CBF remove Jesus

Lots of people say that the SBC is like a "Glass House" with people looking at our every move and listening to our every word----well----so is the CBF!! Trouble is---the CBF isn't giving us anything to see nor hear----they are "Moon Walking on Krypton!!"----going nowhere fast and high!!!

I don't know of anyone who is totally satisfied with the SBC or CBF. Both have got their share of problems and are blaming the other. Both spend a lot of time glorifying self and patting themselves on the back. It is a fight going nowhere and giving Satan they glory. The fact is that they are not doing evangelism. The SBC touted the problem with evangelism was the liberals amkinmg that equal to the CBF. But now Welch has said the resurgence has not produced evangelism. Neither can blame the other. They need to get off their intellectual cushions and get to work. The need is not more money. The need is for men and women who spend time in the closet with God instead of replacing that with Richmond and Nashville. Anything that was ever done for God started in the closet.

 

2 Timothy 3:1 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! 6 For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, 7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; 9 but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was.

 

I'm not surprised at all. I always think of the CBF as the place for the more liberal Baptist churches. A SBC church (that eventually joined the CBF) I attended for a short while as a new believer in this area (VA) had these things going on:
1. The issue of Jn 14.6 was set aside as "a loose thread" in a SS class as something to discuss since several class members disputed it
2. The pastor told me that he had no problem with a pastor calling God "Mother"
3. The pastor gave me, a new believer, a book by a liberal feminist theologian that said the fall was actually man's separation from creation, not from God; the book also said that Eve, when she took the forbidden fruit, was a wise woman, a rabbi, a minister, etc., etc.
4. The pastor talked about seeing Christ in someone who was not a Christian

While all this was going on (and my head was spinning, believe me), the church was discussing the CBF and decided to start sending funds to them. I think CBF was pretty new at the time (this was 1991). Anyway, this church ended up leaving the SBC and joining with CBF.

Most Baptist churches here in No. VA are liberal.

 

Wow, how can anyone read a testimony such as this and not see that the changing of the purpose statement by the CBF is very intentional, and is deeper than many can see or believe??

The continual fall down the slippery slope! </font>[/QUOTE]Did you read the articles that Pronto posted?

 

The fact of the matter is this: There is no such thing as a "moderate" in politics or in the realm of theology. Your either believe all the Bible and what it has to say or you don't. You can't pick and choose from it like your in a cafeteria line. You can't have it both ways.
The CBF is a liberal fellowship period.
Its impossible to fall "up" a slippery slope.

 

Or should we say---a "greased Fire Pole"----they greased their own Fire Pole back in 1979!!!! Then reached the point of no return(happily for the SBC) in '89 or thereabouts!!!!

 

Don't kid yourself there are liberals and conservatives in both the SBC and CBF. They are in those groups for various reasons. The majority I have met are not in those groups because of theology. Some were in those groups because of politics. I have met some very conservatives folks in the CBF and some folks who I wonder if they really believe the Bible who are in the SBC. It is not always so cut and dried.

Personally I think the leadership in both groups is rotten compared to what they once were. Neither exemplify holiness.

 

It seems to me that this is a very disfunctional relationship with the SBC and the CBF. I think it is time for the CBF to officially break all ties and go their own way, or vice versa. What would it take for the SBC to do with the CBF what we did about a year or so ago with the BWA?

Joseph Botwinick

 

gb93433 - I think you hit the nail on the head with your last sentence and JB did too with his first sentence. I would be happy if my church would drop affiliation with both groups and go it as an independent. The political struggles within both groups do not serve the Lord - and I am coming to the point that I cannot see any difference between the two warring sides. It has taken on the appearance of two political parties. Any attempt at discussion degenerates into name calling and resembles the KJVO arguments. Bruce

 

I'm not SBC or CBF, but anytime you take Jesus out of your statement of faith, you have done away with the object of your faith. I think this is a bad decision and, as another poster said, a very slippery slope toward ecumenicism.

 

The problem with both the SBC and the CBF is that there is no mechanism whatsoever that guards the door to theological liberalism.

For example, who credentials "pastors" in the SBC? No one! The church ordains and that person becomes recognized as a SBC pastor. The SBC has no mechanism that screens these "ordained" pastors to see if they believe historic biblical doctrine.

Since there is no mechanism in place to screen either churches or pastors, liberalism will always be a problem in the SBC.

I lived in Auburn, AL, and there were some biblical SBC churches and there were some liberal SBC churches. By liberal, I mean they taught that Jesus was not the only way.

 

The leadership isn't the problem in the SBC. I don't see how anyone can say that. The problem is the shallow, in-grown, ignorant, generational, deacon-controlled, pastor as hired hand mentality of 70% of all SBC churches I've observed. These churches are so dysfunctional that they should be closed.

The leadership of the SBC is calling their membership back to biblical, historic Southern Baptist doctrine, but most in the churches can't stomach that.

 

Good point Bruce, it seems that churches are more keen to beat each other up rather than evangalise which is a real shame.

 

AMEN PastorSBC

 

As of now it is not a SBC or CBF decision. Churches are free to associate with whomever they wish, you remember local autonomy?!

The only way there could be any thing along the lines that you speak of is if the SBC or CBF demanded an exclusive participation agreement of some kind.

The CBF would never do that and the SBC, though much closer then the CBF is not likely to something along these lines right now. I do think however that the SBC will use a backdoor to accomplish this exclusivity among "their" churches by demanding that all churches affirm and conform to the BFM 2000 sometime in the future.

 

That would violate and destroy local church autonomy, a vital historic baptist distinctive. But if you insist on keeping this demand, which is your priviledge, you would be acting more Methodist then Baptist. It is simply not the way Baptist's have done things for a very long time and there isn't any sign of things changing any time soon.

 

As of now it is not a SBC or CBF decision. Churches are free to associate with whomever they wish, you remember local autonomy?!

The only way there could be any thing along the lines that you speak of is if the SBC or CBF demanded an exclusive participation agreement of some kind.

The CBF would never do that and the SBC, though much closer then the CBF is not likely to something along these lines right now. I do think however that the SBC will use a backdoor to accomplish this exclusivity among "their" churches by demanding that all churches affirm and conform to the BFM 2000 sometime in the future. </font>[/QUOTE]Nothing of the kind has to be done. They do not have to affrim any creed except the Bible. But, we can pass a motion as a convention officially seperating from the CBF as a national convention. What local Churches choose to do is up to them. If we, as a convention choose not to associate with a local church body because of their beliefs, we are free to do so without infringing on their local autonomy. They can just be autonomous without us. Understand?

Joseph Botwinick