Liberal, left-leaning "Baptists?"

I don't know if I qualify as a left-leaning Baptist, but I probably lean a little more left than some. To answer your question, the issue is not about arguing for something that is "very clearly" condemned by God. If it was "very clear", there would be no argument. Instead, there are often disagreement about one's *interpretation* of a particular scripture. You may think a scripture is "clear", but if someone disagrees with your interpretation, they can still disagree with *you* without necessarily disagreeing with the Bible. Unless you claim to speak directly for God (which I don't think you do), there should be some room for disagreement since none of us have perfect knowledge and understanding of scripture.

Brian

 

God bless you for that post, Stan!

Before you get crowded with excuses for behaviors, let me mention something I have been thinking: one of the rather prominent mockeries of Christianity is from those who see exactly what you are talking about. They say, in effect, "Yeah, sure. Get yourself saved and then sin all you want because God will forgive you!" They see what appears to them to be a license to sin because salvation cannot be lost.

And I have tried to counter that when I find it by saying that a person indwelt by the Holy Spirit, as all who belong to Christ are (Romans 8:9), has a new heart and does not WANT to sin, and then, given that heart and that control by the Holy Spirit, is deeply troubled when he or she does sin. Thus, the total freedom given us in Christ is nevertheless severely restrained by the new nature given us. We can do what we want to do, sure, but what we want to do is honor Christ with our lives and words and thoughts.

What I am seeing in so many who take the name of Christ is that they are using the freedom in Christ as license for joining the world instead of being a living witness. The mockers have a point where this is concerned, don't they?

The goal of the Holy Spirit in our lives is to transform us into the image of Christ, bit by bit. As the years go by, I find my own heart wants more and more to honor Christ and to reference my every moment to Him. It is becoming almost natural to draw away from things that do not honor Him.

And so I wonder, too, where the honor to Christ is in those who seem to spend a lot of time finding excuses for what they want to do all in the name of the freedom that comes from Christ.
There seems to be a very large gap between those who want to use the freedom as an excuse and those who truly want to honor Christ and strive to follow Him more closely as their lives go on.

I know this post will win me a lot of friends, too, but oh well. It's really what I have noticed and what I have wondered about, and I'm glad you are the one who had the courage to start this thread.

In Christ,
Helen

 

Hey, I still respect ya, Helen...and you, too, Stan!

 

This is not really true, and really is the definition of liberal. Bible believers can argue over "unclear" matters, but Liberals attack the clear teachings and foundational doctrines of the inerrant Word (original sin, deity of Christ, exclusivity of the gospel, eternal damnation, bodily ressurection, inerrancy, etc, etc).

 

I basically agree, I just didn't understood Stan's post as asking about "leaning" that far left.

But the line is blurred further still, because people disagree about what is "liberal" and what is not. Some people would add a great many things to your list of "foundational doctrines" to your list. I'm arguing with a Baptist on another forum that is trying to say that belief in posttrib is a "clear, foundational" doctrine and to disagree is to stray from saving truth. On other forums yet, I'm blasted as a heretic for not being KJV-only, even if I were to agree 100% with them on every other point. How far left is left? How far right is right? It's a little bit relative.

 

Bob,

That's a very fine post, but you'd better be careful--you're in danger of being labelled a moderate.

 

Bob, an excellent post.

Counselor, I am one of those liberal baptists who defends homosexuality and who likewise believes that our preachers must do a better job on focusing their preaching on the full teachings of the Bible.

When this topic came up in the past, I created the thread below, which may give you an idea where we come from. As a side note, liberal baptists still tend to be more conservative than mainstream Christians.

Hermeneutic of a Liberal

Joshua

 

Stan, I'm must be one of those liberal republican Baptist that just don't make sense to you. But just as heavy as this subject leaves your mind and soul, enough to puke... your position has left the same feelings with homosexuals as they walk out of our Churches realizing that they don't belong here. I can't in a million years see Jesus turning them away, how can you. And yes, demanding that they change when "most" can't is turning them away.

I feel that it was based on misinterpretation of scripture. Surely if God has said that they are an abomination and he made the same statement about the eating of shrimp and fish with skin a few verses earlier, something may not being interpreted correctly. As a Baptist one of our core beliefs is that "individually" we can go to the Holy Spirit and seek answers on interpretation of these minor conflicts that arise. You don't have to believe what is shown me by the spirit, but you do have to tolerate it cuz someone just like me is sitting next to you in your own church, but chooses not to voice these things.

Sin is sin and we should not use the redemption as a licensed, I personally have never said that. It is a different argument by claiming certain things are not sin. Meaning if they are classified as sin, then the Christian has no business committing them.

I knew I was going to have problems early on when I approached my Grandmother whom I was living with, a good Baptist woman, in the 1960's, and ask if my RA Camp Counselor (Charles DeSilva) could come and visit me as I had contracted a very serious disease. She said yes at first until she found out he was Black. She then justified her position with the Bible. And it made sense to me at the time, but I didn't see how it was "right".
I have been cautious every since with how people use the Bible to get what they want and not what Jesus wants.

I think Jesus would change the way the homosexual is being treated and thought of in the church for the simple fact that the "fruit" is not there. They are turning away, not coming in.

I have 8 homosexuals scattered through out my entire family from both side (mine and my wife's families) that have come out to us since they all know me and my wife's stance on the subject. Each one of you reading this have about the same number (percentage wise), they just won't tell you about it because of your stance. They don't go to church and you can't figure it out. You will never be able to share how God loves them and has made it possible for them to die knowing they are saved. Our own traditional teachings have set this mess up and since it is not your problem, you would "feel" more comfortable if it just stays that way since you aren't the "witch" being hunted.

I don't mean to be hard on you, but I feel you are hurting more people than you are helping. So that you can feel comfortable, you don't mind others going to hell. Because that is what is happening under this current reign of interpretation.

We need to get them in, stop judging it as sin, and if God wants them to stop, they will stop. Not because of what man classifies as sin but because of the law God has placed in the hearts of all man. If it isn't written there (as I believe), then so be it. You must accept that they will be homosexuals. Let's bring them to God and let him handle it. Stan, stop sounding like my Grandmother! I'll pray for you.

PS. Charles DeSilva, if you by chance are reading this, contact me. It was this South American Baptist minister who was there and counseled me as I accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior in 1968 at RA Camp in Mathis TX.

[ May 11, 2002, 08:21 PM: Message edited by: post-it ]

 

This is fallacy. If we are being true to Scripture and Christ, I don't really care what "feelings" sodomites or any other deviants have, other than ones of Spirit-led remorse, repentance and a need for the Savior. Sodomites should be treated as are every other sinner - preached the truth to, that unless they repent they shall likewise perish. An unrepentant sodomite has no place in the church - but then neither does any other unrepentant sinner.

1 Cor 6:9 "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."

Until the "church" stops coddling sexual deviants and unrepenant sinners, it will continue to be a stench in the nostrils of God. Unless the church preaches the uncompromising truth of the gospel, many will stand in that last day and here the dreaded words "I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers." Matthew 7:23

And if this thread is going to turn into another mindless and scriptureless defense of sodomy, it will be shut down fast.

 

Thanks Chris, stay on top of it.

 

Chris, I will, at your request, stick with scripture to back all assertions I make. I will also stop posting at your request.

Continuing into the next chapter we find the following.
1 Cor 7:
It is good for a man not to marry.
25 Now about virgins, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are.
29 From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none;

Something changed somewhere, otherwise we have a contradiction in instruction between then and now. Just as 1 Cor 7 is no longer in force, neither are certain parts of Chapter 6.

Switching subjects due to warning from Chris. To those of you who are ministers. How many times have you confronted the women in your church who are guilty of gossip and told them they have no part in heaven if they keep it up? How many men have you approached and pointed out their sin of arrogance and let them know that they are headed to eternal damnation for such action.

Of those ladies you spoke to about the sin of gossip (if ever), how many will continue to do it. And do you really feel they are going to hell for doing so or are they truly saved?

How many women nationwide in our churches do you think gossip on a constant basis. Why aren't we kicking them out? Paul is very clear about this in Chapter 5 when referencing the sinner. Why aren't we kicking those arrogant men out also.

Because in the end, we will have empty churches.

Right now we are minus the homosexual in churches.

Chris, as a student in the Seminary, I hope you remember this post when you find your job position as clergy lives and dies by those ladies who gossip constantly. You will have to find some exception to the sin list scriptures which will allow you to work as a minister in good conscience. I found it and it has kept my family together. Let me know if you wish me to post my scriptural defense for homosexuals as well as for the gossips. Until then I shall remain silent in your forum on this subject.

[ May 12, 2002, 04:56 AM: Message edited by: post-it ]

 

On second thought, I can see no one here wants to hear anything I have to say. I will go back to “All Other Discussion” and help the atheists see the error of their way. God bless you all as you help each other understand the word.