-
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!
Liberal Baptist....
- Thread starter nate
- Start date
- Status
alexander284
Well-Known Member
I'd consider "Free Will Baptists" to be very liberal. (Though I dislike labels like "liberal" or "conservative.")
alexander284,
The Free Will Baptists are about as "liberal" as Bob Jones University. The Free Will Baptist Bible College in Nashville is as straight-laced as one could possibly be. It would be akin to Pensacola Christian or Bob Jones in rules and deportment for the students. One of my daughter's best friends went there-for a year! It was so narrow and negative she had to leave.
Skirts for the girls, "white-wall ear" haircuts for the boys, literal interpretation of Scripture, and on and on it goes.
I have had Free Will Baptist pastors as friends, and nothing could be further from the truth (from where I have been and what I have seen in Middle Tennessee--which is a bastion of Free Will).
I say kindly and with love; I would check my source or perspective if I were you?
sdg!
rd
The Free Will Baptists are about as "liberal" as Bob Jones University. The Free Will Baptist Bible College in Nashville is as straight-laced as one could possibly be. It would be akin to Pensacola Christian or Bob Jones in rules and deportment for the students. One of my daughter's best friends went there-for a year! It was so narrow and negative she had to leave.
Skirts for the girls, "white-wall ear" haircuts for the boys, literal interpretation of Scripture, and on and on it goes.
I have had Free Will Baptist pastors as friends, and nothing could be further from the truth (from where I have been and what I have seen in Middle Tennessee--which is a bastion of Free Will).
I say kindly and with love; I would check my source or perspective if I were you?
sdg!
rd
I would agree with you very much Alexander in the fact I also do not like to judge entire denominations. But I was wondering which Baptist groups tend to be more liberal in their seminaries and practices. Thanks for the information Rhetorician your posts always contain good information.
Most consider the American Baptist Convention to be pretty liberal, though the American Baptists on the BB might disagree. 
At any rate, in the Fundamentalist/Modernist battles of the 1920's and on, the ABC ("Northern Baptist" at the time) was a prime battleground, with the Conservative Baptists and the GARB eventually exiting the convention.
At any rate, in the Fundamentalist/Modernist battles of the 1920's and on, the ABC ("Northern Baptist" at the time) was a prime battleground, with the Conservative Baptists and the GARB eventually exiting the convention.
At the liberal end of the spectrum you will find the Alliance of Baptists and the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists, along with some churches from the American Baptist Churches in the USA (ABC-USA). The Church of the Brethren, an Anabaptistic group that cooperates with the ABC-USA, is also liberal by southern standards.
The ABC-USA as a whole is more liberal than the Southern Baptist Convention, although a number of churches are trying to mount their own version of the resurgence that conservatives within the SBC accomplished in the 1970s and 1980s.
The ABC-USA as a whole is more liberal than the Southern Baptist Convention, although a number of churches are trying to mount their own version of the resurgence that conservatives within the SBC accomplished in the 1970s and 1980s.
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
1. Alliance of Baptists: LIBERAL with a capital L.
2. Any denomination with the words "welcoming and affirming" in it is LIBERAL with a capital L. That is code for welcoming and affirming sin.
3. The only thing about the ABC that seems to be different from the SBC is that it seems the liberals have won control of that denomination and true Bible believers have pretty much abandoned it and are trying to start a new denomination. At least, that is the way I remember reading the article several months back.
4. Another liberal denomination is the CBF. Probably not as liberal as A of B, but liberal nonetheless.
Joseph Botwinick
Does any Baptist group or denomination allow homosexuals to be in the ministry? To me that's the line one has to question if they are truely Baptist any more. I agree gb I don't like to judge people as a whole or group but my question was as a whole does the denomination do things conservatives would consider wrong.
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
Nate,
The Alliance of Baptists and any denomination that has the words "welcoming and affirming" allow homosexual unions and ministers.
Alliance of Baptists statement on homosexuality
Wikipedia says this about the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
Joseph Botwinick
The Alliance of Baptists and any denomination that has the words "welcoming and affirming" allow homosexual unions and ministers.
Alliance of Baptists statement on homosexuality
Wikipedia says this about the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
Joseph Botwinick
Mark Osgatharp
New Member
What a sad day among Baptists when condoning sodomy is the litmus test of one's fidelity, or lack thereof, to God's word. Does this mean if a group of churches condemns sodomy that they are in the pail of Baptist doctrinal respectability?
For the record, the Alliance of Baptists, a group of formerly Southern Baptist churches located primarily in the southeast, is on record as being fully supportive of sodomite relationships. Such churches ceased being authentic Baptists long before they embraced the sodomite heresy.
Mark Osgatharp
Mark Osgatharp
New Member
A "liberal", in the bad sense of the term, is anyone who takes liberties with God's word. Aanyone who says "I know what the Bible says but...." is a liberal in doctrine.
A "liberal", in the good sense of the term, is a man who has a liberal love for his brothers in Christ, as well as for lost humanity, and who proves that love by liberal distribution of his money (not someone elses money) to support the gospel ministry and those who have a legitimate need for worldly goods.
Mark Osgatharp
A "liberal", in the good sense of the term, is a man who has a liberal love for his brothers in Christ, as well as for lost humanity, and who proves that love by liberal distribution of his money (not someone elses money) to support the gospel ministry and those who have a legitimate need for worldly goods.
Mark Osgatharp
I can't believe a meeting like this was actually held in a First Baptist Church. I guess this would be a "Liberal Baptist Church" all though I would now call it a church of satan.
Here's a short little bit of what's on the site from Joseph's link.
"As Christians and as Baptists, we particularly lament the denigration of our gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender sisters and brothers in this debate by those who claim to speak for God. We affirm that the Alliance of Baptists supports the rights of all citizens to full marriage equality, and we affirm anew that the Alliance will "create places of refuge and renewal for those who are ignored by the church."
This Statement of Concern was adopted at the Annual Meeting of the Alliance of Baptists meeting at First Baptist Church in Dayton, Ohio."
Here's a short little bit of what's on the site from Joseph's link.
"As Christians and as Baptists, we particularly lament the denigration of our gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender sisters and brothers in this debate by those who claim to speak for God. We affirm that the Alliance of Baptists supports the rights of all citizens to full marriage equality, and we affirm anew that the Alliance will "create places of refuge and renewal for those who are ignored by the church."
This Statement of Concern was adopted at the Annual Meeting of the Alliance of Baptists meeting at First Baptist Church in Dayton, Ohio."
I cannot even understand how a group could get so far off. But I have seen other things just as bad though. One non-Christian I talked to a few years ago told me he had started attending a church and then left when the church embraced homosexuality.
I guess it shouldn't surprise us if we read Rev. 2 and 3. Every denomination has some bad apples. I think the bad apples are increasing though. I have personally seen bad apples among those who call themselves good and preach the right stuff but live a lie.
FYI to all:
The Co-operative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) is a movement of some (but not all) who were more liberal than those of us who worked for the "conservative resurgernce" in Southen Baptist life. For those of you who don't know this was begun when Adrian Rogers was elected president of the SBC in 1979. (He has just died God rest his soul). The CBF for all intents and purposes is a "split" off the SBC.
One of the primary issues that the CBF folk left over was the issue of confessions of faith. They made the stand that the historic Baptist confessions had been made into creeds. The main differences that were disputed, were the fact that (the liberal) men (and sometimes women) were made to sign a "Confession of Faith" in order to prove their commitment to the inerrancy and infallibility of the Scripures. In their minds this was a "forced issue" and took it out of the "conscience" realm.
The more "progressives" (read liberal) ones called it "creeping creedalism." They used the historic Baptist principle of "soul competency" & "priesthood of each believer" to argue against the "confession of faith" argument.
The "confession of faith" orthodoxy did grant that there was those two issues that mark us and help define us as Baptists. But, these two issues no where in our history have superceded the commonly held view of all Baptists be they; Calvinists, Free Will, Particular, Primitive, pre-, post-, al-, sabbatarian, legalistic, antinominan, IBF, SBC, etc. that all of us were "lashed to the rock of Biblical inerrancy!"
In the last year or two, however, the CBF has had its own problems. They left over the confessional issue and tried to rally 'round "missions" as the hub of the wheel that held them together. They have detested the idea of having to have any formal doctrinal statement to bind them together.
Lately though, this has backfired somewhat on them in the CBF. There have been some very liberal groups like the homosexuals and "tree hugger" types who have tried to force their way into postitions of leadership and committees in order to gain a hearing. So; they have been forced, at least to think about who they are, and what they b/l in order to define their whole structure. So, they might have to draw up a confession of faith of their own.
It seems to be one of the ironies of life. You leave one group b/c you feel that their stance along a doctinal basis and having to sign the document is too strong. Then you leave, and as soon as you do, you have to come up with an instrument similar to what you have just avowedly hated.
If there is a bit of confusion over the two issues of "confession" vs. "creed." This is the place where one of the many arguments over the "conservative resurgence" revolved.
"Confession of Faith:"
A statement of belief held by any body of believers, at any time, with the CONSENT of all who are a member of that body. It can be changed, modified, ratified, etc. as time goes along to show the changing nature of the beliefs held or to respond to the current culture.
"Creed:"
It is similar to a "Confession of Faith" or "Statement of Faith." It does state the theology of those who b/l. The major difference is; you MUST b/l what is written in order to be a _______. An example might be; to be a Roman Catholic you might have to b/l all of the teachings of the church and subscribe to the "Roman Catholic Creed."
This is where the CBF said the conservatives in the SBC had make the Confessions of Faith a Creed, by having to b/l them and sign them.
The issues are CONSENT vs. MUST!
I have said way too much.
sdg!
rd
The Co-operative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) is a movement of some (but not all) who were more liberal than those of us who worked for the "conservative resurgernce" in Southen Baptist life. For those of you who don't know this was begun when Adrian Rogers was elected president of the SBC in 1979. (He has just died God rest his soul). The CBF for all intents and purposes is a "split" off the SBC.
One of the primary issues that the CBF folk left over was the issue of confessions of faith. They made the stand that the historic Baptist confessions had been made into creeds. The main differences that were disputed, were the fact that (the liberal) men (and sometimes women) were made to sign a "Confession of Faith" in order to prove their commitment to the inerrancy and infallibility of the Scripures. In their minds this was a "forced issue" and took it out of the "conscience" realm.
The more "progressives" (read liberal) ones called it "creeping creedalism." They used the historic Baptist principle of "soul competency" & "priesthood of each believer" to argue against the "confession of faith" argument.
The "confession of faith" orthodoxy did grant that there was those two issues that mark us and help define us as Baptists. But, these two issues no where in our history have superceded the commonly held view of all Baptists be they; Calvinists, Free Will, Particular, Primitive, pre-, post-, al-, sabbatarian, legalistic, antinominan, IBF, SBC, etc. that all of us were "lashed to the rock of Biblical inerrancy!"
In the last year or two, however, the CBF has had its own problems. They left over the confessional issue and tried to rally 'round "missions" as the hub of the wheel that held them together. They have detested the idea of having to have any formal doctrinal statement to bind them together.
Lately though, this has backfired somewhat on them in the CBF. There have been some very liberal groups like the homosexuals and "tree hugger" types who have tried to force their way into postitions of leadership and committees in order to gain a hearing. So; they have been forced, at least to think about who they are, and what they b/l in order to define their whole structure. So, they might have to draw up a confession of faith of their own.
It seems to be one of the ironies of life. You leave one group b/c you feel that their stance along a doctinal basis and having to sign the document is too strong. Then you leave, and as soon as you do, you have to come up with an instrument similar to what you have just avowedly hated.
If there is a bit of confusion over the two issues of "confession" vs. "creed." This is the place where one of the many arguments over the "conservative resurgence" revolved.
"Confession of Faith:"
A statement of belief held by any body of believers, at any time, with the CONSENT of all who are a member of that body. It can be changed, modified, ratified, etc. as time goes along to show the changing nature of the beliefs held or to respond to the current culture.
"Creed:"
It is similar to a "Confession of Faith" or "Statement of Faith." It does state the theology of those who b/l. The major difference is; you MUST b/l what is written in order to be a _______. An example might be; to be a Roman Catholic you might have to b/l all of the teachings of the church and subscribe to the "Roman Catholic Creed."
This is where the CBF said the conservatives in the SBC had make the Confessions of Faith a Creed, by having to b/l them and sign them.
The issues are CONSENT vs. MUST!
I have said way too much.
sdg!
rd
- Status