Seminary leaders cite distinction between belief and advocacy (Tounges)

Southwestern Seminary’s theology dean, David Allen, doesn’t expect any surprises from faculty when he sends them a memo soon about a new trustee statement regarding the neo-charismatic practice of private prayer language.

Prospective faculty members have been quizzed on the subject for years, Allen said.

If a current faculty member practices “a private prayer language” as one trustee alleges five of them do, then the pertinent question becomes whether that view is advocated in the classroom.

“I would not bring that professor in and say, ‘You cannot say that outside of class.’ I’m not going to restrict anyone in that way.”

“The statement said we will not knowingly endorse private prayer language,” Allen explained, taking that to mean advocating that practice.

The newly passed statement reads: “As it concerns private practices of devotion, these practices, if genuinely private, remain unknown to the general public and are, therefore, beyond the purview of Southwestern Seminary. Southwestern will not knowingly endorse in any way, advertise, or commend the conclusions of the contemporary charismatic movement including ‘private prayer language.’ Neither will Southwestern knowingly employ professors or administrators who promote such practices.”

Allen draws a distinction between the statement by which a seminary operates and the freedom of an individual pastor.

“A pastor at a local church is not an entity of the Southern Baptist Convention. They are by definition autonomous, as is their pastor. However, a seminary is a different animal,” he said, because of the responsibility it has to its churches through elected trustees.

Prior to his election to the faculty and administration, Allen served as a trustee throughout the previous seminary president’s administration and takes issue with McKissic’s characterization that the newly passed statement represents a theological and philosophical shift that will exclude many practitioners of tongues.

“During the entire Hemphill time, as a board member, if a person articulated to me that they had charismatic leanings and inclusive of that was a private prayer language, it would be very unlikely I would have been supportive of faculty status.”

But a faculty member who privately discloses a sympathetic view toward the practice of a private prayer language won’t be hauled into the dean’s office.

“I would not bring that professor in and say you cannot say that outside of class. It’s not going to restrict in that way. If we have people who do that here we’re certainly not going to try to move for their dismissal,” Allen said.

“We have lots of students who aren’t Southern Baptists and some are charismatic. We do not expect our students to affirm the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. Under no conditions would any such student be unwelcome here,” Allen stated.

“On the other side of the coin, we can be careful in whom we do hire. We will not hire anyone knowingly who affirms that which the vast majority of Southern Baptists disavow.”

“As long as it remains private, it’s not problematic to me because I don’t know,” agreed Southwestern Seminary President Paige Patterson. “If it does become known to some people, but is not a matter that is advocated or advertised and the reputation of the school is not harmed thereby, then it’s not a problem.”

While the focus of the statement was placed on the hiring process, Patterson said he questions whether there’s even one professor who advocates the practice of a private prayer language.

Patterson disputes McKissic’s claim the school has abandoned its commitment to the inerrant Word of God by banning a practice the apostle Paul said should not be forbidden. He called their difference a disagreement with McKissic’s interpretation, not a denial of God’s Word.

“We don’t forbid tongues. We said what we are going to do in the seminary as a direction. He is confusing our disagreement with him as a disagreement with inerrancy.”

Patterson said a variety of interpretations are held by Southwestern professors, including cessationists like Vice President Craig Blaising and those who would view some legitimacy to what was happening at Corinth while regarding it as “implicitly dangerous.”

“I have never been a cessationist. I don’t believe the sign gifts ceased with the coming of the New Testament. I do not think that the scriptural grounds for arguing that are persuasive, but I do believe that if it is an actual case of the gift of tongues, that it will be the experience of Acts 2 where people speak languages they have never formally studied in order to present the gospel.”

Preaching from 1 Corinthians 14 in a chapel sermon last April, Patterson stated that “Acts 2 portrays the legitimate gifts of tongues” for gospel proclamation and that the Corinthian believers were merely imitating the Acts 2 manifestation in a manner similar to pagan prophets of the time.

Nevertheless, “It would be a mistake for evangelicals to forbid others to speak in tongues ... That doesn’t mean that a person who is building a major part of his faith on something that is so ... downplayed by Paul should be called to be your pastor,” Patterson said.

He said 1 Corinthians 14 seems to give evidence of a private prayer language, but notes that Paul says such prayer leaves the mind out of prayer so that praying with the mind is preferred. Furthermore, Patterson said, it is not synonymous with the groanings mentioned in Romans 8:26—a statement that contradicts one of McKissic’s examples of private prayer language.

While Patterson said he does not believe there is “a lot of necessity” for that type of situation anymore, nevertheless, “God is God and it could happen, but if it happens, I believe it will be [an Acts 2 manifestation],” he said, referring to speaking known languages previously unknown to the speaker and made available to preach the gospel.

END TIMES/DREAMS VISIONS/PROPHECY PING LIST PING Please let me know if you want on or off the list.

THE FOLLOWING FROM EACH OF THE FOLLOWING TRANSLATIONS AS NOTED:

(1):
--Inspired speech will be over some day; MSG

--As for prophecy ([d]the gift of interpreting the divine will and purpose), it will be fulfilled and pass away; AMP

-- 8 Prophecy and speaking in unknown languages[b] and special knowledge will become useless. NLT

--8Love never fails; but whether prophecies, they shall be done away DARBY

-- 8The love doth never fail; and whether [there be] prophecies, they shall become useless; YOUNG’S LITERAL TRANSLATION

QX Commentary: “some day” . . . what day? [A]When John runs out of ink at the end of Revelation? [B]Whenever the Church gets around to deciding what’s really in the Canon? No way. “fulfilled and pass away” . . . When? [A] OR [B] ?? NO WAY! When the old order passes away and Christ IN HIS FULLNESS AND COMPLETENESS SETS UP OVERT RULE OVER ALL CREATION, INCLUDING THIS PLANET! Nothing else is logical. “become useless” ONLY when that is complete—Christ’s complete reign over all creation is fully installed in HIS FULL KNOWN-NESS. “prophecies done away?” When there’s no further need of such—when WE KNOW AS WE ARE KNOWN! WHEN THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD HAS BEEN WRITTEN ON ALL HEARTS. Nothing else fits. Nothing else is logical.

(2):
--praying in tongues will end; MSG

--as for tongues, they will be destroyed and cease; AMP

-- 8 Prophecy and speaking in unknown languages[b] and special knowledge will become useless. NLT

-- or tongues, they shall cease; DARBY

-- whether tongues, they shall cease YOUNG’S LITERAL

Qx Commentary: “tongues will end” “destroyed and cease” “become useless” When? When they would be pointless! When all speak the same Heavenly, Christ’s Kingdom language! Nothing else fits. Nothing else is logical.

(3):
--understanding will reach its limit. MSG

--as for knowledge, it will pass away [it will lose its value and be superseded by truth]. AMP

--9 Now our knowledge is partial and incomplete, and even the gift of prophecy reveals only part of the whole picture! NLT

-- or knowledge, it shall be done away. DARBY

-- whether knowledge, it shall become useless; YOUNG’S LITERAL

Qx Commentary: “understanding will reach it’s limit” . . . whether natural or Holy Spirit special understanding . . . it’s purpose here, it’s needfulness here will only be fully met WHEN . . . We all understand as we are understood; when God’s knowledge is written on hearts; when God’s knowledge floods all creation as the seas flood the sea floor. Nothing else fits. Nothing else is logical.

(4):
--We know only a portion of the truth, and what we say about God is always incomplete. MSG

--9For our knowledge is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect), and our prophecy (our teaching) is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect). AMP

--9 Now our knowledge is partial and incomplete, and even the gift of prophecy reveals only part of the whole picture! NLT

--9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part: DARBY

-- 9for in part we know, and in part we prophecy; YOUNG’S LITERAL

Qx Commentary: “a portion of the truth” That’s Paul writing . . . who’s been up to the 3rd Heaven etc. who scribes so much of the NT . . . yet, in this time/space dimension—he knows, we know, a portion of the truth. “our knowledge is fragmentary” Until when? We have The whole of Scripture.

IS OUR KNOWLEDGE NO LONGER FRAGMENTARY? IF SCRIPTURE IS THE COMPLETE AND THE PERFECT, THEN ACCORDING TO THIS VERSE AND CESSATIONISM, OUR KNOWLEDGE SHOULD NO LONGER BE FRAGMENTARY! THAT’S ABSURD! Oh, I know, CESSATIONISTS KNOWLEDGE IS 100% COMPLETE and us silly rabbit noncessationists have fragmentary knowledge? Is that it? That’s more absurd! LOL. The only logical COMPLETE in terms of knowledge of the truth is when Christ reigns fully overtly and knowledge of Him and knowledge of God and His ways floods creation and even all this earth as the seas cover the sea floor. Nothing else fits. Nothing else is logical.

(5):
--But when the Complete arrives, our incompletes will be canceled. MSG

--10But when the complete and perfect (total) comes, the incomplete and imperfect will vanish away (become antiquated, void, and superseded). AMP

--But when full understanding comes, these partial things will become useless. NLT

-- 10but when that which is perfect has come, that which is in part shall be done away. DARBY

-- 10and when that which is perfect may come, then that which [is] in part shall become useless. YOUNG’S LITERAL

Qx Commentary: “when the Complete arrives” WHO IS THE COMPLETE? CHRIST, GOD ALONE. Only when He steps up to reign overtly over all that is, will the incomplete on this soiled planet vanish away as imperfect, outdated, useless. Until that day, we all see through the glass darkly, dimly, fuzzily. When we see Him FACE TO FACE, ALL IS KNOWN; KNOWLEDGE OF HIM AND HIS WAYS IS COMPLETE AS NEVER BEFORE. Then and only then. Nothing else fits. Nothing else is logical. Any other explanation is absurd. I’m tired. I’ll just leave the rest of the Scriptures uncommented on. The comments would be essentially the same anyway.

(6):
--When I grew up, I left those infant ways for good. MSG

-- 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; now that I have become a man, I am done with childish ways and have put them aside. AMP

--11When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I reasoned as a child; when I became a man, I had done with what belonged to the child. DARBY

-- 11When I was a babe, as a babe I was speaking, as a babe I was thinking, as a babe I was reasoning, and when I have become a man, I have made useless the things of the babe; YOUNG’S LITERAL

(7):
--12We don't yet see things clearly. We're squinting in a fog, peering through a mist. MSG

--12For now we are looking in a mirror that gives only a dim (blurred) reflection [of reality as [e]in a riddle or enigma], AMP

(8):
--But it won't be long before the weather clears and the sun shines bright! MSG

--but then [when perfection comes] we shall see in reality and face to face! AMP

(9):
--We'll see it all then, see it all as clearly as God sees us, knowing him directly just as he knows us! MSG

--Now I know in part (imperfectly), but then I shall know and understand [f]fully and clearly, even in the same manner as I have been [g]fully and clearly known and understood [[h]by God]. AMP

-- Now we see things imperfectly as in a cloudy mirror, but then we will see everything with perfect clarity.[c] NLT

(10):
--13But for right now, until that completeness, we have three things to do to lead us toward that consummation: MSG

--All that I know now is partial and incomplete, but then I will know everything completely, just as God now knows me completely. NLT

-- 12For we see now through a dim window obscurely, but then face to face; now I know partially, but then I shall know according as I also have been known. DARBY

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.