Sorry, I just don't get it
"UNREGENERATE DENOMINATION" ADOPTS"REGENERATE" RESOLUTION AT 2008 SBC
Can anyone figure this out? It has me baffled.
The Flounders, headed by Tom Ascol, has an article on their website alleging that the Southern Baptist Convention is "an unregenerate denomination."
Yet, on the floor of the 2008 meeting of messengers of this "unregenerate denomination," Tom Ascol's amendment to a Resolution on "regenerate" church membership was approved, and it calls for the "unregenerate denomination" to "repent of "any failure among us" in regard to an SBC church's reporting statistics of membership and attendance.
I just don't get it.
How can an "unregenerate denomination" do any such thing as that? If the SBC churches scale down their reports to only include the number of members which actually are regular attendants, will that make it a "regenerate denomination"?
And if the SBC is an "unregenerate denomination," does that include Tom Ascol's own church and other Flounders' churches? On the other hand, if Ascol and his church and other Flounders' churches are "regenerate," why in the world are they affiliated with an "unregenerate denomination"? And why is Ascol concerned about what numerical reports are made by an "unregenerate denomination"? What is accomplished by a Resolution by an "unregenerate denomination"?
Something here just does not "square up." I just don't get it.
posted by Bob L. Ross @ 3:11 PM
3 Comments:
you're intentionally not getting it, sir.
As usual you refuse to exert the smallest of effort to ethically represent the positions of people you disagree with, and to try to see things the other side.
any reasonable observer "gets" what is being attempted here with this resolution.
this resolution was not a "hybrid" "paedobaptist" resolution, it was a resolution that people from 1 pointers to 5 pointers knew that its time has come.
we've been sloppy and negligent in how we receive members, caring for members, and exhort members in chronic rebellion or have forsaken the faith and fellowship with the body.
this resolution will give cover and encouragment for some, it will be a wake up call for others,
this resolution will be an instrument to help pastors who are convicted about these issues to lead their congregations in a conversation about some important issues.
And you thought Mohler was mental.
Leave it to a Calvinist to use mental acrobatics to arrive at the conclusions they have.
I think Ascol's end result is that he is going to alienate more people than bring back into the church.
Thank God we're not living in 1640 Puritan England: Ascol would have our ears cropped!
Sauve qui peu!!!
CAN'T HAVE IT
BOTH WAYS
Anonymous said...
any reasonable observer "gets" what is being attempted here with this resolution.
So, how can 7000+ messengers of an "unregenerate denomination" really pass a resolution about a "regenerate church membership" when the entire denomination of millions of members is "unregenerate"?
Isn't Tom Ascol simply trying to have it both ways -- denigrating the SBC as "unregenerate," yet wanting the SBC to pass a resolution about
"regenerate church membership" which merely calls for trimming off the non-attendants and does not call for repentance unto salvation by the "unregenerate"?
That's about like calling the Roman Catholic Church "unregenerate" and asking the RCC for a Resolution to merely trim down its church roll of the non-attendants.
If the SBC is really "unregenerate," Ascol should be calling it to repentance unto salvation, not merely trimming off the "dead wood" members.
Post a Comment
<< Home