More heresy from the NBC

[Revmitchell]

In a session, "Can We All Get Along? Finding Common Ground with Other Faiths," panelists seemed flummoxed by a question about applying Jesus' own exclusive truth claims in John 14:6 ("I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.")

Texas Baptist leader David Currie said he doesn't accept all faiths, but agreed with another panelist that John 14:6 was open to interpretation. "It is never appropriate to be dogmatic in one's convictions," Currie said (rather dogmatically), according to Baptist Press. "God is truth. I don't know all truth. So what I bear witness to is what I have experienced in my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and that's as far as I can take it."


http://www.baptistpress.org/BPFirstPerson.asp?ID=27531

 

[Martin]

Texas Baptist leader David Currie said he doesn't accept all faiths, but agreed with another panelist that John 14:6 was open to interpretation.

That is pitiful and pathetic. I don't see how John 14:6 is "open to interpretation". It says what it means!

I think there are going to be a lot of people, like this Currie character, who are going to be in bad shape come judgment day.

The LORD Jesus is the ONLY way to heaven. Point, blank, period. Any compromise on that point is soul damning heresy.

Yes, you may quote me on that :wavey: .

 

[SBCPreacher]

Knowing now that this was said at Jimmy Carter's and Bill Clinton's big Baptist meeting, I'm not the least surprised.

 

[skypair]

Knowing now that this was said at Jimmy Carter's and Bill Clinton's big Baptist meeting, I'm not the least surprised.

Oh me! I didn't know Bill was there, too.

And if John 14:6 is open to "interpretation," then we might as well leave all scripture up to "private interpretation!"

skypair

 

[ituttut]

"So what I bear witness to is what I have experienced in my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and that's as far as I can take it."

This man is honest, but at a "stand still". He can say no more than he "has experienced".

Our experience" is limited, but His Word is not. We can be "dogmatic" (a poor choice of words), or sure, just as was Jesus, and Paul. Did they say, "Well, I can't be too sure about this"? If we can't stand, then we back off and apply only what we have "experienced". His Word is sure, transcending our lonely and personal experience.

It is His Word we are carry to the world, and not "our experience".

 

[JustChristian]

That is pitiful and pathetic. I don't see how John 14:6 is "open to interpretation". It says what it means!

I think there are going to be a lot of people, like this Currie character, who are going to be in bad shape come judgment day.

The LORD Jesus is the ONLY way to heaven. Point, blank, period. Any compromise on that point is soul damning heresy.

Yes, you may quote me on that :wavey: .

Don't you believe that all scripture requires interpretation? Baptists have historically held that this is the right and responsibility of the believer, not the Pope or a priest. Who interprets scripture for you?

 

[just-want-peace]

Don't you believe that all scripture requires interpretation? Baptists have historically held that this is the right and responsibility of the believer, not the Pope or a priest. Who interprets scripture for you?

If, by "interpretation", you mean "what does it say?", then yes; it is the believer who does it.

If, on the other hand, you mean "what does it say (that I don't like and am going to make it say what I want it to)", then you have a real big problem.

For instance: John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

There is no "interpreting" here; just acceptance or rejection.

There's a fine line between truly "interpreting" (understanding) and "rewriting". Much of modern "interpretation" is nothing more or less than "rewriting" so that the Word doesn't step on toes as much, as hard, or as often.

 

[Palatka51]

In a session, "Can We All Get Along? Finding Common Ground with Other Faiths," panelists seemed flummoxed by a question about applying Jesus' own exclusive truth claims in John 14:6 ("I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.")

You've heard of the statement when one falls? "He'll feel that in the morning". Well it should in his case be "He'll feel that in eternity".

 

[JustChristian]

If, by "interpretation", you mean "what does it say?", then yes; it is the believer who does it.

If, on the other hand, you mean "what does it say (that I don't like and am going to make it say what I want it to)", then you have a real big problem.

For instance: John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

There is no "interpreting" here; just acceptance or rejection.

There's a fine line between truly "interpreting" (understanding) and "rewriting". Much of modern "interpretation" is nothing more or less than "rewriting" so that the Word doesn't step on toes as much, as hard, or as often.

This is interpreting: what does it say?


This is not and never has been: "what does it say (that I don't like and am going to make it say what I want it to)"

 

[Revmitchell]

Don't you believe that all scripture requires interpretation? Baptists have historically held that this is the right and responsibility of the believer, not the Pope or a priest. Who interprets scripture for you?

Texas Baptist leader David Currie said he doesn't accept all faiths, but agreed with another panelist that John 14:6 was open to interpretation. "It is never appropriate to be dogmatic in one's convictions," Currie said (rather dogmatically), according to Baptist Press. "God is truth. I don't know all truth. So what I bear witness to is what I have experienced in my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and that's as far as I can take it."

John 14:6 is not open to interpretation. Not by Currie and not by you. This is a verse that is worth dying for. Currie is engaging in the libs favorite toll. "Double Speak" And it is shameful.

 

[ituttut]

Don't you believe that all scripture requires interpretation? Baptists have historically held that this is the right and responsibility of the believer, not the Pope or a priest. Who interprets scripture for you?

Interpretation is made by just about all, but the Bible is all ready interpreted for us. Our own interpretation led's to error.

Right under, just-want-peace says it very well.

All through the Bible we see those who believe God, and those that do not. We are to believe what we read in the Bible for this is God today speaking to us. Do we believe what the Holy Spirit presents?

Example of man interpreting (not believing) can be found in the book of Acts. Does the Gentile have only One Apostle? His Word tells us YES! Other than God forcing Peter to preach to Cornelius, can we find where any (including John the Baptist, Jesus while on earth, Peter, James, etc) preaching to a Gentile about the Body of Christ? It wasn't even known until after our Lord Jesus Christ revealed This Church to Paul. Those of the gospel of John the Baptist all had a "Kingdom" gospel that applied to God's people, the Hebrew, those issued through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The "Kingdom" is promised to ISRAEL. We justified through faith are in the Body Church, and not the Kingdom Church.

The "Kingdom Church" waits for the "Tribulation" which can only come after we in the "Body of Christ" are caught up to Him in the air.

 

[JustChristian]

Interpretation is made by just about all, but the Bible is all ready interpreted for us. Our own interpretation led's to error.

Right under, just-want-peace says it very well.

All through the Bible we see those who believe God, and those that do not. We are to believe what we read in the Bible for this is God today speaking to us. Do we believe what the Holy Spirit presents?

Example of man interpreting (not believing) can be found in the book of Acts. Does the Gentile have only One Apostle? His Word tells us YES! Other than God forcing Peter to preach to Cornelius, can we find where any (including John the Baptist, Jesus while on earth, Peter, James, etc) preaching to a Gentile about the Body of Christ? It wasn't even known until after our Lord Jesus Christ revealed This Church to Paul. Those of the gospel of John the Baptist all had a "Kingdom" gospel that applied to God's people, the Hebrew, those issued through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The "Kingdom" is promised to ISRAEL. We justified through faith are in the Body Church, and not the Kingdom Church.

The "Kingdom Church" waits for the "Tribulation" which can only come after we in the "Body of Christ" are caught up to Him in the air.

I disagree with your statement that the Bible is already interpreted for us. There are many passages of scripture that aren't that clear in terms of their meaning. Maybe you mean that YOU have already interpreted the Bible for all of us.

 

[J.D.]

It depends on what "is" is.

 

[Timsings]

This thread is another example of the kind of cheap shot extremism that goes on here. The OP pulls one comment out of a commentary on the New Baptist Covenent meeting and allows it to set up other posters for negative reactions about the meeting.

I find it pretty pitiful that there are so many people here who are willing to criticize this meeting just because things didn't go just the way they wanted them to. Even the author of the commentary quoted Carter as saying that Baptists should put aside their disagreements on specific issues for the sake of spreading the gospel. But that is not enough for some people here.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have to say that I have known David Currie for over 25 years. I consider him to be a friend. He doesn't need me to defend him. But I saw in his quoted words a reference toward a principle that I have tried to follow for a long time. Anytime you have human beings involved in something, it is flawed because of the limitations of human knowledge. This includes the formation of the Bible. We wait on God to reveal God's will to us. Unfortunately, we also lack patience. We can't depend on the Bible exclusively. We can't interpret it on our own. We need the presence of the Holy Spirit to properly interpret scripture.

I am reminded of a simple formula that I put together years ago to distinguish liberal from conservative Christians. The liberal believes that he has the capacity to know a great deal, but he also believes that he does not actually know very much. The conservative believes that he does not have the capacity to know very much, but he also believes that, actually, he knows a great deal. Just ask him! :BangHead:

Let the bashing begin!

Tim Reynolds

 

[Revmitchell]

This thread is another example of the kind of cheap shot extremism that goes on here. The OP pulls one comment out of a commentary on the New Baptist Covenent meeting and allows it to set up other posters for negative reactions about the meeting.

I find it pretty pitiful that there are so many people here who are willing to criticize this meeting just because things didn't go just the way they wanted them to. Even the author of the commentary quoted Carter as saying that Baptists should put aside their disagreements on specific issues for the sake of spreading the gospel. But that is not enough for some people here.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have to say that I have known David Currie for over 25 years. I consider him to be a friend. He doesn't need me to defend him. But I saw in his quoted words a reference toward a principle that I have tried to follow for a long time. Anytime you have human beings involved in something, it is flawed because of the limitations of human knowledge. This includes the formation of the Bible. We wait on God to reveal God's will to us. Unfortunately, we also lack patience. We can't depend on the Bible exclusively. We can't interpret it on our own. We need the presence of the Holy Spirit to properly interpret scripture.

I am reminded of a simple formula that I put together years ago to distinguish liberal from conservative Christians. The liberal believes that he has the capacity to know a great deal, but he also believes that he does not actually know very much. The conservative believes that he does not have the capacity to know very much, but he also believes that, actually, he knows a great deal. Just ask him! :BangHead:

Let the bashing begin!

Tim Reynolds

Anyone who believes John 14:6 is open to interpretation has a serious theological crisis. This is not a secondary issue. Jesus is the only way period.

 

[ituttut]

I disagree with your statement that the Bible is already interpreted for us. There are many passages of scripture that aren't that clear in terms of their meaning. Maybe you mean that YOU have already interpreted the Bible for all of us.

What scriptures are you saying aren't clear? Any that have to do with our justification today are very explicit. All the Bible is not written to us today, but it is all written for us.

 

[ituttut]

It depends on what "is" is.

Hi J.D. Good point. "Is" is what we say it is, and "Is" is what God says it "Is". I say He "is" right.

 

[JustChristian]

John 14:6 is not open to interpretation. Not by Currie and not by you. This is a verse that is worth dying for. Currie is engaging in the libs favorite toll. "Double Speak" And it is shameful.

So you claim to have perfect understanding of every verse in the Bible? I seriously doubt it.

 

[Revmitchell]

So you claim to have perfect understanding of every verse in the Bible? I seriously doubt it.

Uh... It appears you are engaging in hyperbole. (But I could be wrong) I only say that because you accused me of saying something I never said. Why would you do that?

I spoke of one verse and one verse only and it involves a primary issue. Not every verse in scripture is questionable except by libs who need to justify the tearing down of scripture so as to promote their percieved notion of tolerance.

 

[JustChristian]

Interpretation is made by just about all, but the Bible is all ready interpreted for us. Our own interpretation led's to error.

Right under, just-want-peace says it very well.

All through the Bible we see those who believe God, and those that do not. We are to believe what we read in the Bible for this is God today speaking to us. Do we believe what the Holy Spirit presents?

Example of man interpreting (not believing) can be found in the book of Acts. Does the Gentile have only One Apostle? His Word tells us YES! Other than God forcing Peter to preach to Cornelius, can we find where any (including John the Baptist, Jesus while on earth, Peter, James, etc) preaching to a Gentile about the Body of Christ? It wasn't even known until after our Lord Jesus Christ revealed This Church to Paul. Those of the gospel of John the Baptist all had a "Kingdom" gospel that applied to God's people, the Hebrew, those issued through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The "Kingdom" is promised to ISRAEL. We justified through faith are in the Body Church, and not the Kingdom Church.

The "Kingdom Church" waits for the "Tribulation" which can only come after we in the "Body of Christ" are caught up to Him in the air.

Then I'll let the Bible speak for itself.

Act 8:26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.
Act 8:27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,
Act 8:28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.
Act 8:29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
Act 8:30 And Philip ran thither to [him], and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
Act 8:31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.