matthew11v25
Puritan Board Sophomore
From the Southern Baptist Convention:
Baptist Press - Baptist Press News with a Christian Perspective
Baptist Press - Baptist Press News with a Christian Perspective
SBC rejection of the NIV 2011
- Thread starter matthew11v25
- Start date
- Status
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
Hmmm, and yet they have no problem selling the Message, which in my opinion is actually much worse. Here is the Lord's prayer in the Message in case you don't believe me.
Our Father in heaven,
Reveal who you are.
Set the world right;
Do what's best— as above, so below.
Keep us alive with three square meals.
Keep us forgiven with you and forgiving others.
Keep us safe from ourselves and the Devil.
You're in charge!
You can do anything you want!
You're ablaze in beauty!
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Our Father in heaven,
Reveal who you are.
Set the world right;
Do what's best— as above, so below.
Keep us alive with three square meals.
Keep us forgiven with you and forgiving others.
Keep us safe from ourselves and the Devil.
You're in charge!
You can do anything you want!
You're ablaze in beauty!
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Steve Curtis
Puritan Board Senior
Interesting bit in the same report:
3:23 p.m. -- Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary President Daniel Akin is presenting his report. He said that for the first time in its history, seminary enrollment passed 2,700. By comparison, at a low moment during the conservative-moderate battle over the seminary, enrollment had dropped to 585. Asked during Q&A about the controversy over Calvinism, Akin said, "Southeastern has one agenda, and it is called the Great Commission." JC stands for "Jesus Christ," he said, and not "John Calvin."
3:23 p.m. -- Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary President Daniel Akin is presenting his report. He said that for the first time in its history, seminary enrollment passed 2,700. By comparison, at a low moment during the conservative-moderate battle over the seminary, enrollment had dropped to 585. Asked during Q&A about the controversy over Calvinism, Akin said, "Southeastern has one agenda, and it is called the Great Commission." JC stands for "Jesus Christ," he said, and not "John Calvin."
Joseph Scibbe
Puritan Board Junior
Wow, I did not see this one coming. Not sure how I feel about some of the wording.
And John Calvin would agree, and disagree with him by saying that he supports missions too, from what I know two missionaries where sent to Brazil from Geneva. But really, it is all about the Triune God, Soli Deo Gloria.
elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
I humbly disagree with the SBC messengers. I found a lot of the TNIV inclusive language troubling, especially pluralizing when it was singular in the original (Psalm 1). However, they reverted those changes back in NIV2011, and kept the places where gender inclusivity was appropriate (i.e. "people" for anthropoi, not "men" as in the NIV, i.e. Matthew 6:14-15). Even the SBC's Holman Christian Standard Bible makes these changes. The NIV2011 and the HCSB are not all that different.
I think the addition of William Mounce to the NIV committee, who was a critic of the TNIV, really helped balance the translation. It's problematic when laymen like the messengers in the SBC feel qualified to judge what is proper Bible translation.
I think the addition of William Mounce to the NIV committee, who was a critic of the TNIV, really helped balance the translation. It's problematic when laymen like the messengers in the SBC feel qualified to judge what is proper Bible translation.
matthew11v25
Puritan Board Sophomore
It strikes me as inconsistent. The issue they have with the NIV2011 is the same with almost every other Functional translation...which are sold in the Lifeway Stores.
The ongoing criticism of the NIV may knock it out of #1 spot but I have a feeling that the NLT, not the HCSB, would take it's place.
The ongoing criticism of the NIV may knock it out of #1 spot but I have a feeling that the NLT, not the HCSB, would take it's place.
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
Dr. Akin's comments should not surprise anyone because he is not a Calvinist nor is he particularily reformed. For evidence of this, see the website of the church he attends Wake Cross Roads Baptist Church. Dr. Akin is also not an anti-Calvinist, as so many other Baptist leaders are. Dr. Akin is just focused on the gospel, expository preaching, and the Great Commission. Everything else comes second to him, which is why he hires both Calvinist and Arminian professors at Southeastern.
Pilgrim
Puritanboard Commissioner
Where the rubber meets the road will be whether or not Lifeway will carry the NIV 2011. This is basically just a resolution adopted by the Convention but it is not binding on Lifeway. Does anybody know whether or not Lifeway is carrying it now? It was easy for them to decline to carry the TNIV since the 1984 NIV was still in print.
The NIV is seen as a bigger deal than the other gender-neutral translations like the NLT because the latter isn't recommended for in-depth study, although I'm sure many Christians use it as their main Bible. Neither the NLT nor the Message have threatened to become the #1 bestseller. That's not to argue that the policy isn't inconsistent. There has long been a tug of war with the more theologically minded (whether Calvinist or not) wanting to get rid of Osteen, Meyer and Jakes books vs. the desire to meet consumer demand and the need to make a profit. When the name was changed from Baptist Bookstore (and officially, Baptist Sunday School Board) to LifeWay it represented a shift to want to appeal to a broader base.
What is also very interesting about this is that this resolution was presented to the resolutions committee, who refused to take it up for whatever reason. (I doubt it was out of a desire to dodge the issue.) The resolution was then presented directly to the Convention, who overwhelmingly passed it.
The NIV is seen as a bigger deal than the other gender-neutral translations like the NLT because the latter isn't recommended for in-depth study, although I'm sure many Christians use it as their main Bible. Neither the NLT nor the Message have threatened to become the #1 bestseller. That's not to argue that the policy isn't inconsistent. There has long been a tug of war with the more theologically minded (whether Calvinist or not) wanting to get rid of Osteen, Meyer and Jakes books vs. the desire to meet consumer demand and the need to make a profit. When the name was changed from Baptist Bookstore (and officially, Baptist Sunday School Board) to LifeWay it represented a shift to want to appeal to a broader base.
What is also very interesting about this is that this resolution was presented to the resolutions committee, who refused to take it up for whatever reason. (I doubt it was out of a desire to dodge the issue.) The resolution was then presented directly to the Convention, who overwhelmingly passed it.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Is it typical for churches to even care what the convention says? I grew up in the SBC and none of them knew what the Convention recommended, nor did they care (granted I realize that this could be just a coincidence). Do you think churches will jettison the translation because of this recommendation?
elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
When I was attending an SBC church, the pastors would publicly say that they were embarrassed by some of the convention resolutions, specifically the call to boycott Disney. They still supported the idea of making non-binding resolutions in order to take a public stand on issues, though.
Personally, I'd prefer that they not, or at least drastically reduce the number of resolutions they propose. A lot of them are simply not well-thought out, and others are voted on knee-jerk social conservatism, which I don't think ought to be a defining mark of a Christian.
What makes it worse is that the media doesn't understand the autonomy of local Baptist churches and the non-binding nature of the resolutions. They understand the words the president of the SBC as if he were a Baptist pope, and the resolutions as if they are signed legislation.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
That reminds me. My uncle was removed from the Convention that year because he attended wearing Mickey Mouse ears and some other things that were obviously Disney (I don't remember what they were now). It did not go over well with some there.
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
In 1977, after delivering a sermon as an invited speaker that included an amillennial interpretation of Scripture, the Pastor of the SBC church got up an felt obliged to explain that my views did not accord with the SBC and members were to consider my sermon's content with careful discernment. Many whispered to me at the "thanks and good sermon" handshake exercise afterwards, not a few parishioners whispered to me that they wished they could hear more messages like mine. Sigh.
This experience led me to adopting the practice of always providing a comprehensive statement of faith to my fellow SBC pastors requesting me for potential pulpit supply, tent meetings, pastor conferences, etc.
AMR
This experience led me to adopting the practice of always providing a comprehensive statement of faith to my fellow SBC pastors requesting me for potential pulpit supply, tent meetings, pastor conferences, etc.
AMR
Last edited:
MississippiBaptist
Puritan Board Freshman
Of course, my moniker reveals my denominational background. What I find as surprising is the response on this thread. As a Reformed Baptist I get knocked for always objecting to everything. Seems I'm among friends here. 
Personally, I thought the 2011 NIV resolution was a good call. One can give kudos to another denomination without endorsing their entire doctrinal stance.
Personally, I thought the 2011 NIV resolution was a good call. One can give kudos to another denomination without endorsing their entire doctrinal stance.
reaganmarsh
Puritan Board Senior
Yes, as a very recently former Lifeway employee in Pensacola, FL (for the last year, prior to re-entering the pastorate in GA) I can verify that Lifeway does sell the NIV2011, along with Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, T.D. Jakes, John Hagee, and several others who are troubling... The distinguishing marketing/packaging marks are the logo, which is slightly changed, and the gray box (instead of the green one for the old NIV). For those who are on the fence or unfamiliar with it, I would recommend that you review the most recent CBMW report on the NIV2011.
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
I don't think the issue is that they voted to condemn the NIV 2011, the problem is all the other junk that Lifeway has no problem selling. A little hypocritical is all.
MississippiBaptist
Puritan Board Freshman
I got it. I'm ITA with the view on Lifeway, they definitely sell things that are heretical. However, the SBC Messengers do not vote on Lifeway's entire inventory. You guys used something 'we' agree with to beat down Lifeway. I admitted above that I do this, much too frequently, as well. Just a heads up!
N. Eshelman
Puritan Board Senior
I am a bit confused by this whole thing- are these Baptists at a Presbytery meeting?? Which is more confusing:
1. Making decisions that no one will listen to in the first place.
2. Claiming to be Baptists but making decisions using Presbyterian polity?
I guess jus divinum is more obvious than they thought! :LOL:
1. Making decisions that no one will listen to in the first place.
2. Claiming to be Baptists but making decisions using Presbyterian polity?
I guess jus divinum is more obvious than they thought! :LOL:
Backwoods Presbyterian
Puritanboard Amanuensis
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
To paraphrase, its a Baptist thing, you wouldn't understand. In all seriousness though, that is why we have congregational government so that things cannot be forced upon churches against their will. Even though this was something rather silly, down the road it could be a vote allowing for gay pastors. Thanks to our congregational government, we would be free from that decision just as we are free to buy bad bible translations.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
But on the other end, you could have individual churches allowing gay pastors, right? In other words, there is no ecclesiastical body to curb sinfulness. So do not have anyone forcing you to sin, but no one to help prevent it either.
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
You are absolutely right, and there are in fact some non-SBC Baptist churches that do have gay pastors. That is the advantage of having an organization like the SBC. Even though they have no authority over the churches, they do have the power to disassociate with churches who are in serious disagreement with core Baptist doctrine. If a church is an SBC church, you can be pretty sure they will not have gay pastors. I do understand your point that there are some advantages to a more Presbyterian style government, but there are also many disadvantages.
elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
Regarding #2, they're not making decisions; they're making resolutions, which are non-binding public statements, and they serve as recommendations to the churches as well. This is the way Baptists understand the Acts 15 Jerusalem council.
Regarding #1 ... yep, that sounds about right.
N. Eshelman
Puritan Board Senior
If it is non-binding it seems like a giant waste of church dollars to get together and make suggestions to each other.
elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
This is true. If the congregation goes liberal, they can put in a gay pastor, or do whatever they want. But it works both ways too; if the elders, whether in an elder-rule model or a presbyterian model, go liberal, they can force the congregations to accept gay pastors.
Several of the epistles (2Corinthians, 2 Peter, 1 John, Jude, Revelation) warn against false teachers/prophets. I'm much more afraid of the church leadership going liberal and forcing their views on the church than the other way around.
Historically, liberalism has crept into the denominations through the leadership. Hence, the major Episcopal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Lutheran, and Methodist denominations, all of which are hierarchical, have all gone liberal, and the evangelicals in each of those traditions are in split-off denominations. In contrast, the SBC is the largest Baptist body in the U.S. and successfully fought off liberalism.
In the recent gay ordination battle in the PCUSA, this has been true. The General Assembly has been voting in favor of gay ordination for years now, but up until this year, it kept on failing when the individual congregations in the presbyteries voted on it.
Notthemama1984
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Can they? I was under the impression that all Presbyterian denoms allowed local congregations to pick their own pastor. Thus the denom could not force a congregation to accept a gay pastor. The denom simply allowed congregations to call a gay pastor if they so chose.
Am I wrong?
elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
I was thinking more of the elder-rule model, in which the elders themselves choose other elders.
I think you're right that in Presbyterianism the congregation chooses their own pastor. However, I believe elders of other congregations in the presbytery exercise authority over the congregation as well, so a congregation could still be forced to be under the authority of a gay pastor.
Backwoods Presbyterian
Puritanboard Amanuensis
I really hope "Baptists" don't see the Jerusalem Council as "friendly advice" and "non-binding".
---------- Post added at 05:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------
Under no circumstances in a Presbyterian system could a Presbytery force a congregation to have a Minister they have not called.
- Status
