Archive for January, 2007
“You Shouldn’t be Asked to Choose…”
January 16th, 2007 | 3 Comments | Posted in » In the News...
Check out this story, detailing a protest at Smithfield Foods in North Carolina over the company’s decision not to give workers the Martin Luther King holiday off.
The most interesting quote from the article?
“You shouldn’t be asked to choose between Jesus and Dr. King, a man who stood for our fight for humane working conditions,” Keith Ludlum, a Smithfield worker, said in a statement released by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.
HUH?
Renaissance or Rabidity?
January 12th, 2007 | 32 Comments | Posted in » Baptist Issues
Check out this article from Dr. Malcomn Yarnell III.
After reading some of quotes in this article, I have to wonder… are we really talking about Baptist renaissance here or Baptist rabidity?
Allow me to elaborate.
The thrust of Dr. Yarnell’s article is that Baptist history illustrates a strong commitment to being Biblical, and that careful study of the Bible will lead to doctrinal beliefs that are distinctively Baptist. In his own words:
Southwestern’s leading theologians do not promote Baptist theology simply because of history. We are convinced by God’s Word that Baptist doctrine is the best doctrine.
Dr. Yarnell notes that it is because of this belief… that Baptist doctrine is Biblical doctrine… that Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary is encouraging a “renaissance” of Baptist beliefs through a variety of channels… conferences, websites, seminary studies, etc. If this is the sole point of “Baptist renaissance”, I would have exactly zero problems with what Dr. Yarnell has written.
However, as I read this article, I was struck not so much by the majority of the article which addresses “Baptist renaissance”, but by the few sentences and paragraphs throughout the article, that, in my words, constitute “Baptist rabidity” moreso than “Baptist renainssance”.
What do I mean by that? Simple. Rabidity, by definition, is “going to extreme lengths to express or pursue a feeling, interest, or opinion”. As such, “Baptist rabidity” is simply extreme support of Baptist belief, history, and doctrine.
The upside of this? “Baptist rabidity” can truly result in “Baptist renaissance”. The downside? Well… that’s best illustrated by quotes from Dr. Yarnell’s article.
More recently, Dr. Emir Caner proclaimed it this way, “If you give a Christian an open Bible, you will get a Baptist every time!â€
Yet Baptist identity has fallen on hard times. Southern Baptists have been shocked by detractors within their own ranks.
There are two fundamental theological reasons for these distressing trends: first, there is the errant assumption that “Baptists†are simply one among many equally viable options in the broader Christian tradition. Second, there is little awareness that calling oneself “Baptist†is really just another way of saying “thoroughly biblical disciple of Jesus Christ.â€
You see, rabidity (Baptist or other) can go beyond fervant support of a cause. Even if well-intentioned, rabidity can often lead to an overabundance of pride in one’s own cause… to an arrogance that causes one to look down on other causes… to the putting down or tearing down of others that don’t see things in quite the same light.
This is the problem with Baptist rabidity. Dr. Caner’s quote implies that non-Baptists might as well be non-believers. Dr. Yarnell’s generalization about “detractors within their own ranks” implies that certain Baptists are unbiblical and might as well consider themselves unwelcome in Baptist circles. His theological reasons clearly state that non-Baptists hold errant beliefs.
How dare we adopt such condescending views! Should we not be more careful with our attitudes and words? How does a pride-filled, “I’m more Biblical than you” attitude build up the body of Christ? How does this kind of thing promote the unity Jesus found so important as to take time to pray for prior to his arrest (John 17:20-26)? How does such judgment line up with Paul’s teaching regarding disputable matters (Romans 14)? What good does Baptist rabidity really do?
Now, I’m no seminarian. I’m no pastor. I have no formal theological or Biblical education. But really… Am I either so stupid or so blind as to miss the point of this?
We spend countless hours debating calvinism / arminianism, baptismal requirements, tongues, alcohol… all in the name of defining what it really means to be “Baptist” (or Biblical, if you prefer)?
Can’t we offer just a tidbit of the grace God has offered us when it comes to such matters? Let’s drop some of our Baptist rabidity, and see if some real renaissance can occur… not Baptist renaissance, but instead… the renaissance of Christian love (by which we are to be known, in case you missed it)… Christian unity (again, that was so important to our Savior that he took time before his arrest to pray for)… and ultimately… cooperation in fulfilling the commission we have been jointly given… to spread the gospel to a world without hope.
Now THAT’s the kind of renaissance I’m talking about.
(UPDATE: Dr. Yarnell has posted some clarifications over at Marty Duren’s place, SBC Outpost. Check out the comment stream in this post.)
On Hope…
January 10th, 2007 | 1 Comment | Posted in » Christian Living, Devotions / Bible Studies, Worth Reading
Don’t miss this post from Bryan Riley on hope.
Oh, be forewarned… you might experience God’s sledgehammer of conviction after reading… 
Good stuff!
Disputable Matters
January 7th, 2007 | 3 Comments | Posted in » Baptist Issues, Christian Living, Devotions / Bible Studies
Romans 14
1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11It is written:
” ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
’every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.’ ” 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.
19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.
22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.
Yeah yeah, I know what you’re thinking… Here goes John again, pointing out how all of us Baptists ought to just get along. Unity this, unity that… blah blah blah.
Well, not quite.
We were studying Romans 14 this morning in my Sunday School class, and of course… when discussing “disputable matters”, many of our current SBC conflicts came to mind (yes, imagine that). Tongues, baptismal requirements, alcohol, traditional / contemporary church… just about all of ‘em. What struck me most though, was a follow-up question regarding disputable matters from our study guide:
What can you do to prevent this disharmony and promote acceptance of each other in your family of believers?
Quite honestly, I don’t know how to answer that. The current state of the SBC in regard to many disputable matters is one of disharmony… and I don’t see a whole lot of acceptance going on. The question hit home… what can I do to help remedy the situation?
It’s troubling, because I just don’t have a clue. As I see it, we have one side calling for Romans 14 to be followed… acceptance, not judgment… cooperation, not conflict. On the other side, I see a strong desire for strict theological correctness. While I applaud the heart of that, I don’t see how one sees these matters as anything but disputable matters… lower-tier doctrines that, while important (as all Biblical matters are), really aren’t at all clear-cut in Scripture, and really don’t seem to make a hill of beans worth of difference when it comes to moving forward together to share the gospel worldwide, making a difference for God’s Kingdom.
Now, maybe I’m just shortsighted, Biblically ignorant, theologically unsound… whatever… but it’s a dilemna I don’t know how to respond to. Even if our current SBC situation is not a perfect example, how do you answer the question? How do you follow Romans 14 when you see the issue at hand as a disputable matter, and the other does not? How do you do your part to prevent (or remedy) disharmony and promote acceptance (unity)? Maybe it’s not a hard question to answer when it’s a one-on-one matter (just keep on loving them and don’t be a stumbling block), but what about when we’re talking about convention matters? How does one “side” determine not to be a stumbling block? What does that do to the parameters by which we agree to cooperate?
I’m full of questions tonight. Unfortunately, I really don’t have many good answers.
The Blasphemy Challenge
January 3rd, 2007 | 3 Comments | Posted in » In the News...
Here’s one for you… an website sponsored by a group of atheists has issued their “Blasphemy Challenge”, encouraging people to post a video of themselves on denying the existence of the Holy Spirit on youtube. Read more about it here. The point of the exercise? Basically to challenge atheists to be vocal and visible about their beliefs by basically daring God to send them to hell.
How sad. These people most definitely need our prayers.