11/16/2005

Baptists vote on gays in member churches

Let me say this up front and VERY clear:

I have no problem with churches speaking their mind and being as hateful and bigoted as they want to be, okay?

What chaps my ass is that churces are so BOLD as to go BLATANTLY against Biblical teachings of outreach and preaching to the world! Jesus preached to the lepers and the adulterers. He even ate dinner with them! Yet, here is a state Baptist association that wants to vote on kicking out member churches that have accept gay congregants.

Didn't these people ever consider how they were going to preach the Gospel to the supposedly "stray sheep" if they didn't even allow them through the doors of their church?

There's an old saying in the South: You can draw more bees with honey than with vinegar.

Maybe if they stop being so sour and mean, they'd get better response from those they are trying to "convert." What a novel concept!!!

7 Comments:

At 11:02, Blogger lovin' it said...

"The motion was made by Bill Sanderson, pastor of Hephzibah Baptist Church in Wendell, who said that such a policy "must deal clearly with homosexual behavior and include that a church that knowingly affirms, approves or endorses homosexual behavior is a church not in friendly cooperation with the convention."

Here's a direct quote from your article. No one is saying gays can't attend these churches. They are saying the churches must teach what the bible says about homosexuality to be a member of the conference. There is a big difference.

 
At 11:45, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Exactly how and who gets to determine the criteria for deciding what it means when a church "knowingly affirms, approves or endorses homosexual behavior"?

Hmmmm?

It CAN be argued that a church knowingly allowing a practicing gay to attend their church, even if they preach against homosexuality, would still be affirming their behavior.

That very well could put that church on the chopping block.

It's rare you'll find a church that will stand up for what is right. Most will cave because they want the financial support from the big daddy money handlers. The more vehement they are, the more financial support and recognition they get.

 
At 11:51, Blogger lovin' it said...

You've got it backwards, Callie. Local congregations give money to the conference, not the other way around.

Baptists have even more power at the local level then some other church organization. They own all their own property locally. The only power the conference has over the locals is moral approval.

 
At 12:01, Blogger RedStateExile said...

I grew up Southern Baptist and my dad was a deacon all his life until he died. My mother's entire male side of the family are Baptist preachers and missionaries. I know how this works.

If they give, they shall receive support in all forms, financial and otherwise, as long as the local churches do what the state and national conventions rule they must.

Churches do have the autonomy not to follow the rules of the SBC and the state conventions, but they also lose all rights as member churches.

It's kind of like being a Republican. You're one of us as long as you follow the rules. Questioning the elitist powers-that-be will get you cast out. :)

 
At 12:16, Blogger lovin' it said...

Or, they could just drop out and keep their own money, right?

 
At 16:15, Blogger dorsano said...

Their moral relativism does have a peculiar shape, Callie, it seems to me - sort of like a pretzel.

 
At 19:28, Blogger RedStateExile said...

Or, they could just drop out and keep their own money, right?

Light dawns on marble head!

Dorsano-

Peculiar doesn't even begin to describe it. It's so screwed up it even gives pretzels a bad name.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home