Freedom of conscience takes another hit, SBC 2006
For the life of me, I cannot understand why Southern Baptists allowed this resolution to pass since Baptists are famous for touting that they teach freedom of conscience, individual soul liberty, etc better than Presbyterians, etc.
The funny thing to me is this line:
Whereas, There are some religious leaders who are now advocating consumption of alcoholic beverages based on a misinterpretation of the doctrine of "our freedom in Christ";
Leaders like Yahweh in the Old Testament, Jesus in the New Testament, Paul in the New Testament and so on. Or even Baptist leaders like Spurgeon, etc...or guess what bourbon ...first distilled by a Baptist pastor. Oh....oh....oh...the first supply the Pilgrims ran out of? Beer.
And don't try to say oinos meant juice because whoever advocates that is being DISHONEST. The wine from John 2 was alcoholic and there was the potential for being drunk. The yayin (which Yahweh calls good) in the OT was alcoholic.
Oh, and this line:
now, therefore, be itResolved, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Greensboro, North Carolina, June 13-24, 2006, express ur total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages;
I guess this clears up the pondering if Jesus was a Southern Baptist or not...
How about this line:
Resolved, That we urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our commuities and nation; and be it further
Looks like they want to go back to the temperance movement in the 19th/20th century, which was mostly advocated by liberals....not God fearing Baptists, Presbyterians or Congregationalists.
I refer you to Steve McCoy's excellent post on this matter. He is a missional Southern Baptist pastor.
On more thing...which is worse for you? A Guinness once a day or a Big Mac? Doctors are now saying a beer a day can be healthy for you, but let's crunch the numbers:
Big Mac: 560 calories, 30 grams of fat, 10 g sat fat, 1.5 trans fat, 47 carbs
Bottle of Guinness: 125 calories, 0 fat, 10 carbs
But wait you say....is there any sandwich at McDonald's that is lower in calories? Not everyone eats a Big Mac. Maybe grilled chicken?
Sorry, that's 420 calories....370 w/o mayo.
Hamburger? 260.
You lose.
Oh...and heart disease...it kills more people than alcohol, and heart disease comes from greasy, salty, fatty food.
Time to pass a resolution against fastfood, processed food, and the ever loving favorite after church hangout - the all you can eat buffet.
The funny thing to me is this line:
Whereas, There are some religious leaders who are now advocating consumption of alcoholic beverages based on a misinterpretation of the doctrine of "our freedom in Christ";
Leaders like Yahweh in the Old Testament, Jesus in the New Testament, Paul in the New Testament and so on. Or even Baptist leaders like Spurgeon, etc...or guess what bourbon ...first distilled by a Baptist pastor. Oh....oh....oh...the first supply the Pilgrims ran out of? Beer.
And don't try to say oinos meant juice because whoever advocates that is being DISHONEST. The wine from John 2 was alcoholic and there was the potential for being drunk. The yayin (which Yahweh calls good) in the OT was alcoholic.
Oh, and this line:
now, therefore, be itResolved, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Greensboro, North Carolina, June 13-24, 2006, express ur total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages;
I guess this clears up the pondering if Jesus was a Southern Baptist or not...
How about this line:
Resolved, That we urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our commuities and nation; and be it further
Looks like they want to go back to the temperance movement in the 19th/20th century, which was mostly advocated by liberals....not God fearing Baptists, Presbyterians or Congregationalists.
I refer you to Steve McCoy's excellent post on this matter. He is a missional Southern Baptist pastor.
On more thing...which is worse for you? A Guinness once a day or a Big Mac? Doctors are now saying a beer a day can be healthy for you, but let's crunch the numbers:
Big Mac: 560 calories, 30 grams of fat, 10 g sat fat, 1.5 trans fat, 47 carbs
Bottle of Guinness: 125 calories, 0 fat, 10 carbs
But wait you say....is there any sandwich at McDonald's that is lower in calories? Not everyone eats a Big Mac. Maybe grilled chicken?
Sorry, that's 420 calories....370 w/o mayo.
Hamburger? 260.
You lose.
Oh...and heart disease...it kills more people than alcohol, and heart disease comes from greasy, salty, fatty food.
Time to pass a resolution against fastfood, processed food, and the ever loving favorite after church hangout - the all you can eat buffet.
posted by Bobby's blog at 3:06 PM
7 Comments:
Shhhhsh, be quiet, you're scaring my bottle of Sam Adams. :)
Considering those numbers, I'm going on an all beer diet.
Also, did you see the latest Purgatorio post on this. Very funny. http://purgatorio1.com/?p=430
Too funny. I guess no more church potlucks.
Bobby,
The only surprising thing about that resolution is that the Southern Baptists actually debated it and the vote was not a complete blowout. In years not so far past, it would have been rubber-stamped without any discussion.
Alcohol is a forbidden subject in Southern Baptist life.
The real crime here is that the SBC nade a resolution rather than handling things BIBLICALLY and letting the local church handle its own.
Show me in the Bible about a convention.
I recall a get together of Church leaders in Acts 15, which produced a BINDING resolution, unlike the SBC resolution which isn't binding.
They were apostles. WE (SBC) are not. The churches were lead by the apostles. To say that the mission boards and church heirarchies are the same thing is ignoring Gods gifts to these men. Do not look at Acts through 21st century glasses.
That passage in Acts does not justify the church to become controlled by a central committee.The church was led by the apostles, last I checked they are all in heaven. The local churches didn't have the revelation that we have in Scripture. It was necessary for God to reveal His doctrine to them through the apostles. That is why they came to meet in Jerusalem.
I am not saying that Chruch leaders of sister churches discussing doctrinal questions is a bad thing. I am saying that all the human inventions that man has brought into the church has perverted our ecclesiology.
Again, I have no problem with churches having fellowship and discussing doctrinal issues, but I can not agree with the human invention of the SBC or any other church heirarchial system. I say this as a Southern Baptist.
Post a Comment
<< Home