Voddie Baucham

[Soloist]

Anabaptists at their time caused much more divisions and offended more people than Mormons.
In fact Mormons did not intend to divide or to offend. They tried to flee from the world and built up "a world of their own", just like the Amish or the Hutterites.

I think you need to read more on how the Mormons conducted their military practices in taking over area or how they dealt with neighbors with several unmarried daughters.

[Signtist]

In truth ....

VB is a evangelical Calvinistic false teacher and that video proves much more ....

He is willing to go and be nice with Glen Beck who is a Mormon false man and that faith is a complete heretical demonic occult twisting of Christ and the gospel.

Yet VB is also a sell out doing a fun friendly interview not obeying Romans 16:17-18 KJVS
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. [18] For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

False teachers abound today and VB is one of them!

Beware and do no be decieved !

Is there anyone out there who has absolutely no chance of spreading one false thing? In other words, is there one person that is in possession of 100% truth and never gets anything wrong?

[Soloist]

In truth ....

VB is a evangelical Calvinistic false teacher and that video proves much more ....

He is willing to go and be nice with Glen Beck who is a Mormon false man and that faith is a complete heretical demonic occult twisting of Christ and the gospel.

Yet VB is also a sell out doing a fun friendly interview not obeying Romans 16:17-18 KJVS
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. [18] For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

False teachers abound today and VB is one of them!

Beware and do no be decieved !

Is there anyone out there who has absolutely no chance of spreading one false thing? In other words, is there one person that is in possession of 100% truth and never gets anything wrong?

I may not know what I’m wrong on but I accept I likely am wrong on something. He however, doesn’t seem to see any chance of fault in himself or heed warning of his sin and like the Pharisees, he rejects the truth.

[dontperish]

What a Good and Truthful Spirit He gives His own ....so we can walk in all truth.

John 16:13 KJVS
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

God be praised

[Signtist]

Figures. Some people can't answer questions very well.

[Heirbyadoption]

Anabaptists at their time caused much more divisions and offended more people than Mormons.
In fact Mormons did not intend to divide or to offend. They tried to flee from the world and built up "a world of their own", just like the Amish or the Hutterites.

I think you need to read more on how the Mormons conducted their military practices in taking over area or how they dealt with neighbors with several unmarried daughters.

This having been an area of research for me for several years, I encourage you to dig a bit deeper before making statements with that level of historical revision, Petr... It's simply not true, historically speaking.

[Heirbyadoption]

Figures. Some people can't answer questions very well.

Wait... you thought that was an answer?

[Signtist]

You can use the Bible to justify most things, and you can worship the Bible instead of entering into relationship with He who gave us the Word (which isn't the Bible, by the way.) But to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with God is a bit more difficult.

[ohio jones]

You brought up historical Anabaptism as a way of discrediting Voddie's views of racial issues. I'm simply trying to understand why you don't apply this Anabaptism test to all people on racial issues. It simply is not consistent, IMO, and raises a lot of questions in my mind about how your professed views on Anabaptism and Kingdom values hold up under scrutiny. If you are going to apply these types of tests to only one side and not the other, I think that is a problem.

Can you point me to where Voddie says his reformed views undergird his position on racial reconciliation? If you are going to point to where he said racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ, I've already said that I think you are mistaken to attribute that quote to reformed theology, because I reject reformed theology and believe the same thing. Tell me why I'm mistaken in my view that racial reconciliation is already accomplished in Christ's atoning work. In the type of Kingdom you describe in the other thread about what the gospel is, do you see racial animosity in that description? I don't.

Gary, I have tried (evidently unsuccessfully heretofore) to draw the connection for you. But I'll try again =). If one views salvation as primarily involving personal absolution and the "finished work" (which by the way is not a biblical term) of Jesus by grace alone through faith...through the lever of penal substitutionary atonement, for an ultimate futuristic, eschatalogical salvation, then the views of Voddie logically follow. Racial reconciliation already happens by itself when people accept this salvation and personal absolution. There are no societal/cultural or moral next steps/obligations. It is a "free gift" that entails "no works" lest anyone should boast. James is a book of straw. The teachings, life and witness of Jesus are marginalized and literally ignored for the most part. The gospel becomes an ethicless judical deal that doesn't involve real, literal salvation on earth as also in heaven. This theology permits slavery, permits burning witches, permits warring against American Indians, etc etc . I don't find this view of salvation compelling as it doesn't fit with the message and person of Jesus Christ. (Since you have already stated your issue with Calvinism we can leave that for another thread.

I have already outlined in the other thread what I think is a more Christocentric (and in harmony with Jesus teachings) view of salvation and the good news. The real ethics and outworking of that perspective leads to entirely different outcome on race relations, church reconciliation, practical living like Jesus, etc. (Yes I know Anabaptists are repeatedly accused of being a works religion as a result - but that charge I don't think is defensible - but I won't take time to take that down here aside from mentioning the life boat analogy).

However, a simple thought experiment I think shows that in fact the real work of restitution and reconciliation is needed even for those "in Christ." For instance in our Anabaptist tradition, as you and I know, there have been many acrimonious splits between Christians. The work of Christ followers, in this instance, isn't to mystically claim that we are already reconciled "in Christ" and so no work needs to be done to reconcile painful church splits (or any other business or missions split or in marraiges). No...the real work of Kingdom building exists in bringing these parties back together, engaging in the real work of restitution and reconciliation. In our culture and society there is work that needs to be done to bring about racial reconciliation. And that work is part of building the Kingdom of God on earth as in heaven.

It isn't about willy nilly discrediting Voddie because of some unrelated theology. But I have explained that before I think. But even that aside, I am happy to affirm Voddie on the points of his teachings that seem to me to be aligned to the good news of Jesus Christ (his life and witness). For instance, his advocacy for man/woman marriage for life. There is no "gotcha" here, Gary. I don't mind affirming people who espouse things that to me feel like truthful points worth considering. It doesn't matter if it is Voddie or anybody else.

Lurking in the pages of the March/April Anabaptist Council for Truth newsletter is a footnote referencing this post and quoting the underlined part, summarizing the remaining paragraph(s) as "then the logical result is that one will be unconcerned about living the gospel out in tangible, practical ways."

For those not having access to the print edition, it's an abridged version of an audio podcast found here. The paragraph containing the quoted portion starts around 6:48.

It seems to me the quote is taken quite out of context, cherry-picked for the assertions made against it in the remainder of the article/podcast. If one is intent on portraying JBG as a liberal, there's more compelling material on this site.

Mr. Stoltzfus, if you are reading this, you are welcome to defend your use of this post and explain how it is not being used as a strawman. We can start a new thread if you like, although it might be helpful to know your views on Voddie Baucham as well.

And since you've referenced how we look vs. how we think, it might also be relevant to address the claim that BMA is becoming "Southern Baptists in denim skirts" (p. 2).

[joshuabgood]

The operative word in that quote is "primarily..."
Fwiw - I requested a personal convo with Julian regarding his podcast at EBI the other week. The convo generally went well from my perspective...there are some real differences with regard to emphases.

In short, I stand by the quoteand the overall point about salvation. And I have concerns that BMA, EBI, and S and T are significantly influenced by Reformed Theology and I think said theology and it's historical and modern day fruits ought to be reckoned with. Making Wayne Grudems Systematic theology an anchor text for learning, it then doesn't surprise me folks come out with a Calvinistic bend.

In short they feel I have a liberal theology that may well end in ACC mennonitism and works religion.

I don't mind that Julian disagreed publicly. I wouldn't idealize a pejorative word like liberal that also carried social and political baggage. Or juxtapose it as being against Biblical truth as I embrace a high view of the scriptures.

I don't feel so bothered by it that I couldn't feel good about my son going to EBI or LBC etc...