# Not Allowed to Teach Anymore



## Papamarc (May 31, 2007)

I am new to this Board and am not sure where to ask this but I will try this forum.
I have been a member of a "Traditional" SB church for 21 years and providentially discovered the Doctrines of Grace about 3 years ago. As I have learned more and more it has filtered into my teaching more and more. I have led youth, college and adult Bible and book studies over the years. A couple of weeks ago I was informed that I would not be able to teach at church anymore because I was now being called a Calvinist and that was divisive. I have stayed at the church even though the teaching and preaching has been increasingly hard to listen to, trying not to be divisive. I have now had enough and will begin to look for a new church. Is this the wrong thing to do?? I have talked to the pastor and we are on different ends of the spectrum on this. He is a typical SBC 4 point Arminian.


----------



## etexas (May 31, 2007)

Papamarc said:


> I am new to this Board and am not sure where to ask this but I will try this forum.
> I have been a member of a "Traditional" SB church for 21 years and providentially discovered the Doctrines of Grace about 3 years ago. As I have learned more and more it has filtered into my teaching more and more. I have led youth, college and adult Bible and book studies over the years. A couple of weeks ago I was informed that I would not be able to teach at church anymore because I was now being called a Calvinist and that was divisive. I have stayed at the church even though the teaching and preaching has been increasingly hard to listen to, trying not to be divisive. I have now had enough and will begin to look for a new church. Is this the wrong thing to do?? I have talked to the pastor and we are on different ends of the spectrum on this. He is a typical SBC 4 point Arminian.


It sound as if our Lord is trying to tell you something. I would leave.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (May 31, 2007)

Papamarc said:


> I am new to this Board and am not sure where to ask this but I will try this forum.
> I have been a member of a "Traditional" SB church for 21 years and providentially discovered the Doctrines of Grace about 3 years ago. As I have learned more and more it has filtered into my teaching more and more. I have led youth, college and adult Bible and book studies over the years. A couple of weeks ago I was informed that I would not be able to teach at church anymore because I was now being called a Calvinist and that was divisive. I have stayed at the church even though the teaching and preaching has been increasingly hard to listen to, trying not to be divisive. I have now had enough and will begin to look for a new church. Is this the wrong thing to do?? I have talked to the pastor and we are on different ends of the spectrum on this. He is a typical SBC 4 point Arminian.




Went through a similar thing myself brother. Politely and with charity move on and find a fellowship that teaches the free grace of God. You could also ask your pastor to listen to Al Mohler and Jeff Noblit and show him the Abstract of Principles. You could also(in love of course) show him how the SBS has left its foundation and traded it's birthright for a "mess of pottage".



Abstract of Principles



When the original charter of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary was adopted in 1858 it contained the following statement which constitutes as a part of the "fundamental laws." "Every professor of the institution shall be a member of a regular Baptist Church; and all persons accepting professorships in this Seminary shall be considered, by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down, a departure from which principles on his part shall be grounds for his resignation or removal by the Trustees."

The following is an excerpt from the Fundamental Laws of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary written into its charter on April 30, 1858: Every Professor of the institution shall be a member of a regular Baptist Church; and all persons accepting Professorships in this Seminary, shall be considered by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down." (Mueller: History of Southern Seminary; BROADMAN PRESS: P. 238). 



I. THE SCRIPTURES 

The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were given by inspiration of God, and are the only sufficient, certain and authoritative rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience. 



II. GOD

There is but one God, the Maker, Preserver and Ruler of all things, having in and of himself, all perfections, and being infinite in them all; and to Him all creatures owe the highest love, reverence and obedience. 



III. THE TRINITY 

God is revealed to us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit each with distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence or being. 



IV. PROVIDENCE

God from eternity, decrees or permits all things that come to pass, and perpetually upholds, directs, and governs all creatures and all events; yet so as not in any wise to be the author or approver of sin nor to destroy the free will and responsibility of intelligent creatures. 



V. ELECTION

Election is God's eternal choice of some persons unto everlasting life - not because of foreseen merit in them, but of his mere mercy in Christ - in consequence of which choice they are called, justified and glorified. 



VI. THE FALL OF MAN

God originally created man in His own image, and free from sin; but, through the temptation of Satan, he transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original holiness and righteousness; whereby his posterity inherit a nature corrupt and wholly opposed to God and His law, are under condemnation, and as soon as they are capable of moral action, become actual transgressors.



VII. THE MEDIATOR 

Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, is the divinely appointed mediator between God and man. Having taken upon Himself human nature, yet without sin, He perfectly fulfilled the law, suffered and died upon the cross for the salvation of sinners. He was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended to His Father, at whose right hand He ever liveth to make intercession for His people. He is the only Mediator, the Prophet, Priest and King of the Church, and Sovereign of the Universe. 



VIII. REGENERATION

Regeneration is a change of heart, wrought by the Holy Spirit, who quickeneth the dead in trespasses and sins enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the Word of God, and renewing their whole nature, so that they love and practice holiness. It is a work of God's free and special grace alone. 



IX. REPENTANCE

Repentance is an evangelical grace, wherein a person being, by the Holy Spirit, made sensible of the manifold evil of his sin, humbleth himself for it, with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrence, with a purpose and endeavor to walk before God so as to please Him in all things. 



X. FAITH

Saving faith is the belief, on God's authority of whatsoever is revealed in His Word concerning Christ; accepting and resting upon Him alone for justification and eternal life. It is wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and is accompanied by all other saving graces, and leads to a life of holiness. 



XI. JUSTIFICATION

Justification is God's gracious and full acquittal of sinners, who believe in Christ, from all sin, through the satisfaction that Christ has made; not for anything wrought in them or done by them; but on account of the obedience and satisfaction of Christ, they receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness by faith.



XII. SANCTIFICATION

Those who have been regenerated are also sanctified, by God's word and Spirit dwelling in them. This sanctification is progressive through the supply of Divine strength, which all saints seek to obtain, pressing after a heavenly life in cordial obedience to all Christ's commands. 



XIII. PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

Those whom God hath accepted in the Beloved, and sanctified by His Spirit, will never totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere to the end; and though they may fall, through neglect and temptation, into sin, whereby they grieve the Spirit, impair their graces and comforts, bring reproach on the Church, and temporal judgments on themselves, yet they shall be renewed again unto repentance, and be kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. 



XIV. THE CHURCH

The Lord Jesus is the Head of the Church, which is composed of all his true disciples, and in Him is invested supremely all power for its government. According to his commandment, Christians are to associate themselves into particular societies or churches; and to each of these churches he hath given needful authority for administering that order, discipline and worship which he hath appointed. The regular officers of a Church are Bishops or Elders, and Deacons. 



XV. BAPTISM

Baptism is an ordinance of the Lord Jesus, obligatory upon every believer, wherein he is immersed in water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, as a sign of his fellowship with the death and resurrection of Christ, of remission of sins, and of his giving himself up to God, to live and walk in newness of life. It is prerequisite to church fellowship, and to participation in the Lord's Supper. 



XVI. THE LORD'S SUPPER 

The Lord's Supper is an ordinance of Jesus Christ, to be administered with the elements of bread and wine, and to be Observed by his churches till the end of the world. It is in no sense a sacrifice, but is designed to commemorate his death, to confirm the faith and other graces of Christians, and to be a bond, pledge and renewal of their communion with him, and of their church fellowship. 



XVII. THE LORD'S DAY

The Lord's Day is a Christian institution for regular observance, and should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private, resting from worldly employments and amusements, works of necessity and mercy only excepted. 



XVIII. LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE

God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in anything contrary to His word, or not contained in it. Civil magistrates being ordained of God, subjection in all lawful things commanded by them ought to be yielded by us in the Lord, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 



XIV. THE RESURRECTION

The bodies of men after death return to dust, but their spirits return immediately to God - the righteous to rest with Him; the wicked, to be reserved under darkness to the judgment. At the last day, the bodies of all the dead, both just and unjust, will be raised. 



XX. THE JUDGMENT

God hath appointed a day, wherein he will judge the world by Jesus Christ, when every one shall receive according to his deeds: the wicked shall go into everlasting punishment; the righteous, into everlasting life.


----------



## Chris (May 31, 2007)

Papamarc said:


> I am new to this Board and am not sure where to ask this but I will try this forum.
> I have been a member of a "Traditional" SB church for 21 years and providentially discovered the Doctrines of Grace about 3 years ago. As I have learned more and more it has filtered into my teaching more and more. I have led youth, college and adult Bible and book studies over the years. A couple of weeks ago I was informed that I would not be able to teach at church anymore because I was now being called a Calvinist and that was divisive. I have stayed at the church even though the teaching and preaching has been increasingly hard to listen to, trying not to be divisive. I have now had enough and will begin to look for a new church. Is this the wrong thing to do?? I have talked to the pastor and we are on different ends of the spectrum on this. He is a typical SBC 4 point Arminian.



The pastor needs to implement discipline against you if he believes you to be teaching errantly. 

Force his hand.


----------



## Augusta (May 31, 2007)

God is calling you out and providentially making it happen. Praise the Lord!! Although this is a painful thing it is also a great and wonderful thing.  

The fact that you can no longer sit well under bad teaching is proof of God's working in your life and teaching you.


----------



## JonathanHunt (May 31, 2007)

Brother,

If you are very much alone in your theological convictions, and will constantly conflict with your pastor (and undeniably cause upset in the body) then I would say that cautiously, after prayer, and open and frank discussion with your Pastor, you should seek to leave, preferably with his blessing, and remaining in harmony with the membership of the church.

These are not trivial issues, they are major doctrinal matters which affect your church's whole agenda and program. Further, if you are being barred from serving the Lord for holding to the DoG I would agree with the above poster that you are, effectively, being told something clearly.

Nonetheless, seek to live at peace with all men!

JH


----------



## Blueridge Believer (May 31, 2007)

BTW Marc, Winston Salem is a big town. I'm sure there is a good calvinistic Baptist church there somewhere. I know there is a good Free Presbyterian church there. Reggie Kimbrough is the pastor. I think he's a credo baptist.


----------



## Barnpreacher (May 31, 2007)

Blueridge reformer said:


> BTW Marc, Winston Salem is a big town. I'm sure there is a good calvinistic Baptist church there somewhere. I know there is a good Free Presbyterian church there. Reggie Kimbrough is the pastor. I think he's a credo baptist.



I once believed that Kimbro was a credo baptist as well, but I had a personal friend of his tell me he was paedo baptist. Nothwithstanding your personal convictions on baptism, Kimbro is one of the finest preachers around. His messages on grace found at Sermon Audio have been very beneficial to me.


----------



## Kevin (May 31, 2007)

JonathanHunt said:


> Brother,
> 
> If you are very much alone in your theological convictions, and will constantly conflict with your pastor (and undeniably cause upset in the body) then I would say that cautiously, after prayer, and open and frank discussion with your Pastor, you should seek to leave, preferably with his blessing, and remaining in harmony with the membership of the church.
> 
> ...




This is wise advice. Go in peace. The cause of the gospel does not need any more critics. The last thing any follower of Christ would ever want would be the cause of any discord in the name of 'true' doctrine.


----------



## KMK (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> The pastor needs to implement discipline against you if he believes you to be teaching errantly.
> 
> Force his hand.



You are something else, Chris! But you may be right! Not many would choose to go this route, but it has merit. If the pastor tries to explain from the Bible why the Calvinist is wrong, he will fall flat on his face. I think this is the greatest fear of a typical Arminian elder. "How do I teach against the DoG?" I can also see trying to maintain peace but I don't know... If you are going to leave anyway, you might as well let them try to kick you out. (I know my wife would agree with you)

I love the original charter of the SBTS as well, Mr. Farley. Has there ever been an official document from the Seminary that ammended the original charter?


----------



## KMK (May 31, 2007)

Kevin said:


> This is wise advice. Go in peace. The cause of the gospel does not need any more critics. The last thing any follower of Christ would ever want would be the cause of any discord in the name of 'true' doctrine.



It should be the *last* thing you do, but sometimes it must be done. Hence Luther...


----------



## Chris (May 31, 2007)

KMK said:


> You are something else, Chris!




I'm sure you understand the internal struggle I have at times over these issues. I'd say more, but to be honest, I fear that I already say all I need to say about my own situation and the questions I have struggled with in my own church. 




> But you may be right! Not many would choose to go this route, but it has merit. If the pastor tries to explain from the Bible why the Calvinist is wrong, he will fall flat on his face. I think this is the greatest fear of a typical Arminian elder. "How do I teach against the DoG?" I can also see trying to maintain peace but I don't know... If you are going to leave anyway, you might as well let them try to kick you out. (I know my wife would agree with you)



I think Luther would agree - and we need some Martin Luthers in the SBC today. 



> I love the original charter of the SBTS as well, Mr. Farley. Has there ever been an official document from the Seminary that ammended the original charter?




If I recall correctly, no. I do know that the staff still has to sign the AoP every year, and Mohler takes that signing seriously.


----------



## Chris (May 31, 2007)

JonathanHunt said:


> Brother,
> 
> 
> These are not trivial issues, they are major doctrinal matters which affect your church's whole agenda and program.
> ...



I certainly agree with the spirit behind what you're getting at, but many, many SBC churches are at the point of needing disruption more than peace. We're at the point of being like the guys in Jeremiah 6, crying peace when there is no peace.


----------



## SRoper (May 31, 2007)

Marc, you're always welcome at Redeemer Presbyterian.


----------



## KMK (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> I certainly agree with the spirit behind what you're getting at, but many, many SBC churches are at the point of needing disruption more than peace. We're at the point of being like the guys in Jeremiah 6, crying peace when there is no peace.



Perhaps the reason that the SBC is in its present situation is because not enough Godly men stood their ground. 

How exactly does Mohler take it seriously?


----------



## Chris (May 31, 2007)

KMK said:


> How exactly does Mohler take it seriously?




When Mohler took over at SBC, he made it clear that the accepted practice of signing the AoP even though the signer didn't hold to the AoP would no longer be tolerated. 

His position was that to _teach_ there, you had to _sign_ the AoP, and to _sign_ the AoP, you had to ACTUALLY MEAN YOU_ AFFIRM_ED ITS POSITIONS. 

Lots of professors ended up elsewhere shortly thereafter, and SBTS is now a decidely Calvinistic, conservative school, just as Boyce intended.


----------



## Herald (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> The pastor needs to implement discipline against you if he believes you to be teaching errantly.
> 
> Force his hand.



Chris, this not the answer. This is not about making an example of the pastor or the church. With grace and dignity it is time to move on. You owe it to your pastor to tell him why. The abstract principle cited by James is a good start.


----------



## Chris (May 31, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> Chris, this not the answer. This is not about making an example of the pastor or the church. With grace and dignity it is time to move on. You owe it to your pastor to tell him why. The abstract principle cited by James is a good start.




I assure you that I agree with the spirit behind your post, but considering the state of the SBC today, I have to strongly disagree. 

The original poster is _not_ causing division; not by teaching sound doctrine, and not by expecting a fair discipline process.

The _pastor_ is causing division by teaching errant doctrine, censuring sound teaching, and expecting those who support sound teaching to 'go away quietly'. 

I genuinely wish I could accept the idea of setting truth aside and leaving in the interest of peace. Seriously, I wish I could.


----------



## Sydnorphyn (May 31, 2007)

Marc:

Find another community where you can serve the Lord, your situation will not get better but worse.

Grace and peace

John


----------



## Puritanhead (May 31, 2007)

Kevin said:


> The cause of the gospel does not need any more critics. The last thing any follower of Christ would ever want would be the cause of any discord in the name of 'true' doctrine.


 That's what some said to Martin Luther too. The Gospel doesn't need anymore critics. But how does standing up for the Gospel amongst a body of professed believers impugn it? Take a stand!



> "Unless I am convicted by scripture and plain reason - I do not accept the authority of the popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other - my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen."





Papamarc said:


> I am new to this Board and am not sure where to ask this but I will try this forum.
> I have been a member of a "Traditional" SB church for 21 years and providentially discovered the Doctrines of Grace about 3 years ago. As I have learned more and more it has filtered into my teaching more and more. I have led youth, college and adult Bible and book studies over the years. A couple of weeks ago I was informed that I would not be able to teach at church anymore because I was now being called a Calvinist and that was divisive. I have stayed at the church even though the teaching and preaching has been increasingly hard to listen to, trying not to be divisive. I have now had enough and will begin to look for a new church. Is this the wrong thing to do?? I have talked to the pastor and we are on different ends of the spectrum on this. He is a typical SBC 4 point Arminian.


 Here is some simple advice, as I have been there and seen that before. LEAVE! You're not going to be treated right and you don't belong there. If you want you can make a scene on the way out the door and post remonstrances like Martin Luther, or buy a copy of James Boice and Phillip Ryken's _The Doctrines of Grace_ for every person in your Sunday School as you announce your departure, and bid them bon voyage as you goto a real church that is confessionally 1646/1689 and faithful to the whole counsel of God's Word (that is if you want to remain a Baptist!)


----------



## panta dokimazete (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> I assure you that I agree with the spirit behind your post, but considering the state of the SBC today, I have to strongly disagree.
> 
> The original poster is _not_ causing division; not by teaching sound doctrine, and not by expecting a fair discipline process.
> 
> ...



I agree - I actually forced the issue on the subject of alcohol - was serving as interim music minister at an SBC - was considered for full time - mentioned that I was not convicted concerning total abstinence to the pastor - he disclosed it to committee - met with committee - recommended that if they were serious about their conviction, they should drop me as interim, too - they wouldn't do it...seemed cowardly to me...so I finished my commitment and left.


----------



## Ivan (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> When Mohler took over at SBC, he made it clear that the accepted practice of signing the AoP even though the signer didn't hold to the AoP would no longer be tolerated.
> 
> His position was that to _teach_ there, you had to _sign_ the AoP, and to _sign_ the AoP, you had to ACTUALLY MEAN YOU_ AFFIRM_ED ITS POSITIONS.
> 
> Lots of professors ended up elsewhere shortly thereafter, and SBTS is now a decidely Calvinistic, conservative school, just as Boyce intended.



Chris is correct. Now SBTS is the best Southern Baptist seminary around, and that's coming from a Southwestern graduate! 

If I were a young man I'd head to Southern. If God so blesses, I pray that my grandson attends there someday.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (May 31, 2007)

Personally, I would stay until you were kicked out. Make them defend their actions and doctrine with Scripture. You never know. God may use you to bring about a small reformation in that church. Just be gently and meek in all you do so that no one can bring a believable false accusation against you. God's Word and Spirit transforms people. It is His church afterall. Trust his promise that his word will not return void. But again, that's what I would do. If you wish to leave, to find a more sound communion I won't blame you at all. I did this too when I first became reformed. But I think we need to take our membership vows seriously and obey the Scriptures which command us to test the spirits.


----------



## CalvinandHodges (May 31, 2007)

Hi:

Not completely familiar with the ecclesiastical structure of the SBC, but you may want to consider an appeal process. The SBC is vaguely presbyterian isn't it? Don't they have a synod/general assembly of some kind? If your church has more than one elder, then you might appeal first to the elders and get their reaction officially on a sheet of paper. You may wish to contact Al Mohler and get his advise on this subject.

If there is no appeal process, and your pastor is sovereign head of your church, then there is little that you can do about it. You might want to ask him if you both can meet on a weekly or monthly basis in order to discuss his objections to Calvinism. Realize, though, you must "entreat him as an elder" and not deal with him as an equal or inferior (even though your theology is superior!) Pray that your conversations will be salt and light to him.

You have to realize that it takes a great amount of humility for a pastor to admit to a congregant that he is wrong on a matter. After all, it is his job to teach you, not the other way around. Pride hits pastors in a way that is most subtle. A pastor who is often praised for his "godly preaching" may consider your criticisms as "troublemaking" or "divisive" or "proud and arrogant." I have seen it happen to friends of mine. Some may think that they are protecting their ministry from an "upstart." 

In a Congregational Church the pastor is under the authority of the people. What is the consensus of the people? Are they aware of the differences between Arminianism and Calvinism? Are they thoroughgoing Arminians? Or, are they ignorant of the issues? Did they like what you were teaching? Or, was it their complaints to the pastor that caused your loss of teaching authority? Maybe the congregation is split on the matter and the pastor did not want further division?

Only you can answer the questions above, but I think they can guide you as you consider them in the Word of God as to what Jesus would have you to do.

There is a time and season for everything: A time to fight, and a time to shake the dust off your shoes and find greener pastures. May God give you the wisdom, and the courage, to do the right thing.

Keep us informed as to what you decide to do.

Grace and Peace,

-CH


----------



## Ivan (May 31, 2007)

CalvinandHodges said:


> Hi:
> 
> Not completely familiar with the ecclesiastical structure of the SBC, but you may want to consider an appeal process. The SBC is vaguely presbyterian isn't it? Don't they have a synod/general assembly of some kind? If your church has more than one elder, then you might appeal first to the elders and get their reaction officially on a sheet of paper. You may wish to contact Al Mohler and get his advise on this subject.



The SBC has no appeal process, everything is in the local church. Another local pastor or the association's Director of Missions (or the title might be Executive Director) might help, but normally that is not the case. No one outside the local church has any authority over a Southern Baptist church. Although I'm sure Dr. Mohler would like to help, it is unlikely that he would have the time to do it...and he has no authority.

Most Southern Baptist churches do not have elders. The deacons often have the role of the elders. That can be problematic.



> In a Congregational Church the pastor is under the authority of the people.



This is true in Southern Baptist churches, although it doesn't always work that way. I'm sure it doesn't always work that way in Congregational churches either. The pastor is not the lord over the local church. That happens sometimes (in all denominations), but it is not Baptist doctrine. I would never be part of a church where the pastor things he is supreme ruler, nor would I take that role.



> There is a time and season for everything: A time to fight, and a time to shake the dust off your shoes and find greener pastures. May God give you the wisdom, and the courage, to do the right thing.



AMEN, brother!


----------



## Herald (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> I assure you that I agree with the spirit behind your post, but considering the state of the SBC today, I have to strongly disagree.
> 
> The original poster is _not_ causing division; not by teaching sound doctrine, and not by expecting a fair discipline process.
> 
> ...



Chris, I am all for bringing the issue up, discussing it or even debating it. However I am not in favor of bearing the brunt of church discipline over a doctrine that is not deserving of church discipline. If it got to that point I would leave.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 31, 2007)

I'm conflicted about this. It would be interesting to see what, if anything, your Church's Constitution says about discipline or teaching or something like that. My conflict is balancing the unity of the Church with how destructive and Gospel-undermining Arminian doctrines are. It's not that I don't believe a Christian can be converted in such Churches but it is in spite of the fact that God's powerful grace is denied and not because of it. Those that are converted because the Word is effectual, are then impoverished by pietism. They are left with none of the means of Grace. That is a profound sin that many men that call themselves ministers will have to answer to.

If they allowed you to continue to teach and influence the growth of the Church then I would seek the unity of the Body. That they're calling Biblical Truth "divisive" is cause for reflection. I'm not sure I would leave quietly in all situations. At the very least, the Pastor would not get off free from my clear convictions that he will have to answer to God for his lack of diligence in rightly dividing the Word of Truth. Whether I'd take it in front of the Church is another matter and I'm not close enough to the details to be speaking out of turn about how I would handle it.


----------



## Pilgrim (May 31, 2007)

Chris said:


> The pastor needs to implement discipline against you if he believes you to be teaching errantly.
> 
> Force his hand.



Possibly. But it sounds more like divisiveness is the issue. 

I don't want to take a cheap shot at Southern Baptists, but discipline of any kind is nowhere to be found in probably 9/10 of their churches, not even in the rudimentary form of contacting members who have been absent for some time. That's why the churches overall claim 16 million members and the truth is closer to 10.


----------



## Puritanhead (May 31, 2007)

Let me take a cheap shot at Baptists then Chris seeing how I was born and bred a Baptist. In many SBC churches discipline is an arbitrary, capricious process devoid of due process, that is if it ever comes, which it usually doesn't except in extraordinary cases.


----------



## eternallifeinchrist (May 31, 2007)

Hey brother, praying for you. Let us know if you decide to take a stand, so we can stand with you in prayer.

I just left a church that was like you said. Now God has led me to a PCA church, and I hope God is going to amazing things there.

I found when witnessing on the Internet that if I stated my position without applying the term 'Calvinism' that people were more open to listen. Is this what the problem is with obtaining support from your fellow church members?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 31, 2007)

Pilgrim said:


> Possibly. But it sounds more like divisiveness is the issue.
> 
> I don't want to take a cheap shot at Southern Baptists, but discipline of any kind is probably nowhere to be found in probably 9/10 of their churches, not even contacting members who have been absent for some time.



That is, frankly, part of the problem. We have people that won't be in Church for months at a time. They show up one Sunday, out of the blue, and they're voting on Church business or helping with the collection of the offerings. Part of the reason the SBC is so huge, in terms of stated membership, is that many Churches do not purge their roles or take any disciplinary measures against those who never show up for Church.

This is why I suggested he look at the Church's constitution. It might spell out some processes. For me, it's a paradigm shift away from what my standards are because the goal is for reformation. Part of the reformation needed in SBC Churches is not merely going to be a "5 point" Reformation but a recovery of a some form of Church government that fulfills the demands of the Word that the sheep be shepherded and elders "give account" for that work. Since very little thought is given to this process, I'm guessing that this is a unilateral decision made by the Pastor with no trial. Perhaps something in the Church's Constitution will prohibit unilateral action in this instance.


----------



## Pilgrim (May 31, 2007)

Puritanhead said:


> Let me take a cheap shot at Baptists then Chris seeing how I was born and bred a Baptist. In many SBC churches discipline is an arbitrary, capricious process devoid of due process, that is if it ever comes, which it usually doesn't except in extraordinary cases.



That is the other side of the coin. Most of the cases I've heard of have dealt with ministers or other staff members who are forced out by the deacons or some other powerful member(s). One example of this would be "leave quietly and you'll get 3 months severance pay but if you cause a scene you'll get nothing." 

That's not to say that things are perfect on our side of the fence.


----------



## Ivan (May 31, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> Chris, I am all for bringing the issue up, discussing it or even debating it. However I am not in favor of bearing the brunt of church discipline over a doctrine that is not deserving of church discipline. If it got to that point I would leave.



I would too.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 31, 2007)

Pilgrim said:


> That's not to say that things are perfect on our side of the fence.



Agreed. In some ways, it is more shameful that Presbyterians are so sloppy and act so independent given we Confessionally claim that Scripture teaches to the contrary.


----------



## Herald (May 31, 2007)

Puritanhead said:


> Let me take a cheap shot at Baptists then Chris seeing how I was born and bred a Baptist. In many SBC churches discipline is an arbitrary, capricious process devoid of due process, that is if it ever comes, which it usually doesn't except in extraordinary cases.



Ryan - that is a cheap shot and I am dismayed you would say it. Poorly administered church discipline is not the exclusive domain of Baptists. We just recently brought a church discipline situation to conclusion a few weeks ago. Regretably it resulted in the ex-communication of a member. It was neither arbitrary, capricious or devoid of due process. And I know for a fact that we were not extraordinary in our use of church discipline. 

It would be nice to see my Presbyterian brethren challenge such broad brush accusations.


----------



## Papamarc (May 31, 2007)

I want to thank all of you for your comments and advice. I am overwhelmed at the response to my post. I am taking your Godly advice into consideration and am praying about what to do next. 
This has been the craziest thing. I never set out on this journey to discover anything called Calvinism or Doctrines of Grace or any other name you want to call it. I only had a God given passion to find truth. I knew that the things I had been taught were not right.After searching Scripture and reading 100's of books and listening to people like RC Sproul and John Piper and many others it became as clear as day. We don't save ourselves, God Saves! It seemed like it should have been clear to everyone and I was very excited to tell anyone that would listen. Unfortunately in most SBC churches it is taught that we are basically responsible for doing something to receive salvation...walk down front , say a sinner's prayer, raise your hand, etc and it only works between 11:55-12:00 on Sunday at the invitation.
After much prayer and study I basically found out that we were dangerously close to a false gospel. 
I felt like God was wanting me to stay and be yeast in the church for truth even though I was very uncomfortable in our worship services. I led a BS at our home where God has worked in amazing ways, calls to full time youth ministry, calls to full time missions, Bible Studies started at work, witnessing to folks at the Unitarian place, etc. I was using material from people like Michael Horton and John Piper and John Macarthur and CJ Mahaney. The youth BS at our home was being blessed in great ways by God also.
But then the "C" word started popping up and the "E" word and the "P" word around church in association with my name. Suddenly Marc was a not a Christian but a Calvinist and that was not good for the unity of the church. I told the folks that come to both groups that I was not supposed to lead anymore but they still keep coming. 
I never in my wildest dreams thought that I would be persecuted by my own church for truth!


----------



## Herald (May 31, 2007)

Marc - our church was planted by a much larger Baptist church in 2000. I am thankful that the pastor and deacons of that church desired to plant a church in our area of Anne Arundel County. The church started off as a clone of the sending church. Back in 2000 the only out-of-the-closet Calvinist was yours truly. It was a few years later that the pastor accepted the Doctrines of Grace. Eventually our sending church found out about our doctrinal shift. They mildly addressed it but chose to leave us be. I was at our sending church this evening to hear my daughters piano recital. I can't help but feel the eyes looking at me and almost hear the whispers of, "Psst. There's Bill, the Calvinist."


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 31, 2007)

BaptistInCrisis said:


> Ryan - that is a cheap shot and I am dismayed you would say it. Poorly administered church discipline is not the exclusive domain of Baptists. We just recently brought a church discipline situation to conclusion a few weeks ago. Regretably it resulted in the ex-communication of a member. It was neither arbitrary, capricious or devoid of due process. And I know for a fact that we were not extraordinary in our use of church discipline.
> 
> It would be nice to see my Presbyterian brethren challenge such broad brush accusations.



Bill,

Why was Ryan's post a cheap shot? He didn't say it was typical of all Baptists nor the way it has to be. He was simply noting that it is, unfortunately, typical of many SBC congregations. I think his criticism is valid as far as it goes and I didn't think he was mean for pointing it out.

I've heard much worse criticism from actual Southern Baptists. The single Pastor model is severely flawed and leads to giving authority to Deacons that is un-Scriptural or too much authority to a single man.

Some of the injunctions to papamarc to try to work within a disciplinary process need to be understood in the context that the "process" is nonexistant in many Churches.


----------



## Herald (May 31, 2007)

Rich - I responded in the heat of the moment. I'm not an SBC'er, so perhaps there are some things I am not qualified to comment about. I'm sorry for being so quick on the trigger. My apologies to Ryan. Rich - thanks for calling me out on this one.

It may be helpful to recognize that not every Baptist church believes in the doctrines of grace. Most don't. Finneyism, Scofieldism and Arminianism run rampant in most Baptist churches. But praise God for those Baptist churches that have retained or returned to historical Baptist teaching. Once God's sovereignty is recognized other important aspects of church teaching are more apt to fall in line.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 31, 2007)

Amen, Bill. I hope more Churches do but the narrow path offends many people who go to Church for other than their love of God. I count man of every confession in that crowd.

Give me even a loosey SBC Pastor though to some of the excremental theology I hear in the "prayers" of some of the Chaplains here. I was telling somebody yesterday that I've only said "Amen" to two prayers I've had to stand and listen to while here.

Just yesterday, the Chaplain invoked the name of God and thanked him for a number of blasphemous, prideful things and then concluded the prayer with "Semper Fi." I turned to the Major next to me and said: "That was blasphemous."

One of the Chaplains here likes to open up her prayers with "Ooorah God!"

I have some hope for SBC congregations. They are severely impoverished but I'm struck how men do not recoil when you hit them between the eyes with the majesty and holiness of God.


----------



## Davidius (May 31, 2007)

There's a Reformed Baptist church in Mebane but it may be a bit of a drive for you. 

Aside from the Free Presbyterian Church there is also a PCA church in Winston Salem which Scott Roper from the board (sroper) attends. Perhaps he could help you out. And if you want to drive to Burlington you are always welcome to ride the rest of the way with me to Durham.


----------



## KMK (Jun 1, 2007)

Most people here on PB have had similar testimonies, I'm sure. The DoG hit you like lightening and you want to tell everyone and no one wants to hear it!

Here's a question for everyone: Is the unity of a church that stands against and teaches against the sovereignty of God worth protecting?


----------



## shackleton (Jun 1, 2007)

I had a similiar experience. I was attending a Independent Baptist Church when I became aware of the DoG. I talked to the pastor about it and he had a violent reaction and told me I would not be allowed to teach in his church. I responded by giving him a list of bible verses proving Total Depravity and Election. This only culminated in him doing a 6-week series on why Calvinism is a heresy and a black eye to God's name. So I gave up and my wife and I left. 

People cannot usually be convinced of your point of view due to years of hearing about the evils of Calvinism. You might just have to shake the dust off your heals and go elsewhere.


----------



## A5pointer (Jun 1, 2007)

Same thing happened to me, banned from teaching. It is probably a loosing battle for you. Get somewhere where your gift can be used.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jun 1, 2007)

Papamarc said:


> I have talked to the pastor and we are on different ends of the spectrum on this. He is a typical SBC 4 point Arminian.


you've answered your question.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jun 1, 2007)

Make him walk you out the door!



> Acts 16
> 
> 35But when it was day, the magistrates sent the police, saying, "Let those men go." 36And the jailer reported these words to Paul, saying, "The magistrates have sent to let you go. Therefore come out now and go in peace." 37But Paul said to them, _*"They have beaten us publicly, uncondemned, men who are Roman citizens, and have thrown us into prison; and do they now throw us out secretly? No! Let them come themselves and take us out." *_38The police reported these words to the magistrates, and they were afraid when they heard that they were Roman citizens. 39So they came and apologized to them. And they took them out and asked them to leave the city. 40So they went out of the prison and visited Lydia. And when they had seen the brothers, they encouraged them and departed.



If it was appropriate for Paul to stand on principle on simple citizenship...


----------



## puritan lad (Jun 1, 2007)

PapaMarc

I can relate, coming from the Assemblies of God myself. I would look for a new church, as has been the consensus on this board.

As far as being "divisive", I'll leave you with this quote from J.C. Ryle.

_"Divisions and separations are most objectionable in religion. They weaken the cause of true Christianity ...But before we blame people for them, we must be careful that we lay the blame where it is deserved. False doctrine and heresy are even worse than schism. If people separate themselves from teaching that is positively false and unscriptural, they ought to be praised rather than reproved. In such cases separation is a virtue and not a sin."_

Divisiveness isn't always a bad thing.


----------



## Croghanite (Jun 1, 2007)

Papamarc,

A member of the church I am attending is from Winston Salem. Its an hour and a half drive but well worth it. Come and visit. I believe several people from the PB will be there this week.


----------



## KMK (Jun 1, 2007)

puritan lad said:


> PapaMarc
> 
> I can relate, coming from the Assemblies of God myself. I would look for a new church, as has been the consensus on this board.
> 
> ...



Good one, Scott! Where did you dig up that awesome quote?


----------



## Papamarc (Jun 1, 2007)

Thanks once again for all of the Godly advice and invitations to different churches! We are going to start visiting churches next week, I don't know but I think this feels like a divorce might feel, it is very painful. 

*Then they left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name. And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ. Acts 5:41-42*

After reading this passage the other day I decided to keep leading the college group anyway in my home instead of church and told them it was not church related. I heard today that the Assoc Pastor said I was not being submissive to the churches directions. I might be the first ever church discipline candidate, who knows.


----------

