper hand.
My opinion, voiced before, is that denominationalism is on the wane inside and outside the SBC and CBF, which is one reason the CBF will never become a full-fledged denomination. From what I've heard, young ministers coming out of the seminaries are less and less interested in the denomination as such, but in who can provide the resources they think their churches need, hence the reliance on partnerships.
Which helps explain why attendance at the SBC annual convention is so poor.
[ November 16, 2002, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: rsr ] -
RSR, you're right on the money. We had Episcopalians, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc. at McAfee who were almost ambivalent about the denomination where they would seek ordination. If the clergy don't care, then it's unlikely the laypeople will.
As for the baptists there, most (if not all) would have rather lost an arm then become involved in denominational turf wars. We are definitely moving into a post-denominational era for most believers.
Joshua -
Clint Kritzer Active MemberSite Supporter
Yes, that analysis is correct. Funds contributed by well-meaning Baptist pew sitters will be used for spreading heretical, non-Scriptural teachings.
The whole effort is fueled by the anti-fundamentalists emotions that have been propogated throughout the SBC affiliated churches in the past few decades. While I disagree strongly with some of the Machiavellian moves made by the SBC leadership, I even more strongly disagree with throwing out the baby with the bath water.
In this modern world of turning on the water spigot instead of having to carry water from a well, people expect immediate change. Just because the SBC is not going "their" way, they are willing to abandon the ship. I don't believe that most people realize what a slow moving institution the SBC is. Change is affected in terms of decades, not weeks. If we want change within the denomination it comes from within the infrastraucture and requires patience and participation.
In my own church there is a strong anti-SBC movement. Some have approached me on this knowing that I try to follow historic Baptist thinking and to try to gain my support on breaking ties with the Convention. My stock response has become, "how many messengers did we send to the Convention this year?" The answer is NONE. Rather than trying to bring the political pendulum back into the center within the SBC, folks would rather just abandon the effort.
Unfortunately, most of the people within my church are completely numb to the workings of the BGAV and the SBC. At the very least, the current SBC leadership does propogate Biblical teachings and the spread of correct doctrine. Aligning ourselves with other Christian sects is NOT going to accomplish these same ends. Part of the Kingdom Advance strategy is to go into the field, plant churches, and then pull out, leaving the new founded churches and Christians vulnerable to the false teachers about whom Paul warned us.
I would like to try to push that we join the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia. I doubt that I will be able to push this agenda effectively because of the connotations affiliated with the term "conservative" but I will make the effort nonetheless. -
Clint Kritzer Active MemberSite Supporter
For my thoughts on ecumenicism, please see this link:
http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=51;t=001632#000006 -
Wow,
24 hours have passed by and my previous post remains the last word on what I thought would be a really "hot topic." I guess my Virginian brethern just are not interested in the discussion of the direction that the state convention is heading. Curious.... :confused:
[ November 18, 2002, 03:47 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ] -
Baptist Believer Well-Known MemberSite SupporterOriginally posted by BibleboyII:
Wow,
24 hours have passed by and my previous post remains the last word on what I thought would be a really "hot topic." I guess my Virginian brethern just are not interested in the discussion of the direction that the state convention is heading. Curious.... :confused:Click to expand... -
Baptist Believer Well-Known MemberSite SupporterOriginally posted by BibleboyII:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Baptist Believer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BibleboyII:
My advice to all Southern Baptists in Virginia, who want to be sure that their missions offerings go to SBC missions work, would be to either designate their offering specifically to the SBC/IMB or call on your church to affiliate solely with the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginian. Let the BGAV line up with the liberal CBF and die (sorry if that sounds harsh).Click to expand...It's not a matter or SBC or CBF... :rolleyes: , it's a matter of doing what God has called you and Virginia Baptists to do.Click to expand...
Likewise, I maintain that the liberal CBF takes a low view of the Scriptures and as a result is not doing what God has called His followers to do.Click to expand...
Again, you have an opinion about the CBF and you have your right to it, but be careful about slandering people (claiming them to be liberal if they are not and claiming they have a “low view of scripture”) just to bolster your opinions.
The GBAV leans toward affiliation with the liberal CBF. Therefore, it is a matter of choice between the SBC or the CBF. Don't try and confuse the issue.Click to expand...
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />SBC advocates are fond of saying that is a group is not going to play along with the latest whims of the SBC leadership that they are going to join the CBF. :rolleyes:Click to expand...
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Many Texas Baptists don't feel comfortable with the SBC or the CBF, so we are choosing our partnerships carefully. It is also my understanding that a Baptists of the Americas association is in the works that Texas Baptists, Virginia Baptists and other alienated conventions and churches can join to cooperatively carry out the Great Commission.Click to expand...
On second thought I did a little yahoo.com search on "Baptist Convention of the Americas" and turned up the following article:
http://www.baptiststandard.com/2002/5_6/pages/reynolds.html
Read it closely and the political/ideological and philosophical/theological links between the Baptist Convention of the Americas, the Mainstream Baptists, and the CBF jump right out at you.Click to expand...
But many conservative Baptists have those views…
Clearly the Baylor Pres., who funded the registration of the Baptist Convention of the Americas, also supports the Mainstream Baptist movement and CBF issues.Click to expand...
Call yourselves whatever you want to be called; however, the agenda is still rooted in liberal CBF beliefs and practices and the spin-off groups are led by liberal CBF sympathizers.Click to expand...
If nothing else, the BGCT is proof that a state convention can follow Christ apart from the control of the SBC without "joining the CBF".
The SBC never has controled any state convention. The SBC is not structured in a way that allows it to "control" a state convention. The SBC technically only exists for 3-4 days per year when all the state convention messengers come together for the annual meeting. In fact, it is the combination of messengers from all the various state conventions that "control" the SBC.Click to expand...
I also did a yahoo.com search on "Mainstream Baptists." Take a look and see just who is listed on their official website as "Friends and Allies": http://www.mainstreambaptists.org/friends.htm
Isn't that the BGCT logo along with the Baptist Standard, the CBF, and others listed on the above link?Click to expand...
Yeah, the BGCT is not affiliated or associated with the CBF or the Mainstream Baptists are they? "Friends and Allies, Friends and Allies"....Click to expand...
The Mainstream Baptist network began as a fellowship of state support agencies modeled after the group “Texas Baptists Committed”. None of these Mainstream Baptist groups are officially tied to the state conventions. While they may hold common cause with other groups and be listed as “friends” or “allies”, that does not mean that there is a formal relationship or that each group necessarily agrees with the positions of the other.
The BGCT is associated with the CBF in the sense that the BGCT passes on contributions designated to CBF by BGCT member churches. The BGCT also sends money to the SBC the same way. (By your logic, that makes the SBC an ally of the CBF because of the “connection” with Texas Baptists and the dual alignment of many churches!)
Wake up Virginia Baptists and smell the liberal coffee that is brewing all around you with its direct pipeline back to its CBF liberalism conection through the "Friends and Allies" in the Mainstream Baptist Network.Click to expand...
[ November 18, 2002, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Baptist Believer ] -
My home church left the VA Convention because it wasn't conservative enough. I'm not too up on the local governance.
-
Originally Posted by Baptistbeliever:
Certainly the alleged “liberals” that allegedly fill the CBF might think the SBC has a low view of scripture.Click to expand...</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
If the conservative SBC stance to claim and maintain the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Bible constitutes a “low view of Scripture” then call me (us) low.
Again, you have an opinion about the CBF and you have your right to it, but be careful about slandering people (claiming them to be liberal if they are not and claiming they have a “low view of scripture”) just to bolster your opinions.Click to expand...
In fact, this entire debate revolves around the inerrancy of the Bible. I maintain that once you give up the inerrancy of the Bible you have started down the road toward radical theological liberalism. Every Baptist that I have ever met who accepts homosexuality as a normal and moral lifestyle, supports women serving as pastors, and/or supports abortion on demand, read that “a woman’s right to choose,” also rejects the inerrancy of the Bible. It is that rejection of the inerrancy of the Bible that allows them to teach doctrines and hold beliefs that are directly contrary to the Word of God. Their rejection of the inerrancy of the Bible allows them to pick and choose what verses of Scripture that they will submit to and which verses that they can discount as non-authoritative.
Nope. On the face of this you are wrong. While you allege (and you may be right) that supporters of the GBAV see the CBF as one of the only viable mission alternatives to the SBC, it is still a matter of choice between the SBC, the CBF, joining with Texas Baptists, starting their own missions programs and structure for cooperation, or doing something else entirely. Just because a convention may withdraw from full SBC participation *does not necessarily* mean that they embrace the CBF. The Baptist General Convention of Texas is a living example of that.Click to expand...
Not really, but the idea for such a convention was presented at a “Texas Baptists Committed” breakfast a few years ago. The idea has caught on among many laypeople and there seems to be popular support to create such a convention.Click to expand...
I'm not sure who this "Baptists of the Americas" organization is, who are its leaders? Are they affiliated or associated with "Mainstream Baptists"?Click to expand...
Likewise, you did not answer my question regarding the identity of the leadership of the Baptist Convention of the Americas. I assume that since the Baylor President paid for the registration of the organization’s name, with his own funds, that he is one of the leaders. Who are its other leaders? Does this organization have an official position regarding the inerrancy of the Bible? I would not contribute one red cent to the organization until I understood clearly their official position on the inerrancy of the Bible.
Yep. Those Baptist ideals like soul liberty, separation of church and state, priesthood of the believer, autonomy of the local church, and resistance to external creeds.
But many conservative Baptists have those views…Click to expand...
BibleboyII quote:
Clearly the Baylor Pres., who funded the registration of the Baptist Convention of the Americas, also supports the Mainstream Baptist movement and CBF issues.
Yes. But those “CBF issues” (like I just named above) are held by most Baptists throughout the world.Click to expand...
BibleboyII quote:
Call yourselves whatever you want to be called; however, the agenda is still rooted in liberal CBF beliefs and practices and the spin-off groups are led by liberal CBF sympathizers.
You’ve just branded an enormous group of people “liberals” (including me) without any evidence or consideration. You seem to believe that if someone opposed the naked power grabs of the current and recent SBC leadership, they must be liberal themselves or deceived by liberals!Click to expand...
Do I believe that some Virginia Baptists who contribute to the GBAV do not know that the CBF rejects the inerrancy of the Bible and that the GBAV send a percentage of their offerings to the CBF? Yes, my parents (both in their 80s), who live in Virginia, don’t have a clue what is at the bottom of the debate. They would never reject the inerrancy of the Bible. They just go to church and love Jesus and the Word with all their hearts. They give their tithes and offerings and don’t have a clue what percent their church sends to which groups. I have tried to explain the situation to them. However, they always say, “Well we just give our offering to the church.”
Of course you are correct that state conventions are independent of the SBC, but the element of “control” I was referring to is the way the SBC tries to run state conventions by influence, slander and mass media.Click to expand...
BibleboyII quote:
Yeah, the BGCT is not affiliated or associated with the CBF or the Mainstream Baptists are they? "Friends and Allies, Friends and Allies"....
No they are not. To understand the relationship between these groups, you need to do a little more than play the game of “guilt by association” that is so popularly used by the SBC advocates.Click to expand...
The Mainstream Baptist network began as a fellowship of state support agencies modeled after the group “Texas Baptists Committed”. None of these Mainstream Baptist groups are officially tied to the state conventions. While they may hold common cause with other groups and be listed as “friends” or “allies”, that does not mean that there is a formal relationship or that each group necessarily agrees with the positions of the other.Click to expand...
I am not trying to make the case that each of the groups listed on the Mainstream Baptist Networks “Friends and Allies” webpage necessarily agree with the positions of the others. However, I am saying that the CBF arose out of the SBC conservative vs. liberal conflict over the inerrancy of the Bible. The CBF is the result of the labor of the liberal SBCers who reject the inerrancy of the Bible. I believe that the Mainstream Baptist Network agrees with the CBF on this issue. Likewise, I may be wrong but according to the Baptist Standard article referenced above I believe that at least one of the founders of the Baptist Convention of the Americas embraces these same beliefs. If someone can show me that I am wrong about this I’ll welcome the information.
The BGCT is associated with the CBF in the sense that the BGCT passes on contributions designated to CBF by BGCT member churches. The BGCT also sends money to the SBC the same way. (By your logic, that makes the SBC an ally of the CBF because of the “connection” with Texas Baptists and the dual alignment of many churches!)Click to expand...
BibleboyII quote:
Wake up Virginia Baptists and smell the liberal coffee that is brewing all around you with its direct pipeline back to its CBF liberalism connection through the "Friends and Allies" in the Mainstream Baptist Network.
[QUOTE}Yeah whatever… Don’t let reality get in the way.</font>Click to expand...
[ November 19, 2002, 07:40 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ] -
Originally posted by stubbornkelly:
My home church left the VA Convention because it wasn't conservative enough. I'm not too up on the local governance.Click to expand...
Is your home church now an independant Baptist Church? If they still hold to SBC type doctrines I would urge you to have your friends and family in that church contact the Southern Baptist Conseevatives of Virginia and see what they have to say. -
Lookee at what I found . . . .
"Grove Avenue Baptist Church is. . . .
A Bible believing New Testament Church based in Richmond, Virginia, with an outreach that includes mission projects in the community, the state and around the world. The church is a member of the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia and The Richmond Baptist Association." -
Clint Kritzer Active MemberSite Supporter
Kelly -
You were a member of Grove Avenue? There was a pastor there in the mid to late 1800's named William Hatcher who, after retiring from the pulpit, founded my high school, Fork Union Military Academy.
Grove Avenue is a very well known and respected church, very influential in this part of the SBC world due to it's large membership! -
Since I was 8, Clint. I still am, officially. I kept my membership there through college, and they weren't keen on ending my membership there until I'd found a new church up here (which makes sense, I suppose).
But you know, I've been away from that church for so long . . . I don't really know what the new pastor's major foci are. The last pastor was heavily into foreign missions (he and his wife were missionaryies in Brazil for 15 or 20 odd years), and there was a heavy missions push during his time there.
I always forget you and Margie live in Virginia!
[/side talk]