When would slavery in the Southern States have ended...

Post Reply New Topic

ArrantPariah wrote:

I don't know about that. I don't remember anyone in the Methodist Church I went to as a kid being tolerant of homosexuality.
We used the same Holy Bible as the Baptists, ya know........

As a matter of fact, Southern Baptists and other evangelical groups have consigned us Lutherans to the fires of hell for daring to practice infant baptism, for our amillennial stance, our supersesionist (replace theology) stance, our denial of irresistible grace, our rejection of human choice in salvation, and our use of liturgical worship.
If it was a case that they just didn't agree with us, I wouldn't have a beef with them. Rather, the fact that they claim that my little girl's baptism isn't valid - and thus would condemn her to hell with me for not "making the choice to welcome Christ into our hearts" - is what genuinely pisses me off.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Nothing in anything you've mentioned calls out the UMC. There is no condemnation of Methodists whatsoever in anything you've copy/pasted here.

Sure, we regard homosexuality as unrighteous. But nowhere in there does it say that "homosexuals are consigned to hell." In fact, the resolution you cited that affirms the Baptist belief in hell as a real place is merely a reaction to an author (Rob Bell) who appears to promote universal reconciliation. It has nothing to do with homosexuals going to hell nor does it have anything to do with the UMC going to hell.

Baptists don't believe that any one sin or wrong idea consigns someone to hell. ALL sin condemns us to hell, and God's forgiveness is available to ALL sinners who want it.

@Kraichgauer: Sorry you feel that way, but fundamentally the only thing Baptists are concerned with as far as the destiny of the human soul is whether one has accepted the free gift of God's grace and forgiveness through Jesus Christ. Your complaint is one of nitpicky Biblical interpretation that we have differences on, and some of those that you mentioned might be seen by some as potentially misleading believers. Your position on irresistible grace, for instance, could cause a lot of confusion for someone questioning whether his experience of salvation is genuine or not. If one can, say, fall from grace, was he really saved to begin with? It can also call into question God's ability to protect His own. Your position on human choice can also be confusing. I mean, we can go round after round on free will and whether it actually exists or not, but saying we have no choice in the matter doesn't offer much hope for those experiencing doubt.

I don't take any direct issue with infant baptism, but I do think baptism should be up to the person who is old enough to decide for himself or herself whether they accept Jesus and become a Christian. Baptism has no saving power. What some Baptist churches do is have something that functions similarly to infant baptism, and it is not Biblically unknown to present infants before the church and dedicate them to the service of God. I just disagree that baptism is the appropriate symbolism for such a thing.

We don't have a problem with liturgical worship, either. Some of the most conservative Baptist churches borrow heavily from liturgical worship. I've found some things in normal Baptist worship to be lacking, however. The problem with liturgical worship is that a highly ritualized worship element runs the risk of existing for its own sake rather than as a vehicle for genuine worship. It lulls the congregant into simply going through the motions without complete participation from the inside out. The extreme opposite is just as wrong--turning the worship service into a rock concert that glorifies the talent rather than Jesus.

One of the biggest problems I have with our (SBC) churches is that we for the most part choose not to have a strictly liturgical service and call it good, yet many of us have slipped right back into a tendency towards what WE call traditional worship when what we're REALLY saying is we just want a Bill and Gloria Gaither concert every Sunday--and that's just as bad as the heavy metal concert churches. It's not about the music or format. It's about the heart of the worshipper. I'm also sickened by the total lack of concern for the needs of the whole congregation and apparent blindness to the needs of the community we purport to serve. Convince a Baptist church to do what they're supposed to do (what any church is supposed to do) and you'll have a bunch of people that are so excited about showing up every Sunday it won't matter what choice of worship style they offer.

As for myself--I actually work in a Baptist church as a musician. I was brought up in a smaller, "country" church that tended to emphasize Southern Gospel music. I had my fill of it by my teenage years, and lately I've developed a taste for contemporary praise and worship music. I consider myself an eclectic when it comes to music--I have an extensive classical background, but I can also be seen in bars and clubs playing rock and pop covers (and people in my church do know that I play in bars, shower and change clothes, and show up for soundcheck within 3 or 4 hours after getting home from a late-night gig). So I can hang with a old-time pentecostal worship style just as well as I can read music accompanying a more concert-style choir. And I can do anything in between. We probably have some old-timers who think we're going to hell for using music that doesn't come from the Baptist Hymnal (they obviously haven't seen the newest one). But I've never heard any complaints after I slip back into my country southern gospel roots. It's relevant to them and I've caught a few teenagers actually enjoying it, too. In order to reach the worshippers, some versatility is necessary.

I say that to say this: I've often been dissatisfied with how things are done where I work. I feel like many of the people there are just waiting to die and they are out of touch or just flat don't care about what they leave behind. I don't feel I'm in the best place to grow as a Christian at the moment, and I've taken time to look at opportunities elsewhere. What I'm finding, interestingly enough, is that there are numerous calls open for praise band musicians and worship leaders at UMC, Presbyterian, and Lutheran churches. So it's not just Baptists. Check this out:

CCM worship leader wanted, Lutheran Church

So, apparently, Lutherans don't exclusively do liturgical worship, either.

I don't care what denomination you belong to. We all have problems. We're all still sinners. We all still need to repent. So before you try to remove the speck from your Baptist neighbor's eye, please be sure to remove the beam from your own. I promise to do the same.

Southern Baptists won a Mathematics prize for this one:

http://improbable.com/ig/1994/1994-math.html#alabamans



http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 99,4259125

The Baptists do think higher of United Methodists than of Catholics, but no Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Agnostics, Atheists or Episcopalians make the cut.

I happen to be a Southern Baptist. It has been my experience that the most condemning and hypocritical people I have met are secular liberals. It's not our job to apologize for the Bible. But we're not going to sugar coat it either.

Longshanks

Amen to that.

What, then, does your job entail?

To worship God and submit to His will. And that's coming from someone who was raised an athiest. What do you care what our job is?

Longshanks

You're the one who brought up your job description. If you don't want to discuss it, then there is no point in your mentioning your job description in the first place.

And what, pray tell, is His will, to which your job description requires you to submit?

Have you ever even been to church??

That's an awfully patronizing tone to take, ArrantPariah.

I disagree fundamentally with many of the doctrines espoused by many faiths, and I vehemently disagree with the intereference of faith communities in politics. But I respect the beliefs of people of faith and try to find a means by which their interests and mine can coexist. That means will not be found by one side ridiculing the other uncritically.

That's not the call of the question. Seeing as you openly mock us, why should you even care? What's it to you? I asked you first.

Longshanks

I am not mocking--merely asking.

You state that it is not your job to apologize for the Bible, nor to "sugarcoat" it. You didn't write the Bible, so for what would there be for you to apologize?

You state that your job is "To worship God and submit to His will."

Why should you care if I care or don't care? What's it to you? You're getting extremely defensive here.

My reason for caring: I regard the Southern Baptist Church as a dangerous force for evil.

I've had the pleasure. Don't really perceive any point in it.

Given the source of that statement, it's the best compliment I've ever heard for the Southern Baptist church.......