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.
Laying on of hands was not required. It was the practice at times but not always.
Same thing today.
Winning souls is what it is all about.....
In proverbs we are told "He that wins souls is wise"
Yes there are those listed tasks and not everyone is even called to be one of those you listed.
Jesus told us to go and be his witnesses.Hmmmm not listed?
So only an evangelist can win souls?
I do know what I am talking about and arguing about this issue takes us away as Southern Baptist from what we are supposed to be doing Winning Souls.
Please provide Scriptural support for that claim.
The reference to "that which is complete" in the verse is referring to complete revelation. That is the Word of God.
= = =
In a word . . . HOGWASH.
That's an inference, an extrapolation, an assumption AT BEST.
And, it's a most implausible, improbable, irrational one, at that.
I'd rather others took up that proof. It's not a raging priority for me at the moment.
That would be interesting!
Perhaps when I carve out the time to bother.
Doing a number of things at once currently.
I have already posted my reasoning on this. I fail to see how it is irrational.
Yes, as a Berean I must search the scriptures to see if what you tell me is true.
First of all, the so called 'gifts' in Corinthians are not really gifts, that is just a poor KJV translation.
But think about it a moment...if the 'gifts' are gone, so would be the 'gift ministries (prophets, evangelists, apostles, pastors, and teachers). But we have those that bill themselves as pastors and evangelists, and sometimes even prophets. Are they fake?
None of those listed ministries are any greater than the other for the one that is needed and present is the greatest for the moment. Winning new souls isn't terribly important when you have a congregation of newly won souls needing direction.
But if we have any legitimate evangelists or teachers, then there must be some prophets and apostles out there somewhere, and if that is the case, then there must also be the need for the mis named gifts of the spirit.
Are there spirits? Is there a possibility that one might need to discerns the presence of spirit, whether from God or not and if not, the identity and whether one should deal with it or leave it alone?
Is there the possibility of needing a miraculaous healing?
One 'yes' is all we need!
I'm willing to listen to your argument but you will have to post scripture that supports ongoing revelation. Jesus Himself appealed to scripture whenever He was asked hard questions. The servant. as we well know, is not above his master. So, your own personal words and feelings are not authoritative, sorry.
= = =
PING TO THOSE I CAN RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD ON THE END TIMES/PROPHECY/DREAMS/VISIONS PING LIST
I'm involved in enough tasks these days and particularly today . . . I'm unlikely to carve out that kind of time. Any of you willing to post the Scriptures per the above? Would greatly appreciate it. More than one of you would be grand.
If you're not but know someone who might be willing, please ping or FREEPMAIL them.
Thanks in advance.
LUB, THANKS BIG.
There are no apostles, since there is none alive today that have witnessed the resurrected Christ.
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.)
= = =
Wow and interpretation consistent with Scripture; with Biblical prophecy; with logic; with solid Scriptural study habits . . . with reality.
Amazing on such a thread! LOL. /sat
THANKS TONS.
Nah. Doesn't influence me at all.
Convoluted juxtoapositions, extrapolations, inferences, assumptions
do NOT remotely come close to my notions of reasonable logical understanding thought processes.
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
Now, Mary . . . such things just cannot happen! Pontificators who know better than Holy Spirit what Scripture means have said it's impossible. They MUST be right! /satire
Paul mentioned with his understanding and without. Works for me.
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.
= = =
AMEN! AMEN!
I apologize. However my operating in the Gifts of the Spirit is a CURRENT thing, so your claiming as fact that it doesn't exist could be construed as arrogance. It's kinda like you sayin' that my kids don't exist. Does that make sense?
It doesn't bother me, though. It is, what it is. You're in a church that teaches that doctrine. Doesn't mean we are on opposing sides, in the big picture.
If you have made Jesus the Lord of your life, we're on the same team! I'll drop out of the conversation if I'm offending you. God Bless!
Now, now.
Biblically sound logic has no influence on certain biases. We have to keep that in mind! LOL.
Can you prove that?
No, didn't think so.
Where do you get the idea that there were only 14 apostles for ever and all time?
(Jesus...Paul...and the original 12)
It might be helpful to understand what an apostle is before you say there aren't any.
I do not appreciate your arrogance in this instance.
= = =
I know that feeling.
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.