Zone1 Southern Baptist leaders will decide the fate of congregations with women pastors

That's where the controversy is. What's the Word of God? Is it equality? Is it changing to be more popular? Is the Word an admonishing to be modern. If a denomination believes this is the Word of God they have an obligation to change and adapt. Those that find this self serving nonsense must follow a more traditional form of practice.
.

That's it. That's all there is to say.

.
 
There's no real discussion. It's like whether you break your eggs at the big end or the little end. What do you think the discussion should be?
 
At a guess....
Where there are a few obscure occasions where a female pastor is appropriate it is not the norm.

The SBC is a convention...no hierarchy...these independent churches join the SBC, without oversight, because they agree with the SBC.

So....
The SBC will investigate these churches and see if they do agree or if they were merely claiming this to access financial aid that the SBC makes available to member churches.

Saddleback church was more of a case of the large church trying to control the SBC. That's not happening. So they were summarily kicked to the curb. There is no coup allowed in the SBC. It's a convention. The President of the SBC's power ends when he uses his gavel to call a meeting to order.

No one has authority over the group or any independent church.

Much has been inferred and hinted at...but it's absolutely untrue. There is no leadership...only an ongoing changing of various committee members....most having no idea as to what happened before they became a committee member. And fiasco's have happened because of this....such as the ignorance of a list of accused pastors recorded by the legal team. (publicly published names of individuals convicted of crimes who were once pastors of SBC churches)

So....these churches with female pastors will be investigated to ensure nothing untoward is occurring and see if they would need assistance or if they are trying to fraudulently gain SBC funds
 
Baptists use the Bible mostly the KJV1611 as our rule of faith. It was written by man inspired by God. In it, women have leadership in the congregation, but the role of the pastor is for men. For example, Phoebe was a woman with a leadership position in the new testament and was well respected. In the old testament, Sara was a judge and prophet.
 
Last edited:
Baptists use the Bible mostly the KJV1611 as our rule of faith. It was written by man inspired by God. In it, women have leadership in the congregation, but the role of the pastor is for men. For example, Phoebe was a woman with a leadership position in the new testament and was well respected. In the old testament, Sara was a judge and prophet.
Nope....
The 1611 KJV is NOT the Bible of the SBC. SBC affiliated churches use whichever translation they see fit. It can be the Cambridge/Oxford translation of 1789 named as the KJV but really is a completely new translation for the Church of England as had the first English translations and post Geneva Bibles been translated.

The KJV was, and always has been the Church of England Bible translation. To ensure that it was acceptable to their doctrines as they understood the scriptures to read. The SBC tolerates the KJV-only crowd but it has never endorsed such a doctrine in the past 60 years.

The SBC commissioned their own translation (as the Royalties for other translations were becoming expensive) and produced the Holman Christian Standard which their publishing company Lifeway Publishing now uses in all of their Sunday School literature. And indeed I have looked into all of the many notes and notations and odd symbols used in publishing to find it fairly accurate in its publishing. It still uses the traditional translation but the more modern translation is always in footnotes or the minor additions and deletions are parenthesied.

IF a translation was going to be demanded by the SBC it would be the HCSB and not the KJV. But by their Constitution the SBC cannot and will not do any such thing for any translation including their own.
 
Thoughts on this? We have women priests, and Da Wimmimz have long been the life blood of the Church.
Women priests or pastors mean you are so far removed from any of the Abrahamic faiths that why even pretend.

It’s almost as bad as having gay priests or pastors or them promoting that shit or doing gay weddings. Just don’t bother and be atheist - you don’t believe in jack shit.
 
Thoughts on this? We have women priests, and Da Wimmimz have long been the life blood of the Church.




From another perspective:


People should understand how the Southern Baptist Convention is organized. They are no different than other Baptist sects. There might be some exceptions but historically Baptist have a tradition of individual church authority. There is no teeth to anything they decide. Individual churches have the freedom to organize their church anyway their congregation sees fit. Southern Baptist are only affiliated with each other for fundraising capacity not doctrinal pontificating.

Southern Baptists also boycotted Disney in the early 2000s. How many congregations participated in that?
 
People should understand how the Southern Baptist Convention is organized. They are no different than other Baptist sects. There might be some exceptions but historically Baptist have a tradition of individual church authority. There is no teeth to anything they decide. Individual churches have the freedom to organize their church anyway their congregation sees fit. Southern Baptist are only affiliated with each other for fundraising capacity not doctrinal pontificating.

Southern Baptists also boycotted Disney in the early 2000s. How many congregations participated in that?

But these churches might be tossed from the convention....meaning they don't get any say in the convention, the committees or have access to the SBC resources.
 
But these churches might be tossed from the convention....meaning they don't get any say in the convention, the committees or have access to the SBC resources.

That is a possibility. It just goes against Baptist tradition. Southern Baptist churches are a very loose confederation. There is no authority at the top. The primary benefit of a church belonging to the convention is that they get to donate money to it. It is really weird if you think about it. They are withholding their ability to give to the Southern Baptist Convention.
 
But these churches might be tossed from the convention....meaning they don't get any say in the convention, the committees or have access to the SBC resources.

Nerdy types get a high off of holding titles. "Delegate to the Convention" makes a person feel more important than they actually are. Doctrinally I agree with these nerds. Organizationally this is totally stupid move and an unbaptist move.
 
That is a possibility. It just goes against Baptist tradition. Southern Baptist churches are a very loose confederation. There is no authority at the top. The primary benefit of a church belonging to the convention is that they get to donate money to it. It is really weird if you think about it. They are withholding their ability to give to the Southern Baptist Convention.
Yes, but some of those traditions suck. I was a member of a church that gave a million every year to the convention. Not a huge church by any means...maybe 1k active. But everything we had was paid for....including mission plant church. And we paid their bills.
We never once got even a "thank you letter" from the IMB.
Today that has changed....a lot.

Meanwhile churches like Saddleback didn't even cough up a dime but wanted extra special attention and voice in the convention. That's what started the stink eye....especially when they wanted the convention to endorse their constitutional makeup of church governance and unique doctrines.
Uhhhh....NO!

Everyone tries at some point to control the SBC....from Charismatics to Calvinists...the SBC ain't having it. It's easier to herd cats than change the SBC.
 
Yes it does. Scripture teaches specific roles for leadership structure.
Do those standards apply to leadership in secular organizations like governments? If so, who was the more qualified candidate in the 2016 election and the 2020 election?

Bonus: Who is the least qualified using those standards in the current slate of known Republican Candidates for President?
 
Do those standards apply to leadership in secular organizations like governments? If so, who was the more qualified candidate in the 2016 election and the 2020 election?

Bonus: Who is the least qualified using those standards in the current slate of known Republican Candidates for President?
"God sets up leaders or deposes them" (Daniel to Nebacanezzar)

"You would have no authority unless my father gave it to you" (Jesus to Pilate).

My BEST advice?
Pray for the leaders we need and not the leaders we deserve.
 

Forum List

Back
Top