INTRODUCTION:
A lady once told the dynamic, if crude, evangelist Billy Sunday that she didn’t like the way he preached the gospel.
“Oh? And how do you preach the gospel, Madam?” he asked.
“Oh, I don’t preach,” She said.
“Well, I like my way better,” he told the woman.
We have been telling each other as Baptists for years that we don’t like each other’s way of preaching the Gospel. Nevertheless, we have preached the Gospel. We have agreed that the world needs to hear and to respond to Gospel preaching. We have agreed on little else except that we have not been very effective in gaining a positive response to the preaching of the Gospel.
We are divided. There are at least 33 different Baptist groups in America. The same issues that divide Baptists into separate groups also divide Southern Baptists into factions, each seeking control over the other factions.
Southern Baptists are the largest of the groups who call themselves Baptist. It is as a Southern Baptist this preacher preaches and it is to Southern Baptists that he preaches. There is a message here, however, for all Baptists.
Walt Kelly’s Pogo the Possum once declared, “We has met the enemy and he is us!” If, as you read or hear these sermons, you feel included as a Baptist, it is to you that this work is addressed and it is “us” who are divided. The divisions are more than denominational, ecclesiastical or doctrinal; they are personal.
To deal with religious differences on a personal basis rather than along denominational or doctrinal lines presents certain problems. We usually defend our church and/or denomination as a body of doctrine; a whole body of belief as if to fail to embrace any part of it is to betray all of it. To deal personally is more subjective; less dogmatic. We shall not achieve total agreement; perhaps not even consensus. We shall, however, examine those things which divide us.
Another problem with dealing with religious differences on a personal basis is being able to discuss them without to resorting to Theological Jargon peculiar to one’s own religious background. It is hoped that the language used in these sermons will be readily understood.
If the people to whom we write is “us”, then we are at once both the divided and the dividers. Although there is little hope for eliminating the divisions by examining them, perhaps we can understand the divisions and find some common ground upon which we can re-unite for Jesus’ sake.
Unity in Diversity has been the theme of Southern Baptists throughout most of our history. The leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention from the beginning recognized that there were varying views among its members on almost any subject. Some wag has said, “Show me 10 Baptists and I’ll show you 11 different opinions!” A willingness and an ability to accommodate these differing opinions within a religious organization has been the genius of Southern Baptists.
The past 4 decades have seen an erosion of this willingness to entertain different opinions within the denomination and the diversity which has made Southern Baptists strong has come under attack from its more fundamental members, particularly those who hold a Dispensational Theology. The Southern Baptist Convention is divided.
Baptists have experienced difficulty in maintaining diversity throughout our history. Other Baptist groups have divided into conventions and associations which have divided into other conventions and associations. The conflicts have been, for the most part, about doctrine but not every division has been the result of Theological differences..
SERMON ONE: PROVIDING FOR DIVERSITY
INTRODUCTION
“Unity in Diversity” was the slogan as Southern Baptists tried to deal with the tension created by the commentary on Genesis by Ralph Elliot in Kansas City in 1963. The convention drafted a “Baptist Faith and Message” which was designed to provide for diversity within the ranks of the body without alienating anyone. That it passed is a tribute to the statesmanship of men like Herschel Hobbs. However, the intensity of the opposition to the statement was a preview of things to come. Now, more than 4 decades later, those who intensely opposed the provision for diversity in the convention have gained control of the convention’s boards and agencies by electing to those positions which govern the appointments of the boards and agencies only those who would require that all leaders agree with their positions on Theology, Inspiration, and Revelation. If “Unity in Diversity” had merit as a slogan, then unity has been lost along with diversity. We are divided. Unity will not be restored until we provide for diversity among Baptists.
I. DIVERSITY MUST BE PROVIDED TO ENCOURAGE SCHOLARSHIP
When academic freedom is denied the scholars in our schools, research is stifled and new ideas are not shared. Sadly, job security often takes precedence over other considerations in the academic community, both secular and sacred. “I just don’t believe the convention is ready for this idea.” is often heard from the professors in our seminaries. One professor told his class that his book on Systematic Theology could not be published until after his death.
Scholarship will not flourish in an environment of fear. I was not allowed to bring a tape recorder to class in the early 60’s. I wonder what it is like today.
Many of the reference books used today will be opposed by those who “pad” the trustees of our schools. Many reference books which will be needed tomorrow will not be written, or if written, will have to be published outside the convention. Scholarship cannot flourish when scholars cannot be scholars.
It has been my privilege to be the pastor to many members of the academic community.. These brilliant people have been the leaders of the churches where I have served. It is to these academics that I appeal for academic freedom in our schools; to provide for diversity. Every public school teacher; every community college professor; every college student, and every other Baptist who is engaged in an education-related endeavor must stand in opposition to the stifling of academic freedom in those institutions supported by our mission money. Tell your pastor that you will not stand for it! If you do not take a stand, Baptist work as we know it will cease to exist and in its place will be a training situation which will produce clones of the very people who have destroyed the provisions for diversity and caused the loss of unity among Southern Baptists.
II. DIVERSITY MUST BE PROVIDED TO ALLOW THE INDIVIDUAL CHURCHES TO ADAPT TO THE CULTURE OF ITS MEMBERS AND THE COMMUNITY WHICH IT SERVES.
The church, if it is to reach the community and be respected by it, must at once be separate from the community but indigenous to it. The church must fit in. (Our mission programs might be more effective if the churches established in foreign places were more indigenous to the communities they seek to serve.)
I once preached a revival in the Tangelo Park Baptist Church of Orlando, Florida. The community was racially integrated and so was the church. The pastor was criticized by some of the pastors in the Wekiwa Baptist Association for promoting integration. The opposition grew, and when the church needed help from the association, help was refused and the bond payments were not met. The Church failed. The problems encountered there could have been solved if the ministers of the association had supported the effort. A wonderful opportunity was lost. We did not provide for diversity.
There was in the Tampa Palms Shopping Center in Tampa, Florida, a church. It occupied one of the stores. The large windows clearly displayed all that took place inside. The community was one of great affluence and the furnishings of the church reflected that. There were those who insist that a great church building should be built--maybe one has been built by now--but this one fit. A Georgian Building with giant columns and a balcony would not fit in. We must provide for diversity even in the buildings Baptists occupy.
I moved from Florida to Texas to attend seminary. I was fortunate to serve a small church near Nocona while there. One day I showed some pictures of my Florida Youth Group on an outing to a lake; swimming and water-skiing; boys and girls in the same lake! I was introduced to the taboo against mixed bathing. We must allow each church and each member freedom in choosing to be a part of the community. Swimming with boys and girls together in Florida is one thing; in Texas it’s quite another. Diversity must be provided for in matters of social customs and taboos.
III. DIVERSITY MUST BE PROVIDED TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TALENTED BAPTISTS.
“Now there are varieties of gifts…and there are varieties of ministries…and there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons.” (II Cor. 4-6)
The church has a responsibility to seek out and to help develop talented people. Some church may produce an operatic soprano while another produces country gospel singers. One church may produce a fine guitarist while another produces a fine organist. Each can take pride in its efforts if each produces a witness for Jesus. Many entertainers have wonderful testimonies but there are those who believe their testimony would be out of place in their church. The church cannot hope to influence the talent of its individual members if it fails to provide encouragement and guidance and the opportunity to display and develop these talents.
IV. DIVERSITY MUST BE PROVIDED SO THAT THE CHURCH CAN BE EFFECTIVE AT ALL LEVELS OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC LIFE.
There is an underlying anti-intellectualism in the problems facing Baptist Churches. There is a prevalent, if unexpressed, idea that there is a causal and proportionate relationship between intellectualism and liberalism among Baptists. “I’m as ignorant as a dog and I wish I was as ignorant as a hog!”, one speaker said in a chapel address at the seminary that I attended. (My thought was that his wish had been granted!)
The intellectual Christian must be challenged differently from a man who works at a gas station. There must be churches and ministers who can challenge intellectuals. These churches and ministers must be accepted by their fellows whose ministries are to more common folk.
There must be churches and ministers who can reach the poor and ignorant. Not every preacher can reach a man who is penniless; his wife and children are hungry and cold; who cannot read or write well, and he despairs of what tomorrow may bring.
Leroy Marvel was a preacher who had peculiar faith and talents. Leroy could reach people who would never listen to most of us. He preached about Pharaoh wanting to spend one more night with the frogs and about the woman at the well leaving her water pot, but common folk responded to him and they could tell that Jesus in Leroy Marvel loved them!
Leroy could neither read nor write; his wife read his Bible to him and he memorized his texts. He audited the diploma classes at seminary. Leroy Marvel was a novelty and many at school dismissed his as just that: a novelty!
I went to a nearby church to hear him preach one night and as I drove into the church yard, the men were building wooden walks from the building to the parking lot. Leroy explained that they had been praying for rain to end the 6 month-long dry-spell and they believed it would rain before the service was over. They wanted to be able to get to their cars.
It Rained! It poured! Although Leroy was not accepted by many of the seminarians (students and professors alike) he was accepted and honored by God who blessed his ministry.
Leroy died a few years later. I’m sure his homecoming was greeted by “Well done, my good and faithful servant…” and as Jess Moody would say “In the heavenly applause you could hear the clapping of nail-scarred hands.”
There must be ministers and churches who can reach the hungry and homeless. I was spending some time with Carl Elder when he was the pastor of a small church near Grapevine, Texas. A truck carrying migrant workers drove up to the small pastorium and its driver asked for food and gas money. Carl gave them both. When they left I chided him for his gullibility. “I just can’t turn them away,” he said. “I grew up travelling in a truck just like that.”
Carl and his brother Lloyd grew up to become leaders among Baptists. Carl was my pastor in Alaska and later became a consultant for the Church Ministries Department of the Texas Baptist Convention. He and his wife, Winona, volunteered to teach a semester at the Hong Kong Baptist Seminary. Wynona became a counselor at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Lloyd became president of the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. He left the board a victim of the loss of diversity in the convention. Some pastor reached the Elder brothers. Some church nurtured the Elder boys. Some good Baptist people loved and ministered to the Elder brothers and encouraged them. God blessed them through these people and then God blessed many of us through the Elder brothers.
CONCLUSION:
Baptists must be allowed to be different. As long as these children of God maintain their identity as such and as Baptists there must be a
Place for a them to love, to worship, and to serve. You can help to provide for the diversity which strengthens Baptists and here are a few suggest-
Ions which will help you to do just that:
1. Study the Baptist Faith and Message and determine to lead your church to provide for the diversity in its membership and programs which
The Baptist Faith and Message teaches. It is true that many Baptists are ignorant of many of the historical doctrinal beliefs of Baptists.
2. Defend those with whom you may not fully agree.
3. Seek out the talented in your church and help them to develop the gifts they possess. If this is not done, there may not be any more Elder boys. There may never be another Leroy Marvel. There may never be another Greg Presley who was loved and encouraged by John Eden and Oral Dorriety in Cottonwood, Alabama; who was loved and encouraged by Clyde Harless and R.W. Waterman in Graceville, Florida; who was loved and encouraged by Pat Wimberly and Clarence Eiland at Bartow First Baptist Church; who was loved and encouraged by Carl Elder at Hamilton Acres Baptist Church in Fairbanks, Alaska; who was loved and encouraged and ordained by Andy Seago in Tacoma, Washington. I am the product of the diversity that has made the Southern Baptist Convention the greatest force for Evangelism the world has ever known.
I am a product of diversity!
SERMON TWO: THE LIMITING OF DIVERSITY It must be said that diversity in the teaching of religion must be limited. There is strength in diversity. There is the possibility of unity in diversity but these are relative terms. As Baptists, we have gained our doctrines from Scripture which is sometimes explicit, ie, there can be no question as to its meaning, and sometimes implicit, ie, the meaning is implied and subject to interpretation. “Thou shall not steal, kill, commit adultery, and covet” are very explicit. In matters which are implicit in the Bible, diversity must be provided for.
In addition to the explicit in the Bible, diversity must be limited in doctrines which are central to the Christian faith. For instance, the death and resurrection of Jesus is both explicit in scripture and is central to the faith. To accommodate a contrary doctrine in this matter would violate the faith. In the following minutes, certain doctrines will be discussed and there shall be some discussion of the diversity which each requires of us as Baptists, and in some, the need to limit diversity.
Vance Havener, at the pastor’s conference in 1963 where some were saying that there was room in the Convention for the rankest liberal to the most radical fundamentalist said, "well, then, your tents too big!”.
Baptists must be identifiable and recognizable but Baptists must have freedom. We must have room and we must make room. There has been ample room for most of our history but the more conservative are not making room for the moderates. It is the recollection of this preacher that the moderates for years have made room for the very conservatives.
I. THE BASIS FOR LIMITING DIVERSITY
The only basis for limiting diversity is to identify and protect against heresy. The first Universal Church Council at Nicaea produced the first creed which established the doctrine of the Trinity. It laid no claim to the creation of the doctrine. It set forth the doctrine so that all would have to believe it and teach it. Those who failed to honor the creed were denounced as heretics.
Every council since Nicaea has been called for the purpose of dealing with doctrine. Every council has limited diversity. Control of the churches has always been a matter of silencing dissent. The Roman Catholic Church has survived by limiting diversity. There are many Baptists who would control the many Baptist churches and are attempting to do so by limiting diversity. Just as Augustine of Hippo deposed Pelagius as a heretic in the fifth century, there are those Baptists who would control every Baptist by deposing everyone who does not agree with them in matters of Biblical Revelation and Inspiration. At this point in the controversy, great scholars like A. H. Strong, W. T. Conner, W. W. Adams, Georgia Harkness, Bernard Ramm, Boyd Hunt, Kenneth Chafin, and, perhaps your pastor; are being treated as heretics. The result of this will be the loss of traditional Baptist beliefs and values.
This preacher predicts that, if those who seek to limit diversity and gain control of the Baptist Institution succeed (and it looks as if they have succeeded), in order to carry the Gospel to the world, there will be raised from the turmoil a mighty force to whom the responsibility for missions will be given. It will be this People of God who shall gain unity by providing diversity. It will be this People of God who will be able to reach the people of every race and social strata with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It will be this People of God who will ultimately prevail; and they may not be called Baptist!
If the basis for limiting diversity is to deal with heresy, the question arises, “Who shall determine what is heresy and what restrictions shall be imposed?” As Baptists, we reject creeds. As autonomous bodies we reject hierarchal proclamations that certain doctrines are heretical. How, then, shall we deal with heresy? How shall we limit diversity?
II. THE MEANS OF LIMITING DIVERSITY
1. EDUCATION. We teach. We must not burn heretics either literally or figuratively. There must be a conscious effort by Baptist leaders to correct error by teaching sound doctrine and this teaching must begin with the local church.
It is the task and privilege of the pastor-teacher to lead the members of the church to accept sound doctrine. He must recognize that those who have preceded him have done this very thing and to change an accepted doctrine or tradition in order to achieve a political or personal ambition is unacceptable. If the view of the pastor is contrary to the traditional views taught and preached in your church through the years, it should be questioned by the leaders of the church.
“And He gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers.” (Eph. 4:11) The prophets were to try the spirits.
2. EXAMPLE. We lead. It is hard to embrace a belief that is contrary to a belief held by a hero. A dear lady in my first pastorate in Packwood, Washington was a graduate of Moody Bible Institute. She gave me a set of Lewis-Sperry-Schaeffer, a bible commentary. This Saint was the epitome of all I thought a Christian should be. I wanted to believe what she believed! I wanted to become the same kind of person she was. I struggled for years with problems created by my inability to accept some of the teachings in that commentary. My brother led me to accept the fact that I really didn’t believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of Scripture. I felt that I was rejecting the dear lady. I had to be led to a more acceptable Theology by someone I loved and respected. You must be ever aware that someone is looking up to you as an example; wanting to be like you, wanting to believe like you. You can, by example, lead another to a new way of thinking, a new way of living, a new set of values, a new set of doctrines.
3. ENLIGHTENMENT. We allow the Holy Spirit to influence the people we hope to change. We depend upon the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth to us.
“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” (John 14:26)
The belief that all believers are priests unto themselves capable of knowing God personally and knowing His Will through prayer and Bible study says to us that we can know the truth, we can recognize error. As priests, we have the privilege of receiving from God through the Holy Spirit, the truth but we also have the responsibility to lead others to place their gifts upon a worthy altar: a Spiritual one inscribed “For Jesus’ sake and for the Gospel’s.” The mind dedicated to Christ can be taught by the Holy Spirit. Our task is to lead others to learn from the Holy Spirit and to lay their best gifts on that Spiritual altar for Jesus’ sake.
Most church members do not read the Bible. The majority of Baptists (clergy included) do not pray for Spiritual enlightenment and guidance on a regular basis, much less on a daily basis. The people in the pew depend upon the person in the pulpit to tell them what the Bible is and what it says. The result, sometimes, is the blind leading the blind!
III. THE RESULT OF LIMITING DIVERSITY.
1. When diversity is limited through education, example and enlightenment, the result is a happier, more informed, and a more active Christian community.
2. When Diversity is limited through political and selfish action, the result is division, conflict, and failure to be the church for which Jesus died.
CONCLUSION:
We are not saved by what we believe. We are saved by Him in whom we believe. One can be wrong about a doctrine and still get to heaven for it does not depend upon his rightness but upon Jesus’ Righteousness. It depends upon Him in whom we have trusted.
“…I know whom I have believed and I am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to Him until that day.” (II Timothy 1:112)
In 410 AD and the decade following, the first heretic, Pelagius, taught that man could, and therefore, must become perfect. Augustine believed and taught that man was human and must be accepted as such for he is tainted by original sin; the sin of Adam. Baptism cured original sin but didn’t take away man’s frailties and bent to sinning. There is a lesson to be learned from the fact that the Catholic Church took from Pelagius the idea of asceticism and soon hermits were seeking perfection by withdrawing from the world. Soon these hermits would band together in monasteries and convents seeking Pelagianistic perfection. Meanwhile, the church continued to baptize babies to save them from the sin of Adam. Heretic and judge co-exist even today! We can learn from those with whom we disagree. The doctrines are to be learned and, as enlightenment comes, brought up to date.
The traditional views of Baptist Theologians who have been long revered by their peers and posterity are being called heretical by men whose ambitions motivated them to seize power over the Southern Baptist institutions. The long-accepted doctrines of Revelation and Inspiration are being challenged by men who cannot, or will not, be led by sound exegesis and Spiritual enlightenment. A system of Theology is being advocated and preached that defies logic and is so pessimistic and lacking in love that it does not deserve to be called Christian.
Here are a few suggestions for you so that when diversity is limited in your church you will know if it is to silence dissent or if it is done through education, example, and enlightenment:
1. Ask your pastor to teach a study of the great doctrines; the Doctrine of God, the Doctrine of man, the Doctrines of Inspiration and Revelation. The doctrine of the Priesthood of all believers, and insist that he present some of the different views on the doctrines held by various Baptists.
2. Through your church training department have backyard study courses on Baptist doctrine. Ask your church council to schedule at least one doctrinal study per quarter for every age group beginning with junior high.
3. Be sure that the Baptist Faith and Message is taught at least once each year in your church.
SERMON THREE: DISPENSATIONALISM
We have said that diversity can and must be limited in matters which are in conflict with traditional Baptist beliefs. We have said that we limit diversity by education, ie, we teach; by example, ie, we lead; and by enlightenment, ie, we depend upon the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth to us as we study.
Dispensationalism is a system of interpretation of the Bible and of history and, while many Southern Baptists hold this view, it is foreign to traditional Baptist beliefs and, therefore, diversity must be limited in the propagation of this system of belief.
The Greek word “oikonomia” occurs seven times in the New Testament. It is translated “dispensation” four times. It is translated “stewardship” three times. Its root meaning is that of a stewardship, a management, a disposition of goods or affairs.
“Dispensation” is used frequently in theological literature to indicate the modes of God’s administration of His Kingdom. The Old Testament is thus referred to as the old, the legal, the Jewish, or the material dispensation, and the New Testament is accordingly call the new or the Christian dispensation.
However, the word has acquired special meaning with a school of interpretation: Dispensationalism which divides sacred history into seven periods, during each of which a special administration (dispensation) prevails. According to C. I. Schofield, “…these periods are marked off in Scripture by some change in God’s method of dealing with mankind or a portion of mankind, in respect to the questions of sin and of man’s responsibility. Each of the dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man and each ends in judgement--marking utter failure.”
Bernard Ramm says in the Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists, “Dispensationalism follows a very strict literalism in Biblical literature and has never been affirmed by any outstanding Baptist Theologian.” Page 370;
Broadman Press, 1958.
The dispensational idea was detailed in a book by Andrew Larkin called “Dispensational Truths” but this system of interpretation has been presented to Baptists primarily through the use of the Schofield Reference Bible, and by radio and television evangelists like Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggart and others.
It is the contention of this preacher that the divisions among Baptists today are not just a matter of conservatives versus moderates; it is also this dispensational idea that divides us.
I was still a relatively young pastor when I noticed that almost every problem I had with a church member over a point of Biblical Interpretation was with a person who studied the notes in his or her Schofield Bible. I began to strongly suspect that Schofield, not Satan, was the greatest detractor I faced in my ministry.
I have sought throughout my ministry to avoid polemics; to say only good of others; and to argue Baptist belief only by presenting it positively and without reference to the errors of those who hold diverse or opposite beliefs. This has been a sin against my ministry! Baptist preachers and teachers have been guilty of this same sin for years. The result of this sin may be the divisions in our convention which are too complex to be labelled liberal vs. conservative; too serious to be ignored; and too established to be overcome. The division is there! A new denomination exists where the dominant systematic theology is not liberal or conservative; it is dispensational. Its systematic theology is foreign to Southern Baptists! Its systematic theology corrupts Southern Baptists! Its systematic theology should be exposed by Southern Baptists! This should be done respectfully but dynamically. There must be a dynamic effort on the part of Southern Baptists to re-establish themselves as the champions of the Gospel which save, loves, and cares for a lost and dying world.
It must be established that dispensationalism is not Baptistic and that the Schofield notes are in conflict with many traditional Baptist beliefs. We again quote Bernard Ramm: “…has never been affirmed by any outstanding Baptist theologian.”
We need to look at some of the theories set forth in the Schofield Notes; see if you agree with these interpretations of Scripture:
I. THE GAP THEORY OF CREATION..
1. Notes on Genesis 1:2. The earth was without form and void.”
“Two main interpretations have been advanced to explain the expression ‘without form and void.’ The first, which may be called the original chaos interpretation, regards these words as a description of an original formless matter in the first stage of the creation of the universe. The second, which may be called the Divine Judgment interpretation, sees in these words a description of the earth only, and that in a condition subsequent to its creation, not as it was originally.”
2. Notes on Genesis 1:3. Then God said, “Let there be light;” and there was light.
“Neither here nor in vv. 14-18 is an original creative act implied. A different word is used. The sense is ‘made to appear, made visible.’ The sun and the moon were created ‘in the beginning.’ The light came from the sun, of course, but the vapor diffused the light. Later the sun appeared in an unclouded day.”
“And ‘morning’ may be held to limit ‘day’ to the solar day; but the frequent parabolic use
of natural phenomena may warrant the conclusion that it simply means that each creative day was a period of time marked off by a beginning and an end to become a measure of time before the fourth day, as seen in vv. 14-18”
“Then God said, “let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light unto the earth; and it was so. God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.”
Dispensationalism separates the creation of heaven and earth from the rest of creation by an indefinite time--a gap in time and in the Genesis account. This theory provides for a time of development of the earth but declares that no development took place until sometime later when the sun finally got the vapors warm enough to allow the light from the sun to shine through. This allowed Him to create plant life. This theory is in conflict with both the evolutionist’s theories and the Theistic Creationist’s theories.
II. THE POSTPONED KINGDOM THEORY
1. Notes on Acts 1:11.
“…in due time the messiah, born of a virgin according to Isaiah’s prophesy (7:14) appeared among men and began His ministry by announcing the predicted Kingdom as ‘at hand’ Matt 4:17, note 4.). The rejection of the Kingdom followed. (2) Thereupon the rejected King announced His approaching crucifixion, resurrection, departure, and return…”
2. Notes on Acts 2:1: “The sixth dispensation: the church.”
“When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place.”
3. Notes on Revelation 20:4 “The seventh dispensation: the Kingdom…”
“Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God; and those who had not worshipped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand, and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.”
The idea that Jesus’ rejection by the Jews marked his failure to establish His Kingdom on earth as God had intended and, therefore, He was recalled to heaven until the time for His return was more opportune and the Kingdom could be established is foreign to most Baptists. Jesus did not fail! The Kingdom was and is established! It was not a physical political government as the Jews had anticipated; but a Spiritual Kingdom where the King reigns in the lives of His subjects. Dr. Leon McBeth often said in class at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, “Brethren, where the King reigns; there the Kingdom is established!”
III. THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
1. Notes on Acts 2:4.
“…and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.”
“(3) The New Testament distinguishes between having the Spirit, which is true of all believers, and being filled with the Spirit, which is the Christian’s privilege and duty… (Cp 2:4 with 4:29-31; Eph. 1:13-14 with 5:18)”
The Holy Spirit is a person; the third person of the Trinity. The Holy Spirit is indivisible. When this person comes to live with and in you, He is there; you cannot get more of Him. As He is given greater control of your life and you do what you do because you are motivated by Him, you become a “Spiritual person”.
I like the illustration of the man who builds a house for himself. As soon as one room is finished, he moves into that room and begins to prepare a second room. When that room is ready, he moves into it so that now he occupies two rooms. Soon the whole house is completed and he now lives in the whole house--he has occupied the whole house. He now fills the whole house. So it is with the Holy Spirit and your life; when you are saved, the Holy Spirit comes to live in you. As you give Him room, He occupies more and more of you until it can be said of you “Here is a person who is filled with the Holy Spirit!”
IV. THE PESSIMISM OF DISPENSATIONALISM
1. In his notes, Schofield writes: “The purpose of each dispensation, then, is to place man under a specific rule of conduct, but such stewardship is not a condition of salvation. In every past dispensation unregenerate man has failed, and he has failed in this present dispensation and will fail in the future.”
2. Dispensationalism ignores the position of man in God’s creation.
“When I consider, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have ordained; What is man that You take thought of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet You have made him a little lower than God, and You crown him with glory and majesty! (Ps. 8:3-5).
(1) Notes on Psalm 8:3-5: The psalmist looks at himself in comparison to the rest of creation and says, “When I look at Thy heavens, the moon and the stars which Thou hast established; what is man that Thou dost care for him? Yet Thou has made him a little less than God, and dost crown him with glory and honor.”
(2) The dispensationalist reads these words and finds only a prediction of the Messiah: “In Ps. 8, while His Deity is fully recognized, He is seen as Son of Man (vv.4-6) who ‘made [for] a little [while] lower than the angels,’ is to have dominion over the redeemed creation (Heb. 2:6-11). Thus the Psalm speaks primarily of what God bestowed upon the human race as represented in Adam (Gen. 1:26-28).”(Notes on Ps.8:4-6.)
Schofield is like the lad who described his father: “My dad an do anything; he can drive a car, he can fly an airplane, he can work math that is hard, he can make speeches, he builds things, he is really great! But, mostly, he just takes out the trash!”
Man is really great! God made Man great! Man, though he is born into a fallen society and always makes the wrong choice between good and evil until he chooses Christ as Lord of his life, is that part of creation upon which God looked and said that it was very good!
Man has worth! It is man upon whom the love of God is lavished in Jesus Christ! God so loved the world that He gave His Son to die that man and all creation could be redeemed.
The people of God see the human race as good and highly valued by God and expend all of their individual and collective strength and energy to bring redemption to all mankind “…to every creature!” If we should begin to think of man as worthless, we shall question the wisdom of evangelism. We shall become ingrown into our churches where we shall meet and sing and pray and shout while the world which God created and saw that it was very good goes to hell right past our doors.
CONCLUSION:
Dispensationalism is a present factor in Baptist life today. This interpretation of biblical history is prevalent among many of our more conservative pastors and their churches are being led to accept it as proper. This has come to be so for one or more of the following reasons:
1. Widespread use by ministers and teachers in Baptist Churches of the Schofield reference bible. This has been fostered in part by the ministers’ criticism of the convention literature and in part by the ministers’ ignorance of what Schofield teaches.
My brother, a graduate of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, tells me that he had never heard the word dispensationalist until he heard me use it. Very few Baptists have made the effort to either study dispensationalism or to refute it.
2. The awarding of Non-language degrees by our Southern Baptist Seminaries. The reason Dr. Ramm could say in the Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists that dispensationalism “…has never been affirmed by any prominent Baptist Theologian” was that no prominent Baptist Theologian was unable to read Greek and Hebrew!” The failure of the clergy to diligently exegete (dig out the meaning of) Scripture is a more acute problem than the failure of the lay people to read their Bibles.
3. The failure of our people to read the Bible. The person in the pew is dependant upon the person in the pulpit for knowledge of the Bible; what it is and what it says. It is the privilege and responsibility of every Christian to read the Bible prayerfully so that the enlightenment that comes from the Holy Spirit will equip them to withstand the Winds of Doctrine which blow so freely in our churches.
4. The Failure of Our People to insist upon a Regenerate Church.
a. The trend toward the baptism of children in our churches is manifest in the concrete blocks placed in the baptisteries so the children won’t drown and the situation where an elementary department Sunday School teacher can lead the children to come into a church business meeting and determine policy from the firing of the pastor to the size of the budget.
b. There is reluctance in the churches to institute a procedure for the receiving of members which will help to assure the salvation of each member.
I was able to lead one church where I was pastor to adopt such a plan. The requirement for membership was that the candidate would be visited by each member of the church council who would explain the function and requirements of his or her particular organization; the Sunday School, church Training, music director, the WMU or Brotherhood. The treasurer and the deacon chairman were also required to visit the candidate. The burden was not upon the new member for orientation, it was upon the church leadership. In each case, the candidate was told, “you can be a member of this church and not attend Sunday School, but, you will be much happier if you do. We will urge you to attend and if you feel that you would not like this kind of church, feel free to back out now.”
The deacon chairman would explain the function of the deacons; the treasurer would explain the church’s finances and would talk about tithing. “You can be a member here and not tithe but you must understand that we teach tithing as biblical and the pastor will preach on the subject from time to time. If you don’t think you’ll be happy in a church that believes in tithing, feel free to back out now.” (This preacher has an essay on the council approach to church organization which can be had by writing to him).
c. The reluctance of the churches to exercise redemptive discipline.
The Bible clearly teaches church discipline as a means of redeeming wayward Christians. When done in love and with a goal of restored fellow-ship, discipline can be wonderful thing. If a teacher is teaching dispensationalism in your church, you can go in love and redeem that teacher.
d. The failure of the churches to provide for and limit diversity in the doctrines of the church as its mission. There must be freedom of expression of ideas on the part of the members but this must be tempered by sound doctrine on the part of the leadership.
5. Finally, here are some suggestions for you to do in your church:
a. Teach dispensational theology as a doctrine to be guarded against. When I was learning to fly I was taught to tail-spin the aircraft; not so that I could be a stunt pilot but so that I could deal with a tail-spin if I ever got into one.
b. Encourage your messengers to the conventions to bring about an end to non-language degrees in our seminaries.
c. Emphasize and practice Bible study in the church and in your homes.
d. Insist that your pastor present and teach a plan for receiving church members which will help to produce a regenerate church. A good reference would be: Findley B. Edge, “A Quest for Vitality in Religion”, Broadman Press; Nashville, Tennessee (1963).
SERMON FOUR: REVELATION AND INSPIRATION
TEXT: 2 Tim. 3:16) “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.”
INTRODUCTION:
No problem divides us like the problem of how we got our Bible. We are called the people of the book; what does that mean? We all claim to be people of the The Book. We all claim to hold the Bible up as the Word of God and the guide for our lives. Yet, we are more divided in what we believe about the Bible than any other tenet of our Baptist Faith.
We agree that God wants us to know Him and about Him. We also agree that God is fully revealed in Jesus. We disagree about how God got the Bible written! We strain at a gnat and swallow a camel! The problem is with us. We do not dwell on the things upon which we agree; we get all involved with theories about inspiration and become divided by these theories.
Walt Kelly’s Pogo the possum once declared, “We has met the enemy and he is us!” We have divided ourselves about the various theories of Inspiration. We have let these divisions turn us against each other. We have declared each other unfit to serve Jesus because we don’t agree on the theories. But all the while, we call them theories! Isn’t that strange?
I. SOME OF US BELIEVE THAT GOD DICTATED THE BIBLE AND MEN WROTE DOWN WHAT HE DICTATED.
Those of us who believe this way would argue that a divine book requires a divine author and man is but an instrument in producing a divine book, but he really has no part in it except as secretary. If man took part, there would be the possibility of human error. For the Bible to be a divine book, it must be free of all error. There are those of us who believe that for the Bible to have any error in it would render it unreliable, and, therefore, useless. An inerrant Bible is necessary for the faith of many of us. Those of us who hold this belief are called Inerrantists.
II. SOME OF US BELIEVE THAT GOD INSPIRED MEN TO WRITE THE BIBLE AND AS THEY WROTE THEIR VERY WORDS WERE CONTROLLED BY GOD.
Those of us who believe that the very words of the Bible are so inspired give equal weight and authority to each word. To answer the problems this belief presents in matters of translations, the claim for inspiration of every word is limited to the original writings. We call the original writings Autographs. (It must be noted here that no one alive today has ever seen any of the original writings. They do not exist.)
This belief is called the Plenary Verbal theory of inspiration. It allows for the writers to write at their level of sophistication and in the context of their time and situation but the intensity of God’s influence is such that the very words and every word is as if God spoke it. This belief fulfills the need in some of us to have a Bible that is perfect, containing no error at all unless it is something that crept in during the translation into another language. Those of us who hold this belief are also called Inerrantists or Biblicists.
III. SOME OF US BELIEVE THAT THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY MEN TO WHOM GOD HAD REVEALED HIMSELF OR TRUTHS ABOUT HIMSELF.
Those of us who hold this belief recognize that, in most cases, the writer had no idea that he was writing the Word of God; he was just giving an account of what had happened to him and others or what he had seen.
Those of us who believe this way see that the dynamic of the writer is used to convey God’s message and that the writer called it as he saw it.
The sun came up! The sun moved across the sky! The Bible was written in the popular language of the day and if the writer believed that the earth was flat, his writings reflect that.
Those of us who hold this belief recognize varied literary styles and the different types of literature which make up the Bible. Job can be treated as a drama that may have been performed in the theatres of his day. The Psalms can be appreciated as music and poetry created with the same license that musicians and poets exercise today. This is called the Dynamical Theory of Inspiration. Those of us who hold this belief are called Moderates.
IV. SOME OF US BELIEVE THAT THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION SHOULD ACCEPT ONE OF THE ABOVE THEORIES OF INSPIRATION AND REJECT THOSE WHO HOLD OTHER THEORIES.
There have always been different opinions and theories of Inspiration but for many years we have worked and served together; each one of us allowing the other to believe what he felt was right about Revelation and Inspiration. This has changed!
John E. Kennedy was a classmate at seminary. John had come from a Christian Science background which he left when his wife died of cancer. He became a Seventh - day Adventist. Later, he found Jesus and became a Baptist. He surrendered to the ministry. He had some strange ideas when we first began our studies. On the day we graduated, he and a friend and I had lunch together and reflected upon our experiences at school. “Well, I haven’t changed my opinions!” John said. “No, but now you are willing for me to have an opinion!” I told him. We could not have served together when we first met. Later he stayed in my home in Florida while he sought a pastorate. He helped me in my church in many ways. I recommended him to a church in my association and he enjoyed a successful pastorate there. We had learned the importance of providing for diversity.
CONCLUSION:
The Baptist Faith and Message of 1963-64 says of the Bible:
“The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is the record of God’s revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of Divine instruction. It has God for it author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. It reveals the principles by which God judges us; and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinion should be tried. The criterion by which the Bible is to be interpreted is Jesus Christ.”
This statement was written by a committee consisting of the presidents of the state conventions in 1962-63 and was presented to the convention in Kansas City in 1963. It reflects the traditional broad view of Southern Baptists regarding the Bible; it may not state everyone’s detailed opinion but it provides for each of us to have an opinion. A Baptist holding to the Dictation Theory, the Plenary Verbal Theory, or the Dynamical Theory can meet, love, and work together under the provisions of this statement.
When Baptists who hold a particular theory about Biblical Inspiration and Interpretation seek to exclude from positions of responsibility and places of service those who hold dissimilar views, we lose diversity and we lose unity.
What can be done? Perhaps nothing will reverse the trend. Whether it can be reversed or not- there is a need for individual Baptists to speak up for traditional beliefs. The exclusion of moderates from our boards and agencies is costing us many able leaders in our convention. This results in the loss of academic freedom in our schools and will eventually result in our leaders being clones of those who have destroyed the diversity and the unity which has made the Southern Baptist Convention the most effective missionary force the world has ever known. The movement to exclude those with whom they disagree is a movement of the clergy and the laity is ignorant of the movement and/or its effect. You, the church member, must become involved so that the divisions can be overcome. Here are some suggestions for you to consider:
1. Ask that your church council provide at least one study course each year on Baptist Doctrine for each age group at the training hour.
2. Ask for “backyard study groups” to study Baptist beliefs.
3. Ask your pastor to preach on the Baptist Beliefs dealing with the various views held by Baptists on the great doctrines.
4. Be willing to discuss differences without alienating others. There may not be agreement or consensus but there must be provision for diversity.
5. Study the Bible. We are promised that the Holy Spirit will enlighten us as we prayerfully study His Word.
6. Become familiar with the Doctrine of the Priesthood of all Believers. You will find that you are competent to find God’s will for your life and your church through prayer and Bible study. This privilege is accompanied with the responsibility to find God’s Will. Also, as a priest, it is your responsibility to teach these truths to others.
7. Use the Bible to lead others to accept salvation in Jesus Christ. Nothing diminishes differences like uniting in the work of evangelism.
CONCLUSION TO THE SERIES:
I am a recipient of the blessings that the Southern Baptist Convention bestows. I was raised in a home where we were Southern Baptists. I was raised in several Southern Baptist churches. I was licensed to the ministry by a Southern Baptist Church. I was ordained to the Gospel Ministry by a Southern Baptist church. I was educated for the ministry in a Southern Baptist Seminary. I want to stay a Southern Baptist! I want to know that I will be welcome in any Southern Baptist church even if I disagree with some of its members or the pastor.
So I say to those who would divide us “Let no man trouble me further for I bear in my body the marks of the Gospel” and many of the marks on my psyche are from the divisions which are destroying the Southern Baptist Convention. Please Join me in trying to understand and heal these divisions so that we will be united once more in the work of the Church.
Rev. Greg Presley,
A Voice For Today MinistriesOrdained Baptist Minister (Retired)
1610 Reynolds Road Lot 120
Lakeland, Florida 33801
(863)666-5521
