New Policy: Southern Baptist Missionary Candidates Can't Speak in Tongues

Beliefnet ^ | Nov. 23 2005Beliefnet | Adelle M. Banks

[tutstar]

The Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board has adopted a new policy that forbids missionary candidates from speaking in tongues.

The policy, adopted Nov. 15 during the board's trustee meeting in Huntsville, Ala., reflects ongoing Southern Baptist opposition to charismatic or Pentecostal practices.

[Blackirish]

1st thing you know your blabbing in front of people in some kinda goofy spasm. Next thing you know your playin with snakes. Then finally your dancin around drinking strychnine.

Glad I'm a Catholic.

[pageonetoo]

I've often wondered if a majority of these charismatic churches have members who are 'faking' tongues or prophesy.

Me, too. But, I have never questioned the person acting in that way. I take the position that God can sort it out better, than I. I refuse to place any limits on the Spirit of God.

As a student of Scripture, I can say that I learn new things daily. In the case of tongues and prophecies, they are nothing new. They have continued, unabated, since the early church was started. There was confusion about the gifts, and Paul wrote to the Corinthians to try and explain the purpose of God's gifts.

The "charismatic" movement has languished, at times in history, but it took off again back in the early 1900's. If you want to read something fabulous, try "Ever increasing faith", by Smith Wigglesworth (actual name). You can read it online.

I took a weekend trip with some friends, to a church in Kentucky. I witnesed the people handling snakes. I thought they were fools, but to them, it is an honest test of their faith.

I cannot place limits on God's people. I can only listen, as God speaks to me...

Chapter 1

Have Faith in God

"For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them" (Mark 11:23, 24)

These are days when we need to have our faith strengthened, when we need to know God. God has designed that the just shall live by faith. Any man can be changed by faith, no matter how he may be fettered. I know that God's word is sufficient. One word from Him can change a nation. His word is from everlasting to everlasting. It is through the entrance of this everlasting Word, this incorruptible seed, that we are born again, and come into this wonderful salvation. Man cannot live by bread alone, but must live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. This is the food of faith. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God."

Everywhere men are trying to discredit the Bible and take from it all the miraculous. One preacher says, "Well, you know, Jesus arranged beforehand to have that colt tied where it was, and for the men to say just what they did." I tell you God can arrange everything without going near. He can plan for you, and when He plans for you, all is peace. All things are possible if you will believe...

[chronic_loser]

I am not a Southern Baptist (although I grew up SBC). That is one of the best posts I have seen on the issue and sums up my own thoughts. Thank you for saying it.

I do have one qualifier. I would hold that since the gifts of the Spirit are subject to the "prophet," then a person who "has these gifts" might be willing to exercise them in private. Otherwise, what you invariably get is some of the flavor you see on this thread, of people being accused of "quenching the Spirit" when in fact, they are only seeking to avoid the distraction of debate on "who is more spiritual."

I would not disqualify the person, but make the practice of a "private prayer language" truly PRIVATE. A person ought to have to agree to that, if you want to "limit" things.

I remember some years ago when I was working as a missionary in Colombia with Wycliffe, a charismatic "proselytizer" came and threw the base into such disunity that the whole mission almost split over it. They were interdenominational and we had AOG missionaries (I dated an AOG girl there for a bit), Baptists, Brethren, Bible Church, you name it. It caused quite a bit of ruckus, and I am sure that is what the Baptists in Huntsville AL are trying to avoid. Some of the charismatics felt persecuted for a while and some of the brethren felt judged. Love and compromise worked it out, and they got back to the job of reaching the lost indigenous peoples of Colombia.

[pageonetoo]

Your mind is so full of crap, that it cannot see...- page

...Maybe you should call him a vile execrable pathetic denizen of hell who vomits unspiritual filth...

I did not call anyone anything. I posited that his mind is a cesspool of contradiction. I shortened that by saying "crap". I could have explained better, but I was talking to another Christian, or so I thought, and debating about things. He posted a link to me, which spouted CRAP!...

My apologies for being course and vulgar...

[George W. Bush]

You completely misrepresent the purpose of tongues. The general idea is to allow the Spirit to speak through you - where you personally do not have the understanding to say what needs to be said.

On Pentecost, men understood and were converted.

Show me this where charismatics speak in tongues and the heathen or non-Christians hear of Christ and are converted.

On Pentecost, it is clear they did not speak any common languages. And yet, men of many nations and languages came to Christ.

The other purpose, for which I believe tongues are completely appropriate, are for personal communication with God - where we may not know the words to pray, and the Spirit in us helps us in this way.

Fine. Then keep it personal, in your prayer closet. Don't babble it at me and expect me to worship your practice like you're some kind of special holy man with some special dispensation. If I wanted babble, I could turn on CNN. Or a foreign language channel. I want to hear the Word preached and hymns and have fellowship. Not try to determine if someone is speaking in tongues or is just having a psychotic episode in church.

...may even get you cured of an unknown cancer, for all you'd know.

Do people actually claim in your circle to get cured of unknown (and undiagnosed) fatal illnesses? Those must be some pretty powerful miracles. But even we Baptists can claim to be cured of diseases we don't actually have. Hey, I just cured myself of leprosy while I was typing! It's a miracle!

Regardless of whether you believe it to be for you or your denomination -

Baptists are not a denomination. That is exactly why this makes it a hotter topic than it would be in a denomination.

...the attribution of such to Demonic Powers and paganism is really being judgmental about something you may not understand as fully as you claim to.

1 John 4:1 (KJV)

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Recall something maybe your mother once told you - if you have nothing nice to say - say nothing at all.

So a Christian can't say bad things about Hitler? Well, this is just plain silly anyway. What you're telling us is that any discernment or biblical restrictions on our worship or practice is irrelevant in the towering face of false prophets and babblers and their spiritual needs.

I agree with the SBC position in that it is their denomination to do with what they choose - as the Catholics do, as AOG does, as they all do.

We are not a denonmination. We are several large conventions of state and regional associations who hold to a common doctrine. You can be, for instance, expelled for heresy. As I recall, three SBC churches in Florida were expelled in the late Nineties for going charismatic. Since they were expelled from the Florida association, they were automatically expelled from the entire SBC. If Florida had not acted, the SBC would have had to expel the entire association for Florida and begin a new one with those who were obedient to SBC principles. And if the SBC failed to expel Florida, all the others who objected to their lack of action would withdraw from SBC, something SBC wouldn't like. If it sounds like a campfire where everyone is seated holding a gun on each other (though amicably), you get the picture. We practice separation from error, sometimes being a little trigger-happy perhaps.

Baptist churches are independently owned and controlled. But if you are a Baptist church, there is a certain tradition and theology that you will subscribe to in broad terms. Now, Baptists have also Baptist liberty, which is that principle that we may not forbid to others that which scripture does not plainly speak about. And that is valuable. However, as you know, there are all sorts of ways to determine what scripture speaks of. In general, SBC has conservative Bible-believing positions but is not particularly extreme in how it states them or in trying to boss around any church. And SBC churches expect the seminaries to eschew modernism and liberalism. Baptist seminaries are always watched by vigilant preachers and laymen. Sometimes not enough. But one can see what has happened in the Protestant denominations by failing to supervise their seminaries adequately.

As far as missionary efforts, Baptists do band together to support a pretty ambitious common missionary effort, a hallmark of Baptists as a group. So if there is one place where we might most resemble a denomination, it is in the seminaries and in our missions efforts. That is why the question is so important, perhaps more so to Baptists than to Protestants.

[Coldwater Creek]

I have and aunt and uncle that were So. Baptist missionaries to Argentina for almost 40 years, and are now teaching extension classes for Golden Gate Seminary. They are strong Democrats and have no use for conservatives at all. When I discovered this, I was shocked and saddened.

[George W. Bush]

I would not disqualify the person, but make the practice of a "private prayer language" truly PRIVATE. A person ought to have to agree to that, if you want to "limit" things.

I agree with this. I have been urging the local Baptist church should consider a man for trustee or deacon. His wife and he are a bit into Word-Faith ideas which sometimes accompanies the tongues/prophesy stuff. For all I know, they are charismatic to some extent. And as long as it is private and they are not in clear error by ordinary Baptist thinking, I see no reason not to move him to a leadership role. They are Baptists just like me and they have liberty with their brethren. Within reasonable but rather broad limits.

[George W. Bush]

I took a weekend trip with some friends, to a church in Kentucky. I witnesed the people handling snakes. I thought they were fools, but to them, it is an honest test of their faith.

You should not worship with them. It is a false doctrine which many churches, including Baptists, have worked to eliminate. People shouldn't die on a regular basis by testing their faith. I think scripture warns us not to tempt God or test Him. I would not partake of these practices.

[RaceBannon]

Now that's got to be one of the most spiritual things anyone ever said to me.

Have a nice day to you, too

[George W. Bush]

One of the most disturbing things about some movements today is the insistence that we are actually now in the midst of revival.

Scripture tells of a great falling away in the End Times. Of persecution by those you considered brethren.

Yet the charismatics are preaching End Times but with a great revival and none of it can be gainsaid by the mere use of scripture (too judgmental). And they can never criticize, never test the spirits, never actually dissent or they'll be run out of the charismatic club (or get exorcised since these people believe a Christian can be demon-possessed).

It's a strange mix. But given their attitude toward scripture and their practices and the refusal to properly study and apply the Word, one cannot be surprised at the results.

[George W. Bush]

I will pray for the Holy Spirit to change your heart. Your mind is so full of crap, that it cannot see...

I'm not sure even us Calvinists ever got to these spiritual heights. Can I borrow this for future theological discussions?

[RaceBannon]

But none of that means anything when you look to the Early Church.

The people at Pentacost heard NOTHING of the Holy Spirit Baptism that was to occur, yet they spoke in tongues, had the gifts of miracles, all of it, and NOT ONE had heard of any of it and it had NOTHING to do with spiritual maturity, and NONE of them tarried for that spirit after Salvation.

Today's modern Charismatic movement is so far removed from the Biblical example it is almost cult like.

[RaceBannon]

make sure we copy that posting, just in case we want to sound extra spiritual ourselves....

[George W. Bush]

Today's modern Charismatic movement is so far removed from the Biblical example it is almost cult like.

It is cultish and many of these groups have officially annointed 'apostles' and 'prophets'. Many of them could go Jonestown pretty easily. They also are well-known for discipling new members by essentially placing them entirely under the control of a senior member who then dictates their entire spiritual practice and even their family life, right down to their marriage. These practices are self-correcting because generally a cult church comes apart at the seams when you attempt to place people in such spiritual bondage to others.

Cultish, indeed.

[ScubieNuc]

What confused me in your first post was...

"That is the mark of a saved Believers vs saved a non believer."

Then in your response to my question, you said...

There are those who believe only enough to be saved. Then there are those who believe more. Pretty simple, eh? "

To me, that can confuse new Christians. The Bible talks about those who believe (believers) and those who believe not (non-believers). The Bible says that those who believe are saved. (Luke 8:12, Acts 15:11, Acts 16:31)Therefore, technically, you CANNOT have "saved nonbelievers."

Clear Christian terminology, in this case, is what I'm looking for. Most Christians I know, refer to the un-saved as non-believers.

Secondly, The phrase, "those who believe more" leads me to believe that you are saying that the gifts you get are dependant on your "level" of belief. Like I said before, you either believe or believe not.

This may all seem like silly hair spliting, but I have my reasons. I have personally seen (in an AOG church) people who came to believe that they weren't saved, because they (like you said) didn't have the "mark of a saved believer". In other words, they didn't speak in tongues so they didn't have the sign of being saved. Plus, if speaking in tongues is the least of the gifts, and they couldn't have the least of the gifts, then they believed that they don't get any of the gifts. When you tie that up with the "predistination" belief that God doesn't choose all people to be saved, people come to assume that they must be one of those not fortunate enough to be saved, and give up.

That, I believe, is a tragedy.

Overall, I believe what you are saying is that there are Christians who know more, and there are "babes" who know less. The only way "babes" can know more, is for them to study the Word or have it preached to them. I agree with all that.

Sincerely

[xzins]

You might have the same problem reading the bible closely about tongues as you do reading it about Paul's Damascus experience. You wrote, God smote him off his horse, and left him blinded, temporarily.

Go check the story of Paul's experience and tell me the part of what you wrote that is incorrect.

BTW, it's not nice to tell someone their mind is "full of crap."

[yarddog]

I have and aunt and uncle that were So. Baptist missionaries to Argentina for almost 40 years, and are now teaching extension classes for Golden Gate Seminary. They are strong Democrats and have no use for conservatives at all. When I discovered this, I was shocked and saddened

Not at all surprising. I will say again tho that most of them are great people.

[pageonetoo]

It seems your mind ain't the only thing...

I guess I am not pious enough to suit you. I guess you guys are a little more "Chrisitian"...

[Blogger]

points well taken.

[Matchett-PI]

"...slanders Darby -mainly because they virullently oppose dispensational thought ..." ~ Zechariah11

That heresy existed long before Darby adopted it. LONG before. LOL

Cerinthus embraced chiliasm, a form of apocalyptic vision that depicted the millennium as a physical and material period.

In North Africa there arose the Donatists, led by Tyconius, who predicted that the world would end in 380 C.E. Augustine, then Bishop of Hippo, took aim at the sect in an effort to disprove what he termed "out-dated and inappropriate dreams of an earthly paradise." After his death in 430 C.E., a council of church leaders meeting at Ephesus condemned the literalist vision of a physical, worldly millennialist utopia.

Eusebius is one of the early church fathers who most clearly denounces "chiliasm," as premillennialism was then called. In the same work he writes, "About the same time … appeared Cerinthus, the leader of another Heresy. Caius, in The Disputation attributed to him, writes respection him: ‘But Cerinthus, by means of revelations which he pretended as if they were showed him by angels, asserting, that after the resurrection there would be an earthly kingdom of Christ, and that flesh, i.e. men, again inhabiting Jerusalem, would be subject to desires and pleasures. Being also an enemy to the divine scriptures, with a view to deceive men, he said that there would be a space of a thousand years for celebrating nuptial festivals.’" Eusebius also writes of a tradition passed down by Polycarp regarding an encounter between the Apostle John and Cerinthus in a public bath, "He [Polycarp] says that John the Apostle once entered a bath to wash; but ascertaining that Cerinthus was within, he leaped out of the place and fled from the door, not enduring to enter under the same roof with him, and exhorting those with him to do the same, saying, ‘Let us flee, lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, that enemy of the truth is within.’" Tertullianus is another early church father who attributes chiliasm’s birth to Cerinthus. He writes: "They are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years, who think with the heretic Cerinthus. For the Kingdom of Christ is now eternal in the saints, although the glory of the saints shall be manifested after the resurrection."

http://members.aol.com/twarren19/athacreed.html

Justin Martyr (A.D.150)
CHAP. XI.--WHAT KINGDOM CHRISTIANS LOOK FOR.
"And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose, without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom; whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment awarded to him who so confesses. For if we looked for a human kingdom, we should also deny our Christ, that we might not be slain; and we should strive to escape detection, that we might obtain what we expect. But since our thoughts are not fixed on the present, we are not concerned when men cut us off; since also death is a debt which must at all events be paid." (First Apology of Justin Martyr, ch. 11)

"Chiliasm found no favor with the best of the Apostolic Fathers... " (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, v. 25 - 36 ).


Eusebius (A.D.325)
"This same historian (Papias) also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise certain strange parables of our Lord, and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the antiquity of man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as, for instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments. (Book III, Ch. 39)

Epiphanes (315-403)
"There is indeed a millennium mentioned by St.John; but the most, and those pious men, look upon those words as true indeed, but to be taken in a spiritual sense." (Heresies, 77:26.)

The belief in the millennium was condemned as superstitious at the Council of Ephesus in 431.

"This obscure doctrine [Chiliasm] was probabally known to but very few except the fathers of the church, and is very sparingly mentioned by them during the first centuries; and there is reason to believe that it scarcely attained much notoriety, even among the learned Christians, until it was made a matter of controversy by Origen, and then rejected by the greater majority. In fact, we find Origen himself saying that it was confined to those of the simpler sort. " (Waddington's History, pg. 56)

A field guide to Heresies: http://kevin.davnet.org/articles/heresy.html
Ebionism
Ebionites considered Christianity as a sect of Judaism. The believed the Jesus was a mere man of exceptional righteousness and a superior endowment of the Spirit which came upon him at his baptism. Some Ebionites accepted, and some rejected, the supernatural conception of Christ. Ebionites were among the Judaizers who attempted to impose the Law of Moses upon Christians. Ebionites were millenialists--those who believe in a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ on Earth.

The System of Cerinthus
Cerinthus (contemporary of the Apostle John) combined Gnostic views (separating the earthly Jesus who was the son of Joseph and Mary from the heavenly Christ) with the views of the Judaizers. Cerinthus was also a millinealist (also known as chiliasm).


The Great Premillennial HOAX by Don Matzat
http://www.issuesetc.org/resource/journals/v1.htm

bttt