Those Who Make the BFM Say What It Doesn't
H.G. Wells once said, "I write as straight as I can, just as I walk as straight as I can, because that is the best way to get there." The best way to get to an understanding of the role of women in the SBC should be the straighforward wording of the Southern Baptist Convention's Confession of Faith. The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message makes the following statement about women under Article VI entitled The Church: "While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture."
This statement is clear. Whether or not one agrees with the premise, it should be granted that the 2000 BFM prohibits women from serving in the office of pastor ; which is defined in Article VI as an office within a church. There is no prohibition regarding women serving as Hebrew professors at our seminaries; there is no prohibition regarding women serving as Vice-Presidents or even Presidents of our Southern Baptist agencies; there is no prohibition regarding women serving as Strategy Cordinators with the International Mission Board; there is no prohibition regarding women teaching men; and as and there is no prohibition regarding women serving as chaplains. The only confessional prohibition is that women cannot serve in the 'office of pastor.'
The 2000 BFM Committee also used clear language to express their belief in the possible fallibility (error) of their interpretations of the sacred text. The 2000 BFM Committee displayed the same humble approach that the 1925 and 1963 Committees exhibited in acknowledging their ability to err in interpretating biblical doctrines - while at the same time believing the Bible itself is without error. This acknowledgment is spelled out in in their report to the 2000 Southern Baptist Convention:
As in the past so in the future, Baptists should hold themselves free to revise their statements of faith as may seem to them wise and expedient at any time. Any group of Baptists, large or small, have the inherent right to draw up for themselves and publish to the world a confession of their faith whenever they may think it advisable to do so. The sole authority for faith and practice among Baptists is the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Confessions are only guides in interpretation, having no authority over the conscience.
If this generation of Southern Baptists does not understand the significance of such humble language and experience heartfelt gratitude for it, there will one day arise another generation who will express appreciation that their Southern Baptist forefathers had such wisdom. All Southern Baptists readily concede that unless the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message is revised, women are officially prohibited from serving in the 'office of pastor' within a church that wishes to cooperate with other Southern Baptists churches or be identified with the Southern Baptist Convention. My goal is neither to revise or amend the 2000 BFM; I desire to show Southern Baptists how the phrase 'office of pastor' has now been taken by hard-line complementarians in the Southern Baptist Convention and used as the basis for the removal of women from performing any Christian function or ministry that involves men. These ministries from which Southern Baptist women have been prohibited include, but are not limited to, the 'indulgence' of exegeting Scripture in the presence of men, participating in any public leadership or administration of the ordinances with men present, and serving in Southern Baptist positions or jobs that require supervision of men. Integrity demands that we Southern Baptist should say what we mean. The intentional and clear phrase 'office of pastor' means what it says. To now use it to justify the complete removal of Southern Baptist women from any ministry involving men is both deceptive and unacceptable.
The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
Southern Baptists, including Dorothy Patterson, Al Mohler, Danny Akin and others, serve on the Board of Directors of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. There are some fine men and women across the evangelical spectrum who serve on the board of directors, council and board of reference of CBMW. They write some excellent articles and materials from a complementarian perspective, and I have profited from them. I am grateful for Christians like those who serve on the Council, including the Southern Baptists named above, because they think seriously about such issues as manhood and womanhood and write for the profit of others. There are as many other conservative, evangelical men and women who write for Christians for Biblical Equality, an organization that holds to egalitarianism, and I have profited from their scholarly approach to biblical manhood and womanhood as well. Contrary what some assert, not only is it possible for a conservative, Bible-believing Christian to hold to egalitarianism. thousands of inerrantists do.
It is interesting to me, however, that complementarians often seem to lack either consensus or precision related to the question of whether or not it is only the senior pastor position that is banned for women. Hard-line complementarians on the CBMW have not reached a consensus with softer complementarians on whether or not women can lead worship, serve on pastoral staffs, teach men in the academic setting, etc . . . Unfortunately, it seems as if those advocating the hard-line complementarian position, which limits women far beyond the role of 'pastor' or 'elder,' may be currently winning the day at CBMW. I would love to be proven wrong by the CBMW revealing publicly which ministries they believe to be barred to women, with clear biblical warrants given. Otherwise, the kingdom is harmed by a kind of blanket discouragement for women to think of themselves as being able to minister according to their gifts, or to pursue ministry positions within the church other than the 'office of pastor.'
It is time that we Southern Baptists recognized that there may be a few people in leadership positions within our Convention who would seek to force upon the convention things regarding women that we have never offically adopted - like prohibitions on missionaries possessing a private prayer language, or prohibitions on women teaching Hebrew in our seminaries, or prohibitions on women serving as chaplains, etc . . . In my next post (I'm still researching for it) I will tell you the story of Regimental Army Chaplain, Major Paige Heard, who is now stationed at historic West Point Military Academy. Major Heard is a life-long Southern Baptist, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, New Orleans Seminary, and has faithfully served Christ as an endorsed chaplain of the Southern Baptist Convention. Paige is a conservative. She believes the Bible is infallible, inerrant, and sufficient. Yet, she is now only one of five female Southern Baptist chaplains left in the Army. In 2004 the trustees of the North American Misson Board voted to stop endorsing female chaplains. Major Heard had been endorsed prior to the 2004 prohibition and was 'grandfathered' in.
Ironically, the North American Mission Board in 2003 had initially said they would not 'ordain' women. But when they learned that the Army did not require ordination for a woman to serve as Chaplain, just an endorsement from NAMB, the trustees scrambled to stop the endorsements in 2004. In explaining why the trustees would no longer endorse 'women' to be chaplains for the Army, the NAMB Chairman of the Trustee Board said, "we will not endorse a woman where where the role and function of the chaplain would be seen the same as that of a pastor."
Do you notice the difference in language? The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message prohibits a woman from 'the office of pastor' in the local church. Somebody, somewhere, drove the NAMB trustees in 2004 to change the prohibition from 'office' to 'function' or 'ministry.' Now, a Southern Baptist woman, according to those who wish to force this narrow view on the rest of us, cannot minister or serve in any manner that might smack of what a pastor might do. As in . . .
(1). Indulging in the exposition of Scripture with men present.
(2). Having 'authority' over men in ministry.
(3). Leading men to faith in Jesus Christ.
(4). Leading in the observing of the ordinances in the presence of men.
(5). Leading worship in a worship service with men present.
(6). Teaching Christian history to men who will be pastors.
(7). Teaching anything spiritual to a boy over the age of twelve.
At the rate we are going to have some leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention who may very well take this prohibition of women holding the 'office of pastor' and do something ridiculous like establish a homemaking program at a seminary to teach women to sew, cook, clean, iron, etc . . . since they are prohibited from doing anything else in terms of ministry. Oh, wait, that's already happening.
More Monday.
Wade Burleson
posted by Wade Burleson | Friday, April 04, 2008
172 Comments:
Come on Wade, by now you should realize that stress relief is only found in suing the Missouri Baptist Convention for 10 million dollars, not in pretending to be nice to Dorothy Patterson. I saw you sticking your tongue out at her picture. Come on, sue the MBC. You might get 20 million. Oh, and you can pick anything you want to sue us for. I might suggest stealing the Baptist Building and then suing the MBC because there is not a library it big enough to put all of your books, or maybe that the front door is not big enough for your head...either way precedent is set...Come sue Jesus!
and with that I am off to bed :)
K
Wade,
I ran into as Dad of a young man who spent several years in our church. his son is a missionary in West Africa.
The missionary service started when he was a member of our church. While he was in school, he acted as a part-time youth minister and activities director in our church.
Then he was led to go to Africa as a short-term summer missionary and he was bitten, but good. He came back, finished his education, got married, and applied to the IMB.
Well, his wife turned out to be quite gifted at speaking and even at preaching, and when it came time to go to work, she could not sign, in good conscience, the BF&M 2000.
They are now very effective in West Africa as CBF missionaries.
Sad. The SBC could use them. As long as we continue to debate this stuff in abstract terms, it'll remain a high-minded debate. Put flesh and blood with it, and it's another matter. That's why what you're saying is important right now.
I have to wonder how many stories there really are out there, of promising Christian warriors derailed by (principally) one man's unwarranted prejudice against womem in the ministry. At the least, they've been run off to other pastures, and at worst they've been so discouraged as to be driven out of service altogether.
Wade,
Fair is fair. You promised me you would be fair in the content of this post.
You have been.
There have been several things wherein I have to disagree with you of late, especially dealing with ecclesiology and I still do, but in this post you have articulated what I see as a problem.
I really believe the Scripture does teach that the pastor of a local church is to be of the male gender.
It is as plain as day that the "Baptist guide" for practice and polity, the BF&M 2000 does say exactly what you report it to say.
I really believe any other prohibition is extra-biblical as to what women can and cannot do in the practice of their faith.
I really believe that to say the BF&M says anything else is prohibited to women is to defraud the document as to its content.
For me, it has nothing to do with culture, tradition or anything else.
I am sure we will greatly disagree on other things, but on the content of this post I stand with you because I believe it to be true and for no other motivation.
cb
Wow.
In two responses we get to see the terrible results of man-centered theology where political ease seems to trump the will of God, where some strut about saying, "Look what we got changed!" and, just before it, a sample of the hate required to pervert things as precious as the mission boards. May the Lord forgive us for not waking up and acting sooner to correct this sort of thing.
A very precise and thoughtful blog. Thank you. As a friend of many ordained women, as one who has experienced the joy of hearing women preach and watching them carry out their God given call to pastor, and as a pastor who has a staff that includes four ordained women, I just don't understand how someone as sensitive and thoughtful as yourself can continue to waste your time with such such depleted thinking as the so-called Baptists of this ilk. Don't you get it? the B,F, & M statement on "office of pastor" is just the surface of a deeply held bigotry against women...you think not? ask Women....
Anyway, as long as you hang in there, more power to you...I just wish you were using your splendid gifts for other causes of the Gospel than the pettiness of your brothers of the SBC.
CB, great comment and assessment.
“All Southern Baptists readily concede that unless the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message is revised, women are officially prohibited from serving in the 'office of pastor' within a church that wishes to cooperate with other Southern Baptists churches or be identified with the Southern Baptist Convention.”
—I concede this realizing what it means and humbly stand by it.
I also get the meaning from these posts that your fight is not with the elder/pastor role per se but with folks using that argument and jumping off the deep end with a whole litany of prohibitions. Point taken.
Mr. Cleveland makes a solid point here: “As long as we continue to debate this stuff in abstract terms, it'll remain a high-minded debate. Put flesh and blood with it, and it's another matter.” Whether abstract or face-to-face I would hold to the elder/pastor view as being reserved for one gender only. His statement was made in the context of missionaries (which I agree) but arguments are easy when you’re not sitting in front of the person.
For example, when praying at abortion clinics there are many present (the majority actually) who hold to a different view of justification. A view foreign to the Gospel but yet they’re taking a strong stand on an important issue such as people living. So here I am standing next to a person who I feel is in grave error concerning their very soul but we’re partnering together in a worthwhile cause. We are no longer in the abstract, we are face-to-face. And lovingly—and with grace, He has allowed this earthen, very cracked vessel (gaping holes actually) to proclaim His Gospel to all who had ears to listen.
And Roger, while you may see male elders/pastors as petty, we see it as endeavoring to stay true to the Word of God…hardly petty would you say?
John in the STL
It sounds like according to them Jesus shouldn't have sent women to proclaim to the male disciples the wonderful message of our faith that he is risen. Of course the male disciples didn't believe them, so I guess that makes it ok. The women went to him, but the male disciples waited till he came to them. Wonder if that tells us anything.
Oh well, Jesus did a few other things that these people wouldn't like, and conveniently ignore.
I still wonder with their attitudes how they decide it's ok for those unworthy people (are women people?) to be allowed to teach males of any age. Taken to such a logical conclusion, male children should be taken at birth from the influence of these unworthy creatures who could only be allowed to cook for them and change their diapers while men teach them everything.
And no male who lifts holy hands (I Timothy 2:8) has answered my question from a previous post whether silver jewelry is ok, since gold and pearls are forbidden in the same chapter (I Timothy 2:9) as the passage about authority over men (1 Timothy 2:11).
Either women are completely human or women are lesser creatures and can be put under all sorts of restrictions. What's next, Baptist burkas?
Susie
Wade,
I recall at the inception of the civil rights movement, watching more than one Southern governor justifying racial discrimination, on the basis of "separate but equal" and "states' rights". All high-sounding theories.
Then I saw a news special about a nursing home (here in Alabama, when I lived in Indiana) showing elderly ladies literally sleeping in chicken-wire pigeonholes on shelves. It broke my heart.
I cried. And it forever changed my view of civil rights.
While we're in that "high-minded debate" (and I do not view your blog as doing that ... you're dealing with people here...), we're not likely to be crying over flesh-and-blood people living in the pigeonholes of gender prejudice.
That's what I'm saying.
Suzie,
I am in a dilemma. I see and understand the biblical arguments of those conservatives who have no issue with a woman pastor. I also would never hesitate to cooperate with an evangelical, conservative church that makes a decision to call a woman as their pastor. Yet, my own church would not follow that path, nor would I lead my church to do so. In addition, I understand how some interpret the Scripture as prohibiting a woman from serving in the 'office' of pastor. To them, it is a matter of biblical precendent and assumption - not direct commandment.
Correction is needed in the SBC. My goal is to bring about correction regarding the mimimization of the roles and ministries of Southern Baptist women - in areas other than the office of pastor. To correct the problems, you must first accept the SBC where we are - and not run, quit, or separate. Though I think it was a mistake to force Southern Baptist Churches to accept the prohibition on women pastors by placing it in our Confession - a matter which ought to have been dealt with at each autonomous local church - we are where we are.
It is my goal to stop the spiral to the far right on this issue, a descent downward that is being orchestrated by complementarian hardliners who may have been behind the prohibition in the first place. I appreciate your comments. I confess, I learn far more from you than I do k. michael.
Bob, good thoughts, as usual.
Wade,
I have to admit that if I believed the text of scripture said, and meant when inspired by the Spirit originally, that only men could be deacons or pastors AND they had to be red-headed and part their hair in the middle, [this would exclude bald-headed men of course] that would be what I believe and proclaim.
If someone added that they had to be six feet tall and weigh 250 pounds because that makes them less likely to be intimidated by others, I would NOT believe that to be scriptural and would not proclaim it.
However, if the text of scripture speaking about deacons/pastors as to gender, color of hair, height and weight was understood differently by folks, having good people on both sides, I would NOT separate from a fellow believer over it. By 'good people' I mean people who accept the inspiration and sufficiencey of the scripture and name Jesus as Lord of life.
I might enjoy attending a local fellowship that held my view of such matters. But I would not call the other side heretics or accuse them of NOT believing the bible.
I would even endeavor to cooperate in a mission enterprise worldwide with churches that might be on the otherside of the issue but do proclaim the gospel.
But I would also want to be open to the fact that my application, that the 'red-headed' and 'part it in the middle' standard rules out bald-headed men, MIGHT be incorrect because the text MIGHT be meaning 'if they have hair.'
My point is simply that I must always be open to the fact that some of my positions on lesser issues may not be fully correct in every way [to think otherwise would be the height of spiritual egotism it seems to me] because I'm still seeing throught a glass darkly, and that my ultimate fellowship with believers must be around weightier theological matters. Those would have to do with the Person and Work of Christ [as Paul told the Corinthians] in other words, the gospel, and I would want local congregations and individual christians to be responsible for interpreting those lesser issues. This, because...WHATEVER UNITIES US ULTIMATELY DIVIDES US.
Finally, this would make it essential ANY confession of faith created by that cooperating convention of churches NOT be specific as to lesser doctrines, and, when necessary to identify what makes a baptist, is specific, it must make certain it NEVER trumpts the collective conscience of churches or individuals thus taking the place of the scripturs and the Holy Spirit in ANYONE'S life.
It seems so simple to me...but that's just me.
Dad
Dad,
Nobody could not have said it better.
Though I have been trying to say what you just beautifully articulated for three years now.
I would like to offer a few thoughts from someone who is no longer "one of you," but who still mourns the seperating.
Wade, you wrote "There is no prohibition regarding women serving as Hebrew professors at our seminaries; there is no prohibition regarding women serving as Vice-Presidents or even Presidents of our Southern Baptist agencies; there is no prohibition regarding women serving as Strategy Coordinators with the International Mission Board; there is no prohibition regarding women teaching men; and there is no prohibition regarding women serving as chaplains."
As I read those lines my mind kept going, "And there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. . ." and it dawned on me that when I was a SB, I felt condemned. For over 50 years I felt condemned for who God made me and who he had called me to be - a woman called into His service. My brothers and sisters, this should not have been, and should not be.
I served as missionary with the IMB. 2000 came and I could not in good conscience stay with the IMB. I returned to the states and became a healthcare chaplain. 2002 came and I could no longer stay a Southern Baptist. Now I'm on the outside, making my way toward another home. The transition is difficult, but certainly no more difficult than feeling condemned for the past half-century for just being the servant minister God has called me to be.
Wade, you wrote, "To correct the problems, you must first accept the SBC whe - and not run, quit, or seperate." As a woman in ministry, I did not have that option. As a man, you do. Blessings on your journey and strength as you travail.
Someone wrote earlier, "Put flesh and blood with it and it's a different matter." I rarely post. I rarely take the time or expend the emotional energy, but today I wanted to illumine the picture with a little more flesh and blood.
BB
Wade,
In my opinion the Baptist Faith and Message has always been a broad confession that most "faith" mission agencies would not tolerate. Agencies such as TEAM, C&MA, Pioneers, New Tribes, Send International. So I see the tightening of Theological parameters as a wonderful return to the Fidelity of Scripture. Lets praise God for this movement of His Spirit.Semper Reformanda.
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters
BB,
May I elicit an answer to my question to you?
If there is success in changing the views of the SBC toward women, and if women - like yourself - no longer feel 'condemned' for fulfilling their calling, would you consider returning to the Southern Baptist Convention and represent us in the medical chaplaincy field?
Blessings,
wade
Wade,
You said, “I am in a dilemma.” I agree we all are.
Let’s say two guys are going to have a theological debate. One says, (behind ‘closed doors) “Look out behind you!”
As the other is distracted, the one in ‘secrete’ kicks him between the legs, and says, “Now the overwhelming majority of the church delegates have voted and you have lost the debate.”
That’s how the BFM 2000 was passed. The churches were ‘blindsided’ as they were kept in the dark, and we are stuck with “The office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”
“...by Scripture”…that’s a laugh! Qualified by Paige Patterson is more correct. I’ll bet his small hand-picked committee did not have one word in their BFM that did not pass HIS interpretation.
Everywhere you look, Patterson is pushing his agenda against women. “It takes only one wrong person among you to infect all the others.” (Romans 5:9)
Will God have a different place in heaven for the thousands that have been saved by women pastors?
Will God give Patterson a special crown for keeping women pastors out of the SBC, or will He say, I have called many, but you have denied them from answering my call, and the resulting lost souls in hell are on your hands?
BB,
Thanks! Your words made me want to cry.
Wade, It may be time for a movement to liberate and empower women in SBC life similar to the civil rights movement to liberate and empower minorities of America. Your post today is excellent and the SBC needs to deal with it.
May God prick the conscience of our convention to treat women with the equality, respect and empowerment that they biblically deserve.
Dwight
"It seems that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, just like the Southern Baptist Convention, is now being controlled by a few hard-lined complementarians that are forcing their views on everyone else."
This is exactly what has happened and more and more are catching on and realize they have gone 'extra-Biblical', not just a difference in interpretations. It has 'regressed' more and more into Patriarchy.
Thank you, Wade, for an excellent series of posts and to the commentors who are willing to discuss this issue in a manner that glorifies God. It breaks my heart to hear stories like those of BB or the missionaries Bob spoke of, or indeed missionaries I know personally who were forced in one way or the other to leave the IMB. And they WILL leave - I don't believe my generation of women is going to be content to sit around and let their gifts and passions go unused.
I find it sad when modern bodies of believers are more concerned with preserving the traditions of the past than with progressing the cause of justice in the world.
So, as my little cousin would say, let's "keepin' talkin'" about this issue.
Melanie Warren
Broken Arrow, OK
Wade, Thank you for the kind words. I appreciate what you are trying to do, though sometimes I think you are batting your head against a brick wall. But I have had times when I felt God was calling me to bat my head against a brick wall, so why can't God call others to do that as well? And though my brick walls didn't always fall, the walls of Jericho did, so there is hope.
People listen to you. I don't know how much change will come, but hang in there.
I understand all too well what BB has gone through, though it has not been my path. There have been too many stories like hers. At least she did not lose her faith or calling. I know some who did because of anti-women words and actions, and I hurt for them as well.
A word to you men who think women are unworthy. Did you learn anything from your mothers? Did a woman ever say anything that you found useful in your spiritual life? What about your wives? Or do you make them be silent all the time? But I forget, if you don't think women have anything to say. you wouldn't be reading my comment anyway.
Susie
Wade,
I honestly believe this issue is a public example of rebellion to the Word of God. I do not think that God will continue to bless your misssion or ministry with such outward rebellion.
As Mark Dever said on a "Together for the Gospel" Blog. It is not a civil rights issue but a Sufficiency issue. My generation and younger have heard all the arguments and found the egalitarian side wanting from Scripture.
It did not go unnoticed that not one appeal from BB was from Scripture directly!
I, as an mk from Indonesia, do not want to return to the old days of the Southern Baptist Convention.
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters
Mr. Masters,
There is another Peson who goes by the name of Master that determines whether or not I am in rebellion, and His Word takes precedence over your words.
Sorry, but your words ring shallow, hollow and lifeless.
Wade
"Wade, It may be time for a movement to liberate and empower women in SBC life similar to the civil rights movement to liberate and empower minorities of America. "
Why is it that the black guy always has to play the race card? This has nothing to do with "civil rights." This has to do with God given gender roles (which are equal in rank), the institution of the family, and the institution of the church. Maybe sir (Mr. McKissic), it is from YOU whom Wade has learned to combine the unchristian use of the faulty analogy and the appeal to ignorance.
Women will never officially be recognized as biblical pastors and elders by the convention. It is unbiblical.
K
Wade,
What part of "I do not permit a women to teach" do you not understand... contextually of course!
In Christian Love
Robert I Masters
The ignorance and superficiality of the questions and 'arguments' offered by Mr. Masters and Mr. Crowder have become very tiresome.
DrMarque
Robert:
What part of "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" do you not understand?
In Christian Love,
-jack-
K.Michael said "Why is it that the black guy always has to play the race card?"
-Perhaps because (unlike a white man like yourself) he daily deals with people making assumptions about the content of his character because of the color of his skin.
-jack-
1 Timothy 2:12 has the prohibition against women teaching or having authority over men. 1 Timothy 2:9 says women should not wear gold (Is silver ok?) or pearls or have braided hair. 1 Timothy 2:8 says men should lift up holy hands in prayer without anger or disputing. Which are cultural and which are for all time?
Susie
KMC:
You are a Punk and are only hurting yourself!! Keep spitting out your venom for all to see, it will be a written record for all to see for years to come.
k. michael crowder: I hope with all in me that Wade deletes your last comment. I am seething as I read it. Shame on you. And you a supposed minister? God help us.
I am a lay women who wants to cry when I realize how the SBC feels about women. If women in the local church were to go on strike, the the church could not fumction.
K. Michael,
You are much bigger than the silly remark you made. Evidently, you are tired and need to go to bed.
Phil in Norman.
Jack,
Well good question from the Bible! I would say that the verse means that the ground at the foot of the cross is level. The book of Galatians was written to what audience? It does not speak to roles at all.
Good exegesis will lead you to that conclusion about that passage.
I believe that demonstrates a exegetical error right out of the gate for CBE proponents.
from the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters
This post has been removed by the author.
CB,
Thank you for articulating my position, too.
I, too, take an inerrantist approach to Scripture. I am not what Wade would call a "hard-line complementarian."
I know what I believe and I know what my church believes, and I try to keep us walking together in the light of God's Written Word.
Phil in Norman.
"I, as an mk from Indonesia, do not want to return to the old days of the Southern Baptist Convention"
And I, as a person, do not want to return to 1571 'Geneva' with authoritarian magistrates and a state church. Now,was that Biblical?
Lucy
Robert Masters: Two of my favorite stories in scripture are Mary and Martha and the book of Esther. These are wonderful stories of women who followed what God has led them to do. May I be a follower as these women were and not allow men such as yourself to stop me from doing so.
"What part of "I do not permit a women to teach" do you not understand... contextually of course!"
It is obvious you do not understand it except what you have been taught by other men what to think it means.
Now, if you could kindly explain to me at what age a boy becomes a man (in context, of course) perhaps we could set all the SBC churches straight. :o)
Or perhaps you could explain why the word "authenteo" is only used ONCE in scripture in 1 Tim 2 or why 1 Corin 14 includes verse 36 which negates verses 34 and 35.
Or why Paul writes assuming women are prophesying in 1 Corin 11 so the question is whether to do so with their heads covered or not.
Scripture does not contradict itself so it must be YOUR interpretation.
In any event, it is a secondary issue and would behoove us all to re-read 1 Corinthians 13 as it is sandwiched in between them both for a reason. :o)
The book of Galatians was written to what audience? It does not speak to roles at all.
So you are admitting that there are specific audiences for the letters? That, is a start.
What roles? Where are these specific roles?
Lucy
Lucy,
I dont believe that Geneva only represented those two principles, a state church and capital punishment for Anabaptist.
I think the expository example of John Calvin was something we can follow today.
I like the centrality of the Word of God that existed in Geneva pulpits.
I like the fact that God was the center of Gevena worship
I like the fact that the highest man to the lowliest peasant could discuss theology and understand it in Geneva.
I like the fact that the Geneva helped spread a worldwide reformation.
Three questions for you...if Calvin hated Anabaptist so much why did he marry one?
Was Calvin on the council of Geneva at the time of the trial of Servetus?
Do you hold the same beliefs that Servetus did at that time?
Lastly you dont care for the work that the the Red Cross does around the world...remember they came from Geneva!
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters
Robert:
I believe that (in Christ) there are neither egalitarian nor complementarian, neither cessasionist nor continualist, neither teetotaler nor winebibber, neither Baptist nor Pentecostal for we are all one in Christ Jesus.
I am a Christian who is a member of a local church that contributes to the work of the SBC as well as other Christian organizations.
When the SBC and those other organizations work to further the exercise of the great commission and Christ’s universal church I support them. When those organizations seek to divide the body and build earthly kingdoms I do not.
People are literally going to hell while we argue over interpretations of scripture that will be points of debate until the day we all sit at our father’s feet and he explains to us that which we could not understand while on this earth.
-jack-
This post has been removed by the author.
I am in complete agreement that we should follow words of motions, confessions etc.
I recognize that even if we agree on words, there can be varying interpretations (though not in the case cited here) and beyond that issues regarding the application and carrying out of words.
The question for me is what is the best way to influence trustees and agencies toward an application that is consistent with the words but does not go beyond what has been agreed upon.
For me, there is some gray area here inasmuch as institutions have many decisions to make about their operations that may touch on principles that have been adopted by the larger body. But that does not justify anything an institution might do in the name of the BFM.
Continued discussion and personal persuasion is my preferred route. "Revolution" and "holding someone accountable", while not always bad, can be blunt and ineffective instruments.
I am not sure that I have any wisdom to offer on the most wise course, however.
Common observation shows us that once battle lines are drawn that it becomes harder to win hearts and minds, and it becomes a matter of survival.
Change agents often lose support from people who would be their cohorts when this occurs because some people will sense a threat to the corporate body. They may prioritize supporting the existing status for preservation reasons and postpone or subordinate the concern of the change agent with which they otherwise would agree.
Again, I see the point, and is some, though not all particulars, agree.
The question that is still open for me is how to address the issues in a productive and not a destructive way.
Louis
Nice try, Mr. Geneva. But you seem to have only read ONE side of the history which is not unusual with those who worship the Reformation instead of Christ. (There has ALWAYS been a remnant church)
That Calvin married an AnaBaptist is a stretch. His wife was the widow of his friend John Storder and their connections to Ana baptists are tenuous, short and in their early years.
Calvin was a Catholic, too!
Too bad, Calvin did not see the truth in much of the Ana Baptists position of the sacraments and sacralism. How do you deal with that? A brilliant theologian ignoring such basic principles of the NT? He would not have become famous and published but would have more credibility had he hidden out in caves with the persecuted Ana baptists!
So which is truth:
Did Calvin acknowledge that Servetus was in his congregation and have him arrested or not?
Did Calvin try to get him to recant his heresy and when he did not, did Calvin ask that he be beheaded instead of burned?
Or, did Calvin order 'green wood' so he would burn slower?
Did Calvin write letters to his friend after the burning of Servetus complaining of those who were 'persecuting' him for his part with having Servatus burned?
YES.
Yes,he was a brilliant theologian and I believe election is in every page of scripture but Calvin loved his eventual position and stature...too much. Just like all men do who have too much power/influence too long.
To try and link me with the same beliefs as Servetus because I question this worship of Calvin only shows your immaturity and refusal to look at facts. You have erected an idol that you put before Christ. Many are doing it today, unfortuantly. I pray it is a young man's passing fancy and that Christ alone with soon take center stage.
Lucy
Mr. Masters,
I do not permit that woman to teach men fits contextually, linguistically, gramatically and historically fits with a prohibition of a specific woman in the church over which Timothy was providing oversight.
It is also consistent with the numerous examples in the New Testament of women prophesying (the seven prophetesses), women teaching men (as the example of both the man and woman instructing Paul) and women ministering.
You may not accept the interpretation - but to call such an interpretation of the sacred, infallible and inerrant text 'rebellion' is over the top.
Blessings,
Wade
Jack,
How nice shall we all sing Kumbayah in the SBC.
How would you decide what to teach at a Southern Baptist seminary in a foreign country. All-inclusive like that too.
I seem to remember that kinda teaching at the Baptist seminary in penang -malaysia. When a professor there said that the book of Genesis was not literal when it was talking about a flood.
Seems to me that that is what the CBF is al about---why dont you join it.
from the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert i Masters
K. Michael Crowder,
What you call the "race card," I call the truth card. If you can't see the relationship between the civil rights movement and the inclusion, affirmation and empowerment of women in SBC life, that explains why women are systematically discriminated against and their gifts are not recognized and utilized in SBC life outside of the Senior Pastor's role to any significant degree. This is the identical treatment that the SBC displayed toward Blacks and other minorities for many years and in some ways continue to do so. I am absolutely convinced based on Scriptures and Scripture alone that a female is not to serve as a senior pastor of a local church (I Cor. 11:3, 8-10; I Timothy 2:12). I'm equally as convinced that a woman can proclaim or preach God's Word in the Sunday and Wednesday worship services and during the Sunday School hour similar to what Mrs. Criswell did for years.
Although we have only male elders at our church and our church constitution insists that our elders be males, I'm not absolutely convinced that in an elders form of church government that if the majority of elders are males and the senior pastor is a male, that a female cannot serve as an elder. Females serve as elders at Willow Creek in Chicago. The trustee board system in the SBC functions similarly to the elders body system in many local churches and just as no one considers it biblically inappropriate for women to sit on SBC trustee boards, I don't see why it would be inappropriate for women to serve as elders but not as senior pastors - because again, the Bible is clear as far as I'm concerned on the gender of the senior pastor. The Bible is not as clear to me regarding women serving as trustees or elders, therefore I would err on the side of grace.
K, I have not employed nor do I believe Wade has employed an "unchristian use of [a] faulty analogy" nor "an appeal to ignorance." Your analysis expressed in this thread explains why the SBC annual meetings and leadership at the entity head level remains predominately White and why women are discriminated against at every level.
Just as we've seen dramatic improvement with the SBC treatment toward Blacks, one day we will see the SBC treat women with fairness, inclusion, equality, empowerment and the affirmation and utilization of their gifts with the exception of the senior pastor's role.
Dwight McKissic
Wade,
Please do not delete K. Michael Crowder's comment. What he has written he has written and it should stand as testimony either for or against him.
If he has a change of soul (mind, heart and will), let him write a revision stating the change.
Matthew 12:37.
Phil in Norman.
Dwight,
Excellent comment. I have already deleted one anymous comment that was not as nice to K Michael. Thanks for your Christian spirit.
Off for my Friday afternoon golf. Away from the computer, so everyone be nice. It is an open forum. Phil, I will not delete K Michael's comment. I hope people will respond as graciously and Christian as Dwight, to whom the comment was addressed.
K Michael,
For you to write "Why is it that the black man always has to play the race card" is as offensive to Dwight and his friends as someone who would write Why is it that the ignorant red neck always has to write like a jack ass would be to you and your friends. I know the administrator of this blog will delete this, but I'm angry.
"Continued discussion and personal persuasion is my preferred route. "Revolution" and "holding someone accountable", while not always bad, can be blunt and ineffective instruments"
I guess I would need more specific information here to really understand where you are coming from. Do you mean personl persuasion as in private?
I have yet to see anyone call for 'revolution' so I think using that word is a bit curious.
Having public discussions can lead to being informed and to holding others accountable. It also leads to 'bluntness' from some in public conversation which some call negative truths. Are you uncomfortable with that? Because it seems people can be uncomfortable with anything they disagree with no matter how it is presented.
public discussion seems to have been used quite a bit to bring about change when one reads history.
Who gets to decide?
Mr Burleson,
I was not saying that that your interpetation of that passage was your sole reason for being in rebellion. I was refering to your whole blog activity concerning gender roles.
I sincerely believed that back when Marty Duren was heading up SBCOUTPOST.
I stand by my contention that it is still the case.
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters
Geneva,
By the testimony of those closest to Calvin, we know that he had little care for his fellow human beings.
He was par excelent as a commentary writer of Scriptures in most passages, but as Debbie says, he was terribly lacking in many parts of Scripture:
1. Infant baptism to wash away original sin.
2. The Lord's Supper having "presence" in the sense that it became the actual or real blood and flesh of Christ. He only differed with the Roman Catholic Church as to definition of Church and how the bread and wine was changed.
3. He believed in no separation of church and state and may have believed toward the end of his life in the supremacy of church over state.
Baptist are only Calvinist in the sense of Original Sin, Perseverance of the Saints, Limited Atonement, and Unconditional Election with severe reservations about his belief in double predestination (ordained some to Heaven and some to Hell before the foundation of the world) and with the ramifications of Irresistible Grace.
Baptist have always had a strong belief in "soul competency" which is heresy to Calvinism as you should well know if you are a Baptist.
Phil in Norman.
Lucy,
What Iam really trying to say about Geneva is this point.
http://www.founders.org/library/reform.html
In Christian Love
Robert i Masters
"What Iam really trying to say about Geneva is this point.
http://www.founders.org/library/reform.htm"
You may want to check out other views that are not so 'invested' in the outcome. Just for balance.
And, thanks for dropping the Geneva. :o)
Lucy
Dwight,
I want you to know that I personally was offended [not just dismayed or disagree with but personally offended] at the remarks of Michael Crowder. Because of this I've written him privately.
I do want to tell you that I appreciate your gracious response to him. You stuck with the issues instead of reacting to the person. I'm not surprised. You have spiritual and moral convictions that have stood the test of time and the energy of not a few who have attempted to get you to violate those convictions. For the kind of nonconfrontational person that I know you to be by nature [though you have the courage to do so when needed as history has shown] that has taken a real measure of the Spirit. I thank you for standing firm again.
I count it a personal joy to have you as a personal friend.
Robert:
On the last night of His life, Jesus earnestly prayed for unity for all believers then and forever.
It is His prayer, His desire and His will that we become and remain One in spirit. That doesn't mean that we will not disagree, it only means that even when we disagree, we must still work towards unity of spirit and unity of the truth, or faith, that we hold in common.
Jesus' prayer was this: "I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world...Holy Father keep them in Your name...thay they may be one, even as We are.
If and when the church I serve chooses to no longer contribute to the SBC then I will no longer concern mysdelf with the SBC.
So long as the SBC accepts our support - financial and otherwise then I consider it my duty to see that those resources are used to further Christ's commands -- not to limit his kingdom according to our small views of his great plans.
Blessings,
-jack-
Phil,
I guess will just have to disagree on what Baptist believe in the SBC.
BTW you are welcome to come to a Southern Baptist church that believes in the Doctrines of Grace here in the heart of "Geneva".(nashville)
Grace to you
Robert I Masters
Lucy,
So I should not read Rebecca Groothuis because she is too invested in the outcome of her egalitarian writings! Please... sounds like your arguing for convictionless authors.
Iam convinced of the purpose and vision of Founders ministry that is why I write ...............
from the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters
To the elder Burleson, (the better looking one :)
I too left a message for KMC. Whether we agree in here or not, we're family and while we might not physically meet this side of Glory, we certainly can express our beliefs with the highest of regards for one another.
From the Southern Baptist St. Louis,
John
And yea, that's a Red Sox hat I have on and I work right next to Busch Stadium in STL.