They really said that?

[ttg]

The Southern Baptists had their annual convention in Greensboro, NC this week and there was quite a bit of controversy. Topics such as removing all children from public schools, or that all Baptist leaders must come from the churches that give the most money were shelved until further notice. However one made it throught that caught my attention.

The denomination... voted in favor of recommending that Southern Baptists not be selected for leadership positions if they are "a user of alcohol." (Nashville Tennessean, Anita Wadhwani, 6/15/06)

Mary must be hanging her head in shame. After all, it was she who encouraged her Son to make wine for a wedding party in Cana of Galilee. He told her that His time has not yet come, but she insisted. And Jesus obeyed His mother for she has His respect and the power of persuasion over our Lord. So now, were Jesus to make his second coming today, he would be ignored by the Southern Baptists, deemed unworthy due to His fondness of tipping a glass on occasion.

Too bad the Baptists weren't around to tell Jesus the error of his ways.

 

[destiny]

The Southern Baptists had their annual convention in Greensboro, NC this week and there was quite a bit of controversy. Topics such as removing all children from public schools, or that all Baptist leaders must come from the churches that give the most money were shelved until further notice. However one made it throught that caught my attention.

The denomination... voted in favor of recommending that Southern Baptists not be selected for leadership positions if they are "a user of alcohol." (Nashville Tennessean, Anita Wadhwani, 6/15/06)

Sounds like a win win situation to me, good for them.

 

[Vic C.]

Oh boy! :o

Isn't hitting below the belt some sort of foul?


It's their ball and they can play with it however they choose. Besides, it's not as bad as insisting people not eat meat on a Friday or forbidding the driking of coffee because it was considered "The Devil's drink", then later on approving it saying it's now ok to drink it. We will beat the devil at his own game, he said. All because some pope liked coffee. 8-) Now thay allow people to eat meat on Fridays. I guess their surplus of salted, cured fish is gone.


Pass the sugar, please. :-D

 

[Lewis]

Wow I remember when I was coming up we did not eat meat on Friday, that went on for a little while anyway. Because the Catholics in my family said it was wrong. And then after a while everybody said where's them pork chops :-D

 

[paisley]

"Mary must be hanging her head in shame. After all, it was she who encouraged her Son to make wine for a wedding party in Cana of Galilee. He told her that His time has not yet come, but she insisted. And Jesus obeyed His mother for she has His respect and the power of persuasion over our Lord. So now, were Jesus to make his second coming today, he would be ignored by the Southern Baptists, deemed unworthy due to His fondness of tipping a glass on occasion.

Too bad the Baptists weren't around to tell Jesus the error of his ways."

Wow, that is a pretty strong criticism. My response is, first of all I don't consider myself any denomination. I just consider myself a Christian so I am not defending the Baptists as a Baptist.
Second, I don't consider what Mary thinks since she was a sinner just like you and me. But I am heavily concerned with what Jesus and God think since they are the One's I worship.
Third, I don't think it is as bad as you put it out to be since there is nothing harmful in refraining from alcohol but there is something harmful in drinking too much. There are also people that just are more inclined to being alcoholics than others so refraining from alcohol just prevents problems for many people, priests and pastors included.
4th, Lev. 10:8-11 says 8 "And the LORD spake unto Aaron, saying, 9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations: 10 And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; 11 And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses."
Numbers 6:1-4 states "1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate F12 themselves unto the LORD: 3 He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried. 4 All the days of his separation F13 shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from the kernels even to the husk."
Judges 13:3-5 " 3 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son. 4 Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing: 5 For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines"
Deu. 29:5-6 5 And I have led you forty years in the wilderness: your clothes are not waxen old upon you, and thy shoe is not waxen old upon thy foot. 6 Ye have not eaten bread, neither have ye drunk wine or strong drink: that ye might know that I am the LORD your God.
There are other examples in the Bible but the point is, I don't think it would cause God shame for the leaders of the church to set themselves apart to demonstrate a life of holiness by not drinking alcohol. In fact, it might even please God since GOD required the priests entering the temple and Nazarites to go without alcohol. I don't see this as unBiblical at all.

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Well, I personally think it is good decision. Leaders often influence others and since that is the case it is wise to require people not to do certain things that might cause those being lead to stumble into sin. Please consider the following verses:

Romans 14:21
1 Corinthians 8:13

(Both verses deal with causing others to stumble)

I would like to note that I don’t think there is anything thing wrong with drinking per say but I believe that a person in leadership should prayerfully consider whether or not they should drink or do anything else that might temp others to sin. Leadership is a big responsibility and certain sacrifices have to be made when one decides to do any time of Christian leadership.

 

[Vic C.]

I am writing this as I am at church, listening to the opening words of Pastor's sermon. He was at the SBC meeting in S. Carolina and is talking about some of the misinformation the "press" is reporting. The one thing that stuck out so far was the Public School issue.

There was NO resolution to remove SBC students from public Schools, so there was nothing to shelf. The resolution was to NOT remove children from the schools, but an urging to keep them there, along with Christian public school teachers, so that their Christian presence is present and felt.

If you want the truth about what transpired, don't trust the press, or the SBC haters, goto:

SBC Annual Meeting-2006

Resolutions

For instance:

RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Greensboro, North Carolina, June 13-14, 2006, encourage Southern Baptists to heed our Lord’s admonition to be salt and light in our society; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we affirm the hundreds of thousands of Christian men and women who teach in our public schools, and we encourage our young people who are seriously considering the teaching profession as a possible calling of God to pursue that calling; and be it finally

RESOLVED, That we encourage all Southern Baptist churches to solicit individuals from their membership to engage the culture of our public school systems nationwide by running for election to their local school boards and exerting their godly influence upon these school systems.

Public School Resolution

I will address more of the OP after service, when I speak to Pastor about the other issues brought up in the OP.

Before I sign off, here is the Alcohol Resolution

 

[Vic C.]

We spoke breifly today during our business meeting about the SBC meeting. Pastor touched on this:

that all Baptist leaders must come from the churches that give the most money were shelved until further notice.

The actual resolution was (nothing on this matter was tabled) that leaders in the SBC must come from churches that give a minimum of 10% to the SBC Co-Op.

:end

 

[moniker]

Well, I personally think it is good decision. Leaders often influence others and since that is the case it is wise to require people not to do certain things that might cause those being lead to stumble into sin. Please consider the following verses:

Romans 14:21
1 Corinthians 8:13

(Both verses deal with causing others to stumble)

I would like to note that I don’t think there is anything thing wrong with drinking per say but I believe that a person in leadership should prayerfully consider whether or not they should drink or do anything else that might temp others to sin. Leadership is a big responsibility and certain sacrifices have to be made when one decides to do any time of Christian leadership.

A glass of red wine a day strengthens your heart and can lead to a longer, healthier life. So long as you can act responsibly there's nothing wrong with drinking alcohol regardless of your position. Jesus had a glass every now and again.

 

[thessalonian]

There is certainly Biblical precedence for some in the Church not taking alcohol. Perhaps that is the context in which the baptists intend the statement. But ttg's post has a valid point. I doudt that the statement against alcohol was because they just want the leadership to abstain from alcohol consumption. Jesus did turn water in to wine at the wedding at Cana and for the Southern Baptists to continue in favor of a no alcohol policy is in fact unbiblical as ttg suggests. It should also be noted that in acts 2 when the Jews said that the Apostles were drunk (with regard to the speaking in tongues) Peter never said "I don't drink". He says it is 10 am. Peter and the Apostles drank folks.

Blessings

 

[thessalonian]

Abstaining from meat on fridays is a type of fast. It is the giving up of something that is GOOD! Not a statement that eating meat on Friday's is immoral. We are talking apples and oranges in the discussion of whether or not drinking alcohol is a sin. There is no sin in the Catholic Church stated "thou shall not eat meat on Fridays". The sin incurred is one of disobedience to those who have concern for our souls (Heb 13:17) and therefore prescribe some level of fasting.

Once again fasting is abstaining from something that is good.

Blessings

 

[thessalonian]

Well, I personally think it is good decision. Leaders often influence others and since that is the case it is wise to require people not to do certain things that might cause those being lead to stumble into sin. Please consider the following verses:

Romans 14:21
1 Corinthians 8:13

(Both verses deal with causing others to stumble)

I would like to note that I don’t think there is anything thing wrong with drinking per say but I believe that a person in leadership should prayerfully consider whether or not they should drink or do anything else that might temp others to sin. Leadership is a big responsibility and certain sacrifices have to be made when one decides to do any time of Christian leadership.

The Southern Baptist Church does in fact speak against drinking alcohol as a sin. This is unbiblical!

 

[thessalonian]

Oh boy! :o

Isn't hitting below the belt some sort of foul?


It's their ball and they can play with it however they choose. Besides, it's not as bad as insisting people not eat meat on a Friday or forbidding the driking of coffee because it was considered "The Devil's drink", then later on approving it saying it's now ok to drink it. We will beat the devil at his own game, he said. All because some pope liked coffee. 8-) Now thay allow people to eat meat on Fridays. I guess their surplus of salted, cured fish is gone.


Pass the sugar, please. :-D

See my comments above regarding eating of meat on Fridays. You are comparing apples to oranges. Catholicism does not and never has taught that drinking coffee was a sin. You are confusing us with the Mormons.

 

[Vic C.]

There is certainly Biblical precedence for some in the Church not taking alcohol. Perhaps that is the context in which the baptists intend the statement. But ttg's post has a valid point. I doudt that the statement against alcohol was because they just want the leadership to abstain from alcohol consumption.

Actually, that is exactly why. I agree there is Biblical precedence for it too.

1 Tim 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

We are applying the sober part to both our Pastors and Deacons. You and I both know there is a danger of "overconsumption" in this day and age especially. It is the SBC's desire that their local church leaders and SBC leaders lead by example. That is all. No need to play the "unBiblical card". We really don't want to go there.

As for me confusing the Mormons for the RCC... I don't think so. I may have been overzealous in my first post. The fact is there WERE some in the Church that wanted to see it banned, but Pope Clement VIII didn't go for it. He really did believe he was cheating the divil by "baptizing" coffee into the Church. I never said they thought it was a sin, though I can see the implications of such.

Abstaining from meat on fridays is a type of fast. It is the giving up of something that is GOOD! Not a statement that eating meat on Friday's is immoral.

I think they should have made that clear to ALL parishioners. Many thought it was a sin to eat meat on Fridays. The bottom line here though is... fasting MUST be from the heart. Many who "fasted", that is, abstained from eating meat on Fridays, did so because of their obligation to the Church. When one does something simply because they are told they must do it is not heartfelt at all.

Here it is again:

http://www.sbc.net

For all to see. Full disclosure... everything down to financial reports. They care to hide nothing. I really don't see the SBC Convention Meeting as an issue at all. We should really be discussing important issues within the Body, like what is happenning with the Episcopal and some Presbyterian churches.

 

[lovely]

I am sorry to hear that they are not encouraging parents to remove their children from the government schools. In order for our children to be salt and light they must first be believers themselves, and be trained in the Word to gain their own roots. The children should be hearing of God throughout their day, and be memorizing Scripture, singing hymns, and hearing how communication, history, sience are all centered around God. This can only be accomplished if we have the hearts of our children as parents, and then collectively as a church of believers. True Christian schools, and true Godly homes should be seeing about the education of our children. I think providing a more affordable, of free, christian education to our children would be a most worthwhile thing, and that the fruits of those efforts would pay of enormously because they are based in Scripture.

As far as parents gettting involved with the school boards, and the teaching in the public schools, if they feel a specific calling to go out to these schools, that is great, but their hands are so tied most of them can only pray for these students anyway. They can not teach the children the things of God, or even acknowledge God. I think it would be best if these parents organized their own churches to provide schools, and employed Christian teachers to expound on the things of God to our little ones. We can pray for them, while we are teaching ours, and seek other Scriptural, and natural avenues in our daily walk of obedience...such as hospitality to neighbors in our homes, charity to the sick and those in prison...to be a light.

If we raise up Godly children, who impact a country, then these things may improve on a more basic level...real change. However, if we continue to allow the government to teach our children, eight hours a day, without even mentioning God once, and distort their minds with all that opposes God, then we run the risk of loosing our own children's souls to an influence that has more one on one time with them than their parents do.

To glorify God is to seek Him first, and to raise up Godly children. I think Scripture supports that we teach our own children, and that teaching them of God is where we start. I do not see where it supports handing them over at age four, left in the system for 12 years, at least, and then expect that they are ready to give an answer, or be salt and light, when they are being influenced so greatly by the world. Being a witness to our own children is priority, that is why God has given them to us. The government schools are the governments. Let those that support the governments teaching utilize them, and we shall pray for them, invite them to our homes for a meal, help those who need it when sick or without, etc. This is being salt and light, this is the role of God's children, and through this love and charity we share the gospel, not by using our children to fight political battles that God is in control of.

Seek the Kingdom of God first, not control of the government, and certainly not at the price of sacrificing our own children for a cause that should have never been a high priority goal for believers to begin with. Render the government that which is the government's, and render God that which is God's. Our children should be dedicated to Him, raised in His Word, and given an opportunity to take root, and know the true love of Christ. They do not belong to the government, do not let them have them.

The Lord bless you all today.

 

[thessalonian]

. Many who "fasted", that is, abstained from eating meat on Fridays, did so because of their obligation to the Church. When one does something simply because they are told they must do it is not heartfelt at all.

First of all I will let God judge what is heartfelt and what it not. However, obedience to God given authority whether they know the reasons or are completely in agreement with what is set down for there own good can in fact be virtuous. Jesus gives the parable of the two sons. One says he ill not do his fathers will but then does. The other says he will but then does not. The first is held up as more virtuous. It is not wrong to do something out of obedience, even though we do not understand it for God's understanding is greater than ours. I do agree however that the teaching on abstaining from meat could be more clear at times and better presented.

They care to hide nothing. I really don't see the SBC Convention Meeting as an issue at all. We should really be discussing important issues within the Body, like what is happenning with the Episcopal and some Presbyterian churches.

The issue is whether or not baptists condemn consumption of alcohol. Now like your arguement above, I've never known a Southern Baptist who did not condemn consumptoin of alcohol. Now if this is unrelated to what the Convention has said then my apologies, but I doudt that it is. Ttg in that context has a point.

Blessings

 

[thessalonian]

. Many who "fasted", that is, abstained from eating meat on Fridays, did so because of their obligation to the Church. When one does something simply because they are told they must do it is not heartfelt at all.

First of all I will let God judge what is heartfelt and what it not. However, obedience to God given authority whether they know the reasons or are completely in agreement with what is set down for there own good can in fact be virtuous. Jesus gives the parable of the two sons. One says he ill not do his fathers will but then does. The other says he will but then does not. The first is held up as more virtuous. It is not wrong to do something out of obedience, even though we do not understand it for God's understanding is greater than ours. I do agree however that the teaching on abstaining from meat could be more clear at times and better presented.

They care to hide nothing. I really don't see the SBC Convention Meeting as an issue at all. We should really be discussing important issues within the Body, like what is happenning with the Episcopal and some Presbyterian churches.

The issue is whether or not baptists condemn consumption of alcohol. Now like your arguement above, I've never known a Southern Baptist who did not condemn consumptoin of alcohol. Now if this is unrelated to what the Convention has said then my apologies, but I doudt that it is. Ttg in that context has a point.

Blessings

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

A glass of red wine a day strengthens your heart and can lead to a longer, healthier life.

A healthy diet and exercise does the same thing.

So long as you can act responsibly there's nothing wrong with drinking alcohol regardless of your position.

True, I agree as I stated in my original post:

I would like to note that I don’t think there is anything wrong with drinking per say…

Jesus had a glass every now and again.

Really, how do you know that? The Bible does not say that explicitly or implicitly, and if so please point me to the verse.

Again I personally do not believe it is a sin to drink alcohol, and I believe the Bible says that as well. However do consider what I said before about leaders having a responsibility to those they lead and how it is a good idea to abstain from those things that might cause others to stubble. I don’t remember the verse but I remember somewhere in the New Testament were it says that while some things are permissible not all things are beneficial.

The Southern Baptist Church does in fact speak against drinking alcohol as a sin. This is unbiblical!

Ok, well I don’t agree with everything the Southern Baptists believe.

 

[moniker]

A glass of red wine a day strengthens your heart and can lead to a longer, healthier life.

A healthy diet and exercise does the same thing.

And a healthy diet would include a glass of wine a day if you want to lower your risk of heart disease and a number of other healh issues. Drinking a glass of red wine (although most other forms of alcohol will work as well) on top of eating right and exercising is extremely beneficial.

Jesus had a glass every now and again.

Really, how do you know that? The Bible does not say that explicitly or implicitly, and if so please point me to the verse.

It says so implicity in the fact that Jesus was jewish and drinking wine is/was an obligation during passover. Otherwise, scripture dealing with the last supper where he shares his cup.

For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes

He can't drink wine again unless he drank it before.

And I understand your point, I just feel that a leader drinking responsibly gives the same message as abstaining from it completely. Actually it might give an even better message if it promotes healthy drinking in his followers for the health reasons I stated earlier.