I would not concern yourself with this if it's the only issue you have with attended the church otherwise. I doubt anyone will care about your view of the atonement.
-
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!
One more reason why I can't be Southern Baptist
- Thread starter Rebel1
- Start date
- Status
I would not concern yourself with this if it's the only issue you have with attended the church otherwise. I doubt anyone will care about your view of the atonement.
I hope you're right. I have a couple of other issues, but I don't know if they would present a problem if I wanted to join.
I'm a recovering Southern Baptist who attends a Southern Baptist church.
I have been critical of the convention for many, many years over what I considered to be some witch hunting that accompanied the Resurgence and the politicization of the convention. I prefer the 1963 BF&M to its recent incarnations. I am Augustinian in soteriology and have never been in a church with such inclinations.
All that said, none it affects where I attend church; my church is full of good people who want to serve Christ. The actions of the convention are almost inconsequential in that context. In all my years in Baptist churches, none has asked me to subscribe to any flavor of the BF&M, much less any of the innumerable resolutions, some of which I applaud and many of which I ignore or oppose.
The truth is that churches and pastors are increasingly post-convention in their outlook and don't consider themselves bound by what's decided in Nashville or even the outdated annual meetings that generate more heat than light.
Unless you intend on becoming an elder there, I would not worry about it.
I used to attend a Reformed church in which about 3/4 of the congregation were not Reformed. No one cared.
I considered that at one time, but I am past that now.
A dozen years ago I began looking for a church and was led — by an improbable series of circumstances — to my current church. Those included my car dying on the way to visit another church and a curiosity about a church at which a singer I remembered from my teenage years presenting a concert at the church I'm now attending.
It had nothing to do with the convention or the BF&M. I was welcomed and offered an opportunity to serve when what I really wanted was just to sit the pew for a while and heal.
My experience with several SBC churches (both large and small) is the average member does not care about the SBC except in giving to missions. Many pastors that I know would have left the SBC long ago if it were not for their congregation being either bound by tradition (they are Southern Baptists) or advocating support for SBC foreign missions. The last thing that I'd worry about is SBC affiliation (although it wouldn't hurt my feelings if my church left the SBC....it wouldn't change anything, except perhaps a few dollars spent elsewhere).
Thanks for that perspective. It helps.
One can agree to penal substitution theory, yet disagree that the crucifixion displayed God’s wrath on the Son.
Basic PST requires the Son to endure certain marring and abuse to heal the breach between God and man.
One cannot read Isaiah and not see such was predetermined of the Son to endure. It just wasn’t the “wrath of God” but human zeal.
Unfortunately (imo) the reformers really were far too conformed to RCC thinking and, therefore, a general examination of the whole matter should be undertaken by the SBC.
Basic PST requires the Son to endure certain marring and abuse to heal the breach between God and man.
One cannot read Isaiah and not see such was predetermined of the Son to endure. It just wasn’t the “wrath of God” but human zeal.
Unfortunately (imo) the reformers really were far too conformed to RCC thinking and, therefore, a general examination of the whole matter should be undertaken by the SBC.
What you said is reasonable, I feel. I don't agree with all of it, but it is reasonable.
Our executive disfellowship a church in our association - after the pastor divorced his wife and married the church secretary.
Our DOM did talk to the church, but they did not see any reason to boot their pastor out.
As TC said - that's all we could do.
Felipe Rios
Member
Can someone explain to me what "soul liberty" is?
"Let your conscience be your guild."
It is one of the Baptist Distinctives and overlaps with "Priesthood of the Believer."
Felipe Rios
Member
I've been a Baptist for over 11 years and I have never heard of that lol"Let your conscience be your guild."
It is one of the Baptist Distinctives and overlaps with "Priesthood of the Believer."
Yes, it's a Baptist 101 principle!
L. Duane Brown has a whole chapter on it in Biblical Basis for Baptists.
I have before me a book I picked up when I worked for the SBC's Baptist Sunday School Board.
Soul Liberty, published by the SBC's Convention Press:
"soul liberty means the freedom of every human being, whether as an individual or in a group, from social coercion in religious matters"
What a joke!! The resolution seems to conflate the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ with the false theology that claims Christ did not die for all mankind.
Was the term defined. Nope
What a joke.
The SBC got something right.
- Status