The BF&M and Communion

[Sandy]

[Tom Parker]

Sandy:

What you write is hard to read because it lacks reality. But that is the beauty of blogging each is entitled to his or view.

[William Thornton]

The 'submissive' stuff is substantive.

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

It occurred to me also that if the differences between 1963 and the 2000 document weren't viewed as substantive why would David Flick get fired for not agreeing with them? I can't imagine that the convention leadership would have bothered an update if they didn't think what they were adding was important to them, and therefore substantive.

[Sandy]

[Tim Bonney]

[Dave Roberts]

The biggest single difference between the 63 and 2K BFM's is in the preamble. The 2K document declares itself as an "instrument of doctrinal accountability." That completely changes its character from the nature of the 25 and 63 documents which are provided as guidance to the agencies and as information to the churches.

Academic freedom is never absolute, even in the most secular private institutions. Attacking the main sources of university funding will almost always land a professor in trouble. However, so much of the touted liberalism is based on quotes out of context, bits taken out of tapes made of professor's lectures, and of off-the-cuff remarks dug out of conversations. It's interesting that the history of the CR/Takeover Movement began not with charges about seminaries at all but the Judge Pressler attempting a political takeover of the Baylor Trustees, at which he failed, and it was only transferred to the SBC when he found the constitutional achilles heel of presidential appointment powers.

Also, if you want to split theological hairs, saying that the Bible "has truth without mixture of error for its matter" is quite a different statement from an ontological perspective than is saying that the Bible "is truth without mixture of error." The assumption of inerrancy is always grounded in the nature of the document. An inerrantist believes that things are true because they are in the Bible. I happen to believe that things are in the Bible because they have been found to be true. Those two assumptions stand worlds apart.

[Tim Bonney]

[Tim Bonney]

By the way, I don't think there is anything wrong with a denomination having a basic faith statement. But for it to be a basic faith statement that means something it needs to be a statement that focuses on the basics of the faith and the specific distinctives of that denomination. It shouldn't be a catch all document for whatever the latest denominational/political issue that comes along. Otherwise you end up doctrinally chasing the gages and also risking obscuring what is really important to faith. If denominational distinctives are real and meaningful they won't change that much. (Unless of course a group with a whole other theology takes over your denomination.)

If you look at the Apostle's Creed and the Nicene Creed they have not change for centuries. Not just decades, centuries. IMHO that is the test of a faith statement having lasting validity.

[Sandy]

[Dave Roberts]

[Tim Bonney]

[Tom Parker]

Tim:

You said:"When I was in seminary at SBTS there where plenty of women seeking calls to ministry from churches that supported their call. Of course most of them are now Methodists and Presbyterians. Our gain, the SBC's loss."

The sad part the men running the SBC could care less.



You also said:"Yes, views of the submission of women are substantive unless you are a man and haven't been told officially for the first time that you can't be a pastor despite God's call."

The unmitigated gall of any SB man telling a woman that the calling she has had did not come from God.

Some of the men who have supported these doings will regret them someday or become further victims in SBC life when the tide changes against some view they hold that conscience will not allow them to deny it to keep that steady paycheck. There are times when conscience should overrule the keeping of one's steady paycheck. I think some in SBC life have forgotten that.

[Tom Parker]

"A Southern Baptist college professor says those families in which the dad stays at home and the wife is the family’s primary breadwinner don’t comport with God’s plan for the family revealed in the Bible.

Owen Strachan, assistant professor of Christian theology and church history at Boyce College, the undergraduate arm of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., described “dad moms” as “man fails” in an article in the Spring 2012 issue of The Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

He defended that thesis Sept. 25 in a Moody Radio program debate over the question, “Are Stay-at-Home Dads Violating God’s Design for Men and Women?”

“I would say both men and women bear the image of God and so are fully invested for a life of meaningful service for God,” Strachan said. “That’s my starting point, but I would say then from a broad biblical theology that men are called to be leaders, providers, protectors and women are nurturers.”

“Women follow men in the home and the church,” he said. “Women are called to the high calling of raising families, given that God blesses them with children and making homes, being homemakers. These are roles that I think Scripture hands down for us pretty clearly in texts like Genesis 3.”

Another great example of the 2000 BF&M thinking by our SB professors.

This is what the TAKEOVER did to "improve" the SBC. How about his statement--"pretty clearly." Spoken like a died in the wool FUNDAMENTALIST.

[Mrs Haruo]

"Man fail?" "MAN FAIL?" I'd like to see that professor look a wounded soldier in the eye who's returned from the war to his waiting family and say that. What a bunch of self-righteous chicken excreta. I wonder if said professor even knows how to change a diaper. What a gas-bag.

[Tom Parker]

Mrs. Haruo:

You said:'What a bunch of self-righteous chicken excreta. I wonder if said professor even knows how to change a diaper. What a gas-bag."

Excellent comment! This is the kind of garbage that future pastors of SBC churches are fed a daily diet of.

Somebody pinch me. This is 2012 is it not.

[Haruo]

[Tom Parker]

"Man Fail", what the heck does that mean. How dare he even say such a thing. Some would say that he is a loser for saying such backwards things and slamming men and women at the very same time.

[Sandy]

As usual, conversations among individuals opposed to the SBC's leadership involving the BFM2000's provision related to the issue of submission by women is way out of context, and doesn't reflect the doctrine's interpretation by Southern Baptists at all. There are millions of women who seem to be quite happy with their family and church role, serving in Southern Baptist churches as either volunteers or vocational ministers. I'm not sure what the exact figure is at the moment, but there are over 2,000 women serving in international missions with the IMB. Last time I checked, there were over a dozen women on the executive committee, far more than there ever were under the pre-1979 leadership.

But I've learned, over the years, that the open mindedness and inclusion championed by those Baptists who either left the SBC entirely, or still hang out with one foot dangling from the CP in "dually affiliated" CBF congregations are only open minded and inclusive when it comes to themselves. When the issue involves Southern Baptists who happen to be more conservative, all their "principles" evaporate.

[Sandy]

[Tim Bonney]

[Dave Roberts]

[Tom Parker]

Sandy:

You said:'There are millions of women who seem to be quite happy with their family and church role, serving in Southern Baptist churches as either volunteers or vocational ministers. I'm not sure what the exact figure is at the moment, but there are over 2,000 women serving in international missions with the IMB. Last time I checked, there were over a dozen women on the executive committee, far more than there ever were under the pre-1979 leadership."

Whoopty doo, for all the ladies you mentioned above how about the many who have been told even after God called them to preach that there was not place for them in the SBC,

You sir are comparing apples to oranges. But that seems to be your MO.