What are your thoughts re Hegelian dialectic?

[MaxPC]

The conservative Anabaptists chose to either:

- Remove liberal leaning people from their assemblies once they start to actually push for changes. This is how, for example, Amish groups formed.

- The conservatives all exit the assembly and form a new church. This is what happened in the 1950s.

- The conservatives accept the liberals. The church becomes a liberal church. This is what almost all Amish and Mennonite churches allowed to happen.

Considering the liberals “won” most congregations, it would seem they should go off and be happy in their shrinking and greying congregations. It’s almost a joke how many MC USA, UMC, PC(USA) congregations shrink and eventually close their doors.

Yes, UMC, MCUSA, PCUSA, Episcopalian churches are impoverishing themselves spiritually as well.

I see that the conservatives have left the Episcopalian denomination and either rejoined conservative Anglicans or have joined the Catholic Church in its Anglican Ordinariate. Likewise those who believe in Biblical fidelity in the Church of the Brethren have left and formed the Biblically focused Covenant Brethren Church.

Those who leave feel that they have exhausted all means of reforming their congregation and are tired of being labeled and obstructed. A friend of mine shared that one of the liberals threatened to use a 2x4 on a reputable, long-standing member who held to Biblical fidelity. My guess is that Hd was not working against the conservative and so he was resorting to threats of physical violence against the Biblically faithful member.

[Ken]

Liberals are attempting to capture the SBC just like they have captured thousands of other American institutions. The proper thing to do when liberals show up is:

- Kick them out
- If you can’t, leave with as many people and resources as possible

The alternative is to end up kind the “Boy Scouts”, who are now a homosexuality-promotion organisation.

Liberals aren't trying to capture the SBC. Most liberals (like Jimmy Carter) left the SBC long ago. The SBC has been drifting rightward over the past two decades.

What is really happening is that a minority of ultra-conservatives are trying to invent a string of litmus tests that they can use to drive out the more mainstream conservatives and consolidate power for themselves. Now that they failed to elect their candidate of choice in the election last week they, themselves are threatening to leave.

[MaxPC]

Epilogue:
An interesting change connected to the new SBC president "A check reveals a change-which deserves an answer".

An Op-Ed on SBCs election and future

[temporal1]

Epilogue:
An interesting change connected to the new SBC president "A check reveals a change-which deserves an answer".

An Op-Ed on SBCs election and future

i have not fully read both links.
i have not fully read this thread.

i noted this warning comment in the first link:

.. Evangeline1031
4 days ago
”Here's a Roman Catholic with a friendly caution for our SB brothers and sisters.
Beware of incrementalism and incrementalists”.

i pray for inspiration, for leaders to be inspired by God. whether in church leadership, or any other, including POTUS.
God uses all for His purposes. He uses some of the worst. He always has.

What field does He choose from?? He has humans, angels, saints. He uses all. Much to human consternation.

- - -

hmm. creeping incrementalism. i wonder about creepy incrementalists?

[Josh]

Liberals are attempting to capture the SBC just like they have captured thousands of other American institutions. The proper thing to do when liberals show up is:

- Kick them out
- If you can’t, leave with as many people and resources as possible

The alternative is to end up kind the “Boy Scouts”, who are now a homosexuality-promotion organisation.

Liberals aren't trying to capture the SBC. Most liberals (like Jimmy Carter) left the SBC long ago. The SBC has been drifting rightward over the past two decades.

What is really happening is that a minority of ultra-conservatives are trying to invent a string of litmus tests that they can use to drive out the more mainstream conservatives and consolidate power for themselves. Now that they failed to elect their candidate of choice in the election last week they, themselves are threatening to leave.

Trying to bring in CRT is liberal, which is what this controversy is about.

[Bootstrap]

Trying to bring in CRT is liberal, which is what this controversy is about.

Do you have any quotes from Russell Moore, J.D. Greear, or Beth Moore that call for Critical Race Theory?

This is what I said on page 1. We are on page 12 now. I don't think anyone has given a serious response to it. When you said Beth Moore has embraced the LGBTQ agenda, I asked for evidence of that, I don't think you responded to that.

Is this about Hegel or about the Southern Baptist Church?

The article in the OP seems to be critical of this resolution. I'm not sure why.

On Critical Race Theory And Intersectionality

RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Birmingham, Alabama, June 11–12, 2019, affirm Scripture as the first, last, and sufficient authority with regard to how the Church seeks to redress social ills, and we reject any conduct, creeds, and religious opinions which contradict Scripture; and be it further

RESOLVED, That critical race theory and intersectionality should only be employed as analytical tools subordinate to Scripture—not as transcendent ideological frameworks; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the gospel of Jesus Christ alone grants the power to change people and society because “he who started a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 1:6); and be it further

RESOLVED, That Southern Baptists will carefully analyze how the information gleaned from these tools are employed to address social dynamics; and be it further

RESOLVED, That Southern Baptist churches and institutions repudiate the misuse of insights gained from critical race theory, intersectionality, and any unbiblical ideologies that can emerge from their use when absolutized as a worldview; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we deny any philosophy or theology that fundamentally defines individuals using categories identified as sinful in Scripture rather than the transcendent reality shared by every image bearer and divinely affirmed distinctions; and be it further

RESOLVED, That while we denounce the misuse of critical race theory and intersectionality, we do not deny that ethnic, gender, and cultural distinctions exist and are a gift from God that will give Him absolute glory when all humanity gathers around His throne in worship because of the redemption accomplished by our resurrected Lord; and be it finally

RESOLVED, That Southern Baptist churches seek to exhibit this eschatological promise in our churches in the present by focusing on unity in Christ amid image bearers and rightly celebrate our differences as determined by God in the new creation.

It promotes this alternative statement:

https://statementonsocialjustice.com/

It is also critical of Russell Moore, Beth Moore, and J.D. Grear. I am not sure why. I think of all of these people as biblical teachers who take a biblical stance on issues like gay marriage and homosexuality, each of them teaches extensively from the Bible, treating it as authoritative.

I'm not Southern Baptist, a lot of this is probably inside baseball.

[Josh]

Boot,

Beth Moore embraced full inclusion a while ago and also recanted statements in her earlier books. You can find this with a simple Google search.

The real question is why the ardent defending of those trying to move an institution liberal. When does the slippery slope stop?

[MaxPC]

Boot,

Beth Moore embraced full inclusion a while ago and also recanted statements in her earlier books. You can find this with a simple Google search.

The real question is why the ardent defending of those trying to move an institution liberal. When does the slippery slope stop?

Precisely. Well said. Josh, I appreciate how you slice through the obfuscatory-doublespeak rhetoric and the nonsense straw men and address the very heart of the matter.

[Bootstrap]

Boot,

Beth Moore embraced full inclusion a while ago and also recanted statements in her earlier books. You can find this with a simple Google search.

Links please? To things she actually said?

People who make accusations but refuse to do the work to back them up with evidence are going against some very basic principles found in Scripture. Both Old Testament and New Testament. I mean seriously, are we supposed to abandon even the basics of Christianity in the name of tribal conservatism?

The real question is why the ardent defending of those trying to move an institution liberal. When does the slippery slope stop?

No, the real question is why we get one thread after another like this, in which loud accusations are made, nobody provides any evidence for those accusations, and anyone who asks is branded as a bad person. Is this what the Bible calls us to? There is no danger that MennoNet will become a hotbed of Marxism. There is a very real danger that it will continue to be home to this kind of tribal scandalmongering in the name of conservatism.

Seems almost like some people see condemnation and contempt as basic Christian virtues, taking sides as liberals versus conservatives as the central question in the Kingdom of God, and see truth as irrelevant. That's not Christlike. That's not a way to get at the truth or understand what the Bible teaches. And it seems almost like having hot division is really, really important to some people.

If this particular dispute is one that we really should be involved in, then the people who think that's true should be very happy to answer questions. If they respond to that request with self-righteous posturing ... well, that says something.

[Soloist]

Boot,

Beth Moore embraced full inclusion a while ago and also recanted statements in her earlier books. You can find this with a simple Google search.

Links please? To things she actually said?

People who make accusations but refuse to do the work to back them up with evidence are going against some very basic principles found in Scripture. Both Old Testament and New Testament. I mean seriously, are we supposed to abandon even the basics of Christianity in the name of tribal conservatism?

The real question is why the ardent defending of those trying to move an institution liberal. When does the slippery slope stop?

No, the real question is why we get one thread after another like this, in which loud accusations are made, nobody provides any evidence for those accusations, and anyone who asks is branded as a bad person. Is this what the Bible calls us to? There is no danger that MennoNet will become a hotbed of Marxism. There is a very real danger that it will continue to be home to this kind of tribal scandalmongering in the name of conservatism.

Seems almost like some people see condemnation and contempt as basic Christian virtues, taking sides as liberals versus conservatives as the central question in the Kingdom of God, and see truth as irrelevant. That's not Christlike. That's not a way to get at the truth or understand what the Bible teaches. And it seems almost like having hot division is really, really important to some people.

If this particular dispute is one that we really should be involved in, then the people who think that's true should be very happy to answer questions. If they respond to that request with self-righteous posturing ... well, that says something.

https://michellelesley.com/tag/beth-moo ... sexuality/

You will have to actually read a bit to see the quotes you so desire. It was pretty easy to search but here you go Boot.

https://baptistmessage.com/beth-moore-c ... ual-sin-2/

Take a look at this one for what she did with her book