[ReformationFan]

Indeed. The first time I read the Westminster Confession of Faith it was like the sun rose and the clouds went away. I got a little tired of the mindset that between the moment the last verse of the last book of Revelation was written to the immediate present, there was no history just “the Bible and me.” Now, I fully support sola scriptura, but folks were basically saying classical Arminian theology without ever having heard of Arminius.

[Cronos]

I got a little tired of the mindset that between the moment the last verse of the last book of Revelation was written to the immediate present, there was no history just “the Bible and me.”

Correct. The Bible is inerrant, but it is read by fallible people (you and me). It also contains a lot of information that if read in bits and pieces can contradict (note: if read in bits and piece).

The WCF of course I disagree with in parts, but it puts a common teaching that prevents people jumping to conclusions and the errors of unitarianism etc.

The Baptist concept, from what I understand, is similar to congregationalism, wherein each church can have diverging theologies. I think that is not a complete understanding of what the Baptists stand for

[Cronos]

I did not read your post before replying about. You said It would take serious heresy being presented by the SBC leadership for churches to leave the organization and unaffiliate -- well, then, please help me understand what is the common theology? I mean, it's nice to say "the Bible and the divinity of Christ", but, then does that mean a, say non-Trinitarian group can be SBC?