blog discussing the Memphis Declaration is Twelve Witnesses.

by Carlos on Fri May 05, 2006 at 02:42:59 PM EST

The Genesis of these beliefs is that Man was made in God's image.  Think about that statement.  Do you really believe that God needs arms, or legs to get around?  Do you believe that God needs a mouth to eat or speak?

Nature the only verifiable living book of God's instructions, states that all that is, has a purpose.

Therefore why does God need a body at all?  If God does not need a body then God does not have one.  So why does the christian Church state that man was created in God's image?  Think about it.

By teaching that Man was created in God's image then the Church may inflict upon God human Characteristics, such as love, hate, vengence, protection, the desire for power,. etc.  I know this must be a shock, but God is not human.  God does not desire power.  God is power.  God does not ask to be worshipped or loved  A father does not ask for his children to love him, only for his children to be capable of standing on their own two feet, to be understanding, respectful of life and preferably happy and successful.  God is the same, therefore God has provided Man with living
instructions that are to be found within Nature.

 Follow them and you will be rewarded and in doing so all of mankind will benefit.  Disobey them and you will be punished forwith.  Both rewards and punishment are administered immediately.  

What happens in an afterlife is unknown as it it meant to be that way. The belief that there is a Heaven or Hell was created for the purpose of control, pofit and power.  God has already administered reward to those whose acts warrant rewards and punishment to those who have committed act of Evil  This life is your heaven or hell.  

Man has the ability to make this life a heaven or hell, unfortunately man has for the most part chosen hell.  For the most part, man has rejected God in favor of technology.  Technology is only a tool, it will not give you peace, serenity, understanding or protection.  Only by following God's living book of instruction found within Nature will man be able to make this life heaven.  

The challenge is their, it is up to you.  

Unfortunately people who do not understand the Living Word of God will not recognise either the rewards or punishment even in their deathbed.  Basically the belief that Man was made in God's Image was to be able to inflict upon God, man's frailites so the church could control it parishners.  It was all for power, profits and control.  To understand the Living Word of God go to www.thechurchofthelivingwordofgod.net    Facilitator Peter

by Facilitator Peter on Sat May 06, 2006 at 01:25:59 PM EST

As a signatory of this statement, I need to ask you some things Carlos, because you wrote:

This week a group of Southern Baptist leaders, inspired in part by McLaren's emergent church movement,  released a statement called, The Memphis Declaration. Although these leaders are very conservative in their Christian beliefs, it is a good sign that they are speaking out. They are not satisfied with the way the Southern Baptist Convention has been controlled and manipulated by the narrow and mean spirited political agenda of the Christian Right.

A. What statements have been issued that state that they were inspired by McLaren's movement?  None.  What then is the source of this attribution?

B. Some Emergent Church folks were there, all of which have a theology and epistemology that is exactly the opposite of Brian McLaren.  It is rather difficult to see, then, how he has influenced them.  If that is the source of this observation, then I feel compelled to point out that this is about as logical a conclusion as saying, "There were Arminian Baptists there, and they were influenced by John Wesley's political views," or "There were Reformed Baptist there, and they were influenced by Abraham Kuyper's political views."

C. The tendency to which we (as I am one of the signatories) were objecting is the one to exclude others of like theological mind who disagree with the political agenda of the SBC leadership and the way it is now running the SBC, because it is derivative of the high church ecclesiology of the Landmark Baptists in an increasing fashion, not "the Christian right" and its political agenda for the US.  That is a completely different issue.  The "political agenda" to which they spoke has to do with personal agendas they and we the signatories believe exist within certain groups and their leaders within the Convention and its agencies.  For example, agendas to remove denominational executives with whom they disagree about non-essential theological issues or issues extraneous to the current iteration of the Baptist Faith and Message, like the distribution of spiritual gifts, Calvinism-Arminianism, etc.

D.  This document is in no way a repudiation of the conservative resurgence in the SBC.  In fact, all of us agree with the BFM 2000, and some of us use less forgiving confessions like the London Baptist Confession of 1646 and 1689, not just the new BFM.  It is a call to recover the material, not just the formal principle of the Reformation.  A little Reformation history might be informative for you on what that means to flesh out this statement.

D. The document is directed inward, toward ourselves, not to the SBC or its leadership or "the Christian Right" to which this website speaks.  As for our politics, we are all over the map as a group, ranging from Republican to Democrat to members of third parties to independent voters.  


by genembridges on Sat May 06, 2006 at 02:17:52 PM EST

Thanks genembridges for giving your detailed insider perspective on this. Perhaps I did exaggerate the Declaration's critique of the Christian Right and its connection to Brian McLaren. I read the Memphis Declaration as a statement against authoritarianism and arrogance and it reminded me of at least the tone of the material I have read of McLaren and other "emergent" leaders. I was hoping the Declaration was also a subtle way for some SBC leaders to critique the SBC's too cozy relationship with the Republican party and with the Christian Right as practiced by people like Dobson, Falwell, Perkins, Bauer, etc.

by Carlos on Sun May 07, 2006 at 04:05:36 PM EST

Mr. Bridges,

I based my statement (regarding you) on the Baptist Press article.  You were not listed.  If you have since signed the document - I apologize.  

I have responded to both yours and Mr. Rogers post at my own personal blog.  Thanks.

bigdaddyweave.blogspot.com

Big Daddy Weave

by Big Daddy Weave on Wed May 10, 2006 at 01:08:17 AM EST