The SBC: Poll for Southern Baptists

...and this is probably a large reason why.

Rev. G</font>[/QUOTE]Yes, Rev. G, I've heard many such things many times.

But the fact still remains that Calvinism teaches that God has predestinated all things that come to pass; ergo, if revival comes to pass, it is because God predestinated it to be so; if revival does not come to pass, it is because God did not predestinate it so to be.

Therefore, nothing any of the Neo-Calvinist SBC Reformers does will have any real effect on anything. Every event is just another jerk on the puppet string.

Mark Osgatharp

 

Rev. G (and others),

I am still trying to determine where I stand regarding Reform Theology, Calvinism, Freewill, etc. so don't jump all over me when I ask the following question. Okay (this is not my real question )?

If sovereign God, who is as you say 100% in control, decides to allow His creation to exercise a God given freewill with respect to choosing or rejecting salvation in Christ, does that somehow necessarily limit His Sovereignty?

[ October 18, 2002, 05:34 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]

 

I think that's a good philosophical question. I heard a tape of a well-known individual in the Wake Forest area advancing that as a possibility.

I haven't heard the reasoning developed well yet, but here's my analysis of it, at least until someone convinces me otherwise.
1. God is 100% in control.
2. God allows people to have some measure of control (free will) over their own salvation.

In my mind, once God relinquishes one ounce of control, even if it is by his free choice, he is no longer 100% in control, and is no longer sovereign by definition.

Just my opinion, BibleboyII. Well worth discussion.

 

There are two things that Southern Baptists (and their critics) tend to forget when talking about the SBC.

1. The SBC as a denomination consists of more than 40,000 individual, autonomous, independent, BAPTIST churches. They come together largely out of a desire to cooperate in a few areas of ministry and mission work, mainly support of the North American and International mission boards and theological education. The character of the denomination is only slightly affected by the national leadership because, in spite of efforts to change it to the contrary, the local churches are still independent and autonomous. The denomination itself has always been mainstream conservative evangelical Christian because most of its churches are mainstream conservative evangelical Christian. It has some churches that are more moderate and some churches that are fundamentalist because it is Baptist and based on cooperation in ministry and not doctrinal conformity. But neither moderates nor fundamentalists constitute a significant majority.

2. Statements of doctrinal belief that come from the leadership of the convention are not binding on the churches. They are, to some degree, binding on institutions and agencies operated by the convention, insofar as the trustees decide they want to enforce them. But churches decide on their own what they will accept or reject from the convention with regard to doctrinal statements or matters of church polity. Fewer than 20 percent of the state bodies, associations, and individual churches, for example, have adopted the new Baptist Faith and Message. In the past decade, the messenger registration at the SBC annual convention has averaged around 10,000 people (several have been less than that). At an average of 2 messengers per church, that means that only one out of ten churches in the SBC are even sending messengers to the convention.

That's not to say that the SBC hasn't been affected by the "conservative resurgence". But I'm guessing that most churches in the SBC are like mine when it comes to denominational politics. Most of our members couldn't tell you the name of any of the recent SBC presidents, but they'll work their socks off to raise money for Lottie Moon.

 

BibleboyII,

It sounds like a semantic argument to me.

God is sovereign and allpowerful. He is in control, but sometimes it's potential control, it's not always a push from behind toward something. We have to choose Him. The more we let Him control, the more He will "control" (or probably more aptly "guide") us, our wants, our thoughts, etc. toward Him. His allowing us some freewill in our salvation decision-making doesn't negate that, it only makes our responsibility to make the right decision all the greater, and the rewards all the better.

It would be like a father throwing a ball in the yard and saying "Go get that ball" to his son. If there is only one way, say the yard is full of stacks of plywood except for a little pathway, the way to the ball seems much more authoritarian, rigid, and like the father has more control. If there is nothing but open yard, maybe something to stop and visit along the way like in Family Circus every Sunday, then the choices along the way make the way all the sweeter for the kid. Without SOME freewill how can we be or feel like anything but giant pawns in a cosmic chess game?

 

IMHO I feel that the SBC is sprialing downhill to worldliness. I attended a SBC church for 5 years and the first three was bearable, the last 2 was horrible. When I moved to the Indianpolis area I attended about 10 sbc churches. What I encounter was an emphasis on having rock concerts for their praise and worship, no emphasis on sin and repenting, no guidance on how to live a fulfilling Christian life. They did ofer alot of small groups that gossip more about the pastor and other members then teach Bible.

Call me a fundie but I say "Give me that old time religion, it is good enough for me!" I can live with what some people call legalism better then in a worldly lifestyle that is acceptable by many of the SBC that I have seen. I do not agree with everything IFB teach, but they come closes to what I do believe. I guess I am a fundie and I am proud of it
But remember this is only my opinion and it is based on what I have experienced.

I however would like to know if in the south If the SBC is more conservative then in the north?
God Bless,
Cathy

 

Hello Cathy,

Your first sentence quoted above sounds as if you have been effected by the liberal SBC'ers more than you aware. LOL I said that because you used a classic liberal explanation for what you said, "...my opinion and it is based on what I have experienced." That reminded me of the way liberals sometimes pass the Word of God through the sieve of their personal experience; rather than allowing their personal experience to pass the sieve of the Word.

To answer you final question: yes and no. It all depends on the particular SBC church. I wish that I could tell you that we, in the South, are all conservative; however, we are not. What you need to do is pay close attention to the manner in which the particular church refers to the Bible. If they say they believe that the Bible is the inspired, infallible, inerrant Word of God they are most likely conservative. If they say that they believe that the Bible "contains the Word of God" watch out, they are most likely theological liberals.

[ October 22, 2002, 05:19 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]