Forcibly Removing All the Tulips at SWBTS

[Revmitchell]

Angry and jealous liberals who lost cannot help but criticize that which they lost. That's what's behind these unsubstantiated attacks.

And their arguments are the same tired arguments made since Dr. Stanley became President. "people are leaving" well I am sure they are. Libbies do not find things comfortable when the standard of scripture is held to what it is and not left to being interpreted by feelings, experiences, or science.

 

[preachinjesus]

One man's liberal is another man's conservative.

The sad thing about this whole business is how fast some throw around labels and libel good, honest, God loving Christians in order to score some cheap points.

It's just so sad. Nothing about it is glorifying to God.

 

[go2church]

Clearly you are glad your side won, great - moving on.

The OP was SBC seminaries so they have been the focus of my comments, but they could just as easily apply to other seminaries in the same situation. Ministry in the post-modern era requires one to step away from modernism in order to be effective. The SBC seminaries and others as well are not preparing their students to be able to do this. The numbers though not telling the whole story do provide a thorough outline from which one is able to discern there is a problem.

 

[Revmitchell]

Clearly you are glad your side won, great - moving on.

Ministry in the post-modern era requires one to step away from modernism in order to be effective.

No this is false. The gospel is self reliant and is given its power by the Holy Ghost.

 

[go2church]

On this point it is clear we disagree.

You said "No, this is false" what I assume you mean is that post-modernism does not have to be embraced. Does that also mean modernism must be rejected as well? Because if that is the case then seminaries are in more trouble then I thought. If I have assumed in error please forgive.

For your point to be correct, that post-modernism does not have to be embraced, it would have to also be that ministry must not embrace modernism (as it has clearly done) to be effective. So which is it, self-relevant gospel, modern gospel or post-modern gospel?

 

[Revmitchell]

On this point it is clear we disagree.

You said "No, this is false" what I assume you mean is that post-modernism does not have to be embraced. Does that also mean modernism must be rejected as well? Because if that is the case then seminaries are in more trouble then I thought. If I have assumed in error please forgive.

For your point to be correct, that post-modernism does not have to be embraced, it would have to also be that ministry must not embrace modernism (as it has clearly done) to be effective. So which is it, self-relevant gospel, modern gospel or post-modern gospel?

I reject the notion that your answers are the only answers. These broad terms only serve to give allowance for all kinds of things. What I see going on from all sides is that all sorts of methods, strategies, and concerns for sub-cultures but rarely is ever the Holy Ghost and scripture brought into the equation. What was rejected of "modernism" was liberalism not sub-culture. And of course post-modernism is trying to return to it just with a new wrapping.

 

[go2church]

I reject the notion that your answers are the only answers. These broad terms only serve to give allowance for all kinds of things. What I see going on from all sides is that all sorts of methods, strategies, and concerns for sub-cultures but rarely is ever the Holy Ghost and scripture brought into the equation. What was rejected of "modernism" was liberalism not sub-culture. And of course post-modernism is trying to return to it just with a new wrapping.

Well you are coming around to a post-modern way of thinking already!

Seriously I think I understand what you are saying though I might argue that liberalism was never really rejected, what I think happened is that the center moved, but that is really neither here nor there.

I would however strongly argue that post-modernism is very different then modernism and not just a new wrapping, therefore needing new ways in which those in ministry need to minister.

This is guess the thrust of what I have been trying to say. We are in a new day, what worked long ago won't work now. That doesn't mean it was wrong or a waste of time or that they didn't work, not at all. It is just that "today" is so different then "yesterday" that we need to being doing a better job in our seminaries of preparing those preparing to enter ministry.

 

[JustChristian]

I was pleased to read Dr Mohler's comments on the web site you referenced and to see that the Abstract of Principles is again in effect at Southern Seminary.

Baptist's always have supported a Baptist Creed haven't they? NOT. Whatever happened to the Priesthood of the Believer? We might as well have a pope.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Baptist's always have supported a Baptist Creed haven't they?

Baptist confessions are as old as Baptists are.

Whatever happened to the Priesthood of the Believer?

Nothing. Confessions of faith or creeds don't compromise the Priesthood of the Believer. In fact the priesthood of the believer is often a part of confessions.

 

[JustChristian]

Baptist confessions are as old as Baptists are.

Nothing. Confessions of faith or creeds don't compromise the Priesthood of the Believer. In fact the priesthood of the believer is often a part of confessions.

They certainly compromise the jobs of missionaries and seminary professors.

 

[sag38]

Priesthood of the Believe used to be a wonderful descriptive term of our freedom in Christ and the ability to be able to read the Bible and interpret scripture for ourselves in the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit. But, some have misused it, or should I say perverted it? Again, thank God the conservatives won.

 

[Tom Butler]

Originally Posted by Pastor Larry
Baptist confessions are as old as Baptists are.

Nothing. Confessions of faith or creeds don't compromise the Priesthood of the Believer. In fact the priesthood of the believer is often a part of confessions.

They certainly compromise the jobs of missionaries and seminary professors.

I certainly hope so.

I chair the board of trustees at Mid-Continent University in Mayfield, Kentucky. We are Southern Baptist, although not an arm of either the Kentucky Baptist Convention or SBC. All trustees are Southern Baptist, and all are active in a local church.

Our by-laws require that all classes, religious and secular, be taught from the Biblical world view, and specifically from the standpoint of an inerrant Scripture.

All faculty in the Baptist College of the Bible (who must be Southern Baptist) must sign a document which sets forth agreement with the Baptist Faith and Message.

In the Baptist College of Arts and Sciences, we do not require all faculty to be Southern Baptist, but do require even non-Baptists to sign an agreement not to teach contrary to the BF & M.

Within those parameters, the faculty is free to hold a variety of views on secondary issues. Robust discussion on those issues is encouraged on the campus.

Creedal? No. Confessional? By all means. No Baptist school can allow total academic freedom. To do so is to violate the admonition in Jude to earnestly contend for the faith

 

[JRG39402]

I think this is unnecessary gossip, but that's just me.

 

[Revmitchell]

I think this is unnecessary gossip, but that's just me.

It is and it is common from its source.

 

[Pastor Larry]

They certainly compromise the jobs of missionaries and seminary professors.

No they don't. Confessions are statements of belief. They are inanimate. They can't threaten anything.

The jobs of missionaries and professors are compromised by the missionaries and professors themselves.

 

[Tom Butler]

I think this is unnecessary gossip, but that's just me.

I've missed something. What gossip are you talking about?

 

[gb93433]

1. Calvinism as it relates to Missions

Every student is absolutely required to take a class in personal evangelism and every class requires at least 10 student reports of gospel sharing. If you don't share the gospel, you don't pass the class.

Thirdly, at Southern it has never been taught, nor will it ever be, that missionary work (home or foreign) is not essential due to God's sovereign choices.

Isn't evangelism part of missionary work. How are they separate? I have never seen discipleship happen without mission work first.

 

[donnA]

I chair the board of trustees at Mid-Continent University in Mayfield, Kentucky.

My former pastor graduated from mid contient.

 

[JustChristian]

Originally Posted by Pastor Larry
Baptist confessions are as old as Baptists are.

Nothing. Confessions of faith or creeds don't compromise the Priesthood of the Believer. In fact the priesthood of the believer is often a part of confessions.




I certainly hope so.

I chair the board of trustees at Mid-Continent University in Mayfield, Kentucky. We are Southern Baptist, although not an arm of either the Kentucky Baptist Convention or SBC. All trustees are Southern Baptist, and all are active in a local church.

Our by-laws require that all classes, religious and secular, be taught from the Biblical world view, and specifically from the standpoint of an inerrant Scripture.

All faculty in the Baptist College of the Bible (who must be Southern Baptist) must sign a document which sets forth agreement with the Baptist Faith and Message.

In the Baptist College of Arts and Sciences, we do not require all faculty to be Southern Baptist, but do require even non-Baptists to sign an agreement not to teach contrary to the BF & M.

Within those parameters, the faculty is free to hold a variety of views on secondary issues. Robust discussion on those issues is encouraged on the campus.

Creedal? No. Confessional? By all means. No Baptist school can allow total academic freedom. To do so is to violate the admonition in Jude to earnestly contend for the faith

So you're saying that even other Baptists are not acceptable to you? I don't understand that from a Biblical perspective.

 

[Tom Butler]

So you're saying that even other Baptists are not acceptable to you? I don't understand that from a Biblical perspective.

This is a fair question, and here's the answer:

In 1949 representatives of 14 or 15 Southern Baptist Associations in Western Kentucky, Southern Illinois and West Tennessee came together to establish a Baptist institute of higher learning. Each cooperating association nominated two of its number to serve on the board of trustees. Thus, it was highly unlikely that any trustee was not going to be SBC. And that made it likely that the faculty, staff and administration were going to come from Southern Baptist churches.

Mid-Continent University has two colleges--the Baptist College of the Bible and the Baptist College of Arts and Sciences. Since it is an avowed SBC school, all the College of the Bible faculty must be Southern Baptist. Most of the College of Arts and Sciences faculty are Southern Baptist, but some are not.

The trustees,k faculty and administration have not circled the wagons. But they know what they believe, believe it to be true, and have acted accordingly.

No one is forced to teach against their beliefs. But they may not teach against the our confessional statement. If they can't do it, then they will not be hired.

The problems that developed in the 50s, 60s and 70s in our SBC seminaries was that many of the faculty agreed to teach according to the school's confessional statement, then did just the opposite. And the administration let them do it, and the trustees let the president get by with it. May God help us to be faithful to that which has been entrusted to us.