Pastors, what would you do?

Pastor Dave wrote:

Then you are making my point. Some doctrines aren't worth selling the store over. How you interpret an insignificant detail of a parable is of far less importance than your belief on the inerrancy of Scripture. To equate all doctrine as having equal status and importance means that we have no source of doctrine, namely, that the doctrine of God and of Scripture is equal to that of close vs. closed communion or doctrine of atonement being equal to the issue of whether a man is mid trib or pre trib.

Pastor Bob wrote:

A thousand times, YES. To go from one Sunday using the KJV to the next using NKJV is a gargantuan leap for most churches that are KJVP. The fact that the man now uses the ESV shows that he could perhaps have some ambivalence about his own convictions about mss evidence, etc. Sounds like he may not have been able to teach them about translation issues because he was inept and ill prepared. I think it's pretty lame for churches to spell out a translation in their SoF, but if they do and you agree to do it, you'd better be able to persuade and teach with great patience, or else you're going to get axed.

You say he "introduced Calvinism." What did he introduce? Total Depravity? Perseverance? Unconditional or Irresistable election? I'm not wanting a debate on the TULIP, nor am I trying to belabor a point. Soteriology is important. I have no problem if a man is a five pointer or a two pointer. However, if you are pressed on the issue and do not share honestly, you only set yourself up for a fall if you try to lead a church to a healthier understanding of a doctrine (in the opinion of the pastor) down the road. Besides, the object of the game is not to make five pointers or two pointers, but to make disciples. So that's why I'm curious as to what the aim of the pastor was. What was he trying to persuade the church to believe? What did the church delineate in its SoF regarding Soteriology?

 

Pastor Bob wrote:

I do not disagree. My contention about the importance of the doctrine at hand (I think we all need to read "What is an Evangelical" by Martyn Lloyd-Jones) is that far too many churches are being torn asunder by Satan over minutia, when the doctrine of God, Atonement and Bibliology are being allowed to slide down the slippery slope.

You are right about Criswell being a Baptist college. I am not sure if it is affiliated with the Southern Baptist Conservative Convention in Texas (I forget the name..it's not the BGCT). Criswell College is hardly Calvinistic, though

It appears that the church needs to take responsibility as well. Their SoF may or may not be clear. Even the best of SoFs can be ambiguous in places they shouldn't.

We, too, must remember this: a church has had to lose a pastor, and a pastor has had to undergo an unwanted termination. This will take a remarkable toll on the pastor, his family, and the local church for years to come. May God heal wounds for His glory and His kingdom's sake.

 

Most likely I would resign. Kick the dust off my feet and rolled on to where the Lord wanted me to be. If the Lord wanted him there the vote would have gone the other way even if there had to be a back door revival to get it.