Posted on 10/30/2006 8:56:41 AM PST by Rightly Biased
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.
Nor should the statement pose a problem for any of the students, he added.
“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.
Others may beat me to it.
I'm going back to pottery.
However, posting Scripture doesn't force anyone to believe it.
In my experience, biases on this topic trump all kinds of Scriptural evidence.
Sad, that.
The kingdom is the church, and Christ is ruling at the right hand of His Father in heaven. But you missed my point. The reference to "that which is complete" in the verse is referring to complete revelation. That is the Word of God.
I'll believe it
9For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.
11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
There. Let's read 1Cor 13:10 in context. We're talking about Love: The one thing that will remain, even after Christ returns, and we are all made perfect, in Him.
You see, when we are in eternity with Jesus, there will be no more need for prophesy, tongues, or even prayer. We will be 'face to face', knowing fully.
While we are here on earth, in our earthly bodies, we don't have perfect knowledge, therefore we are looking through a glass dimly, prophesying in part, being the imperfect people we are.
These gifts are nothing, he goes on to say, without Love. (Which is kinda the meaning of the whole passage.)
You might also want to consider why the Jews consider Malachi the last prophet, and have recognized none since. The book of Malachi is the last book of the Old T in our bibles, and... the story is continued with the birth of.... John the Baptist, the real last prophet.
There. Let's read all of Luke 16:16. The Law is the first part of the Old Testament. The Prophets are, well, the prohets. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekial, Daniel, etc.
The Law and the Prophets had been taught to the people up until the time of John, who came preparing the way for Jesus, and the 'good news of the kingdom of God.
Yes, the good news. THat Jesus, son of God, came to earth as a man, lived a sinless life, showed us how to conquer our enemy, gave us the weapons of our warfare (the Word, and the Holy Spirit) and finally, died an excruciating death to pay the price for our sins, our sicknesses (by His stripes we ARE healed), and our defeat of the enemy (He overcame him by the Blood of the Lamb)
I am overcome with awe at your Love for us, Holy Father, Precious Son, Spirit of the LIving God.
Paul references things that are "in part". He then talks about "that which is perfect" or "that which is complete". The things that are referred to as being "in part" are tongues, prophecy, and knowledge. The function of all of these gifts was to reveal the will of God. In order for the comparison between "in part" and "that which is perfect" or "that which is complete" to be valid, the thing that is perfect or complete would have to also refer to the revealed will of God. We have that in the Word of God, the Bible.
I prayed for a friend through his wife in church one day. He had a bad headache. When she got home, he told her the time the headache stopped and it was exactly the time we were praying for him.
My husband went to the hospital one day to visit a former pastor of our church. The man in the next bed was in a coma and the pastor asked him to pray for the man. He did and the man came out of the coma and accepted Christ as his savior. He went back into the coma right afterwards. My husband is so humble that he never talks about it, but it was amazing to me. God uses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise!
Yes, I do. I've spoken in tongues for years but not as often as I should. It's meant to edify, build up, the believer.
There is the gift of tongues (to be used in a church setting with interpretation to follow) and prayer language, something a believer uses in private.
Please provide Scriptural support for a "prayer language".
You are SO wrong and God is going to show us more and more miraculous things as we go into the end times. Don't close your mind to Him and what He intends to do.
The Jews consider the OT to be the ONLY part of the Bible they believe. Of course Malachi would be the last prophet. They don't believe in Jesus and the NT. There are still prophets in the world and apostles as well. They just don't wear long beards and robes and sandals (well, most don't anyway).
Who are these "apostles"?
Well, of course, because we are imperfect people using them. The "perfect" and "complete" hasn't come. We are still living in this fallen world. Satan hasn't yet been locked away. We are still people, created by God, seeking after a supernatural relationship with our Heavenly Father .. in all three persons.
The function of all of these gifts was IS to reveal the will of God.
There. Fixed it.
In order for the comparison between "in part" and "that which is perfect" or "that which is complete" to be valid, the thing that is perfect or complete would have to also refer to the revealed will of God.
But it's NOT complete. We still know in part, and see through a glass darkly. Until He returns and we are with Him face to face, the Word, the ENTIRE Word hasn't been lived out.
We have that in the Word of God, the Bible. Yet we still see that through a glass darkly. We don't know fully. It's not complete. Christ hasn't come back for His Bride. At that time, all the need for these things will go away. But in the mean time, we are to be ministering to one another, healing the sick, casting out demons, using the power that Jesus demonstrated for us to use.
Oh, Lord Jesus, that your church would wake up and operate as you intended. Preaching your good news .. and bringing Your kingdom to earth.
testing
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I say that you don't know what you are talking about.
In the Christian Church there are evangelists, prophets, pastors, teachers, and apostles, not just evangelists.
Paul stated that he prayed in tongues 'more than you all'. And he was glad that he did it so much.
This issue should not die.
That is simply not accurate.
First of all, speaking in tongues is NOT a gift. The Greek word is pneumatikos which means 'matters of the spirit', not 'gifts of the spirit'.
Speaking in tongues is for the individual where as interpretation of tongues and prophesy are for the congregation. The 'best' gift is the one that is needed and will bless the most.
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.