“I will not preach the convention sermon as I was invited to do by the 2017 Committee on Order of Business and SBC messengers.”
Paige Patterson in Letter to SBC President Steve Gaines
Earlier today Paige Patterson withdrew from delivering the Keynote Address at the upcoming meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention. The annual gathering of messengers from Southern Baptist churches will take place next Tuesday and Wednesday in Dallas.
According to an article in the Baptist Press, Patterson emailed SBC President Steve Gaines this morning, informing him of the decision. In addition, Patterson said he is withdrawing as chairman of the Evangelism Task Force, an appointment Gaines made last year in response to a vote of the convention in Phoenix.
The Baptist Press article also included the following:
I will not preach the convention sermon as I was invited to do by the 2017 Committee on Order of Business and SBC messengers,” Patterson wrote. That decision and his withdrawal as chairman of the evangelism task force stemmed from “days of soul-searching before our God, whose blessed forgiveness and grace are continually poured out upon us all.”
Both actions, Patterson said, are “an effort to do what I can to contribute to harmony within the Southern Baptist Convention and to respond to the request that has come especially from [Gaines] and other Southern Baptist leadership.”
Because of Patterson’s decision to withdraw as keynote speaker, the keynote message will now be delivered Kie Bowman, pastor of Hyde Park Baptist Church in Austin, Texas.
For those who plan to listen to Bowman’s address, it is scheduled for 9:55 a.m. CST on Wednesday, June 13.
Here is a screen shot of Paige Patterson’s letter to Steve Gaines, which the Baptist Press published.
Finally, Paige Patterson issued the following statement after resigning as keynote speaker and chairman of the Evangelical Task Force. It was published on the Southern Baptist Texan website. (texanonline.net)
We are continuing to follow developments regarding next week’s gathering of Southern Baptists. It may prove to be one of the most heated and contentious SBC meetings of all time.
Patterson isn’t even planning to attend the SBC this year:
Thanks! I have added Patterson’s statement to Southern Baptists to the post.
Patterson’s refusal to admit the wrongs he has been charged with reveals a stubborn, proud man. SWBTS was right in giving him the boot.
Is it just me, or does arrogance and defiance ooze from the letter to the “Southern Baptist Family”?
Tweet from Sarah Smith of the Fort Worth Star Telegram regarding abuse at replacement speaker’s church:
“The speaker newly slated to give the keynote speech at the Southern Baptist Convention’s annual meeting in Dallas comes from a church that had an allegation of abuse while he was there, court documents show.”
Brad Sargent has an updated, fantastic compilation of articles over on Spiritual Sounding Board!
Yes. Trending these days. Yawn. Let us know when genuine leadership shows up in lieu of these talking heads that seem to be inept at real life challenges – despite their heroic theology and many books published as well as stained glass homage.
The protestations regarding following appropriate protocols are not only undermined in my view because of things he’s documented as saying — for one thing, the preaching and prayer that no one take matters outside the church to secular authorities — but because many relevant SEBTS documents were apparently hauled away, as noted by the institution’s then-librarian. Also, didn’t some of the issues with him originate there and not at SWBTS, making his citation of compliance with reporting requirements at SWBTS less compelling — this of course being prior to many of the recent accusations being further detailed and of course investigated?
Other remarkable items: his phrasing others as accusers who twist things (must have missed the specifics there), the “riding off to the setting sun” comment (while previous comments and actions certainly indicate it took a great deal to usher him towards that good night), and the call at the end that falls short of relevance to me in light of what seemed to be a casting of himself in part as a victim — specifically a wounded lion, which we’ve seen so many authoritarians cast themselves as — while admitting very, very little (“a poor choice of words”) and appearing to mitigate even that by pointing outward as to a source of the issues at hand.
Can I submit a motion at the convention that merges the SBC and the UFC? The Pay Per View revenue could pay for lots of stained glass windows.
Maybe Mohler should stay away from the SBC next week too. Stating that he thought he was joining a dinner club is too funny! Didn’t CJ say Mohler was the smartest person on the planet?
So glad to be done with the SBC. I do think I’ll keep my MDiv. signed by Patterson though.
Janet Mefferd will be in Dallas for the SBC meeting next week, which she stated on her program yesterday. Looking forward to hearing her perspective on what occurs.
Thanks for the info on Mohler.
Shocker – Patterson flunky Scott Colter announces his “position has been eliminated” at the seminary:
Scott: “I have been @swbts for 11 yrs….ultimately served as chief of staff to president. Learned yesterday my position is being eliminated.”
Sharayah: “What a treasure it has been to serve the Lord at Southwestern under the leadership of Dr. & Mrs. Paige Patterson. Grateful for the lasting friendships, the myriad memories and the invaluable lessons. I’ll remember it with a full heart.”
I wonder WHO told him not to come so they wouldn’t have to uninvite him?
I would imagine the convention would be total mayhem if PP did show up —- it may be mayhem anyway!
When watching the SBC convention is my eating POPcorn offensive to egalitarians? Do I have to share it with my wife?
I would like info on the MULTIPLE SWBTS employees who were hired by Cedarville University which, I believe, was orchestrated by PP for a SB take over of the university.
Well, that depends. Did you go out and purchase the popcorn yourself? Did you pop the popcorn yourself? Would you refuse to share the popcorn with a male friend, or your dog? Does your wife refuse to share food that she purchases and prepares with you?
If the answer to all of these questions are yeses, then you are good to go! ; ^ )
You ladies ask difficult questions. Imagine what would happen if you ladies asked questions at church?
In case you weren’t aware of it, but I’ve been reading the SBC Issues blog run by the Colters (he was Patterson’s Chief if Staff, she is a student at SWBTS). They are Patterson loyalists, and I’d strongly recommend reading all the posts from early May onward.
Ah, but that’s why we love them!
No doubt about it. 😉
Yup and put multiple faculty and staff out in the curb.
Yes! Please deliver the women at CU from the ongoing misogyny and gender discrimination there. Not to mention coverups. When Patterson’s protege Thomas White became a President in 2012, he immediately made gender an issue, forcing out 20-year Bible professor Joy Fagan (very similar to how PP fired Sheri Klouda—and for the same reasons), rewriting CU’s doctrinal statement to mandate agreement with the complementarian view (a first for CU which had always hosted open discourse with egalitarians, even under Pres. Dixon, despite the preference there for complementarianism), and lumping all feminists together as radical, marriage-hating lesbians who hate God. And he preached that in chapel. What CU women want to know is this: Did White know about the rape of Megan Lively in 2003 and was he complicit in PP’s coverup? In his email to faculty and staff (which he then posted on his blog), White only says he that though he worked at Southeastern at the time, he “didn’t handle the matter.” But he doesn’t say he was actually the Director of Student Life at the time nor does he say if he knew about the rape. Lively herself may not know what other administrators may have been told about it. There may be no way to find out this answer, but it is so important. Whether he knew about it or not, White, like PP’s other protégés, carries on his legacy of misogyny elsewhere. It is terrifying.
For those Wartburgers who are interested, I won’t be delivering the SBC Keynote Address either.
I would like to, but it’s another of the SBC sites I’ve been blocked on for challenging \ questioning the blog..
Win a few, lose a few.
Before the sun sets on Paige Patterson, he still has to face the court sexual abuse case against his Conservative Resurgence bud Paul Pressler. Patterson is alleged to have participated in a cover-up of Pressler’s sins. Two PP’s in the same pod.
Yes and when those newly minted Ph.D Bible professors arrived existing professors and staff were put out on the curb. Lives thrown into ruin.
“When watching the SBC convention is my eating POPcorn offensive to egalitarians? Do I have to share it with my wife?”
i don’t recall a belief in the 100% free exercise of personhood for men and women touching on macabre entertainment value for its own sake, or how to eat popcorn.
if it’s white cheddar popcorn, i wouldn’t share.
Heck, Mohler has probably said that about himself! Consider the opening line in the following documentary about Mohler’s takeover of Southern Seminary:
“I think he’s the most brilliant man I’ve ever known in my life …”
(note: it hasn’t been confirmed, but the narrator sure sounds like Dr. Al!)
It’s called The Doctrine of Bowl-Competency
With popcorn involved there is also the question of Bowel Competency. But I digress…
Not too shocking considering it appears they committed a felony in releasing protected student documents. The seminary had to protect itself from an investigation.
I would have gone for that!
Mahaney said his good buddy Al was “the smartest MAN on the planet”. That comment excludes women.
For the record, Mahaney is WRONG, but I’m just a woman so what do I know?
I don’t see the Baptist witness as what Paige described, and I see the so called orthodox witness as rife with doctrinal battles that are devolving into minutiae as theological theory is applied just to keep that doctrine “orthodox” in the ongoing conservative resurgence that never ends. A skewed application of theory is how the victim of rape is treated like the perpetrator. Where is this spelled out in Scripture unless it is in the imagination of the theorist? Complementarianism is also such a theory. It goes to the very Trinity. These theoretical fights by doctors of the church never end. It makes me glad I am not a battling Baptist. There is a verse in the Bible which describes scribes and Pharisees going to the end of the earth to find a convert and that convert becoming more a child of hell than the proselytizer. In my opinion all of this may be devolving to this point and it will only get worse and the clerics more corrupt in time. Last comment I will make on the Baptist mess.
Kettle Corn is my fav!
Mohler doesn’t have anything to worry about. He and his New Calvinist lieutenants now control every jot and tittle of SBC life. He is untouchable.
Well, Dr. Al faced one very perceptive woman in his early days at SBTS – in the following Q&A (starting at 26:00), a young female seminarian certainly discerned what was coming under his leadership!
Feed my sheep ………. popcorn?
Max, I really wish we could be buddies. We would have some fun conversations!
SBC’s traditional wing (non-Calvinist) has canceled their Connect316 program at SBC-Dallas next week, calling for messengers to meet and pray instead! Radical!! It’s come to that!! Perhaps, if the SBC majority had been doing that all along …
Anthony, I’m afraid you would find me crying during some of those conversations. I’ve been “preaching” this stuff so long, I’ve just about run off all my buddies – I could use some new ones of like-mind.
You should comment more often.
The Doctors of the Church, as you described, are themselves descended from the Pharresses and Sadducees. And yes, like their fathers, they compulsively find young men to convert. It has been a continuation of lineage.
Sorry to hear that, Nick. Guess I just won’t go!
A kettle corn vendor at SBC-Dallas would make a small fortune!
At a conference I attended several years ago, I saw a “Little Orbit” mini-donut vendor raking in the cash as hundreds/thousands of meeting attendees lined up to get those greasy delicacies and a bad cup of coffee each morning.
With Diet Coke.
An extremely illustrative description of life in SBC high places, as we are finding out with each passing day.
Indeed. She asks, “If you don’t believe in the personhood of women, how do you expect to lead them?”
Key. Ladies, if leaders don’t believe in your personhood, run fast – the other way, and problem solved.
Mohler and Moore are not being honest about this right now. The seminaries are teaching women aren’t made in the image of God (per Ware and Strachan), but Mohler claims they believe in the full personhood of women. And the New Calvinists don’t seem to have any problem with being deceptive.
Pffft. When they mention things to pray for, they give a link to SBCIssues. All of those articles are very pro-Patterson…… Like poor PP .. he’s the only true victim of the #churchtoo movement.
“The seminaries are teaching women aren’t made in the image of God (per Ware and Strachan),“
Just curious….any proof of this?
The Relevant article where Strachan admitted this was taken down a few days after it was posted about a month ago.
“It may be best to understand the original creation of male and female as one in which the male was made in the image of God in a direct, unmediated and unilateral fashion, while the female was made image of God through the man and hence in a indirect, mediated and derivative fashion. So while they are both fully image of God, there is also a God intended priority given to the man as the original image of God through whom the woman, as image of God, derived from the male comes to be…”
-Bruce Ware, https://cbmw.org/Resources/Articles/Summaries-of-the-Egalitarian-and-Complementarian-Positions
Ware tries to say both are true in that passage, which makes it unclear. Strachan came right out in the Relevant article and said women were not made in the image of God and that is what he taught. Not surprising it quickly disappeared. He also has a habit of removing his Twitter posts about it. But the Junia Project has referenced some: https://juniaproject.com/image-man-created-god-male-created/
I just found where Relevant put it back up as a podcast: https://relevantmagazine.com/podcast/christianity-masculinity-problem/
Sooooo … Ware teaches that women are a mere derivative of man, while man is a direct image of God.
I guess he never read in the Bible where it says “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”
These guys jump through so many hoops to subordinate women that they are going to hurt themselves some day.
That’s what snake oil salesmen do – talk out of both sides of one’s mouth. Time to shake the dust off the cowgirl boots and get out of Dodge.
“Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.” Matt. 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:11, Acts 13:51. (Apparently, worth repeating.)
As we’ve discussed on TWW, there’s a pretty simple test to see where one’s heart is on the matter of God–how much do they talk about Christ and then love their neighbor?
False prophets may give lip service to Jesus but if they aren’t sacrificing themselves to go out and love their neighbor, they probably don’t believe what Jesus said.
Woman is made in the image of the image of God.
Only some of them. 🙂
Count me in!
To fully follow that logic, men are a derivative of dirt because man was made out of dirt. The only direct images of God would be the earth, all the plants and animals, and all the celestial bodies he directly created. Humanity could only claim being made in the image of dirt. I don’t think that is what Ware intends, but it is unavoidable in his argument.
This Q & A was very revealing. Not being SBC I had no idea of Mohler’s history, (Only all the hoopla all these years about how he ‘saved’ Christianity from the liberals’ corrupting influence.) but it is obvious from this session that his was an unwelcome takeover, and that those present passionately disagreed with what he was bringing in – and he knew it.
Understatement of the year award for this.
I think some of these guys came up with their theology before the legalization of marijuana.
Okay, I’ll admit it here. I first became willing to give Calvinism a reluctant try thanks to a short acquaintance with Ware and his family when we began attending a church he assisted at, years ago. Shared a few meals, hikes in the woods. When he later came up with this ESS stuff, I could not believe it; he seemed so sincere and intelligent. I also seem to recall disagreeing strongly with a book he wrote on the Bondage of the Will some time back. These guys can sound very persuasive. Then you get to reading your bible, and you realize that it contradicts all that they teach.
… and he didn’t care.
Y’all are adulterating the popcorn!! Butter and salt alone belong to popcorn . . . 😉
. . . and he didn’t care. Seriously, he sent chills down my spine with his cold, combative stare. If there is such a thing as a mind controlled Manchurian Candidate, he would look and sound like Mohler. He did not seem human.
“… there will be false teachers among you … they will be men who will subtly introduce dangerous heresies …” (2 Peter 2)
Sooo … let’s make him President of the flagship seminary of the largest Protestant denomination in America!
Women, déclassées. “At one fell swoop,” Macbeth, the Bard.
It’s all starting to make sense now! Mahaney must be a member of the Dodeka secret society!
You know things are getting really weird in the SBC, when you Google “Dodeka Mohler” and a picture of Paige and Dorothy Patterson pops up (her in a strange hat). Try it.
I watched the entire Q & A and felt sick to my stomach! Now that we know the end result of Mohler’s scheming, I couldn’t have any less respect for him.
These people deserve each other! Patterson trained Mohler, well, and I believe Mohler has out maneuvered him.
Nick, I accepted the invitation agreee you declined, but I couldn’t get the time off work… Oh well.
Well played, sir!
I don’t think Patterson ever believed he needed others to take control. He gave off the impression to me that everyone should be in sheer awe of everything he said. Even in his responses here his hubris is obvious.
Mohler is much more subtle than that and probably tells a lot of his yes-men what they want to hear, just like he’s adept at telling the public what they want to hear, even though he doesn’t live it.
I thought it was the Eternal Subordination of the Bowl. But I’m always getting this doctrinal stuff all mixed up.
Did you mean Eternal Subordination of the Bull, as in ESBS?
Ken F (aka Tweed),
But but but Eternal Subordination of the Bull would just be ESB, right? Am I missing something? 🙂
It was a Wartburger test … you win!
I am a fan of subordinating BS, but it doesn’t seem to be catching on where it matters most…
Wade just posted a new tweet:
I’m terrified that I know exactly who it might be and I don’t want it to come out.
No doubt about it. Mohler learned a lot watching Patterson, as the movers and shakers of the Conservative Resurgence dealt a heavy blow to SBC liberals and moderates during the Bible inerrancy war. At the turn of the century, SBC’s CR leaders started to realize that Mohler had moved to the lead and that the CR was merging into a Calvinist Resurgence, something that caught them off-guard. They just didn’t have the ability (or the will) to turn it around – against a flood of non-SBC reformed entities which aligned with Mohler (T4G, TGC, etc.). They were out-maneuvered and out-smarted by Mohler. Southern Baptists had a window open for a brief time in 1992-1993 to send Mohler packing when he declared that he was going to take SBTS and SBC back to its Calvinistic roots in a denomination which had rejected that theology 150 years ago. That window is now closed.
Which faction of SBC folks won’t be happy?
It’s not that. I just think that’s an awfully big burden to bear for that person. It could go either way in terms of who would be horrified.
I also think Patterson would have no trouble throwing Sharaya Coulter under the bus for publishing those private student files and could easily do the same for that person. Even though it’s likely both are on his side. They are women, after all.
The fact that Sharaya was the one that published them is very suspicious and I think Patterson or her husband could have abused her trust in them. I wonder if Patterson told Coulter the files were stolen? I mean, she could have stolen them, but I doubt it. I think she was put up to it.
Like a photocopy.
That would explain why women can’t do loads of stuff that men can do. Except for when they can, but that doesn’t count.
ION: important events in Enbruh today
Well, two, to be exact. Firstly, we’re meeting Dee – looking forward to an Anglo-Scottish-American catchup.
Secondly, Scotland and England are playing a cricket match! Disnae happen all that often. It’s a one-off ODI (one-day international, at 50 overs a side). Scotland are batting the noo; currently an impressive 76 without loss off 11 overs. It’s a short boundary and batting conditions are good, but even so, that’s no’ bad. I’ll keep yeez a’ posted. England won the toss and fielded, incidentally, which doesn’t say much for their batting confidence.
With Scotland (my adopted country) playing England (my country of birth), it’s quite difficult to say which side constitutes “we”. Probably England, from force of sporting habit as much as anything. But where brexit is concerned, “we” is Scotland.
Now 82-0 off 12; interestingly for a total of that size, there’s only been a single extra (a wide).
And the first ball of the 13th over has gone for 4. Scotland will really be eying up a record total here. Second was a dot ball though.
211-3 off 32. Scotland’s two highest-ever partnerships against England have come in this match; the opening stand of 103, along with 93 for the 3rd wicket. Scotland going along nicely…
281-3 off 41. Calum Macleod moves onto 82 off 60; a fine innings by any standards. He has 9 overs remaining to get his ton… meanwhile, I’m off for a run just the noo as I can’t put it off ony mair without my post-prandial blood glucose spiking. I’ll report on Scotland’s total, and the early part of England’s response, when I get back.
295-3 off 42…
Macleod onto 93…
George Munsey just gone for 55, his maiden ODI half-century. The partnership, worth 107, yet another record for Scotland against the Auld Enemy. Macleod on 98… and two more runs gives him his ton!
NOW I’m off for a run.
SO: Scotland closed on 371-5, with Calum Macleod unbeaten on 140 from 94. This is Scotland’s highest-ever ODI score, and they made it against the world’s number-1-ranked ODI side. England can bat a bit too – this will be a really interesting game now.
The American church is about to experience a remarkable thing! The largest Non-Calvinist denomination in the U.S. will soon surrender its vast resources to a New-Calvinist takeover. Election of J.D. Greear to the office of SBC President will finalize that mission, signaling an end to one of the greatest soul-winning institutions on the planet. Oh, it will still take a while for SBC’s 45,000 churches to fall in line, but a generation of new leaders are heading to their pulpits to accomplish that task, one church at a time. Over the next few years, they will shift the SBC default in belief and practice to a distinctly reformed focus at its seminaries, entities, and churches. The SBC Non-Calvinist millions who have sat quietly and allowed this to happen will someday ask “What happened?!” The handful of New-Calvinist leaders who ran a brilliant campaign to Calvinize the denomination will leave Dallas knowing “We made it happen!” SBC will forfeit its denominational gifting of evangelism to a lost world. In the Kingdom of God, who wins?
When the wheels leave the institution, time to pack up and go with God. Their loss, God wins.
” … he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. …All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth…they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them.” – from Hebrews 11
Certainly! The Kingdom of God prevails, despite the futile efforts of man to redefine their role within it. Kingdoms of men – including religious kingdoms – come and go, but God’s Kingdom is from everlasting to everlasting. God wins – He is victorious! We lose when we do not join Him in what what ‘He’ is doing on earth. I once witnessed the hand of God in SBC life; I haven’t seen that in a while … in individual lives, certainly, but not in the institution. Before Christ returns, I truly believe we will see the death of denominations and find the Church comprised of those who worship Him in Spirit and in Truth wherever He puts them. Christ sent his followers into the highways and byways. Believers would do well to seek Him there in these last days and be salt and light to a dying world, while the organized church – with all its rebellion and sin – collapses.
Where was this prophesy? None of the big names predicted this. Who would have known? However, the collapse of the evangelical denominations does seem to be happening, as you point out. And as the SBC postures as the biggest of them all, in the USA anyway, – the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
However, God is not brick and mortar but Spirit and Truth, as you also point out. So, we go with God, no less.
Meanwhile, in the cricket, England’s reply is going briskly; but Bairstow has just gone for 105 off 59, with England 165-2 off 18. Joe Root the next man in; but it looks as though Calum Macleod is going to be top scorer, and quite likely Man of the Match (unless one of Scotland’s bowlers pulls off something even better). Great effort.
With respect to OP, and PP letter(S).
Yup, PP is a real example JC sacrificial life in these letters; and think, this guy has been leading the training of pastors for how many years?
It was given to those in the wilderness waiting for God to call them forth.
How do you handle the prophecy of the Serpent and the Seed receiving wounds?
I am not convinced that the primary lure of neo-calvinism in SBC is theological so much as ethnopolitical. Around here (an urban and comparatively prosperous area) the SBC and CBF baptist churches are so lily white and so middle class who can miss this. And in that sort of culture to add male dominance as a doctrine-good grief. There you go: money, race, gender and power.
It seems to me in scripture that God does not discipline much less destroy something until the last chance has been given and no hope of repentance is seen. And even the we see God giving a warning ahead of time. I don’t see SBC to have reached that point-yet-and maybe they never will. Let us hope.
I was just reading on this yesterday. I asked google who or what is/are the seed of the serpent. Not everybody thinks that is a messianic prophecy. I assumed they did, but nope.
Here is the problem with orthodoxy. It came late in history and has no answers for foundational events of the past.
The Serpent has children and they are at war with the children of the woman. It’s ongoing.
The Serpent has yet to be wounded in any way. He is in remarkable health and lives in Heaven, where he has always lived. Likewise, God has yet to receive any injury in his heel.
This will happen soon though.
From Patterson’s humblebrag statement:
“My part is small in the amazing history of the people we call Baptists.”
Then what’s your face doing on a stained glass window!?
Not only that, but by phrasing it in the passive: “…a poor choice of words has occurred, in and out of the pulpit, over decades of ministry.”
Why doesn’t he just say, “I merely opened my mouth, and out popped these stupid words!”
Are you an advocate of the serpent seed theory?
Serving Kids in Japan,
No. What you link to discusses various idiotic ideas. Sometimes fringe, and sometimes popular dominate doctrines.
Ironicly, since this blog focuses on the SBC, the Southern States had a problem with doctrinaly mandated racism.
I think the link also mentioned Parham. That was an infection and his ideas are still very much a destructive force. (Passed down through the Shepherding Movement)
The war is sitting in plain sight through the entire Book. Genesis 3:15 is the first (non-chronological) mention. This thread is discussing the ongoing war. But commenters are struggling to identify it as such, only that sub-optimal events are taking place.
Image the proverbial blind men touching an elephant.
Passive voice is the worst. It lets people get away with tons of things. “Speculation about X is occurring” is a favorite technique of journalism to cover opinion and make it look like fact. I’m sure Andy Savage would much rather say mistakes were made than I made a mistake
Greetings fae Enbruh
So: I’m officially here in Enbruh having dinner with Dee!
And yes, she’s everything you’d imagine. (In a good way – obviously.) *
Scotland Beat England At Cricket! Fantastic game – England were all out for 365, losing by 6 runs with 7 balls to spare. Scotland’s first ever ODI victory over England – who, remember, are ranked #1 in the world – will hopefully see that fixture repeated more often.
* “You are so funny” – Dee
Dee here. Sharing a dinner with Nick in a pub in Edinburgh named Auld Hundred. I just tried a taste of Nick’s burger with a topping of Haggis and it was much better than I thought! Nick is as fun in person as he is on the blog.
You’ll never guess what.
Dee and I just commented together – and we’re in customs!!!
Bah. That’s because they’re both rubbish.
Fortunately, Dee has Blog Queen Superpowers and was able to approve our comment by phone…
As I just said to Dee – this is what happens when you have too many alter-egos.
Thanks for clarifying. I know someone who believes this stuff – it’s very weird. Who do you think are the serpent children and why do say orthodoxy came too late?
You may not be a fan of born again theology, but the SBC has been arguably the greatest organization for promoting it.
You are not even supposed to be a church member if you have not been born again.
Well, I bought and read JD Greear’s book about stopping asking Jesus into your heart.
And it appears to me the SBC is about to elect its first openly avowing non born again believer as its head.
Gone will be altar calls, personal evangelism, personal faith, being born again, all the stuff that made the SBC the SBC. Right along with congregational governance.
Tithing units or pew peons and women are about to find out what means to be “under authority.” So are born again men.
It ain’t gonna be a pretty death.
Anyway: as you’ll have gathered, it has been my privilege to spend an evening in Edinburgh with Dee.
Dee at one point asked me what keeps me coming back to Wartburg. That was easy: the people. I’m sure you all know what I mean.
And thanks, Dee! (And, by extension, Deb; and GBTC.)
Jesus of Nazareth died a horrible death at the hands of the Roman military in collusion with a corrupt religious establishment.
And since he’s Almighty God in human form, I think he got a tad more than just a heel bruising.
And the devil?
When Jesus rose from the dead, the serpent’s whole head and his cruel hatred for humankind was dealt a mortal blow from which he’ll never recover.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Thanks, Nick. Yes, know what you mean, and same here.
Misogyny, Submission and Patriarchy have always been a part of CU’s culture. As a graduate fully steeped in that environment, I likely never recognized it.
Later, coming back as an emancipated, free-thinking adult staff member – it horrified me. I remember working in one of the offices and being told I had to get my boss coffee, make coffee and take my turn cleaning the cups (of all the other males in the office). I told the head secretary I wouldn’t do it). Not only do I not drink coffee – but these are grown men who can clean their own cups. If they can go on 90min lunch breaks they have the time to wash out their cups at the end of the day. She was gob-smacked. I was personal friends with my boss and I let him know of our conversation. He was horrified. He had no idea this kind of 1950’s thinking was going on in the year 2003-2004 right under his nose. To his credit, he took his turn in the kitchenette cleaning up after his peers. I never did make the coffee or wash up after other people in the one year I lasted there. And that is just a small measly example.
As Staff member – Dixon was out; Brown was in. Students seemed to like Brown. Cedarville was moving away from “Independent Baptist” back toward its roots in the “Southern Baptist Convention.” I think there was eventually some disagreement with Brown’s way of leading.
I am still in the area and have staff members that work at CU that I keep in touch with. I hear things and observe things. When White came in, hardball SBC was full-on. Administrators resigned. The entire Philosophy department was cut. Bible profs were cut – even some long-standing tenured profs. The CU boat was rocking HARD. They began to lose students. I also heard positive things about White – many compared him to Dixon. The way he preaches, his style. He’s “old fashioned.” His evangelistic outreach, conservatism. I don’t know much more. I wouldn’t say that everything is good on the CU homefront.
Of course, I’m sure you are aware, White is on the board of CBMW.
True. The errant wealthy have their way for a time … and then it is over for Eternity. (The rich man and Lazarus, for example.)
“Do not envy wicked men or desire their company; for their hearts devise violence, and their lips declare trouble.…” Proverbs 24.1-2
Psalm 37:7 “Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for Him; fret not when men prosper in their ways, when they carry out wicked schemes.”
Psalm 73:3 “For I envied the arrogant when I saw the prosperity of the wicked.”
You are so welcome! Wish I was there.
Yes really. You made my point concerning the Christ. He laid down his life, while the prophecy said he would be injured in the heel.
Likewise, if I fall down the stairs, Muff Potter does not get a concussion. Nathan does.
Neither references are to the same thing.
The Devil is still accusing the Brethren 24/7. He is in excellent health. If he was mortally wounded, we would no longer refer to him as Devil or Satan. We would be un-opposed. But we are still very opposed.
You are right there. But the Calvinists learned the hard way that if they show their true colors they will be rejected. So they have learned to clothe themselves as angels of light. They keep the good ol’ Southern Baptist words and phrases, and (wink, wink) redefine them amongst themselves. The guy in the pew will hear the same comforting words, while the in the know will be chortling into their beards. They only begin to show themselves when they have their power firmly in place, and anyone who dares disagree can be promptly disposed of.
No, there will be no altar calls, for the gospel is not even presented. You cannot declare God’s love and mercy to all, when you believe that it is limited to a select few. So you will hear doctrine, doctrine and more doctrine. You will hear how anyone who disagrees is a God-hating, two-headed monster who eats their own children. You will be brainwashed, and subtly pressured to conform to whatever beliefs and behaviors are demanded. And God help any who dare to think for themselves! (They give lip service to the Holy Spirit, but in practice people don’t need him – they have the pastor and ‘ruling elders’ – get use to that phrase, you will hear it endlessly. And the ‘safety in the plurality of elders’ speech; I’ve got that one memorized as well. 😉
“And the kings of the earth, who committed fornication and were wanton with her, will weep and wail over her when they see the smoke of her burning; they will stand far off, in fear of her torment, and say,
“Alas! alas! thou great city,
thou mighty city, Babylon!
In one hour has thy judgment come.”
And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their cargo any more, cargo of gold, silver, jewels and pearls, fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet, all kinds of scented wood, all articles of ivory, all articles of costly wood, bronze, iron and marble, cinnamon, spice, incense, myrrh, frankincense, wine, oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and slaves, that is, human souls.
“The fruit for which thy soul longed has gone from thee,
and all thy dainties and thy splendor are lost to thee, never to be found again!”
The merchants of these wares, who gained wealth from her, will stand far off, in fear of her torment, weeping and mourning aloud,
“Alas, alas, for the great city
that was clothed in fine linen, in purple and scarlet,
bedecked with gold, with jewels, and with pearls!
In one hour all this wealth has been laid waste.” (Rev 18:9-16)
what DO they believe is the way to salvation? anybody know?
I believe he is indeed mortally wounded, which is why he is flailing about, inflicting as much damage as he can before his limited time is up. He knows he’s doomed, but he also knows that God does not use force or coercion, so he still has the opportunity to confuse, deceive and potentially destroy weak, fleshly men in his last hours.
They wouldn’t admit it, but they believe that correct doctrine shows that you are ‘elect’. They have no room for all the soft-hearted, lilly-livered ‘God is love’ folks, and will douse all spirit, enthusiasm and desire to know God personally. In place you get your custom engraved, irrevocable ‘get out of hell free’ card. Doesn’t help much when the turmoils of life hit, but you just have to keep reminding yourself that at least you don’t have to burn forever like the poor dupes made for his eternal toast.
No more ‘Mr. Nice Guy’. No more ‘God is love’. It’s all about supreme authority, sovereignty, and complete control. You now serve a cruel, totalitarian despot, but hey, at least he lets you off the hook when so many get to suffer for the very same sins you were forgiven.
For God so loved the WORLD that He gave His Son, that WHOSOEVER BELIEVES in HIM should not perish but have everlasting life? He is not willing that ANY should perish? Where is the part about the elect? So does there ever really have to be a time in which an “elect” receives Christ as Saviour, if they were “elected”? Where does that leave Jesus dying on the cross exactly? I’m researching it, really, but it does explain something that was said to me in “biblical counseling” about God’s sovereignty and the way I felt there was blame being cast toward God as being sovereign in relation to some evil things I had experienced. I remember feeling revolted that someone would think that God had ANYTHING to do with some things i’ve experienced. Well, why did the preacher who was not the calvinist just walk out and leave the church i’m not attending anymore with the preacher who is the calvinist? WHy, so many questions….
Linda, you see it. Once you see it, you can’t un-see it. Once it’s in your knower, you can’t un-know it. The New Calvinists make a mockery of millions of born-again Southern Baptists who believe that “If you (anyone) openly admit by your own mouth that Jesus Christ is the Lord, and if you believe in your own heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is believing in the heart that makes a man righteous before God, and it is stating his belief by his own mouth that confirms his salvation. And the scripture says: ‘Whoever believes on him will not be put to shame’.” (Romans 10:9-11) David Platt, a leading New Calvinist and current President of SBC’s International Mission Board has said that a sinner’s prayer to accept Jesus into your heart is unbiblical and superstitious. Southern Baptists are on the threshold of losing the only identity they have known for the last 150 years.
A once great evangelistic denomination will lose its signature reason for existing – delivering a message of hope in Christ for ALL people – when the new reformers complete Calvinization of the SBC. The election of J.D. Greear this week in Dallas should send that alarm throughout 45,000 SBC churches … lest the giant continue to sleep.
tithing units, pew peons, chess pieces, a checker on a checkerboard…WHO is it that would want the sinners prayer stopped?
Max, maybe it is time dissidents separate and form a new denomination. My spiritual forebears separated from the Northern Baptists due to modernism.
It has been observed repeatedly in posts and comments that the takeover of non-Calvinist congregations by neo-Calvinist pastoral hires frequently involves tactics that have a deceptive character to them.
From the perspective of the people on the receiving end of this treatment, it must look and feel like unchristian behavior on the part of the aggressors. One might be tempted to wonder whether the people doing this can have clean consciences.
From my exposure to conservative Reformed teaching in the last decade, I believe that Reformed thinkers reckon that the Ninth Commandment does not forbid deception in the context of warfare. One can lie to one’s enemies without breaking any biblical command.
It may be that neo-Calvinists can mislead perceived enemies in the non-Calvinist camp without awakening conscience, if the deception is regarded to be part of righteous “warfare” to advance the Calvinist cause.
I don’t know that this is the case, but I’m trying to think about it in terms of what it might look like from the “inside” of the movement.
Mark, there are 15 million Southern Baptists. The vast majority are non-Calvinist in belief and practice (they have been that way for 150 years). It would not be right to think of them as dissidents. The dissidents are the New Calvinists (a small minority of Southern Baptists) who are in the process of taking the denomination from good folks who have amassed tremendous resources around the world. The new reformers think they have come into the world for such a time as this to restore the gospel that Southern Baptists have lost. They are, of course, wrong. The strife may end in yet another split of the SBC. God cannot be pleased with the behavior of His people in this regard.
Samuel, I really believe that the young, restless and reformed army within SBC have been indoctrinated to think this way. They justify stealth and deception, aggression and militancy, for the good of the cause. They feel that sovereign God is on their side … an awful lie they have entered into. They are passionate, but it is a misplaced passion. Their New Calvinist leaders will pay a price for this rebellion.
It’s good to ask yourself why you believe things. It’s how you find truth.
No he does not flail. He is a legal accuser, or opponent. He addresses the Court when he stands before the Throne.
His children are just like him. Starting with the fact they are all ministers. Or in other words, servants.
His head is just fine.
I wasn’t aware the Catholic church was Calvinist. The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the US with 5.3% of the population identifying as such, but, it is dwarfed by the Catholic Church (20.8% of the population). I note that, in contrast to some other denominations, it is possible for entire Baptist congregations to walk away from the SBC with building and bank account.
figures from the Pew Religious Landscape survey
Really? Are you sure about the fine print at the bottom of the page? Seems like with all of the changes, hierarchy, take-over strategies, and hidden agendas of late, this would have been covered, too.
This is, perhaps, part of the reason for the stealth takeover. They are not merely seeking to ‘win’ people over to their theology – as many naive young pastors perceive – but to acquire the church, the property and the accumulated physical, emotional and spiritual investments that have been made by faithful believers for decades. It is far more profitable to acquire a denomination than to start over. Besides, they need the SBC lingo to hide behind, because, again, people will not buy into Calvinism if honestly presented. Many of my friends and loved ones who were taken in by Calvinism simply refuse to believe that the essential doctrines are essential. They have been lured in with a bait and switch, and have been falsely assured that Divine Determinism is compatible with free will. It is very much like the disingenuous pretense that women are both ‘equal’ and ‘not equal’. It is the exact same logic, and requires the same sort of deception and doublespeak. The youngun’s have been sold the package, and do not even see the disconnect – until their churches, marriages and lives start falling apart.
He who controls the narrative…
Which is why we each have access to the Bible and God’s Holy Spirit, on our own, individually.
Start With the prophecy and you will immediately notice an intentional error in the text. The Woman’s Seed is not anatomically correct. This is because both the Serpent and Woman are discriptions of two Signs mentioned in Genesis 1:14. It is both an actual event and a parable. Their proper names are not used.
Why a parabel? Because the purpose of parable is to conceal mysteries of the Kingdom, not teach truth.
Asaph said this…
I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old.
This was 1000 B.C. and yet the sayings where already of old, and apparently verbal.
If you skip forward to circa 30 A.D. the Christ will speak of numerous mysteries and identify specifically who the Serpent’s Seed are.
-Pharassees (separated ones / a political / entered the Church)
-Scribes (teachers of the Law / entered the Church / enemies of Paul)
-Sadducees ( hereditary sons of Zadock / entered the Jerusalem Church / additional priest families emigrated to Rome circa 70 A.D.)
-Herod (hereditary enemy of both the Jews and Brethren / attempted to produced a dynasty from 5 wives including at least two daughter’s of High Priest)
I include Herod due to the warning to beware his leaven. Also, Obidiah said the hidden things of Esau would be discovered, at the end. Till then, Esau remains a mystery long forgotten to the Church.
The Serpent’s Seed, are all of the Kingdom, not the World. They are Servants like their father, the Devil. They comprise three types of Leaven. Two hereditary, and one ideological. They can inter-breed amoung the three strains.
The various parables discuss various facets of their history and traits. The Angels asked for permission to destroy them, but where denied. Permission will be granted in the time of the Harvest,but prior to gathering of the surviving wheat.
Psalm 21:10 describes their fruit/DNA extermination from mankind. Unfortunately,the parable of the three measures of meal informs us, they destroy the Church.
It’s probably possible, yes. It’s also very unlikely in the way they stage their takeovers. They do account for this. Usually a large number of “new members” come over from another already New Calvinist church to help them “replant” the church and hand over power to the new pastor. As many SBC churches are set up a little differently, during this process they also handle some voting that makes sure the financial power is handed over to the new pastor or one of his yes-men.
You gotta understand, most of the congregation have no idea what’s going on during this process and think there’s just a bunch of new people. They think the pastor they are bringing in or already brought in is a nice, non-Calvinist guy. They have no clue that the pastor is out to “reform” them.
People have asked several times in the past couple weeks here why I think New Calvinists believe those who are not New Calvinist are going to hell. It’s because they treat us like enemies. This is one reason.
The other is that they have told me. The last time one did, he said it was because I wasn’t automatically submitting to his superior theology, particularly because I was a woman, and women are supposed to submit to anything a man says.
And then people wonder why I think this movement is so dangerous…
My word. I presume you did not originate this thinking on this subject, so where did you get it? Can you refer me to some more information on this way of thinking about this?
Truth is, I have run into the literal interpretation, that the seed of the woman are humans and the seed of the serpent are snakes and this is a biological curse just like the crawling on the belly curse on the serpent. The seed of the serpent would be literal serpents.
I have run into the common concept that this is a messianic prophecy, and that indeed Satan ‘bruised the heel’ of God at the crucifixion and Jesus crushed the head of the serpent at the same time. The bruised heel was not a fatal wound as seen in the resurrection, but the crushed head of the serpent is an eventually fatal wound consistent with end times prophecies-the eventual lake of fire.
I have run into the two seeds in the spirit predestinarianism concept somebody referenced above.
But I have not run into what you are saying.
I always appreciate your insights!
I am just so sick and tired of this whole business of thanking God that ‘I’ am not like that other sinner over there. Jesus specifically addressed this attitude.
In trying to teach a middle school kid mostly how to think and how to ace standardized tests when you really don’t know the answer, I have tried to teach her how to think through the elimination process. The answer obviously can’t be ‘a’ and it probably cannot be ‘c’ so eliminate those. As to ‘b’ it is a definite maybe, ‘d’ would probably be my guess, but dang it all they gave us ‘e’ none of the above, and that is where genuine guessing comes in. All you can do is be brave, go with your gut once you have eliminated the obvious, and live with the results you get.
I think that when people think like robert thinks they don’t know when to quit eliminating. They are certainly not going to be like that sinner over there, or that other sinner, or like the whole mob of sinners trying to crowd into the temple, and pretty soon all they have left is ‘none of the above’. Tragically they seem to be deceived about themselves; they think that what they think is ‘right’. That is not good thinking. One has to say that what one thinks is probably right after a process of shifting the probabilities. That is documented in scripture by the dark glass comment, the know in part comment, the identifying of when we will know as we are known-not until we actually see Him as He is.
In the meantime there is Jesus with a stern warning that if one goes to the temple to pray and if one only criticizes the others who are there praying, then the critic will go away not having his own sins forgiven.
That Robert person onthe other thread just offhandedly listed a bunch of people and denominations he thinks are nonchristian because they disagree with him on something’s. Their clearly are some who think that way.
On your other comment, the sheer stupidity of men who think women should submit to all of them generically boggles the mind.
Patterson will not be addressing SBC messengers BUT, to plagierize John Adams, Ravi Zacharias still survives!
Certainly! Anyone who would question the aberrations of their belief and practice could not be in the family of the elect! I suppose classical Calvinists think the same thing, but they are more civilized for the most part and not in your face about it.
Oh yes! The Patterson, Pressler, Page and assorted other SBC scandals have taken the spotlight off of “Dr.” Zacharias. He is being honored as a “Special Guest” to speak on Tuesday evening at SBC-Dallas. Southern Baptists have become so open-minded that their spiritual brains have fallen out!
I’ve gone from being disturbed about Robert’s comments to feeling sorry for the guy. He is just one example of multiple thousands who have become so indoctrinated with aberrant theology that they’ve darn near lost their minds.
Yes, this happened a few years ago at an SBC traditional church near me. The young reformed pastor first lied his way past the search committee about his theological persuasion to gain control of the pulpit. He then recruited enough New Calvinist members from a nearby search to pass a vote for elder polity … the last time the congregation would have any say in church governance. He then appointed like-minded elders from the new members. The non-Calvinist members protested, but by then he had gained control of the church. After much weeping and gnashing of teeth, the older members left to start another traditional church … leaving the church they had bought and paid for over the years and its assets in the hands of the new reformers. These guys are bad … and they are coming to an SBC church near you!
meant to say “nearby church”
Yes, should have specified “Protestant.”
SBC’s 45,000+ churches are “autonomous” enough to do their own thing, as long as they conform to the spirit of the Baptist Faith & Message – the BFM was revised in 2000 to provide theological wiggle room for New Calvinism. I expect many traditional churches will walk away from the denomination if/when members realize that eventual Calvinization is in the writing on the wall for them. By doing so, they can protect their church buildings and land from the rogue YRR army. Unfortunately, the New Calvinists have already taken a good number of non-Calvinist churches by stealth and deception. I doubt that SBC churches (the vast majority are non-Calvinist) have things like this covered in their charters, but they need to be scrambling to do so!
Oh, yes, the CBMW is a very big thing for White, the root of his modus operandi. He isn’t just a complementarian; he’s ultra, ultra complementarian. Like PP, he has created a culture where women have been objectified and demeaned—in some staff decisions, demoted as well. Like PP, he believes questioning male authority in any way is sin. (That characteristic is so cultish, it’s frightening). Like PP, he adds to the Gospel and does not believe “all truth is God’s truth.” That has had devastating effects on the liberal arts, which suffer tremendously under the censorship policy passed last year. Historically, CU was never part of the SBC; it was founded by the GARBC. But yes, that was fundamentalist and legalistic to the core. I was a student there in those days and didn’t see it. I enjoyed my education there decades ago and because it was so good, I outgrew the fundamentalism and went beyond it. That was under the Dixon years. Under Brown, CU finally started to shake off that baggage, but Brown was doomed from the start by the fundamentalist impulse that invited Paige Patterson on the Board of Trustees in 2003 (unbeknownst to them, he was covering up Megan Lively’s rape that same year). PP was planning the takeover then, I think. But in any case, Cedarville University is a hot mess of misogyny (and coverups) now. White is not Dixon. We always considered Dixon authoritarian, sure, but he was benevolent and treated faculty and staff alike with respect. His integrity was unquestionable. That is all gone now. Staff members are treated like plebeians (especially women); faculty are held in suspicion, unless White himself hired them. And White gaslights employees constantly. He micromanages, so he is aware of everything. It is hard to believe, therefore, that this same man did not know about the rape at SEBTS in 2003. He says he “didn’t handle the matter” but that doesn’t mean he didn’t know about it. That is the question I beg a journalist to ask.
I think many of the men who are attracted to New Calvinism already believe that or want to have a reason to justify it. New Calvinism lets them bask in narcissism or shore up their insecurity about themselves regarding women. ESS can be taken to mean all women should submit to all men, because they are always subordinate, though even the clobber verses don’t go that far.
I wouldn’t make such an assumption without proof.
Lea, I’ve known many civilized classical Calvinists in my lifetime :-). They have been civil in their discourse and respectful of other expressions of faith. This New Calvinist tribe is an entirely different bunch.
Lively did say that Patterson handled it himself, with “four protogees”. It could be that White was one of them, but maybe he was just busy that day. Patterson had a whole flock of protogees that checked their brains at the door.
My impression of Patterson is that he may have brought his little group in, but he probably wouldn’t have let them handle it. He’s not a person that let’s other people have a word in edgewise. They probably just watched.
The fact that he brought students in to grill Lively, and not appropriate staff members like Moseley and a female staff member (it’s not like there were that many), is very troublesome. I suspect Patterson wanted to hide something by doing that.
That he didn’t report it to the police and told Lively not to do so, was just horrid and wrong.
I hope TWW continues with the series exposing Christian biblical counseling.
Biblical counseling won’t help most people who have depression, anxiety, or suicide. The CDC has been reporting that suicides are up lately.
CDC: Suicide Rate On The Rise
I meant “or suicidal thoughts”
Mmm-hmm, this is what they do: set up a false dichotomy, where you can either be a complementarian (hence a Bible believing, conservative, Jesus loving, pro family values person), or reject complementarianism and be a liberal feminist who supports abortion and homosexual marriage/sexual acts.
You can reject complementarianism and remain a Christian and/or a conservative.
Rejecting complementarianism will not automatically turn a person into a liberal.
I don’t have the quotes, but others on here in past threads have pasted in comments by Ware, where he argues that women are only a derivative of men, implying that women are not fully in God’s image, only men are.
(Per Ware, as I understand him:
Men are the direct copy of God, while women are Xerox copies of men.)
I would like to submit, er, suggest, that this entire ugly edifice of patriarchy is built upon an utterly corrupted definition of submission.
When the light bulb first went on in my own mind, and I began to rethink (actually think through for the first time) all that I had unquestioningly absorbed, I kept trying to get a handle on the nagging, subconscious thought that was just beyond conscious understanding. (That’s how things usually start with me.)
Having something of an innate affinity for etymology, it finally came to me that the words ‘submit’ and ‘submission’ could not possibly mean what they are suggested to mean. By the very fact that Paul was commanding men and women to ‘submit’ to various persons, it can be demonstrated that this ‘submission’ was a choice.
Even in the case of slaves, Paul was addressing the inherent ability of a human being to make free choices. In the case of a slave, his only ‘free choice’ was to disobey the commands of his master – even if it led to punishment and/or death. It is this inherent right, as a human being, that Paul admonishes the converted slave to submit for the sake of the gospel. Of course, the principles behind this cultural exhortation were also corrupted by early Southern Christianity, leading to the assertion that scripture approves of slavery – which some still secretly hold to.
IOW, in reality, submission is a free choice, something that occurs between individuals of like rank and authority. General A submits to the plan of General B., even though he has just as much right to demand the implementation of his own plan. Lieutenants do not submit to Generals – they simply obey their commands, no questions asked. That is obedience, not submission, and that is what has been ‘lost’ in the translation.
Submission, by definition, implies equality of rights. You cannot submit what you do not have. Every human being, male or female, slave or free, has the right to live, and, at times, disobedience is effectually a submission of the right to live for a higher cause, such as truth or justice. Thus, even a prisoner, with no seeming rights or freedoms left, can launch a hunger strike, submitting his last right in his struggle against his captors, which is his right to live. When Jesus ‘submitted’ to the will of his Father, far from suggesting an Eternal Subordination, it demonstrates his equality with the Father: he laid down his inherent right to live. (I think I am shoring up my own lagging belief in the Trinity!) Thus the true importance of Jesus’ many references to doing the will of the Father. He was submitting that which was his due right, in order to accomplish the plans of one of equal rank and shared goals.
I believe it is high time we engaged in serious study of the concept of submission, for it, like so many concepts, has been abused and distorted by people with nefarious agendas masquerading as angels of light.
CBE has done quite a bit on this subject, such as: https://www.cbeinternational.org/resources/article/mutuality/high-view-submission
I actually think to take the “all women must submit to all men approach”, you have to reason outside of the Bible. They come with this assumption and do a lot of mental gymnastics to make it work.
Eternal subordination of the Son is not orthodox at all. Some of the New Calvinists, like Mohler, say they don’t believe it it, but then allow it to be taught in the seminaries. After it was wholly rejected academically, only a few “scholars” like Ware and Strachan still openly admit to holding it. I think Mohler and friends are holding out until they indoctrinate a whole lot more baby pastors and would-be scholars.
I think an honest reading of Ephesians 5 can only mean mutual submission. To interpret it any other way would be to reject what the Scripture is actually saying.
As I think about this week’s election for the next SBC President and J.D. Greear’s candidacy for that position, I’m reminded of something Greear’s bud Mark Driscoll used to say “The church needs dudes!” I’ve been a Southern Baptist for 60+ years (something that might end this week), and I’ve never been accused of being a “dude” not even in my younger years … I guess the church didn’t need me all this time! Well, I’m too fuddy-duddy to change now, so I’ll leave the SBC in the hands of the dudes – this generational shift in leadership, belief and practice just doesn’t have room for me any longer. I’m too old-fashioned and fussy for the youngsters, I suppose, and they keep telling me that my whosoever-will theology just ain’t with the times. I’m too worn out to get with it, be culturally-relevant, and change my view of God’s plan of salvation for ALL people. Besides, I can’t remember the 7 words of the new songs long enough to sing them 11 times. Yep, I ain’t no dude … but you Wartburgers knew that already – I just wanted to vent a bit on the eve of the election of SBC’s first New Calvinst dude as its President. Ken Hemphill, the other presidential candidate, is a great guy but he’s not a dude either. The church needs dudes, you know.
And subject to Replication Fade, where the copy loses accuracy and clarity with each generation.
As in Taliban, ISIS, or Handmaid’s Tale Ultra Complementarian?
I know for a fact Thomas White wasn’t one of the proteges in the room that day because when asked privately by Sarah Pulliam Bailey, Lively said he wasn’t (I have connections to SPB and thus know this; that is not published anywhere.). However, as Director of Student Life, White had to have been made aware of the situation. I just can’t believe Patterson would not have informed White about it since White was in charge of student discipline at the time and both Lively and her rapist were disciplined. I just can’t see White being left completely ignorant of the discipline or the reasons for it. It’s possible, of course, but again White’s own wording in his blog simply says he “didn’t handle the matter,” not that he was completely unaware it ever happened. I believe he chose his wording carefully and was rhetorically savvy. He doesn’t lie–PP did handle it–but he also isn’t completely forthcoming. His blog response also curiously omits the fact that he was the Director of Student Life (he just says he worked at SEBTS at the time). Also, he spends most of the time in his blog response talking about how CU abides by Title IX, which is a red herring. SEBTS doesn’t take Title IX funds and doesn’t have to abide by Title IX regulations, therefore. So talking about CU’s Title IX policies distracts from the SEBTS picture. Plus, according to one alumna who signed the petition demanding PP be removed from the CU Board of Trustees (now moot), whether CU actually follows Title IX regulations is questionable. Commenting on that petition, the aluma Olivia Collene, wrote this: “I attended as a student and worked as a staff member at CU. I am grateful for the time I spent there. However, the hardest thing about the culture there is the ignorance of certain issues such as rape culture. I was sexually abused as a child and had a hard time coping with some of the expectations placed on women there. A friend of mine was sexually assaulted by another student on campus and felt the university did not have her back when she tried to report it. Another friend was assaulted in her internship and was told there was nothing the university could do to protect her from having it happen again.” If true, both of those situations would pose Title IX violations; in the former, obviously, CU must act; in the latter, CU must document it. Did CU do either? Only an investigation would show the truth. Are there other similar situations alumni or present students could attest to? That remains to be seen. But I think Collene’s comment prompted White’s lengthy Title IX discussion in his blog response, that’s for sure.
Then by the definition of “God’s Image” I remember from my time in-country, only MEN are human. Women are thus some species of animal.
As we said in Furry Fandom about the high-profile horndogs and their fantasy-critters, “Just human enough so it isn’t bestiality, not human enough for it to be rape.” Because THAT’s were that attitude leads, whether Furry fantasy art or Meatspace.
If any Wartburgers are still SBC maybe they need a fast jet to get to the convention, and an army of folks to help pass out fliers.
I wonder how many rank and file messengers would vote for JDG if they realized by his own testimony, and by what the SBC has taught for 150 years, the man would not be considered saved? Part of Christendom, yes, but not born again.
The old joke of “is the pope catholic” is being turned on its head to “is the leader of the SBC saved?”
This is a mess of unbelievable proportions.
We are out and in a “whosoever will” church, not SBC.
But to remain SBC and lose the teaching on salvation is to lose the whole shebang. Time to write Ichabod over the door and move on.
Or stop this travesty.
Sounds like somebody very full of himself, a loser zhlub who looks in the mirror and can only see Adonis with Perfect 10 Supermodels draped over him.
And when this self-image collides with Meatspace reality long enough, you get homicidal incels and Manifestos.
I keep remembering the Khmer Rouge and their Superior Ideology –
How’s That For Dangerous?
The essence of a Raid-and-Pillage economy.
Why build it yourself when you can steal it?
“WANT. TAKE. SIMPLE.”
I was a student at SEBTS at the time. We did sign documents where they stated they complied with privacy laws. Whether the government would investigate is another matter, but they certainly could be open to a civil suit.
I think that is why SWBTS quickly fired the Colters. They didn’t want to get bound up in an investigation or lawsuit about either the stolen documents or the privacy laws.
As for whether or not people knew, even if they said something, Patterson would not have listened. I suspect Alan Moseley did exactly that. There was no reason for it to be handled the way it was except that nobody could go against Patterson when he decided to do something. Hence why he was so angry that SWBTS fired him. He didn’t think he could be fired.
“Rulers of Tomorrow! Master Race!”
– Ralph Bakshi, Wizards (crappy movie, appropriate line)
On Fire for The Righteous Cause, like Komsomol, the Red Guard, and the mobs of the French Revolution.
Righteousness plus POWER is a real bad combination.
Like al-Qaeda and the Taliban. “GOD HATH WILLED IT!”
I wish you had not used the word honest. But none the less there is an ‘i’ i that has not been dotted and a ‘t’ that has not been crossed in your argument about Ephesians 5 in so far as it talks about wives and husbands/ church and Christ. For your argument to prevail with those who do not see it the way the issue must be addressed as to whether Christ submits to the church and if so in what way and why is that way ‘submission’.
Personally I see the submission of the incarnate Son to the Father, but not the submission of Christ to the church. So, what are you seeing between Christ and the church?
And to defend a Peculiar Institution regarding Animate Property.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
Not physically abusive, no. But emotionally and verbally abusive along those lines, yes, absolutely. (Gaslighting is a constant.) And prohibiting the act of questioning his male authority: Double yes. The censorship policy passed last year is a perfect example of White’s m.o. (and his Academic Vice Presidents–Loren Reno in the past and now, Tom Mach). They use the policy to censor student writing and faculty curriculum at will; whatever they deem is feminist or too sensual or too tied to evil theory (as in the case of Shane Clairborne’s books, deemed Marxist), gets banned. (And in the case of Claiborne’s case, that censorship doesn’t even fit the policy’s supposed guidelines.) The truth is, the administration just doesn’t trust any liberal arts professors in communications, art, theatre, literature, etc. They view them all with great suspicion since none are SBCers/Patterson loyalists. So as soon as a student complains something is “bad,” the hammer comes down. And if you’re a woman, it comes down doubly hard on you. Women are reminded constantly that they are subordinate to men in the workplace as well as in the home. There is no mutual submission and “servant leader” is a code word for “dominant master you may never ever question, and if you do, you’ll be fired.” This is why there’s no whistle blower on the inside of CU; they are taught that doing so would be divisive to the Kingdom and sinful–and that doing so will result in the loss of employment, immediately. It affects men and women, just like in A Handmaid’s Tale or Farenheit 451, but certain men, and only men, are firmly in charge. And I will not lie: These men are so effective at gaslighting and smoke & mirrors manipulation, that many other faculty in the math and sciences and in nursing and pharmacy don’t even know their liberal arts colleagues are being attacked. Everything is kept hush, hush, lest one be fired. People who are miserable and can get out, do get out. So that’s the solution they pursue: Get out.
i.e. Purity of Ideology, Comrade.
In their early days it was Material Blessings (i.e. Getting Rich), now it’s Ideological Purity. And because of CALVIN’s teaching regarding “false election of the reprobate”, they have to constantly up the ante to PROVE to themselves that they are Elect.
You (generic you) have to have special and secret knowledge to understand it.
Isn’t that characteristic of a SOCIOPATH?
Angel of Light mask and all?
In Koine Greek, “OCCULT GNOSIS”.
Known only to an Inner Ring of Illuminati.
Just to be clear: “Privacy laws” probably referred to FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which is federal law; Title IX regulations are completely different from FERPA. As I understand it, PP claims Lively’s rapist was banned from all SBC seminaries and that such a discipline was consistent with Title IX regulations (do correct me if I’m wrong about that). However, as has been clearly demonstrated by all the reports now, the rest of Title IX was not followed precisely because SEBTS didn’t *have* to follow it since SEBTS does not take any Title IX funding (https://www.sebts.edu/admissions-and-aid/student-resources/default.aspx). Btw, this is exactly why Title IX is so incredibly important!
Headless Unicorn Guy,
One could certainly argue that, yes. I prefer to avoid labels, though, because they tend to be ad hominem attacks in nature and distract from the focus on the men’s decisions and actions.
THIS. I remember counting one of the chant-like choruses in a Tomlin number, which I believe got to 16…
Still got a ways to go to match 50-60 repeat loops of “Just As I Am” during an Altar Call…
They don’t like mutual submission, imo, precisely because it demonstrates what submission *can not mean*, which is mindless obedience to an ‘authority’. Preferring one another in love leads to the same place of giving over ones rights for each other, or really considering their opinions and wants when making decisions, but it does it for BOTH parties. So, in unimportant daily things, the husband will sometimes do what his wife wishes and the wife will sometimes do what the husband wishes. Parents, too, will give up their own wishes out of love for children and I don’t think even children ought to mindlessly obey parents or any adult! Thinking and decision making is still required, but this is precisely what the patriarchy crowd cannot stand. They want to be mindlessly obeyed. Because it benefits them, and they don’t want to prefer another when they could be preferring themselves.
“Mmm-hmm, this is what they do: set up a false dichotomy, where you can either be a complementarian (hence a Bible believing, conservative, Jesus loving, pro family values person), or reject complementarianism and be a liberal feminist who supports abortion and homosexual marriage/sexual acts.
“You can reject complementarianism and remain a Christian and/or a conservative.
“Rejecting complementarianism will not automatically turn a person into a liberal.”
Amen and Amen, Daisy. In fact, one can reject complementarianism, or at least the brand PP and White and the CBMW teach, and actually be biblical. And there are far worse things than being “liberal.” Being abusive, for instance, is far worse.
As a small child I was told the Serpent was reptilian. It was obviously made up.
There are many things made up. Just like Mt. Sinai is on the Sinai Penisula. Or Easter and Christmas.
Presumably, you are a believer, and not a novice. If so, using an actual translation, (not the Message) read the words on the page. If you only know English, get a concordance.
If you discover you have believed something in error, through it out.
On the topic of mutual submission, it seems to me that when people argue in favor of mutual submission some of the illustrations which they see as submission are things that some other people, including me, do not see as submission at all. When talking of laying down one’s life for somebody else, Jesus called it love but did not call it submission. Greater loves had no one…When talking about the husband/wife relationship Paul admonishes the husband to love his wife as Christ loved the church. Within a statement regarding submission Paul had the perfect opportunity to use the word-to equate laying down one’s life with submission-but I don’t see that he did that.
I do agre with you that mutual love and mutual submission could lead to the same conclusions. But, I also think that one can love without submitting (ask anybody who has raised teen agers) and one can submit without loving (ask any employee who has faced such a situation). So, personally, I do not equate the two ideas.
I do note that elsewhere the older women are to teach the younger women how to love their husbands and kids, so I am not excluding love as a responsibility. I am merely saying that submission and loving are not identical ideas.
So are you saying that you did come to these conclusions entirely on your own? What I asked you is where you got the ideas, and I think I hear you saying you just came up with the ideas on your own.
I’m with you as usual, Max. Since I’m in a church that values women I don’t have to choose to leave. Since we contribute to both CBF and SBC it may be just a matter of time before the KY Baptist Convention decrees that we must choose sides! I’m hopeful that a new breeze will waft in the SBC and churches like ours are “safe!” We were dismissed from the local association around 1992 but that didn’t seem to affect our fellowship. Of course, we have called the the servant-type pastors!
And as far as I can tell, there are no “dudes!” 😎
….If you believe not his (Moses) writings, how shall you believe my words?
I get that perspective and I cannot think of submission in the way it is often portrayed as a reasonable thing or a biblical thing that is consistent with the way people are told to interact.
I think love that is not harsh or self seeking and the general laying down of ones life and the sorts of advice we see husbands given would never lead to the kind of expectations I see in comp literature or from comp husbands. I know that I would never feel *loved* if I were treated in such a fashion.
I do agree with you that the definition of submission is one thing at issue here. Whatever Paul meant, mutual love, imo, would lead to one kind of team. The oneness Paul talks about makes this seem even more likely. Was it different 2k years ago? Maybe, Roman codes and all that. But everything Paul says to husbands appears to be an attempt to soften this tendency to ‘rule’. So, however it was 2k years ago, should it be that way today? No. I don’t think so.
I cannot read the words “Serpent Seed” without thinking of William Branham’s kook theology:
Or Bob Howards “King Kull”, or David Icke and the resulting “Reptilian” branch of Paranormal Kookarama.
“KA NAMA KAA LAJERAMA!”
I should note it does not say that men, young or old, should be teaching women how to love their husband. That may be purposeful.
So you’re Jesus Christ now, commenting in red letters?
FEATURE, NOT BUG.
“Why do they all talk like LAWYERS?????”
– Afternoon Drive-Time radio, after interviewing some official “spokeshole”
The Spirit expressly said that in the latter days there would be seducing spirits. Yes, there is a 2000 year lineage of leaven.(parable of three measures) But in the end, the angels appear in the field. Branham met one. (Wheat and tares)
I don’t. I only see mutual submission between the triune God. God the Father is equal to God the Son, and men are equal to women.
Remember the New Calvinists don’t talk about Christ unless they are minimizing Him. They would not generally talk about Christ and then Church because that puts them on the same level as women. So their clobber verse is 5:22 and they don’t talk about how that verse in Greek depends on verse 21 “Submit to one another”.
That is interesting, but the topic you mentioned in your comment which I was following up on was Ephesians, not the neocals. There were no neoCals back then. So, back to Ephesians 5 and back to Paul and back to the question. I asked what you saw as the relationship between Christ and the church because that is the analogy which Paul used.
Now I have a real problem with what you seem to be saying, referencing again your comment which I was discussing as well as your comment this time. I hear you saying that even in his incarnation (ESS is not the issue here) the Son did not submit to the will of the Father (to word it a bit differently in response to your reply) since there is equality in the Trinity.
So, putting all that together I assume that you may also mean that Christ does not submit to the church and that therefore Paul’s analogy does not support mutual submission. I doubt that is what you meant to say, but if the Son did not submit to the Father (God) how would he be thought to submit to the church (man).
And, hey, this is not about neoCals but about Paul and Ephesians and just what Paul was or was not saying by his analogy.
That wasn’t the context of the discussion we were having earlier. We were talking specifically about New Calvinist theology on Ephesians 5. They believe that men never have to submit because they have some sort of weird correlation with God and women don’t.
You are assuming things because I was talking directly about New Calvinist theology on submission. The analogy in Ephesians 5 isn’t an equal one between Jesus and the church and women and men. It said He gave up His life because of love, not submission. You’re looking at the wrong correlation there. But Paul does say that the church, and husbands and wives, should submit to one another. In a way, I think it makes a major point that acting out of love is even greater than acting out of submission.
I really don’t have the time or energy to debate this tonight, especially since it’s not related to what we were talking about.
Correct on all points.
As Dr Ruby was one targeted by Dr White…it would be interesting to understand ALL the reasons behind his, um, “resignation.” Not just the PR-washed stated ones.
Southern Baptists, ponder on this a while.
The list: http://www.joshuapsteele.com/a-farewell-to-cedarville/
Ruby VP of Student Life (a coincidence?) No. https://theventriloquist.us/removing-ruby/
I just read that the vice president will be speaking at the convention. Wonder what happened to the separation of church and state.
I am probably not the only person here who does not know what this ‘sinner’s prayer’ argument thing is about. I was born SBC and continued SBC until my mid forties. I was never in a church that used the sinners’ prayer methodology. We used the same verse that somebody quoted about confessing with one’s mouth and believing, called it a public profession of faith, and publicly confessed faith and were subsequently baptized-everything public. But no sinners prayer.
Now I hear people saying that SBC is giving up something which I never knew that they started in the first place. When did this start and why did they do it, as compared to what we did, and why are they stopping it? I am at a loss here. Somebody must have some reasons to have started it in the first place and now to end it.
And I have no opinion one way or the other, unless somebody tries to say that we are not really ‘saved’ but short of that it is not my business. But I am interested for old times sake I guess.
okrapod: what you just described is called “saying the sinner’s prayer.” Yes, some tracts will have a preprinted one but it is basically repenting of sin and accepting Christ as Savior.
And yes, there in lies the rub. They (new Calvinists) ARE SAYING that is not how one is saved. Either Christ died for you or he did not. If He did you are already saved. If He did not you don’t have a snowball’s chance in hades. And if you DID repent of your sins, and DID accept Christ as Savior, it is meaningless if you are not elect. And if you haven’t been blue pure perfect since you MIGHT be a “false conversion” meaning you probably had not stopped sinning and did not intend to do so when you got saved.
They love to denigrate “fire insurance” salvation. But really there is no other kind! We throw ourselves on the mercy of God through the sacrifice of the Savior. THEN comes the changed life, whether quickly or slowly. Or as the old joke used to be, “You catch’em and I’ll clean’em. Signed, God.”
So yeah, rejecting the “sinner’s prayer” is big deal, and does toss out what SBC folks have done for 150 years in favor of a predetermined elect since no one CAN accept Christ as Savior. That would mean we have free will to reject Him, and they do not believe we have free will.
So nicely put, they “question the salvation” of anyone saved the way you described. Being saved apparently equals becoming a Calvinist to them.
David Platt, President, SBC International Mission Board: Why “Accepting Jesus In Your Heart” Is Superstitious & Unbiblical https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPhEEzjU8xQ&t=6s
SBC Resolution approved at the SBC annual meeting in 2012 following Platt’s statement above:
That’s a good one!
Calvinism comes across to me as a wacky heretical cult, to tell the truth. Not Christianity, in any case.
This ought to be Guy Penrod and the GVB singing it.
They are in for a huge surprise.
What in the world. I posted a comment which disappeared. So I tried again with a slightly different format. Then the original, which had disappeared popped up and the revised form disappeared.
Can it be the rapture? Was one taken and the other left behind?
Southern Baptist leader O.C.S Wallace in the 1930’s put it this way in his book “What Baptists Believe” …
“Salvation comes to the soul that comes to salvation. Forgiving Savior and penitent sinner meet.”
Non-Calvinists would look at Wallace’s statement and declare whosoever-will may come. New-Calvinists see only the predestined elect in those words.
What was the process you went through to come up with these ideas? Do you know others who believe the same way, or do you find yourself pretty much alone in this?
“The U.S. Vice-Pres. will speak to the SBC Wednesday morning. I anticipate mass chaos not just due to security, but the time Southern Baptists need for important business matters (motions, resolutions, misc. bus etc.) is now cut WAY short to acommodate. #SBCAM18 #SBC18 #SBCMotions
7:34 PM · Jun 11, 2018”
Wade Burleson tweet on #SBC18
Yep. Chaos. They are taking the chaos play from someone else’s playbook it appears.
Congress has made no law establishing a state church. What Pence does at his own church or the faith-based venue of another is nobody’s business but his own.
Relevant to your reference:
Could This Woman Bring Down The Southern Baptist Convention?
Well I guess I haven’t really given much thought to the whole thing. The process…I mean.
Do you have a preferred answer?
I agree that it is a wacky cult. Unfortunately, if you know your history, it is indeed historical Christianity. Much as I wish it were not so, Protestantism does stand on historical Calvinism. However, in time, as the truth of its doctrines and their results led to the vast majority of believers turning from the errors of Calvinism.
So, in a sense, Mohler and the gang are correct in their claims of wanting to return Christianity to its roots. However, they were pretty shady roots, and not worthy of clinging to.
Max, this video just confirms for me, in retrospect, what Mohler always was: A well spoken deceptive strategist. Conversely, Patterson has always been a carnival barker who never hid who he really was. He was like a walking red flag with neon flashing lights. An easy target to take on the sins of all the “bad” SBC from Driscoll/Acts 29 to pedophile protector and shepherding cult leader, CJ Mahaney and the authoritarian deceptive tactics to take over the entities. But now it’s time to pretend none of all that happened because the new fad is SJW.
Mohler would never show his hand, publicly, but he would make sure, quietly, she and other females paid for questioning him. Just like he did with Paul Debusman right before his retirement and all the others he got rid of including the female faculty. It was like how the mega world operated. One day they are gone. Disappeared. And don’t dare ask about them or you are suspect. Very authoritarian. Deception is always his strategy and now it’s normalized and passed on through his many minions. It’s the only Christianity they know.
You know the smartest move Mohler made? A big portion of his income comes from OUTSIDE the SBC but was built using SBC platform and resources. The guy is a brilliant strategist.
Politicians speaking in churches was a staple of the civil Rights movement.
Indeed! His cold, calculated, deceptive responses in that 1993 Q&A session gave me the heebie jeebies! He is not only a sly puppeteer of a vast YRR army, he is a puppet himself of another force. Control, manipulation and intimidation are not fruit of a “Holy” Spirit.
By the way, was Mohler the narrator of that video, narrating a piece about himself?! (the pronunciation and inflection sure sounded like Mohler’s voice)
Beyond the perceived political motivation, Pence may very well be doing what he can to turn this nation back to God. However, he doesn’t know that Al Mohler is already doing that in SBC – sort of.
Pretty much says it all right there.
I hope she does, and that all those old nabobs who marginalize and use women as things to be used have their own Sisera moments (in a purely metaphorical sense of course).
If so, would anyone be surprised?
A lot of these Christian Leaders(TM) are poster boys for “Very Full of Himself”.
I don’t think there is any perfect standard for this, but I do like what St Vincent of Lerins wrote: “all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all.” In reality, not much in Christianity fully meets this standard. Still, if one has a belief that has not been widely believed among Christians throughout history, it’s probably wrong. I like to test new ideas against this standard. I don’t think it guarantees one will be right, but it reduces the risk of being very wrong.
It’s not politics or might that will turn anyone to God.
Yes, politicians speaking at churches has been staple since the civil rights era. The civil right era was a good thing but it also created a backlash from social conservatives like my parents. And social conservatives fueled the culture wars. I hated it when there were voter drives in the church (between services) to register for God’s Own Party and all the emphasis on politics. I feel like politicians in churches are modern day money changers. When I am in church I want to hear about God and not about a politician or the shrill Eagle Forum trying to whip up conservative Christian frenzy and fear and hyperbole and hatred about real and imagined matters I rather pray about.
Very logical. One can definitely claim there is safety in numbers.
What happens when tradition clashes with text? My default position is to say, I don’t understand. Not knowing, is a very good starting point.
The older I get the more I embrace “I don’t know” as a viable answer. Your question about what to do when the text clashes with tradition is at the center of much church/theological conflict. Interestingly, the text itself is part of the tradition handed down.
Here is a troublesome passage for the sola scriptura crowd: 2 Thes 2:15 – “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.” The text here says that we are to hold to more than just written tradition. Some would argue that the text eventually captured all of that unwritten tradition, but there is no indication in the text that this actually happened. So if the text itself tells us to hold to non-textual tradition, it seems to complicate the problem for us.
I don’t know…..is profoundly useful.
I don’t think word of mouth…. should cause too much confusion.
Start from the beginning.
Next, note 1:7. They have become troubled by something.
Someone is disobedient to the truth. 1:8.
Someone committed forgery. 2:2.
2:14 explains 2:15. The word of mouth was Paul and Silas in person.
But, you are correct about the Sola crowd. They do not rely solely on Scripture.
Just for fun, search on “sola or solo scriptura.” It seems to be a rage today to describe sola scriptura as something entirely different from solo scriptura. But the ones arguing for this are wearing a huge “kick me” sign because the only difference between sola and solo is the gender and case of the noun. Scriptura is feminine and solo is masculine, so it is a very basic grammatical error in Latin to use “solo scriptura.” No one who has studied Latin would make this argument. Using solo is both the wrong gender and the wrong case. It would be funny except that people fall for it because they think they are hearing it from experts.
Full disclosure: my wife helped me with this – she studied Latin for six years and is a language geneous.
Thanks. I’ll Google that.
That’s a lot of Latin.
Actually, this is a lot of Latin: https://www.latin-is-simple.com/en/vocabulary/adjective/80/ – it shows the difference between sola and solo…
Latin – is – simple- hmmm. Lol. I was born with little communication ability.
Me too, so I married into it. My wife is not a native English speaker, but her mastery of English is much better than mine. If I say she is awesome, does that make me a compImentarian?
Of course I messed up the spelling…
I meant Complimentarian…