Posted on 02/04/2006 2:44:05 AM PST by WKB
ENID, Okla.
A Southern Baptist pastor being removed from a national board governing worldwide evangelism says he doesn't speak in tongues himself but is defending missionaries who do to keep the denomination "broad in our cooperation."
The Rev. Wade Burleson, the senior pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Enid, said that the board of trustees of the Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board wants him to be removed because of his criticism of a policy change enacted by the IMB in November 2005. It stated that any candidate speaking in tongues, even privately, "has eliminated himself or herself from being a representative of the IMB of the SBC."
In a statement, the International Mission Board says it wants him removed not because of the tongues issue, but because of "broken trust and resistance to accountability." Burleson's removal depends on a June vote of the entire Southern Baptist Convention, but the controversy is being watched beyond Baptist circles, largely because of the dispute over tongues, an issue that has rankled many religious groups.
Tongues is described in the Bible as a spiritual language used by early Christians, enabled by the Holy Spirit. The issue of whether it is still relevant, or appropriate, for modern times has divided many denominations.
Burleson says he is not most concerned about tongues, but a willingness to remove ministers who disagree with what he and others consider "nonessential doctrines." Since the changes in the mission board's policy were made official, Burleson has been writing open letters and explanations of his position on his blog, kerussocharis.blogspot.com.
He has repeatedly referred to those who wanted the policy changes as "crusading conservatives."
"Crusading conservatives seek to convince you that their interpretation of the Bible on nonessential doctrines must be accepted by all conservatives, and if someone chooses to not conform to their specific interpretation, then he/she is removed from service," Burleson said.
Burleson says he considers himself a "cooperating conservative," which he defines as a person who is in agreement on the major doctrines of the Bible but gives freedom in areas of interpretation regarding nonessential doctrines. The SBC has long considered the Reformation's rallying cries of faith alone, grace alone, Scripture alone and Christ alone as summing up the major doctrines of Scripture.
The use of the spiritual gift known as tongues or glossolalia would fall into the nonessential category. Southern Baptists have a policy that prohibits their ministers from using tongues in a public setting.
"I do not want people to lose sight of the real issue," Burleson said. "It is not about the new policies. It is the direction we seem to be moving as a convention that shuts out dissent and desires conformity in the interpretation of minor doctrines."
Burleson said he does not practice a "private prayer language," the phrase some use for speaking in tongues, nor does anyone he would consider a close friend or family member. The issue, he said, is one of principle and "is not personal."
Leon McBeth is a retired distinguished professor of church history at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. He said that the SBC has a long-standing antipathy toward what some call the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit.
"In my day, our concern over the tongues issue was a biblical one," McBeth said. "In the Bible, tongues is always associated with conflict. And tongues isn't exclusive to Christianity. The practice goes at least as far back as the Oracle at Delphi.
"Sometime in the 1970s, as a way of ameliorating opposition to tongues, some Southern Baptists began to talk about private prayer language. They believed it was less offensive than calling it tongues."
Lyle Story, a professor of biblical languages and New Testament at Regent University School of Divinity in Virginia Beach, Va., said that the Southern Baptist resistance to tongues is tied to their belief that all the miraculous gifts (healing, prophecy, tongues, miracles) ceased with the death of the original 12 apostles and the completion of the Bible.
Burleson said he is resistant to the policy change because so many Christian men and women throughout history would have violated it.
"Some of our greatest missionaries of all time had a private prayer language, including Miss Bertha Smith of China, who led thousands of people to Christ and died an ambassador of the Southern Baptist Convention at the age of 100," he said.
Jerry Rankin, the president of the International Mission Board, has acknowledged that he has practiced a private prayer language for 30 years.
"We have become so intolerant that everyone must now march in lockstep with us or we kick them out," McBeth said. "I believe this (the policy change) was part of a power play to force Rankin into retirement."
The IMB made the policy change non-retroactive, so Rankin's position as president will not be threatened.
The trustees of the IMB deny that Burleson's criticism of the policy changes had a bearing on their decision to work to remove him. In an official statement released Jan. 11, board chairman Tom Hatley said: "In taking this action, trustees addressed issues involving broken trust and resistance to accountability, not Burleson's opposition to policies recently enacted by the board."
Burleson will remain on the board until the Southern Baptist Convention meets in Greensboro in June. The convention must vote to remove him, as the IMB has no power to do so. Burleson said he remains a strong supporter of the SBC and IMB.
"The International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention is doing the greatest work in our 161-year-old history," Burleson said. "I and my church support the IMB. We will continue to support the IMB."
The line begins "Tongues in the Bible was..."
The author could have been addressing tongues only in how it appears in the bible. I'll cut him some slack.
I do agree with you, however, that tongues go beyond early Christians.
Don't forget these
PROPHETESS 1. Female prophet; women serving as God’s spokesperson. 4 women are explicitly identified as prophetesses: Miriam (Ex. 15:20); Deborah (Judg. 4:4); Huldah (2 Kings 22:14); and Anna (Luke 2:36).
Since you case makes no sense, you should rest it. I did not pick and choose anything. You are the one making up Biblical law.
Is WKB's case too heavy for you? Do you need someone to help lift the burden?
Can I still have your buffet?
Do you need someone to help lift the burden?
Jesus said
Matt. 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
He used the Bible and you didn't try to debate him at all, just shifted gears. NOW I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE BUFFET!! BTW, I don't debate either. I don't have the gift of "tongues" because mine gets all tied up.
I have already answered that three times. Read the thead.
Your dad sounds like a very wise man... :o)
He misquoted the Bible as I have shown in three posts. Grow up or learn to read.
If you call quoting Jesus
"making statements with no support."
Those bee-holders are getting active again.
Those bee-holders are getting active again.
yep,Swatting at the air even after the bees are gone.
Correction, misquoting Jesus...
Speaking in tongues is also about receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost.
I think it also applies to Christian missionaries learning new languages.
So if I don't speak in tongues I am not saved?
Man, I better hit the gibberish books pretty hard.
My personal belief:
What you do in private is between you and God.
Tongues in public WITHOUT and interpretation
is NOT Biblical or of any value to anyone.
I believe that EXACTLY too WKB. I do believe the gift of tongues exists, but when manifested, it has a PURPOSE. Even on the day of Pentecost, it was much more than simple ramblings. I do also believe the gift of tongues applies in much more subtle ways--such as in some learning another language to fulfill God's purposes and maybe in some ways not involving another language--such as a pastor saying exactly what needs to be said to someone (i.e. using the right "language"). Those are just my personal feelings. I don't care what someone else says--they can have their own opinions. I have mine.
Taking Mark 16:18 as Jesus telling people to pick up snakes and drink poison is not an interpretation. It is misquoting and taking His word completely out of context. Your 'interpretation' is indefensible and you should apologize for it. Mark 16:16-18 is very clear that Jesus is talking about signs, not making commandments.
So in 17 did He command us to speak in tongues?
I always like the spirt to fulfill first. Infill sounds too much like construction.
Is there a different word used in the original text
for the word shall in verse 17 than the one in verse 18?
It's the Bill Clinton translation, WK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.