Sunday, January 14, 2007

Al Mohler The Presbyterian for SBC President?

Jerry Grace has looked at the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and concluded that "Baptists don't make good presidents."

For president of the Southern Baptist Convention, Jerry has endorsed Al Mohler, saying, "let's try a Presbyterian to see if he can pull us out of the hole we are in."

Charles

8 Comments:

At Monday, January 15, 2007 9:44:00 AM, Blogger Scott said...

I believe Dr. Mohler would make a great SBC president. Let me share why:

1. He understands what a true Baptist historically believes.

A. Lord's Supper( Who should be invited to the table).

B. He understands how Church Discipline plays a major role in the Lord's Supper.

C. He sees how a lack of Church Discipline has hurt our SBC churches.

D. He understands the totality of the gospel( What must be presented to say that the gospel has been preached).

E. He has a high view of the Scriptures and understands that Scripture is supposed to define how the church is to be organized and what the officers in it should do.

F. He understands that Baptist are Confessional. Each church should know what it believes and should protect itself by using it's Confession to select Deacons and God called men to the ministry.

G.He believes strongly that Baptists have been historically committed to using Catechisms in the training of it's children in Baptist doctrine and should still do so.

H. He believes strongly in Baptist in preaching the gospel to the ends of the earth.

I. He understands that Baptists are Orthodox and Trinitarian.

J. He understands the importance of a theoloically Integrated Ecclesiology( This involves believers' baptism by immersion, regenerate church membership, liberty of conscience, and seperation of church and state.

2. He leads one of our most precious SBC ministries: The seminary which is second to the local church.

3. He is theological. In my opinion he is the strongest theologian as president we have had in sometime. Dr. Meritt and Akin would be second. However, I'm greatly disturbed how Dr. Patterson who is an educated man can get up and say that the Sandy Creek Association was not Calvinistic in it's theology. Just read their confession and one can prove his statement to be in error. This is why I would put Patterson third.

4. Mohler will raise the level of theological awareness among Southern Baptist. Any honest Southern Baptist must admit we are not a strong theological denomination anymore and our historical understanding is low as well. This is changing under Mohler and Akin.

 
At Monday, January 15, 2007 12:26:00 PM, Blogger Scott said...

Charles,

Do you agree with Jerry Grace that the SBC is in a hole according to your blogpost? Could you expound on what areas within the SBC that has holes ? Also, I appreciate your info on Mohler while he was in the hospital. I was glad to see your concern for our brother. Please know that I would have been praying for you as well if you were in that situation.
Also, do you think that any SBC president can pull the SBC out of the holes that it is in ? I would appreciate your thoughts on the role of the SBC president.

 
At Monday, January 15, 2007 2:20:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your so funny! You are a so two faced. Pray for the man then be a smart mouth with your catty comments.

Shame on you!

 
At Tuesday, January 16, 2007 12:06:00 AM, Anonymous Bob L. Ross said...

SCOTT ON DR. MOHLER
Scott said...


J. He [Dr. Mohler] understands the importance of a theoloically Integrated Ecclesiology (This involves believers' baptism by immersion, regenerate church membership, liberty of conscience, and seperation of church and state.

I thought so, too, at the time Dr. Mohler became President of the Louisville Seminary, and I was glad to see him selected for that position.

But that was before he started playing "footsies" with the "baby regenerationists" Hybrid Calvinists (Presbyterians). Presbyterians are among the worst at (1) "baptizing" unbelievers (infants), (2) not practicing immersion, and (3) adding the unregenerate (infants) to the church membership. Talk about Southern Baptists being an "unregenerate denomination"! What are the stats on the pedo churches as to the number they have on their church rolls in relation to those who attend regularly?

Also, historically, they have not been characterized by the Baptist view of freedom of conscience and separation of church and state. Calvin taught them to have a church-and-state setup.

Dr. Mohler's compromise in speaking for the pedos and having pedos speak at the Seminary can only tend to weaken the resolve of Baptist seminarians on these important doctrines and practices.

On his blog, Dr. Mohler says:
"The Lord taught me so much during the crisis -- and He is teaching me much during days of forced rest and recovery. I will be writing about these things in days to come."

I hope that among those things the Lord taught him was the error of his "unionizing" with the "baby regenerationists" Hybrid Calvinists.

 
At Sunday, January 21, 2007 8:54:00 PM, Anonymous Bob L. Ross said...

SBC HOLES?

Scott said...


do you agree with Jerry Grace that the SBC is in a hole according to your blogpost? Could you expound on what areas within the SBC that has holes?

Dear Scott:

Charles has been posting materials expounding on several of the "holes" for the past several months. The Flyswatter archives have that on file. Why not consult them?

One of the biggest holes is the one being dug by the likes of the "Flounders" -- the Hybrid Calvinist hole of "born again before faith." You have been using your own pick and shovel to help on that. And Al Mohler has helped this digging, too, by hiring seminary teachers who advocate this heresy.

Associated with this is the Mark Dever hole about the conversion and baptism of children.

Then there's the anti-invitation hole, dug by the likes of Tom Nettles of Southern Seminary.

Also, both Nettles and Mohler have been digging a hole in which to associate Baptists with the "baby regenerationist" Presbyterians like Frame, Sproul, Ligonier, etc.

In addition, the revision of Baptist history hole dug by you, Gene Bridges, Tom Nettles, etc. -- trying to make Hybrid Calvinists out of our Baptist ancestors.

These are some of the holes on which Charles and the Flyswatter have expounded.

You ask, Also, do you think that any SBC president can pull the SBC out of the holes that it is in?

If the President would speak out about the holes we have mentioned, it would perhaps be of some help, no doubt.

 
At Monday, January 22, 2007 4:12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You Bob need to become more concerned with your soul and you also should not determine what the Lord needs to teach others when you have much he needs to do to you.

 
At Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:48:00 PM, Anonymous Bob L. Ross said...

FRUSTRATION?
Anonymous said...


You Bob need to become more concerned with your soul and you also should not determine what the Lord needs to teach others when you have much he needs to do to you.

I have found this approach by Anonymous to be the "normal" or "usual" way of venting frustration when one is handicappted for substance in regard to an issue: deprecate the messenger.

We have been addressing certain issues over the past few months from a contrary perspective to that of the current crop of Hybrid Calvinists, and so far the antagonists who have commented on the Flyswatter have not been been able to offset our materials. Frustrated, and not able to counter the message, some have evidently perceived that they have no alternative but to use the old "tried and unproven" method of deprecating the messenger.

As a veteran of a number of public debates, I personally have always considered this deprecating approach to be complimentary of my materials. For instance, when I was debating a Campbellite in Georgia on Eternal Security, the materials were evidently too difficult for my opponent, and his frustration was vented in the words, "Mr. Ross, you are worse than the Devil!"

 
At Wednesday, February 14, 2007 9:57:00 AM, Blogger J. Gray said...

You guys are hilarious.

Well, it would be funny if it were not sad. I can't believe I actually read 2 or 3 of these posts.

It seems you guys are so fueled by personal animosity that you rant about ridiculous things and make absurd claims.

I would respond to yuor claims, but they are so absurd they need no response.

My comments that follow are not done because I have nothing to say on the subject, but because I feel that your motivation for why you say the things you do about the people you do to be brought to light.

You attack people PERSONALLY, and not just what they say or do. So it is a very fair response for people to question you personally, on top of what you say and do.

Charles,
You don't even have the integrity to be upfront with your identity. You prefer sneak attacks hiding behind an assumed name on the blogosphere. Did someone at Southern Seminary beat you up as a kid or something?
Geez.
I'd love to see you come out from behind your hiding place and let all of us examine your ministry and background. You seem to have an easy time doing it to others, but I doubt you'd be able to stand up to scrutiny.

I really doubt you'll have the guts to do that. You've been sliding your way across the blogs for too long to start having integrity now.

Bob,
I assume you also have some sort of hard feelings toward many History scholars.
Do you feel they have jobs you "deserve"? Are you jealous of their reputation, when you look at yours as being "that bitter old man who posts online and prints books"? (If they even know who you are.)
You tear down men like Tom Nettles as being disreputable...but don't you find that the least bit ironic?
Nettles is one of the most respected Baptist historians around....and you are "that bitter old man online" or "who?".

I think that jealousy is what breeds your contempt for all the things you post on. But I could be wrong, I suppose.

BTW, where do you pastor? Do you pastor? What are the fruits of your ministry? (Remember it's only about numbers and 'sinners prayers'prayed!).


I would take you guys and your articles more seriously if you had the decency to (a) come out from behind the anonymity or (b) be upfront with what you guys are actually doing to build the Kingdom.

- Gray

 

Post a Comment

<< Home