Well, let me be the first to say that the audioblog is nice for some spice, but it eliminates the ability to cut and paste comments or to look at them to find the real meaning of a specific word choice. It was nice to hear your voice though. :) On another note, All of these differences that are being noticed in the SBC are common in most major organizations I think. While I reallize that not everything can be Assembly of God(tongue in cheeck, sort of) I find that the move to have more diversity in the denominations serves to help break down some past barriers that would have prevented people from forming relationships with other Christians that may have some differences than them. In that order I do like to see more diversity because I hope that it means that people are searching for themselves, and secondly it allows most of us to focus on the main points that bind us together and it allows us to have underlying tensions that keep the relationships interesting. Not even Paul and Peter agreed on everything, we shouldn't either. However, we should be able to get past the minor differences and interrelate based on the Foundation. The body has many parts, and many doctrines that don't all agree. But they do not all have to agree in order to do the task that each member has been given.
Hello again Jason Glen, This is your good old Reformed, Amillenialist brother Nate Penland. I have to agree with Malcom, even though I do not know him, that it was very good to hear your voice. However, I did have a problem with some of Malcom's comments. Certainly Malcom is entitled to his opinion. But it is not his opinion I am after, it is the Bible and making sure that our comments as Christian brothers are saturated with it. The first thing that Malcom said that bothered me was: 1) "In that order I do like to see more diversity because I hope that it means that people are searching for themselves,"
Maybe I mis understood this comment or maybe Malcom did not mean it in the way that it came across. But let us not forget that "searching for ourselves" is something that the lost and dying world is doing in a losing battle to be "individualistic" with a God-centerd world view. We find ourselves in Christ alone! (Galatians 2:20). We find ourselves in Romans 3:10-18 where Paul reminds us of who we are without Christ (Romans 7:24-25). We cannot find our selves through diverse relationships between people. We find ourselves in the word of God as Christ reveals Himself to us. We cannot start with ourselves and hope to one day find the perfection that is in God. We must start with God in His Word and allow it to purge us from self-centered thinking (Heb.4:12).
That naturally leads me to the second thing Malcolm said that is must be thought about more carefully 2) "secondly it allows most of us to focus on the main points that bind us together and it allows us to have underlying tensions that keep the relationships interesting. Not even Paul and Peter agreed on everything, we shouldn't either. However, we should be able to get past the minor differences and interrelate based on the Foundation."
I would ask Malcolm and you, Jason, what ARE the MAIN points that bind us together? Certainly we have the Baptist Faith & Message but even it has some severely general statements that most Baptists do argue over. I, for one was gald to see the SBC take stand on a very openly Biblical issue on women and men and their roles in the church. The BF&M 2000 is more specific in that way. It is also more specific on The innerancy and infallibility of Scripture. These are great strides by the SBC top protect truth at all costs. That is always what we must do because that is what the Bible demainds for us to do (John 8:32, Matt.10:34-39). The bottom line is that doctrine DOES and ALWAYS will divide. It divides because men are naturally "haters of God", especially a sovereign God that does all things for the glory of His name as the rightful, just, all-loving and true sovereign king of the universe. This si the God that said that ALL things are done for "His name's sake" (Isaiah 48:9-11), including saving sinners. Even Christ himself said that his main purpose for going tot he cross was not us, but to "Vindicate the holiness of His Father's name through being both "just and the justifier" (John 12:27-28, Romans 3:25-26). So that is why we must ask the question, what are the MAIN things that Baptist today should "stand together" on? Where do we draw the line? We have certainly decided that Baptist, even Southern Baptists who are open theists are speaking a great and heretical heresy. So we cannot stand together with them and protect truth. Can we stand together with men like Falwell and The Canner brothers who outright dismiss entire chapters of the Bible because it doesn't fit their view of God (ie. Romans 9). Does everyone have to be a full five point calvinist to be saved? No, but if someone was a full, historical arminian or true historical hypercalvinist they certainly would not be saved. So again my main warning is, we must be careful to throw out such genreal statements like "let us focus on the main points". That is what the "Protestant and Catholics together" have said and so they have dumbed down the truth to the minimal so that they can simply get along. Is this what we want? I cannot want that. So when Malcom says that "we should be able to get past the minor differences and interrelate based on the Foundation" that concerns me because the idssue Baptist today are arguing over and should be talking about is "WHAT ARE THE MAJOR AND MINOR issues?" What is the Foundation? Well it is Christ, ofcourse, but we cannot simply say "let's all just love Jesus." If we did, we would be compromising in so many areas we could find truth is we wanted to. The problem, is that we are blurring the lines so that we can get along. Jason, your interelational church, as I know you, would have nothing to do with simply "getting along" and just stamnding together on the MAJOR issues. In fact when I spoke to you about it on the phone, it was all about discussing the theology so as to prevent believing in false, dumbed down, "I just love Jesus" doctrine. We must avoid coming together because we have found the most general thing that we all believe in, because then we are really saying that we are not wanting to look for absolute truth, but any truth will do, as long as we can be both diverse and unified. That was not why our Lord died on the cross. Let us be careful to not trample it with a unity that gives up truth. 1 John 1:21
Please make an editorial note from my blog above. When I said, "But let us not forget that "searching for ourselves" is something that the lost and dying world is doing in a losing battle to be "individualistic" with a God-centerd world view. "
I meant to write "with a man-centered world view." thanks
Sorry I should have read this before I sent it. But another editorial mistake.
What is the Foundation? Well it is Christ, ofcourse, but we cannot simply say "let's all just love Jesus." If we did, we would be compromising in so many areas we could find truth is we wanted to. The problem, is that we are blurring the lines so that we can get along.
This should have said, "we could not find truth if we wanted to."
Jason, I feel I must keep on the pretense put forth and pay homage to your voice, (ooooo, aaaahhhh). Anyway, that being done, on to the real issues. A few thoughts cross my mind. 1. Diversity: a good thing; do you see it in the SBC? not really. Malcolm: I like what you said, focusing on the things that do unify us helps us to better relate to more people. Of course, we need a core of orthodoxy that we do not compromise, but on some issues (tongues), drawing a line in the sand simply does not edify the kingdom. Nate, you said doctrine does and always divide. that is an unfinished thought, here's the rest. It divides, but on each side of the division, there is a unity. For example: Christ is God or he is not. not counting those who believe in the validity logical contradictions, that statement will divide the world into two camps, and on that issue, each camp will be unified, so we see that while doctrine does divide, it also unifies. It is that unity around "major doctrines" that we are seeking.
Also, you said, "We cannot find our selves through diverse relationships between people. We find ourselves in the word of God as Christ reveals Himself to us. We cannot start with ourselves and hope to one day find the perfection that is in God. We must start with God in His Word and allow it to purge us from self-centered thinking (Heb.4:12).- here's a thought: Diversity is not needed to help us find ourselves (like you said), but it is necessary to help us find God. Here's why, None of us, in our personality, temperment, intellect, or any other capacity we have can comprehend or manefest the fullness of God. Therefore, if we are to purge ourselves from selfishness, we must realize that theology is a task that will require other people who will have differing views, not becaue they are wrong or poor exegetes, but they will bring perspectives to the table that while they may not have the whole truth (like our own perpsective), they will contain pieces of the truth that we do not want to miss. I think the point (correct me if I'm wrong) malcolm was making is not that we need to pull theology out of our ear, but rather that instead of individuals reading the Bible and coming up with a set belief, we ought to allow other people to voice views from scripture that disagree with our own, testing them, but not making more of an issue of them than necessary (again, tongues is a good example).
Also, if we're discussing the church and where to draw definite boundries, We simply cannot use Baptists and Christian synomomously. Given that one who is saved is a Christian, for the purposes of a dialogue on church, denominationalism dies off. Malcolm, you mentioned past barriers that have kept people from church. One of them is the term Baptist. It does keep people from some churches (as i'm sure every denomiational title does to some people). We need to focus on God, and how he has revealed himself, not us and why we are different from everyone else. If we truly are different, it will show. Anyway, thats enough for today. Peace, Phil
A couple of points. Nate- "searching for themselves" should have read more properly "searching the scriptures themselves. I believe that given the opportunity the Holy Spirit will really teach us all things.(John 14:26)So you are right that searching ourselves or the company of others we will not necessarily find truth, but through interrelatedness hopefully we should find some new revelation of the truth of Christ as He is in Christians and helps us to offer the diversity that Phil has mentioned. So, yes we should be focussing on what are the major and minor points. As mentioned, tongues should not divide the body of Christ. Yet it does even within denominations. But can you be a Christian and hold fellowship with those who use tongues, public or private, and still maintain righteousness? Of course and if you are in a love relationship as Christ demands then both will be edified in the Lord. So it is not my intent to say we should all just get along. That would be truly naive to think it were that easy. Yet that is exactly what we were ordered to do. So how do we do that which is the second greatest commandment? We start with the first and the second should naturally follow. Have we come full circle yet. So what is the truth that is essential? Is it loving your neighbor or is it having perfect doctrine? (i.e. the parable of the good Samaritan)
"what are the MAIN things that Baptist today should "stand together" on? " I understand that this is mostly a Baptist discussion, but not being Baptist I think that as Christians we should broaden the scope to all saints. Grace to you all, Malcolm
Hey Malcom, in an effiort to make sure that I was not seen as hostile, I appreciate you clearing some things up, espececially about "searching the Scriptures themselves." That was helpful and now I understand and fully agree with that assessment. We must always remember too, that if we come up with something "NEW" that has never been heard or though of in 2000 years of Christianity, then we are wrong. "There is nothing new under the sun." I only say that to make the point that even though we are given the Holy Spirit, we are not "inspired" to add to the Scriptures as the apostles were. The canon is closed and all truth on this earth that we can and should know about Christ has been revealed in His Holy and perfect word. That is just to agree with you, that in that way diversity is necessary because other TRUE Christians who have studied the Scriptures over the past 2000 years cannot all be wrong. We gain so much from these men and IO praise God for them. As far as today, even in the broader Christian world, and not only the BAPTIST world, I must ask the same question, "What are the MAIN things that we must ALL hold to in order that we might truly know and live for Christ? And as Phil said so well (I FULLY agree) where do we draw the line and stand TOGETHER on one side or the other of that line? I am sorry that used Baptist, but it is definitely THE ONE TRUE CHURCH that I am thinking about. Because there are many sitting in cold buildings with a denominational name on the outside who have no interest in Christ and no clue who He really is. But the one true Church is out in the world standing for something that is real and BEARING Fruit that is obvious. I praise the Lord for that. Thank you Malcolm and Phil for the contiuous discussion.
Great conversation. I am happy to see that the audio blog has sponsored just as much activity as prior postings. It is interesting to see the variety of perspectives that we have coming into play here. I, fortunately, have the privilege of knowing all of you guys personally and your various backgrounds and it is a blessing to see healthy conversation taking place between such diverse men.
It is important to remember where we have come from and what has shaped us as we interact with someone new. All four of us have had situations within our background that have shaped the way we approach scripture, and way we approach those with a different perspective than ours.
I am currently very sensitive about what the Bible has to say about truth within community, therefore when I go to traditional Baptist churches and don't see what I believe to be Biblical community taking place, I feel a conviction to approach those congregants about that issue. Nate has always been very sensitive about how people view the sovereignty of God and therefore is quick to bring it up in any spiritual conversation. Phil and Malcolm have viewed the destructive quality of legalism in their involvement with the church and therefore are very sensitive to what they view as statements built on ignorant zeal or a ungracious dogmatic perspective. Not to say that any of you have completely displayed any such attitudes in our conversation, but we tend to be very sensitive to our various area and guard against transgressions of our perspective within our conversation.
All that to say, thanks for the continued involvement and please keep in mind that although the Bible is there for all of us to read, we still see through a glass darkly and need the Holy Spirit's work revelation in our own lives as well as through others in order to better understand how to apply the Word of God to our lives.
8 comments:
Well, let me be the first to say that the audioblog is nice for some spice, but it eliminates the ability to cut and paste comments or to look at them to find the real meaning of a specific word choice. It was nice to hear your voice though. :)
On another note, All of these differences that are being noticed in the SBC are common in most major organizations I think. While I reallize that not everything can be Assembly of God(tongue in cheeck, sort of) I find that the move to have more diversity in the denominations serves to help break down some past barriers that would have prevented people from forming relationships with other Christians that may have some differences than them. In that order I do like to see more diversity because I hope that it means that people are searching for themselves, and secondly it allows most of us to focus on the main points that bind us together and it allows us to have underlying tensions that keep the relationships interesting. Not even Paul and Peter agreed on everything, we shouldn't either. However, we should be able to get past the minor differences and interrelate based on the Foundation.
The body has many parts, and many doctrines that don't all agree. But they do not all have to agree in order to do the task that each member has been given.
Hello again Jason Glen,
This is your good old Reformed, Amillenialist brother Nate Penland. I have to agree with Malcom, even though I do not know him, that it was very good to hear your voice.
However, I did have a problem with some of Malcom's comments. Certainly Malcom is entitled to his opinion. But it is not his opinion I am after, it is the Bible and making sure that our comments as Christian brothers are saturated with it.
The first thing that Malcom said that bothered me was:
1) "In that order I do like to see more diversity because I hope that it means that people are searching for themselves,"
Maybe I mis understood this comment or maybe Malcom did not mean it in the way that it came across. But let us not forget that "searching for ourselves" is something that the lost and dying world is doing in a losing battle to be "individualistic" with a God-centerd world view. We find ourselves in Christ alone! (Galatians 2:20). We find ourselves in Romans 3:10-18 where Paul reminds us of who we are without Christ (Romans 7:24-25). We cannot find our selves through diverse relationships between people. We find ourselves in the word of God as Christ reveals Himself to us. We cannot start with ourselves and hope to one day find the perfection that is in God. We must start with God in His Word and allow it to purge us from self-centered thinking (Heb.4:12).
That naturally leads me to the second thing Malcolm said that is must be thought about more carefully
2) "secondly it allows most of us to focus on the main points that bind us together and it allows us to have underlying tensions that keep the relationships interesting. Not even Paul and Peter agreed on everything, we shouldn't either. However, we should be able to get past the minor differences and interrelate based on the Foundation."
I would ask Malcolm and you, Jason, what ARE the MAIN points that bind us together? Certainly we have the Baptist Faith & Message but even it has some severely general statements that most Baptists do argue over. I, for one was gald to see the SBC take stand on a very openly Biblical issue on women and men and their roles in the church. The BF&M 2000 is more specific in that way. It is also more specific on The innerancy and infallibility of Scripture. These are great strides by the SBC top protect truth at all costs. That is always what we must do because that is what the Bible demainds for us to do (John 8:32, Matt.10:34-39). The bottom line is that doctrine DOES and ALWAYS will divide. It divides because men are naturally "haters of God", especially a sovereign God that does all things for the glory of His name as the rightful, just, all-loving and true sovereign king of the universe. This si the God that said that ALL things are done for "His name's sake" (Isaiah 48:9-11), including saving sinners. Even Christ himself said that his main purpose for going tot he cross was not us, but to "Vindicate the holiness of His Father's name through being both "just and the justifier" (John 12:27-28, Romans 3:25-26).
So that is why we must ask the question, what are the MAIN things that Baptist today should "stand together" on? Where do we draw the line? We have certainly decided that Baptist, even Southern Baptists who are open theists are speaking a great and heretical heresy. So we cannot stand together with them and protect truth. Can we stand together with men like Falwell and The Canner brothers who outright dismiss entire chapters of the Bible because it doesn't fit their view of God (ie. Romans 9). Does everyone have to be a full five point calvinist to be saved? No, but if someone was a full, historical arminian or true historical hypercalvinist they certainly would not be saved. So again my main warning is, we must be careful to throw out such genreal statements like "let us focus on the main points". That is what the "Protestant and Catholics together" have said and so they have dumbed down the truth to the minimal so that they can simply get along. Is this what we want? I cannot want that. So when Malcom says that "we should be able to get past the minor differences and interrelate based on the Foundation" that concerns me because the idssue Baptist today are arguing over and should be talking about is "WHAT ARE THE MAJOR AND MINOR issues?"
What is the Foundation? Well it is Christ, ofcourse, but we cannot simply say "let's all just love Jesus." If we did, we would be compromising in so many areas we could find truth is we wanted to. The problem, is that we are blurring the lines so that we can get along.
Jason, your interelational church, as I know you, would have nothing to do with simply "getting along" and just stamnding together on the MAJOR issues. In fact when I spoke to you about it on the phone, it was all about discussing the theology so as to prevent believing in false, dumbed down, "I just love Jesus" doctrine.
We must avoid coming together because we have found the most general thing that we all believe in, because then we are really saying that we are not wanting to look for absolute truth, but any truth will do, as long as we can be both diverse and unified. That was not why our Lord died on the cross. Let us be careful to not trample it with a unity that gives up truth.
1 John 1:21
Please make an editorial note from my blog above.
When I said, "But let us not forget that "searching for ourselves" is something that the lost and dying world is doing in a losing battle to be "individualistic" with a God-centerd world view. "
I meant to write "with a man-centered world view." thanks
Sorry I should have read this before I sent it. But another editorial mistake.
What is the Foundation? Well it is Christ, ofcourse, but we cannot simply say "let's all just love Jesus." If we did, we would be compromising in so many areas we could find truth is we wanted to. The problem, is that we are blurring the lines so that we can get along.
This should have said, "we could not find truth if we wanted to."
Jason,
I feel I must keep on the pretense put forth and pay homage to your voice, (ooooo, aaaahhhh). Anyway, that being done, on to the real issues.
A few thoughts cross my mind.
1. Diversity: a good thing; do you see it in the SBC? not really. Malcolm: I like what you said, focusing on the things that do unify us helps us to better relate to more people. Of course, we need a core of orthodoxy that we do not compromise, but on some issues (tongues), drawing a line in the sand simply does not edify the kingdom.
Nate, you said doctrine does and always divide. that is an unfinished thought, here's the rest. It divides, but on each side of the division, there is a unity. For example: Christ is God or he is not. not counting those who believe in the validity logical contradictions, that statement will divide the world into two camps, and on that issue, each camp will be unified, so we see that while doctrine does divide, it also unifies. It is that unity around "major doctrines" that we are seeking.
Also, you said, "We cannot find our selves through diverse relationships between people. We find ourselves in the word of God as Christ reveals Himself to us. We cannot start with ourselves and hope to one day find the perfection that is in God. We must start with God in His Word and allow it to purge us from self-centered thinking (Heb.4:12).- here's a thought: Diversity is not needed to help us find ourselves (like you said), but it is necessary to help us find God. Here's why, None of us, in our personality, temperment, intellect, or any other capacity we have can comprehend or manefest the fullness of God. Therefore, if we are to purge ourselves from selfishness, we must realize that theology is a task that will require other people who will have differing views, not becaue they are wrong or poor exegetes, but they will bring perspectives to the table that while they may not have the whole truth (like our own perpsective), they will contain pieces of the truth that we do not want to miss.
I think the point (correct me if I'm wrong) malcolm was making is not that we need to pull theology out of our ear, but rather that instead of individuals reading the Bible and coming up with a set belief, we ought to allow other people to voice views from scripture that disagree with our own, testing them, but not making more of an issue of them than necessary (again, tongues is a good example).
Also, if we're discussing the church and where to draw definite boundries, We simply cannot use Baptists and Christian synomomously. Given that one who is saved is a Christian, for the purposes of a dialogue on church, denominationalism dies off. Malcolm, you mentioned past barriers that have kept people from church. One of them is the term Baptist. It does keep people from some churches (as i'm sure every denomiational title does to some people). We need to focus on God, and how he has revealed himself, not us and why we are different from everyone else. If we truly are different, it will show.
Anyway, thats enough for today.
Peace,
Phil
A couple of points.
Nate- "searching for themselves" should have read more properly "searching the scriptures themselves. I believe that given the opportunity the Holy Spirit will really teach us all things.(John 14:26)So you are right that searching ourselves or the company of others we will not necessarily find truth, but through interrelatedness hopefully we should find some new revelation of the truth of Christ as He is in Christians and helps us to offer the diversity that Phil has mentioned.
So, yes we should be focussing on what are the major and minor points. As mentioned, tongues should not divide the body of Christ. Yet it does even within denominations. But can you be a Christian and hold fellowship with those who use tongues, public or private, and still maintain righteousness? Of course and if you are in a love relationship as Christ demands then both will be edified in the Lord. So it is not my intent to say we should all just get along. That would be truly naive to think it were that easy. Yet that is exactly what we were ordered to do. So how do we do that which is the second greatest commandment? We start with the first and the second should naturally follow. Have we come full circle yet.
So what is the truth that is essential? Is it loving your neighbor or is it having perfect doctrine? (i.e. the parable of the good Samaritan)
"what are the MAIN things that Baptist today should "stand together" on? "
I understand that this is mostly a Baptist discussion, but not being Baptist I think that as Christians we should broaden the scope to all saints.
Grace to you all,
Malcolm
Hey Malcom, in an effiort to make sure that I was not seen as hostile, I appreciate you clearing some things up, espececially about "searching the Scriptures themselves." That was helpful and now I understand and fully agree with that assessment. We must always remember too, that if we come up with something "NEW" that has never been heard or though of in 2000 years of Christianity, then we are wrong. "There is nothing new under the sun." I only say that to make the point that even though we are given the Holy Spirit, we are not "inspired" to add to the Scriptures as the apostles were. The canon is closed and all truth on this earth that we can and should know about Christ has been revealed in His Holy and perfect word. That is just to agree with you, that in that way diversity is necessary because other TRUE Christians who have studied the Scriptures over the past 2000 years cannot all be wrong. We gain so much from these men and IO praise God for them. As far as today, even in the broader Christian world, and not only the BAPTIST world, I must ask the same question, "What are the MAIN things that we must ALL hold to in order that we might truly know and live for Christ? And as Phil said so well (I FULLY agree) where do we draw the line and stand TOGETHER on one side or the other of that line? I am sorry that used Baptist, but it is definitely THE ONE TRUE CHURCH that I am thinking about. Because there are many sitting in cold buildings with a denominational name on the outside who have no interest in Christ and no clue who He really is. But the one true Church is out in the world standing for something that is real and BEARING Fruit that is obvious.
I praise the Lord for that. Thank you Malcolm and Phil for the contiuous discussion.
Your brother,
Nate
Guys,
Great conversation. I am happy to see that the audio blog has sponsored just as much activity as prior postings. It is interesting to see the variety of perspectives that we have coming into play here. I, fortunately, have the privilege of knowing all of you guys personally and your various backgrounds and it is a blessing to see healthy conversation taking place between such diverse men.
It is important to remember where we have come from and what has shaped us as we interact with someone new. All four of us have had situations within our background that have shaped the way we approach scripture, and way we approach those with a different perspective than ours.
I am currently very sensitive about what the Bible has to say about truth within community, therefore when I go to traditional Baptist churches and don't see what I believe to be Biblical community taking place, I feel a conviction to approach those congregants about that issue. Nate has always been very sensitive about how people view the sovereignty of God and therefore is quick to bring it up in any spiritual conversation. Phil and Malcolm have viewed the destructive quality of legalism in their involvement with the church and therefore are very sensitive to what they view as statements built on ignorant zeal or a ungracious dogmatic perspective. Not to say that any of you have completely displayed any such attitudes in our conversation, but we tend to be very sensitive to our various area and guard against transgressions of our perspective within our conversation.
All that to say, thanks for the continued involvement and please keep in mind that although the Bible is there for all of us to read, we still see through a glass darkly and need the Holy Spirit's work revelation in our own lives as well as through others in order to better understand how to apply the Word of God to our lives.
Post a Comment