Post #33: Amen! CB.

Where in the Bible does it say anything about a “soul entering a body?’

What has pushed back the limits of human rights has not been “fundamentalist ravings,” but science and technology.

Perhaps we should push the limit back to where the Bible says our life begins: “In the mind of God.” That’s the only Biblically defensible position (Ps. 139:16).

–

Brother CB:

I don’t understand why you keep turning the discussion toward homosexuals in the church, but once more I will answer your question;

A practicing homosexual is engaging in an ongoing sexual sin. A true (regenerate) follower of Christ would not continue living a sinful life. A practicing homosexual would either have to depart from his sinful former life to become a member of a body of believers or – if he entered into homosexual practices after a profession of faith and baptism into a local body – turn away from this way of life after being lovingly counseled by leaders of his local body – if he is to continue as an active member.

Having said that I hope that our sanctuary is packed with those who are separated from God – homosexuals included – each time we meet so that the message of salvation continues to reach those who need it most.

You also ask “how can anyone of faith, in this culture when babies are being murdered by the millions, “ignore the issue of when life begins” so very easily?”

The frontlines for protecting the unborn have moved from “viable fetus” to “fetus” to “embryo” to “implanted egg/zygote” to “non-implanted zygote” to “non-implanted fertilized egg.” Eventually we will arrive at a battle over whether preventing the fertilization of egg = murder = abortion. We still won’t know where along the timeline from birth back to the earliest stage of conception the soul enters the body but the battles and divisions among us will continue nonetheless.

Can Brothers in Christ not set aside their differences over what should be done to save the unborn in order to work together to fulfill our Great Commission charge to save those who have been born?

You say “Vol challenged Rodney’s outrageous, barbarian, neo-pagan and utterly un-Christian statement in the only proper way for a man of God to do so. Then you come along and not only do you rebuke Vol, but you also go and paste the statement over at Wade’s Farm for nuts, flakes and Wild geese to cackle about.”

Let me first address your statement that I have wronged you through my post on Wade’s site.

I am sorry and I ask your forgiveness.

I am trying to be gracious and polite in my conversations to you both, despite my differences with your response to Dr. Cate.

I encourage you to re-examine your statements to him. He is – after all -a fellow Brother in Christ.

Blessings to you both,

-jack-

Rodney did address Thomas White’s sermon. That is true. If that had been the end of it we would not be having this debate. It was what he continued to say that brought about the debate.
Rodney said:

“I will ignore the issue of when life begins, as no one knows the answer to that question. But, I am sure that such pronouncements as (White’s do) nothing to further the physical and spiritual wellbeing of anyone. All it does is promote (divisions) between people.”

Jack(?), how can anyone of faith, in this culture when babies are being murdered by the millions, “ignore the issue of when life begins” so very easily?

Also, how could a sermon seeking to protect the very lives God created cause a person to desire to leave, a church in general or the SBC in particular unless that person had a position on the sanctity of human life that is in diametric opposition to the Word of God?

Vol challenged Rodney’s outrageous, barbarian, neo-pagan and utterly un-Christian statement in the only proper way for a man of God to do so. Then you come along and not only do you rebuke Vol, but you also go and paste the statement over at Wade’s Farm for nuts, flakes and Wild geese to cackle about.

Brother something is wrong here and it is not Vol’s rebuke of Rodney. it is your theology.

I will ask you straight out. Would you knowingly allow Sodomites to be active members of a church to which you served as pastor?

cb

As my old theology professor once said, “If you have to explain your explanation you already lost,” Richard Land.

rick

The question put forth was:

“Should people who go against the clear teachings of Scripture be welcome in SBC Churches, in the sense of preaching and teaching, and being in leadership positions?”

Which I answered as follows:

“Yes. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (AND, I went on to say): If you are speaking of the unrepentant or the unregenerate, the answers to your questions (as you well know) can be found in the Pauline letters to the early church.”

Brother CB admonishes me that my “answer to Vol’s question betray a weak theological stance and you need to deal with it if you are teaching and preaching to one of the flocks of God, especially a “Baptist flock.”

-So let’s break it down from a biblical perspective:

Unless the two of you live perfect lives I assume that – like all of us – you stumble but press on toward the goal, assured of our salvation through grace despite our sinful nature. That is why I began my answer by quoting Paul thusly:

“Yes. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

Brother CB says “the ultimate conclusion of such a position as your answer represents is that a person could live like a devil (Sodomite) and simply respond to any who would hold him accountable by saying, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” They could say things like: “We all struggle with sin. This is mine, yet I am still a leader in my church.”

Alas you have overlooked the rest of my answer: “If you are speaking of the unrepentant or the unregenerate, the answers to your questions (as you well know) can be found in the Pauline letters to the early church.”

Paul admonished the church at Corinth that unrepentant practitioners of sexual sins are not to be overlooked within the body of believers. That – combined with his description of qualifications of overseers and deacons –would not allow someone to “live like the devil” and lead a church.

Brother David addresses his and Brother CB’s remarks to Brother Rodney (which prompted my response beginning this comment stream;

“When people like Rodney comment that they are so upset about the leaders of the SBC of today, and how they’re holding back women because we say that they should not be pastors of churches, or because we say that abortion is murder; then it makes me not want people like Rodney in the SBC…unless he’s willing to repent of such unBiblical attitudes and views.”

It’s nothing personal against Rodney…I don’t even know Rodney. But, it’s about our passion for the truth of God’s Word, and our passion to remain true to our Lord.”

“When people start talking about abortion being ok because we just cant know when life begins, or that women should be allowed to be Pastors of Churches, or if a Church allows homosexuals to be members in good standing; then that’s a whole ‘nother ballgame. Do you agree?”

Let’s first look at Rodney’s comments:

“I just recently became aware of Thomas White’s statement on birth control. It is the sort of statement that prompted me to leave the Southern Baptist denomination after a lifetime of membership.

I will ignore the issue of when life begins, as no one knows the answer to that question. But, I am sure that such pronouncements as (White’s do) nothing to further the physical and spiritual wellbeing of anyone. All it does is promote (divisions) between people.”

Rodney (like me) said nothing about homosexuals.

Rodney’s statement that “no one knows … when life begins” is offered in rebuttal of Professor Thomas White’s SWBTS chapel sermon remarks that “The third function of most birth control pills prevents a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall and this function is what I referred to as murder.”

I do not yet see that Rodney has anything to repent for, so let’s look at the rest of his statement:

“ I am appalled that the denomination promotes sexism by condemning the ordination of women and treating women as second class citizens in their own families.”

Shall we deny him a seat in our sanctuary because he believes that Ephesians 5:21 defines the relationship between husband and wives as mutual submission?

Shall we treat him as an unbeliever because he points to Acts 2:17-18, Galations 3:28, and the roles of Deborah, Huldah, Phoebe and Priscilla to refute prohibitions against women ministering, teaching or having authority over men?

I don’t know Brother Rodney either but as Brothers in Christ I do know we are instructed to be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave us.

-jack-

A-MEN.

cb

Amen.

David

Jack,

The Bible teaches us to not only love Jesus, but to love the truth of God’s Word, and make sure that we stand on what it clearly teaches. To do otherwise is not follow our Lord. For someone to say that women should be pastors goes against the clear teachings of Scripture every bit as much as Thou shalt not commit adultery, or Thou shalt not murder, or the teachings of Jude concerning keeping false teachers out of the Church.

Therefore, when people like Rodney comment that they are so upset about the leaders of the SBC of today, and how they’re holding back women because we say that they should not be pastors of churches, or because we say that abortion is murder; then it makes me not want people like Rodney in the SBC…unless he’s willing to repent of such unBiblical attitudes and views. It’s nothing personal against Rodney…I dont even know Rodney. But, it’s about our passion for the truth of God’s Word, and our passion to remain true to our Lord.

Now, if you’re talking about different worship styles, or different interpretations about things like pre-trib, or mid-trib; or if you’re talking about the different interpretations like whether five point Calvinism, or four point Calvinism, etc. then we can disagree all day long and still server together. Or, if one Church believes that close communion is the way to go, and another believes in a form of open communion, then we can still serve in the same SBC. But, when people start talking about abortion being ok because we just cant know when life begins, or that women should be allowed to be Pastors of Churches, or if a Church allows homosexuals to be members in good standing; then that’s a whole nother ballgame. Do you agree?

David

Thank you again.

Now maybe you see the inherent weakness of your answer to Vol’s question:

“Should people who go against the clear teachings of Scripture be welcome in SBC Churches, in the sense of preaching and teaching, and being in leadership positions?”

Your answer was:

“Yes. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

The ultimate conclusion of such a position as your answer represents is that a person could live like a devil (Sodomite) and simply respond to any who would hold him accountable by saying, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” They could say things like: “We all struggle with sin. This is mine, yet I am still a leader in my church.”

Jack (?), that just won’t make muster for church leadership.

You will probably now come back with some other “watered down like day old iced-tea” theological position claiming some form of pathetic tolerance of “tent stretching proportions” but that won’t work either.

Your answers to Vol’s questions betray a weak theological stance and you need to deal with it if you are teaching and preaching to one of the flocks of God, especially a “Baptist flock.”

You need to quit hanging around over at Wade’s Farm and get into the Word of God so you can preach the gospel of truth in these perilous times or you need to just leave the pulpit all together.

I have been you friend here. You can take it or leave it. It is a hard truth I realize, but you need to deal with it.

cb