tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post4712092268198318038..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Southern (Baptist) GentlemenRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-81176127153129095772007-10-26T14:53:00.000-04:002007-10-26T14:53:00.000-04:00You, Sir, are no gentleman...You, Sir, are no gentleman...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-13984671571006774832007-09-16T14:57:00.000-04:002007-09-16T14:57:00.000-04:00"Calvin said that he did not appeal to the fathers..."Calvin said that he did not appeal to the fathers, he did mention them, not as precedence, but to show that the thoughts and postitions he had taken were not novel. The churchmen and academics were constantly citing the fathers as authoritative for their traditions. Calvin, like Luther before him in his contest with Erasmus, was only finding parity, what's good for the goose is gravy for the gander. They both made it clear that the final appeal had to be Scripture, not the fathers."<BR/><BR/>Firs i did not say they anyone made the fathers their final appeal. That is not the point. But what dos it mean to say that Calvin did not appeal to the fathers but just used them to state that what he argued for was not novel? He obviously appealed to them when he was saying that what he was saying was not novel. <BR/><BR/>Also Calvin did appeal to them. It has been argued pretty succesflly that what many of the reformers were not against traditon or the Fathers but believed that the Roman Catholic church had strayed away frm the true faith. <BR/><BR/>"Should we base our behavior on Calvin? You do know his character, right?"<BR/><BR/>Yes I know a too well. He took church discipline too far. You do know about his history with some of the people he disagreed with right? Take a look at his life and I think you will find why I think that we should not emulate him in regards to ecclesiastical methods. But i am not too hard on Calvin because many of his time were like him. Heck Zwingli was the first one to martyr another protestant. <BR/><BR/>And my point about the Corinthians was that there is a place for naming names but one should always act like a christian when doing it. <BR/><BR/>EdwinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-68042325855074892932007-09-16T14:46:00.000-04:002007-09-16T14:46:00.000-04:00"SBCer's reference the early church fathers? Where..."SBCer's reference the early church fathers? Where?"<BR/><BR/>have you been to a Southern Baptist seminary lately? Have you spoken to scholars sho are SBC? And again they appeal to the Fathers when they accept the nicene version of the Trinity. (at least to some extent they do and so did Calvin and Luther.) <BR/><BR/>EdwinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-34362450636474386372007-09-16T14:44:00.000-04:002007-09-16T14:44:00.000-04:00"The point, Edwin, is that those who are frequentl..."The point, Edwin, is that those who are frequently the most guilty of this inconsistency are the ones who frequently appeal to "Baptist tradition" to ground their argumentation. Take a look @ some of the ecclesiological arguments about the IMB's baptism policy, for example. "Baptist tradition" was trotted out quite a bit, and not as an ancillary argument."<BR/><BR/>Okay I have no problem with that which I stated in my reply. <BR/><BR/>EDwinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-85431685827578665452007-09-13T22:57:00.000-04:002007-09-13T22:57:00.000-04:00Calvin said that he did not appeal to the fathers,...Calvin said that he did not appeal to the fathers, he did mention them, not as precedence, but to show that the thoughts and postitions he had taken were not novel. The churchmen and academics were constantly citing the fathers as authoritative for their traditions. Calvin, like Luther before him in his contest with Erasmus, was only finding parity, what's good for the goose is gravy for the gander. They both made it clear that the final appeal had to be Scripture, not the fathers.<BR/><BR/>If we cite them and what they say is truth, then the citation is worth every syllable.<BR/><BR/>That sidesteps the issues, however. Name calling and innuendo, slander should have no place. If charges are made, sign the document and stand with hammer in hand not denying it was anothers thesis that was nailed to the doors.<BR/><BR/>The "war" will get bloody. Those who detonate IED's, need to stand take responsiblity for them. It cannot be laid at the foot of the innocent that their blood is shed. Bridges cannot be built when the SBC operates as political opponents meeting is smoke-filled rooms deciding the fate of the SBC in secret. Unfortunately, Land's ethics seem to overlook the necessity to demand disclosure and establishing means to resolve the tensions that exist. The office he holds has become empty of meaning without a mechanism in place where accusations can be presented and challenged.<BR/><BR/>Others among the SBC leadership should know that if they do not form some kind of courts of appeal to hear cases of slander, that they alone will bear the weight of the demise of the SBC.<BR/><BR/>Should we base our behavior on Calvin? You do know his character, right? He was pastor, church planter and as described by those who knew him, the most humble of men. Quite different was Luther, called the master of scatology, quick tempered and not very in control of his mouth. Kinda like David whose impetuous character was both self-destructive and convicting.<BR/><BR/>The problem becomes the cure. We have created an pseudo-world where everyone must assemble dressed with masks that portray the same comic character. It is proposed that if we just march in lock step, everything will be okay. Patching over rotted walls never works. It is only time before the structure becomes so unstable it collapses in ruin. Though the prophet might dig in the wall to show it to the people, he is often met with complaints that he has damaged the wall.<BR/><BR/>How do we sustain a belief in liberty of conscience without the freedom to express truth? When the biblical means of discovery is to expose all things to the light of God's word, how will it help if the accusing parties refuse to establish all things in the mouths of two or three witnesses, and that made manifest in the congregation?<BR/><BR/>Cowards set IED's, they terrorize from the shadows so that their evil is not exposed. To mention Corinthians, are we not competent to judge between ourselves what is truth?Strong Towerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13834108238546908018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-83574077344232290072007-09-13T21:46:00.000-04:002007-09-13T21:46:00.000-04:00SBCer's reference the early church fathers? Where...SBCer's reference the early church fathers? Where?<BR/><BR/>:-)<BR/><BR/>Good points, Gene. One of the other things relating to some of your points is that if you blog and/or name names of the anti-calvinists and their material you're a divider, etc.<BR/><BR/>And how should we think of those SBC leaders who've written, preached and published anti-calvinist material yet now want to act as if they've been the peacemakers?<BR/><BR/>MarkMarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01410144337505012175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-37920305021750936862007-09-13T19:21:00.000-04:002007-09-13T19:21:00.000-04:00I also do not think one should be judging one's be...<I>I also do not think one should be judging one's behavior based on what early Baptists did. I know I would not want to base the way I relate to someone on the early Baptists or Calvin.</I><BR/><BR/>The point, Edwin, is that those who are frequently the most guilty of this inconsistency are the ones who frequently appeal to "Baptist tradition" to ground their argumentation. Take a look @ some of the ecclesiological arguments about the IMB's baptism policy, for example. "Baptist tradition" was trotted out quite a bit, and not as an ancillary argument.GeneMBridgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10504383610477532374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-87285606498010702312007-09-13T19:03:00.000-04:002007-09-13T19:03:00.000-04:00"very like the Ante-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers..."very like the Ante-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers to whom the Roman Catholic Church appeals."<BR/><BR/>This made me laugh. Who does not appeal to the church fathers? Calvin did. Barth did. The SBC does. Everyone who recites the Nicene Creed does. <BR/><BR/><BR/>However I think in some senses this article is very true. The ones in power do not want to give up any to the new young leaders who oppose them. That is true. The problem is many cannot get behind leaders like Ben Cole or others like him. They do not mind him naming names but do not like his vendetta against Patterson nor his methods. There is a difference between naming names and telling the truth vs. being like the Corinthian church by being quick to speak,slow to listen and having a sharp tongue.<BR/><BR/>I also do not think one should be judging one's behavior based on what early Baptists did. I know I would not want to base the way I relate to someone on the early Baptists or Calvin. <BR/><BR/>EdwinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com