BaptistLife.Com Forums.

by **Mark** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:26 pm

In another thread, I made the following statement: Wade Burleson and others will eventually realize that any newfound commitment to inclusiveness - no matter how sincere or encouraging - cannot be reconciled with one's parallel support of Baptist Faith & Message 2000, or the SBC's "conservative resurgence."

I'm open to hearing any convincing arguments otherwise.

by **Haruo** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:35 pm

Well, looking at the ongoing failure to communicate between Norm (and occasionally Sandy) on one side and Tom (and occasionally Wade) on the other in a contemporaneous thread, it looks to me like the extent of the inclusiveness may be a factor. It may be that there are people who can be included under the aegis of the BFMY2K and others who cannot, and that Wade is really only talking about the former (among whom he apparently counts David) while Norm wants him to draw a much wider circle, which is perhaps not reconcilable with the creed.

Or whatever you call it.

Haruo
not SBC

by **John Sneed** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:55 pm

Someplace else on the bulletin board I made this observation, there will no reconciliation between SBC conservatives and the moderates/liberals in the SBC and other entities. The reason is this... we simply believe different things. We are not that close to each other on issues like the Person of God (see the flak I take for attacking open theism), Christ, salvation, the Bible, church polity, and a host of social issues. There is a vast gulf between an SBC conservative and a moderate. There may come a day when everyone learns to be nice to each other and talk to each other without insults. But the kind of re-unification that everyone is speculating about simply will not happen.

JohnTS

by **bobfrgsn** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:26 pm

by **Norm** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:35 pm

by **David Flick** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:40 pm

by **Wade Burleson** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:06 pm

by **pjerwin** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:34 pm

by **John Sneed** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:16 pm

by **Mark** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:35 pm

by **Mark** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:39 pm

by **David Flick** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:49 pm

by **David Flick** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:54 pm

by **Norm** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:49 pm

by **Norm** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:22 pm

by **pjerwin** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 4:31 pm

by **Norm** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 4:45 pm

by **Mark** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 5:15 pm

When it was released, the two biggest (yet most often ignored) surprises of Baptist Faith & Message 2000 were that (1) the term "inerrancy" was omitted; and (2) the phrase "church and state should be separate" was retained.

These were among the few and rare pleasant surprises, I might add. :angel:

by **Norm** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:14 pm

by **Mark** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:40 pm

by **pjerwin** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:24 pm

by **Sandy** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:16 pm

by **Mark** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:23 pm

by **T. D. Webb** » Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:31 am

by **Mark** » Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:52 pm

BaptistLife.Com Forums.

New inclusiveness compatible w/Bapt Faith & Message 2K?

New inclusiveness compatible w/Bapt Faith & Message 2K?

Inclusiveness?

Slapped Down by Wade

Re: Slapped Down by Wade

Who is online