The schism in the SBC had nothing to do with liberal theology. It was all about the fundamentalists seizing political power to support the Republican Party.
This has to be one of the most ideological and ignorant statements ever made on this board.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The schism in the SBC had nothing to do with liberal theology. It was all about the fundamentalists seizing political power to support the Republican Party.
Facts would argue with your opinion.The schism in the SBC had nothing to do with liberal theology. It was all about the fundamentalists seizing political power to support the Republican Party.
Facts would argue with your opinion.
Then why do you make the statement that Democrats cannot be Christians. The Republican Party is calling the shots for the SBC leadership.This has to be one of the most ideological and ignorant statements ever made on this board.
Do you really believe that the Bible is absolutely inerrant? That was what culled out many great professors from the SBS. I could provide about 10 references which disprove that belief. What version of the Bible do you want me to use? let's use the KJV. OK?Liberals do not need facts they just need ideology and good intentions. Facts and results are irrelevant.
Salty, I don't think you did. I just went to their site and didn't find any statement of faith either.I took a quick look at the ofical CBF web page - did nto see a statement of Faith.
Did I miss it?
Maybe SBC "leadership" has enough sense to not be pro murder of the unborn and pro homosexual agenda advancement.Then why do you make the statement that Democrats cannot be Christians. The Republican Party is calling the shots for the SBC leadership.
The Bible is inerrant. I already know what you will post.Do you really believe that the Bible is absolutely inerrant? That was what culled out many great professors from the SBS. I could provide about 10 references which disprove that belief. What version of the Bible do you want me to use? let's use the KJV. OK?
Inerrant means without error. Correct? What's your definition? These incongruities have no impact on my faith whatsoever. I simply don't accept calling someone liberal theologically if they point that out. Now what am I going to say?The Bible is inerrant. I already know what you will post.
you are going to pick out 10 of the usual 30 something "errors" in scripture. None are errors. Type away. I won't do your work for you.Inerrant means without error. Correct? What's your definition? These incongruities have no impact on my faith whatsoever. I simply don't accept calling someone liberal theologically if they point that out. Now what am I going to say?
Then why do you make the statement that Democrats cannot be Christians.
The Republican Party is calling the shots for the SBC leadership.
How old was Ahaziah?you are going to pick out 10 of the usual 30 something "errors" in scripture. None are errors. Type away. I won't do your work for you.
How old was Ahaziah?
vs.
- II Kings 8:26 "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."
- II Chronicles 22:2 "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."
22. You are dealing with a copyist error that made it into KJV, Tyndale, Geneva. You looked at it in other translations?How old was Ahaziah?
vs.
- II Kings 8:26 "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."
- II Chronicles 22:2 "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."
ESVThis is a sophomoric attempt to make a case you are not prepared to make. Copiest errors do not affect inerrancy. Neither were copiest errors in view in the SBC conservative resurgence.
ESV22. You are dealing with a copyist error that made it into KJV, Tyndale, Geneva. You looked at it in other translations?
Did Michal have children?22. You are dealing with a copyist error that made it into KJV, Tyndale, Geneva. You looked at it in other translations?
What's your point? You are going to have to elaborate.Did Michal have children?
ESV
2Sa 6:23 And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death.
2Sa 21:8 The king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Merab[fn] the daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite;
ESV
ESV
2Ki 8:26
Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Athaliah; she was a granddaughter of Omri king of Israel.
2Ch 22:2
Ahaziah was twenty-two[fn] years old when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Athaliah, the granddaughter of Omri
Note: See 2 Kings 8:26; Hebrew forty-two; Septuagint twenty
This was changed when the Old testament Bible was translated into Greek.
Doctrine wise, I agree. Behavior on social issues is where I disagree. The SBC as of late has gone on its apology tour for being ashamed of its past. Our delegate came back from the convention last year saying he thought that the name Southern in the name SBC was actually in jeopardy. Fast forward to this year, divisive bad behavior is rewarded because a prominent BLACK pastor was the sponsor.