How to Explain Key Doctrinal Differences Among Some Baptists

[Steven Yeadon]

In another thread, I mistakenly said I was more "conservative" than many frequenting Southern Baptist affiliated churches. To give you an idea of what I am referring to, let me give you some info on what I meant by the term "conservative."

I have been in SBC churches where I had to leave on multiple occasions. The role of women as not being able to have anything but a servant (deacon) role caused friction at one church. The argument that sermons are to be for explaining the Word, not for lengthy sermons on topics with little in the way of bible verses forced me to leave another. The idea people are potentially going to hell if they get into sins like drunkenness and fornication got me a rebuke. The flat out opposition to Joel Osteen caused friction. The opposition to bible twisting by Celebrate Recovery forced me to avoid other churches after an incident. My opposition to Charismaticism and Pentecostalism caused friction.

Now beliefs are in line with many Baptists. Calling us more "conservative" appears to be in error, but some Baptists do call themselves more "conservative" than others by holding to views like mine.

I have heard two other terms describing my position, but neither sounds adequate. One is being more "literalist" with the bible. Another is being less "modernist" than other Baptists. I feel inclined to the "less modernist" label for myself, but given the history of the term as describing adherence to the fundamentals of the faith vs losing confidence the bible is God's Word, the term "less modernist" does not fit my beliefs.

What do you say? What term best describes the beliefs I hold to with other Baptists that can cause friction over interpreting key doctrines in the bible?

 

[canadyjd]

In another thread, I mistakenly said I was more "conservative" than many frequenting Southern Baptist affiliated churches. To give you an idea of what I am referring to, let me give you some info on what I meant by the term "conservative."

I have been in SBC churches where I had to leave on multiple occasions. The role of women as not being able to have anything but a servant (deacon) role caused friction at one church. The argument that sermons are to be for explaining the Word, not for lengthy sermons on topics with little in the way of bible verses forced me to leave another. The idea people are potentially going to hell if they get into sins like drunkenness and fornication got me a rebuke. The flat out opposition to Joel Osteen caused friction. The opposition to bible twisting by Celebrate Recovery forced me to avoid other churches after an incident. My opposition to Charismaticism and Pentecostalism caused friction.

Now beliefs are in line with many Baptists. Calling us more "conservative" appears to be in error, but some Baptists do call themselves more "conservative" than others by holding to views like mine.

I have heard two other terms describing my position, but neither sounds adequate. One is being more "literalist" with the bible. Another is being less "modernist" than other Baptists. I feel inclined to the "less modernist" label for myself, but given the history of the term as describing adherence to the fundamentals of the faith vs losing confidence the bible is God's Word, the term "less modernist" does not fit my beliefs.

What do you say? What term best describes the beliefs I hold to with other Baptists that can cause friction over interpreting key doctrines in the bible?

The terms “conservative” and “liberal” among religious beliefs are often intermingled with those same terms in political beliefs.

For instance, I have considered myself a conservative, both religiously and politically. When I changed my position on the death penalty (I now believe Christians should oppose it) based on my understand of scripture, I was immediately called a “liberal sissy”.

The same on my view of deacons. I now hold to male leadership among elders. Since deacons are servants with no authority, the positions should be open to women.

I think it’s a mistake to attempt to label yourself or others beyond professing to be a Christian. In fact, I believe much of 1 Cor warns against such identification.

peace to you

 

[Reynolds]

In another thread, I mistakenly said I was more "conservative" than many frequenting Southern Baptist affiliated churches. To give you an idea of what I am referring to, let me give you some info on what I meant by the term "conservative."

I have been in SBC churches where I had to leave on multiple occasions. The role of women as not being able to have anything but a servant (deacon) role caused friction at one church. The argument that sermons are to be for explaining the Word, not for lengthy sermons on topics with little in the way of bible verses forced me to leave another. The idea people are potentially going to hell if they get into sins like drunkenness and fornication got me a rebuke. The flat out opposition to Joel Osteen caused friction. The opposition to bible twisting by Celebrate Recovery forced me to avoid other churches after an incident. My opposition to Charismaticism and Pentecostalism caused friction.

Now beliefs are in line with many Baptists. Calling us more "conservative" appears to be in error, but some Baptists do call themselves more "conservative" than others by holding to views like mine.

I have heard two other terms describing my position, but neither sounds adequate. One is being more "literalist" with the bible. Another is being less "modernist" than other Baptists. I feel inclined to the "less modernist" label for myself, but given the history of the term as describing adherence to the fundamentals of the faith vs losing confidence the bible is God's Word, the term "less modernist" does not fit my beliefs.

What do you say? What term best describes the beliefs I hold to with other Baptists that can cause friction over interpreting key doctrines in the bible?

Honestly, as I see it, your beliefs are best described as transient. Here today, there tomorrow, somewhere else entirely the day after that.

 

[SavedByGrace]

When I changed my position on the death penalty (I now believe Christians should oppose it) based on my understand of scripture

Really? So the places in Scripture that very clearly say that the high crime of "murder", is puhishable by death, as in "life for life", is not true any longer?

Genesis 9:6, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Exodus 24:14, "But if a man acts with premeditation against his neighbor, to kill him by treachery, you shall take him from My altar, that he may die"

Leviticus 21:17, “Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death."

Numbers 35:29-21, " And if he pushed him out of hatred or hurled something at him, lying in wait, so that he died, or in enmity struck him down with his hand, so that he died, then he who struck the blow shall be put to death. He is a murderer. The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death when he meets him"

Matthew 5:21, "You have heard that it was told those who lived long ago, 'You are not to commit murder,' and, 'Whoever murders will be subject to punishment.'"

Revelation 21:8, "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

Can you please provide a single verse from the Bible, where the death penalty for the crime of murder, has been abolished?

 

[SavedByGrace]

Honestly, as I see it, your beliefs are best described as transient. Here today, there tomorrow, somewhere else entirely the day after that.

that is true of probably the greater majority of "modern" Christians!

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

The terms “conservative” and “liberal” among religious beliefs are often intermingled with those same terms in political beliefs.

For instance, I have considered myself a conservative, both religiously and politically. When I changed my position on the death penalty (I now believe Christians should oppose it) based on my understand of scripture, I was immediately called a “liberal sissy”.

The same on my view of deacons. I now hold to male leadership among elders. Since deacons are servants with no authority, the positions should be open to women.

I think it’s a mistake to attempt to label yourself or others beyond professing to be a Christian. In fact, I believe much of 1 Cor warns against such identification.

peace to you

Yeah, the label route rarely does justice to anyone's accumulated nuanced positions. More often than not, it seems to lead to confusion, as labels are easily misunderstood anyway, because of varying usage. Barret had to point this out to the inquisition lawyers during the committee hearings. Good stuff.

 

[37818]

There are a number of issues. Social living issues. And Biblical interpreation issues. And they have a cross over between those two.

Then on the Bible doctrines, there are the essentials being a matter of actaully being Christian. And secodary issues which are not matters of salvation.

Our Baptist distinctives, by which one regards one's self to be Baptist. And here the question on where Baptists differ.

Nevertheless topic of this trread is an important one.

There are a spectrium of sub topices, in which each issue can take a whole thread.

1 Corinthians 1:10 comes to mind, ". . . Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. . . ."

 

[Dr. Bob]

I think "conservative" and "liberal" are still valid but only in a general sense when discussing denominational positions on many issues. The terms discuss a philosophical basis for the actual position of the group.

In the late 1800's and the rise of modernism and liberalism in theology in Germany brought into American churches the term to combat the attack on the inspiration of the Bible, a hermeneutic of literal/verbal/plenary understanding of God's Word, questioning the person/work of our Lord Jesus, et al was a return to foundational and fundamental truth - hence given the name "fundamentalism". This was trans-denominational, since many of the nuances and pet doctrines of a given group were not in question. Paedo and Credo baptizers could join hands in combating liberalism of major biblical attacks.

Among Baptists, the Northern Baptists were harder hit than the Southern Baptists, as they saw liberalism destroying the denomination. They formed the Fundamental Fellowship and tried to keep the convention rooted in biblical truth. They failed. Regular Baptists and Conservative Baptist groups formed within, then splintering from the Northern Convention over liberalism in the 1930-40's.

By the 1960's the "Conservative Baptist Association" had gone to bed with the Northern Baptist liberals, so the descriptive labels (conservative/liberal) were not of much use any more. An attempt at the end of the 20th Century to use other terms like Fundamental, Evangelical, Moderate, etc was tried but labels soon became useless. Even in the SBC, the moderate/cooperative section (truly liberal theologically) is opposed by the founders/conservative wing (truly conservative). But an SBC church will have people or pastors of every different nuance or stripe within the spectrum.

 

[canadyjd]

Really? So the places in Scripture that very clearly say that the high crime of "murder", is puhishable by death, as in "life for life", is not true any longer?

Genesis 9:6, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Exodus 24:14, "But if a man acts with premeditation against his neighbor, to kill him by treachery, you shall take him from My altar, that he may die"

Leviticus 21:17, “Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death."

Numbers 35:29-21, " And if he pushed him out of hatred or hurled something at him, lying in wait, so that he died, or in enmity struck him down with his hand, so that he died, then he who struck the blow shall be put to death. He is a murderer. The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death when he meets him"

Matthew 5:21, "You have heard that it was told those who lived long ago, 'You are not to commit murder,' and, 'Whoever murders will be subject to punishment.'"

Revelation 21:8, "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

Can you please provide a single verse from the Bible, where the death penalty for the crime of murder, has been abolished?

I’m not going to derail this thread. Start another thread and I’ll post my views.

peace to you