1. 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!

Pastor’s letter challenges seminary’s proposed stance

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by gb93433, Oct 17, 2006.

Top Posters
Page 3 of 5
  1. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    Jim, you and I are together on this one! :thumbs:

    ..................

    Re a private prayer language -- we had a very long thread on that a few months back and, as I recall, no one could give a sound biblical basis for it, it was mainly anecdotal.
     
    #41 Marcia, Oct 18, 2006
  2. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    Cor blimey, Marcia, fair dinkum

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
    #42 Jim1999, Oct 18, 2006
  3. El_Guero

    El_Guero New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed

    When ya' gotta stretch that much with that many suspects . . . ya' would do better writting crime novels.

    IMHO. SBC has not been dispensational - that was one of the reasons that a man from DTS could not find an SBC church for many, many years.

     
    #43 El_Guero, Oct 18, 2006
  4. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    You are right. None of the SBC seminaries taught dispensationalism and did not hire any who believe in it. Today there are three versions of dispensationalism. Patterson has knowingly hired some dispensationalists at SWBTS. He himself is one as well.
     
    #44 gb93433, Oct 18, 2006
  5. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    Translation? :smilewinkgrin:

    I take it the "cor blimey" is some kind of exclamation. Is that correct?

    The "fair dinkum" is a puzzle. Could it mean, "I'm so happy to be agreeing with you for once since you are always right"? :laugh: :laugh:
     
    #45 Marcia, Oct 18, 2006
  6. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    The SBC always has issues. When I first received the Baptist slander in the mail, my first thought was that I hope the mailman does not read such gossip. I believe the SBC is so tainted with gossip and it has become such a regular practice that do not even recognize it.

    I do not think I have any problem with anything you wrote except to say that I see no evidence that 1 Cor 12-14 is dealing with the issue you stated.

    Obviously two differing positions cannot be truth. But let me know when someone has all truth. So I am willing to give grace to those who do not agree with me. Therefore, it is imperative that the SBC stop their ranting ignorance and start taking a look at what the evidence is. The SBC has some excellent scholars who are very well equipped but the leadership will not listen to them. Fo about almost 100 years virtually every major school used SBC grammar books for their studies in Greek. The leaders of the SBC are some of the poorest theologians the SBC has to offer. Their best theologians are quietly teaching their students.

    I am not at all in favor of pentocalism. I do not see it as being from God. But I do not see the cessationist view as from God as well. I see the control of the practice as from God. I see it as much the same idea as what I say and do with my wife in private would not edify the body. However how I love my wife is legitimate. There is a huge difference between what I do in private in worshipping God and what I do when I am in church. When I sing to God in private it is to Him. However, I am sure that few would be edified by a solo from me in public.

    If you would like some further dialog about this matter then I suggest you dialog with Dr. Lorin Cranford who is probably the leading Greek professor in the SBC. He is far better equipped than myself.

    The way I often think of the SBC is like what an old man once told some of us, "An empty bag makes the most noise."

    I treat tongues like any other gift. It can be used properly or abused and one is wrong. I believe Paul sets out the proepr use. I also believe in its proper use things will be under control. Years ago I was in a church that did believe in speaking in tongues. One time a lady was there and spoke in tongues and the pastor immediately asked for an interpretation. There was none so the pastor asked one of the deacons to escort her out of the building. Seems quite simple to me.

    Having said what I did let me ask you a question. I am sure you believe the Bible . So how would you interpret 1 Cor. 14:29-33, "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. "
     
    #46 gb93433, Oct 19, 2006
  7. Inadequate in Myself

    Inadequate in Myself Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That much is assumed. But on an issue that has as much difference of opinion at its very heart, the status of an institution or a church as Baptist becomes a significant issue. SWBTS has determined to be representative of a traditional Baptist hermeneutic - as I have said, it is not a question of discussing, it is a question of advocacy.
     
    #47 Inadequate in Myself, Oct 19, 2006
  8. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    101
    #48 preachinjesus, Oct 19, 2006
  9. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    If some Baptists want to become pentecostal, let them join the pentecostal ministry. We have remained biblical down through the years and we should be prepared to stand strong in the faith and not even tolerate these abuses of scripture.

    I am baptist because I believe it is the closest to New Testament teaching. When it departs from that historic teaching, I shall also depart and find a church that dares to believe scripture. Jimmy Swaggart is NOT my idol.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
    #49 Jim1999, Oct 19, 2006
  10. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    I am not aware of tongues ever being much of an issue in the SBC. There has always been disagreement and they have lived with it. A few days ago I discussed this issue with someone and they think it is more of a political ploy by the old guard to gain back the control they recently lost. It is an effort to make the younger leaders look like they are not adhering to orthodoxy. It is an effort to get ready for the convention in 2007.
     
    #50 gb93433, Oct 19, 2006
  11. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    Seems I recall tongues being an issue in some SB churches back in the 60's and the leadership sat on it then.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
    #51 Jim1999, Oct 19, 2006
  12. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    I am sure a number of Pentecostals would say the same thing as you. They would say that they adhere to scripture and you do not.

    I personally believe that few people know much about what scripture teaches and very few have ever discipled anyone. Most people are not consumed with doctrinal issues such as pastors and they are more likely to go where they feel emotionally comfortable.

    I think the key indicator is found in Hebrews 13:7, "Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith."

    I have always felt show me your God. Don't just tell me about him. When I see the outcome of your life then I will clearly see who your God is. There are many who do not have much to say, but it is clear who their God is. It clear that they trust God and not themselves. That kind of person is my leader not a politician in a denomination who may be full of air.

    The thinks that irritates me more than anything else is to see dishonesty and what I would chameleon Christians. I think we are in the days when there is an enormous amount of it in the business world and in churches. Virtually every week we are hearing about a religious leader who did something grossly wrong. I am old enough to have known some of those people I hear about. Looking back, in most cases, it is not a surprise because of who they hung around with instead of walking alone if it was necessary.

    Glad to hearthat you are willing to walk alone if it necessary. But you are not alone. You are always with the one who is a majority. Thank God for people like you.
     
    #52 gb93433, Oct 19, 2006
  13. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    101
    I'd still like to see some Scripture showing where private prayer language is shown as wrongheaded and not old rhetoric about "it's not the church I grew up in"

    maybe even see a Scriptural discussion on whether or not the miraculous gifts have ceased
     
    #53 preachinjesus, Oct 19, 2006
  14. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    Have you read my signature? That is prayer language..the part where we rush off before God speaks.

    I agree there are times when we ought to simply bow in prayer and say nothing. That is prayer language.

    If we dare to say that we are to expect extra-biblical signs and wonders, then we do not have a complete Bible, and the field is open to all kinds of imaginative doctrine. All the speaker in tongues needs is another witness to agree.

    The New Testament churches only had the Old Testament and a few apostolic letters that made their rounds. We have a completed word, and it is sufficient. If one wants extra-biblical expression just vitit some charismatic fellowships. They even have people brarking like dogs..."in the spirit".

    The New Testament is almost void of any mention of the gifts beyond Acts and Corinthians.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
    #54 Jim1999, Oct 19, 2006
  15. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do not think I was stretching anything, here. SBTS was orgainzed in the 1850s, I believe without checking in 1858. That is fairly close to 150 years, by my math.
    There are six seminaries directly So. Baptist, in the US. American in Nashvile was, but not now, a co-venture; Mid- American Baptist is nominally So. Baptist, More than one So. Baptist seminary is located outsaide the US, and several US Colleges and Universities, that are considered "So. Baptist" have Seminary level Grad. Schools, among them Samford, Harding, Baylor, Union, Liberty, not to mention the 'protest Seminaries' over the conservative resonance, including Richmond, Lexington, and SEBTS in Exile :rolleyes:that are now out there. The CBF is still basically So. Baptist, even in 'protest' mode, as most of these churches have not withdrawn from the SBC, at least officially. So we are nearing a 'score' here, as well.
    No, I don't think I said that the 'SBC' was/is a 'dispensational group', but that there were and/or are no doubt some dispensationalists in it. And that this did not start with Paige Patterson. Or at least I meant to say that.
    I've read, but cannot confirm, that R.G.Lee was a 'dispensationalist'. He became Pastor of Belleview during the 1920s. I can confirm that W. A. Criswell was a dispensationalist. He became pastor of FBC, Dallas, in 1944. I'd suggest that these two churches have been, if not the top two, at least as to the 'leading lights' in the SBC, close to "the top of the heap", over the years. So, again, 'dispensationalism' is not necessarily some new 'Johnny-come-lately' idea over the last decade and a half in the SBC, at least not for some of it.

    Oh yeah! You are the one who said "never". Language Cop says that "never" is an absolute term, and he is absolutely sure of that!

    Ed
     
    #55 EdSutton, Oct 19, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 19, 2006
  16. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    Which one of the three varieties of dispensationalism do they subscribe to? Just in the past 80 years or so there has been three different varieties. Seems to me that they are closer to the basic premise of Mormon theology of progressive revelation than the typical SBC theology that has been held since 1845.

    Seems to me that the younger leaders would do well to propose the idea that dispensationalism is not in accordance with Southern Baptist theology and have a vote on that.
     
    #56 gb93433, Oct 19, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 19, 2006
  17. RandR

    RandR New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2003
    Messages:
    348
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aaron made a good point a couple of pages back, asking about where the Bible speaks of a PRIVATE prayer language.

    I suppose that since the president of SWBTS can use argument from silence and deduction to argue for total abstinence from alcohol, then argument from silence and deduction could also be used on this subject.

    I think the argument would go something like this:
    * Paul lays down several restrictions about tongues in corporate worship.
    * Paul says "do not forbid" tongues.
    * Pauls says, "I speak in tongues more than the rest of you."
    * Given the context of 1 Corinthians it is a hermeneutical leap to infer that he is talking about "known languages" when he does not forbid and says he does it more than anyone else.

    That conversation with God thing he's talking about sounds a lot like prayer.
    That "I do it more than you" coupled with all those regulations in chapter 14 indicate that Paul does something quite a bit, just not too much in public. Hhhmmm.

    I'm not even saying this is MY view. It is A view. It is not heresy. It is not an argument from experience. It is a biblical interpretation that some people do and others do not agree with.

    So where does the PRIVATE part come in. He's right. It's not biblical. I'll submit that I've never heard talk of a "private" prayer language outisde of an SBC context. Sure, I'd heard about "prayer language"...just not PRIVATE. So why all the talk lately about a PRIVATE prayer language? Becuase IMB POLICICES INSIST THAT IT REMAIN PRIVATE. At least they did. Now the exclude it all together. The attitude used to be...if you pray in the Spirit...keep it to yourslef in the privacy of your prayer closet. And the overwhelming majority of our m's have complied. It appears that WE ADDED THE "PRIVATE" label in order to make sure the churches we plant on the field weren't using tongues in the worship service. I have no problem with that. I DO have a problem with telling M's (and now apparently SWBTS employees) how they can pray.
     
    #57 RandR, Oct 19, 2006
  18. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think private is supposed to be an excuse for why it does not require an interpretation.
     
    #58 James_Newman, Oct 19, 2006
  19. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    Are there or are there not Baptist distinctives? Just because some Baptists might believe in the sign gifts like tongues, or use a "private prayer language," does not mean that it should be made part of the Baptist doctrine.

    If the sign gifts are valid since the early church, why were they not practiced after a certain time? Didn't they largely disappear in the church until Azusa Street? I really don't know; I'm asking.

    And if they were gone until Azusa Street, how does the Azusa Street "revival" validate sign gifts?
     
    #59 Marcia, Oct 19, 2006
  20. Allan

    Allan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,902
    Likes Received:
    5
    Actually, PRIVATE is something that comes from the Charismatic movement to define the TWO types of tongues used in scripture (this is not biblical either). One is for in church and one is used in you personal devotion. One needs and interpreter (but you can also use it in chruch just not yelling it like those who are to have an interpreter) The other tongues they claim does need an interpreter as it is between you and God and you don't need to know what the Spirit of God is discussing with God the Father.
     
    #60 Allan, Oct 19, 2006
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 3 of 5
Loading...