# What is BGC doctrine



## reformedman (Aug 13, 2007)

Does anyone know what are the core beliefs of the BGC (Baptist General Conference I believe)?

I know that Piper is BGC and I read wikipedia's article and it was useless except for the history and origin of BGC. It says nothing of the beliefs of BGC. I'd like to know all of their statement of faith or which confession (they probably don't have one), but I am most particularly interested in their view of TULIP. I think they might be 4 pointers?

I was speaking today with a BGCer and he was trying to explain how he is a 5 pointer (He laid emphasis on the word 5), and still was saying to me that Christ died for all people. I tried to explain to him what the L meant and what unlimited atonement was as opposed to limited. He flipped me off by saying "ok" and pretty much ended the conversation there so I said my farewell's in the kindest way possible to which he ignored me, and I walked away. Didn't see any brotherly love there at all which made me wonder big time why he'd be standing on a corner giving away free Piper books. 

Excuse my bad english.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 13, 2007)

If I'm not mistaken brother the BGC is a very diverse group. There are people on both sides of the Cavinism/Arminianism debate in it. I think Stephen Boyd is in the conference as well and he's an open theist. I heard Piper in a message he preached about open theism lamenting the fact that they would not take a firm stand against it. Go to his website and search open theism and listen to the message.

Correction: That's Gregory Boyd, the author of "Myth of the Christian Nation", and I can not verify Woodland Hills Church is in the BGC. They are crosstown from Piper.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 13, 2007)

WOODLAND HILL CHURCHIs a member of the BGC and Gregory Boyd is the pastor. He is an open theist.


----------



## elnwood (Aug 13, 2007)

As others have said, Baptist General Conference churches are diverse in their views beyond the usual Baptist distinctives and will depend on the local church. A local PCA pastor in our area will be debating one of the professors from the Bethel Seminary San Diego (BGC seminary, where that pastor attended) next weekend on the issue of female ordination.


----------



## Blueridge Believer (Aug 13, 2007)

It's amazing that Piper can stand to stay in that conference. There must be quite a few good churches left in it.


----------



## KMK (Aug 13, 2007)

elnwood said:


> As others have said, Baptist General Conference churches are diverse in their views beyond the usual Baptist distinctives and will depend on the local church. A local PCA pastor in our area will be debating one of the professors from the Bethel Seminary San Diego (BGC seminary, where that pastor attended) next weekend on the issue of female ordination.



Will this be available online like the Gene vs. Paul extravaganza?


----------



## elnwood (Aug 13, 2007)

KMK said:


> elnwood said:
> 
> 
> > As others have said, Baptist General Conference churches are diverse in their views beyond the usual Baptist distinctives and will depend on the local church. A local PCA pastor in our area will be debating one of the professors from the Bethel Seminary San Diego (BGC seminary, where that pastor attended) next weekend on the issue of female ordination.
> ...



Not sure. I only heard about it from Gene yesterday. Gene debated a theonomist at one Hoagies and Stogies, which was recorded and put online. Possibly.

http://ruberad.wordpress.com/2007/07/05/hoagies-stogies-ordination-of-women/


----------



## beej6 (Aug 13, 2007)

Piper's church is Bethlehem Baptist Church; Google it and www.desiringgod.com for the relevant documents.

As a church that believes in the primacy of the local church, lacking connectiveness (like most Baptist churches, right?), one shouldn't be surprised that the theology could vary widely within the conference...


----------



## reformedman (Aug 14, 2007)

beej6 said:


> As a church that believes in the primacy of the local church, lacking connectiveness (like most Baptist churches, right?), one shouldn't be surprised that the theology could vary widely within the conference...



Because we don't believe in the same government as Presbyterians doesn't mean that we don't share an intimate communion within our churches. From your statement I would guess that you might be greatly blessed and surprised by what you would see in our relationship with other 1689er Baptist Churches. Sharing family conferences, pastoral conferences, sharing pastors for special messages within our churches. 
Sure, it may not exist everwhere, but it sounds by your post that you mean to say that we avoid confraternity, we don't, we greatly encourage likeminded 1689er baptist church fellowship. I hope that you don't get the wrong idea about 1689-baptists by the representation of other baptist groups; it would be likened for me to judge opc by the representation of pcusa or vice versa.


----------



## beej6 (Aug 14, 2007)

Sorry, Frank, I didn't mean to imply there was no connectivity. And the same can happen in 'presbyterian' bodies as well. It's just that I have seen, for example, in the American Baptists, when the national body refuses to get involved in theological disputes, the end result is false unity, said unity which should come from doctrinal unity. I am not saying one has to agree with every jot and tittle (and the OPC certainly doesn't!) but if there is less connectionalism (not none, I know), than less unity of doctrine would be expected.


----------



## KMK (Aug 14, 2007)

reformedman said:


> beej6 said:
> 
> 
> > As a church that believes in the primacy of the local church, lacking connectiveness (like most Baptist churches, right?), one shouldn't be surprised that the theology could vary widely within the conference...
> ...



Are you guys ARBCA?


----------



## KMK (Aug 14, 2007)

beej6 said:


> Sorry, Frank, I didn't mean to imply there was no connectivity. And the same can happen in 'presbyterian' bodies as well. It's just that I have seen, for example, in the American Baptists, when the national body refuses to get involved in theological disputes, the end result is false unity, said unity which should come from doctrinal unity. I am not saying one has to agree with every jot and tittle (and the OPC certainly doesn't!) but if there is less connectionalism (not none, I know), than less unity of doctrine would be expected.



You can't judge anything by the ABC. They are about as 'baptist' as the PCUSA is 'presbyterian'. You are right in that ignorance of theology leads to false unity. (I may use that in a sermon sometime)


----------



## beej6 (Aug 14, 2007)

No, I wasn't trying to judge either, just an example... maybe not the best either... Ken, you might know, are there any Baptist denominations that are uniform in their theology? (Besides the Founders' arm of the SBC <smile>)


----------



## D. Paul (Aug 14, 2007)

We are currently attending a GBC church. 
Core beliefs? BlueridgeBaptist is correct by saying they are diverse. I have witnessed what I consider to be decline over a period of approx. 15 years. While not implying this to be Conference-wide, ours has become increasingly Hybels-Warren-esque in the approach to the worship service. I sat through a mens SS class series on "Can you lose your salvation" which was most decidedly Arminian with the usual misrepresentations of Calvinism. No one offered anything substantial to the contrary (except for a couple strategically-placed Q's of my own)

Now, we are not members so I have no detailed statement to draw from. I have only been delving into the Doctrines of Grace for about 7 yrs and that is most likely the reason I see the decline whereas prior I would have nodded and gone along for the ride.

I vividly recall our asst Pastor's son being home on break from Bethel College where Greg Boyd was teaching at the time. The boy simply gushed about the genius of Boyd. Of course, Boyd is no longer there. 

So, in short, assume that there will probably be a potent mix of Arminian/Dispensational/Seeker Sensitive doctrines. Pragmatism rules.


----------



## reformedman (Aug 14, 2007)

Thanks for the apology, forgiven.



> Are you guys ARBCA?


No, I believe in the independancy of each local church group as being more scriptural than a type of association of churches.



> Jesus prayed in John 17 for His disciples to be brought to complete unity so that the world would know that the Father sent Him. The ASSOCIATION OF REFORMED BAPTIST CHURCHES OF AMERICA (ARBCA) is designed to advance Christ's kingdom by providing a fellowship in which churches of common confession may find mutual encouragement, assistance, edification, and counsel, and participate in cooperative efforts such home and foreign missions, ministerial training, and publications, along with other such endeavors deemed appropriate by the Association.



I think there is a danger when some things are left to a large group to decide for my church, they make one mistake and boom my church goes down the drain with the rest of them. 
Swaggart made headlines with the prostitute and all pentacostals were in the spotlight. 
A priest was caught with some little boys, boom all Catholic priest are paedophiles.
An evangelist was caught stealing, boom no church has integrity.
You can't avoid it, if you are part of a group, your name goes in the same direction as that group. The lesser groups you are in the lesser danger for you and others.

But more importantly, I believe strongly in the church and church government. Presbyterian or Baptist Church government can be seen in Church history so adding a new office, to me, would not be exercising piety.


----------



## KMK (Aug 15, 2007)

beej6 said:


> No, I wasn't trying to judge either, just an example... maybe not the best either... Ken, you might know, are there any Baptist denominations that are uniform in their theology? (Besides the Founders' arm of the SBC <smile>)



Association of Reformed Baptist Churches in America (ARBCA). As you can see, Mr. Melitta does not think to highly of them but not because they are not reformed nor confessional, because they are. They subscribe to the 1689 although their subscription allows for churches to regard some points of the confession to be more important than others. I don't really understand how that works but it allows some churches to join who use grape juice in the Lord's Supper or are not fully convinced that the pope is the antichrist etc. Perhaps someone else could elaborate.


----------



## beej6 (Aug 15, 2007)

I have selfish reasons for asking these questions - on my website I list a number of Reformed Baptist associations etc. I'm not too familiar with them except what I can read on their websites so I always appreciate confirmation that they may have sound preaching.

(Also, if you know of a church that does not belong to any association and yet believes could be included on my website, PM me...)


----------

