Not being a SBC I have no idea what you are talking about...could you be more specific?
-
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!
Reformed and Southern Baptists
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
Not being a SBC I have no idea what you are talking about...could you be more specific?
There is a bit of conflict in the convention because the new and young graduates for the last few years have become very aggressive with their Calvinist doctrine. Young Calvinist pastors refuse to admit to churches they are candidating with that they are Calvinist hoping to slide in under the radar and eventually turn the church Calvinist. Germantown Baptist in Memphis TN was split in half because of this. (just one example)
Statements (based on a Calvinist world view) denouncing evangelism methods, made at convention meetings.
There iare a number of other things but I suppose you can get the idea.
Anyway, there has been some push back because of stuff like this. One was a statement of doctrine ( I forget exactly what is is called) that was posted online and let anyone who wanted to sign on to agree with it. It was basically a statement implying that SBC doctrine was anything but Calvinist.
There have been blog posts back and forth etc. It has created a lot of division to the point that a committee was formed to discover how the divide can be dealt with in the convention. Then a public statement was released asking everyone to be charitable to each others views.
OK, then this puts me in mind of the history lesson of the development of the Kingdom of Prussia. Most in that kingdom were Lutheran but the King & family were Calvinists & the king imported many Hugonauts (French Calvinists) into the county. Eventually they wanted to consolidate (with emphasis from the Lutherans) to one STATE Church (you know the Germans...everything is orderly). So when they did that, the Calvinists merely formed & kept their own churches. They never intermingled with the Lutherans. And why should they? It was a, You go to your church & I will go to mine & everyone will be happy' So why dont the Calvinists just form stronger relationships with Calvinistic churches like Reformed Baptists & leave that SBC thing in the dirt....thats what I would do. Im sure the RB's would be elated.
The convention has always been diverse, although recently the Calvinists have been trying to revise history and they make claims the the convention started out to be all Calvinist or even mostly. Nothing could be further from the truth. For some reason they are fighting to have dominant control. The problem is they are the minority these days.
They wouldnt be a minority if they went to the Reformed Baptists......this appears to be a money thing more than anything
saturneptune
New Member
I was a member of the Presbyterian Church of America for 26 years. I have been a member of a SBC church for 35 years, so I will give you my perspective. First of all, understand, there are different branches of the Presbyterian church. The one I served in was a conservative Presbyterian. However, the main branch of the modern day church in America is called the PCUSA (Presbyterian Church, United States of America). They are much more liberal than the PCA I came from. There are also other branches more conservative than the PCA and more liberal than the PCUSA.
First of all, the differences between the PCA and PCUSA are things like women deacons, elders and pastors. There is also a difference between the interpretation of Scripture, the PCA being much more conservative. The PCA holds to the Bible being totally Inspired and error free.
So, when you get into comparing the SBC with the PCA, they do have much in common. They both believe in eternal security, the complete accuracy of Scripture, and salvation by faith through grace. Both limit the offices of pastor, deacon and elder (elder for the Baptist churches that have chosen that form of government). However, there are some stark differences. The most glaring one is baptism. Presbyterians baptize infants. The SBC churches believe in baptism by immersion, after salvation as a public sign of belief in Jesus Christ and His work on the cross. Another difference is that Presbyterians have a hierarchy called a presbytery. These higher up organizations have a say so in the affairs of the local church, such as the selection of a pastor, Sunday School material, the budget, and maintenance of the buildings or other assets. Also, in general, Presbyterians have during their worship service the reading of creeds, such as the Apostles Creed, and responsive reading from Scripture. It is very rare for a Baptist church to say a creed. Some do have responsive readings. Our hymnals are very similar. When it comes to the differences between contemporary music and traditional, that issue transcends denomination.
Most Presbyterians have open communion. Baptist churches are a mix, depending on the standards of the local church. On the issue of missions, evangelism, and the like, the PCA is very strong on missionaries and supporting them. They believe faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. They are very similar to the SBC. In fact, sometimes overseas, the two groups cooperate with each other.
Some of the Presbyterian sects that are extreme Calvinists, or hyper, do not have missionaries or practice evangelism. However, there are Baptist groups that do the same thing, such as the Primitive Baptists for example. On the issue of reformed, or Calvinism, if that is what you want to call it, God's sovereignty, there are no debates within the Presbyterian church like one sees on this board, ad nauseum. One of the essentials of the Presbyterian church is God's sovereignty. As far as the SBC as a whole goes, there is no direction at the present time. They are still trying to sort it all out, which is not going to be easy considering the fact we are all autonomous churches. If the organization does not stop the bitter fighting over this one issue, they might find themselves a relic of the past.
In conclusion, I am a Baptist because of the issue of baptism, no hierarchy and an autonomous church. In general, I do not like elder government, as elders are suppose to be elected on spiritual maturity, and my experience it is usually based on ones standing in the community. I forgot to mention another difference. In general, you will not see an invitation in a Presbyterian church like most Baptist churches. If the Presbyterians do have a form of invitation, you will not see the "raised hands with all eyes closed" for sin A and then another hand raising session for Sin B.
I would say, in a certain respect the SBC and the PCA are closer than the SBC and some of the sects of Baptists I have seen on this board. It is very apparent to me, from some of the posts, most have no idea what serving in a Presbyterian church is really like.
Money thing?
EWF, I do not think so. I know one of the most influential pastors in the Founders Movement and he is motivated by the truth and ideology. He agrees that men like Al Mohler have been criticized for wanting to gain control of the SBC seminaries, but that is a result of, not the reason for their advocacy of the doctrines of grace.
Thank you. I think that my primary objection with Presbyterian would be over baptism. I could live with their church government (while I prefer congregational government, I wouldn’t consider the Presbyterian form unbiblical).
your mis interpreting my comment. If I were a SBC Pastor, I might be motivated to keep as many Calvinistic SB's in my pews & writing me checks vs the alternative...IE they go elsewhere more suited to them. Now Mohler may want to dismiss it as tribalism but if it was me Id tell him Im practicing what I believe to be the correct theology....& trust me, I would never be an SBC member.....there and again, Id never vote for Hillary Clinton .....(But, what difference does it make).
your mis interpreting my comment. If I were a SBC Pastor, I might be motivated to keep as many Calvinistic SB's in my pews & writing me checks vs the alternative...IE they go elsewhere more suited to them. Now Mohler may want to dismiss it as tribalism but if it was me Id tell him Im practicing what I believe to be the correct theology....& trust me, I would never be an SBC member.....there and again, Id never vote for Hillary Clinton .....(But, what difference does it make).
EWF, perhaps there is some of that, but considering the polarization going on in the SBC over the issue it may prove difficult.
Follow the money trail Herald:thumbs:
TadQueasy
Member
The SBC thanks you.
:laugh: And you belong to it......case closed ROFL
reformed Most 5 point calvinists/A Mil/Covenant theology, using the kjv to great extent.Creeds and Confessions
SBC mostly Dispy, split Cals/Arms/Non call/Bibl only used/
Actually, quite a difference!
DrJamesAch
New Member
Why isn't this in the Calvinist/Arminian forum? No Calvinist biased here :BangHead:
No true Arminians post here, at least that claim to be such. as they all say we are "Non cals!"
Think many of them are Arms, but they somehow think that holding to eternal security makes them not an Arm, but many Arms do in fact hold to eternal security!
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
Where do you get this bit of info? If you think the SBC is mostly dispy and that there are arminians in the SBC, you are probably wrong on a whole lot of other facts.
And where do you get the idea that Reformed baptists use the KJV to a great extent?
- Status