Yesterday I found myself defending Southern Baptist practices. I’m not sure exactly why – this post may or may not explain it.
I got in a discussion on Bob Hyatt’s blog based on his post Question for you Southern Baptists out there….
He’s closed comments on that now but has reposted his latest thoughts from that discussion in the new post Hide the beer the (SB) Pastor’s here… which is open for comments.
Amongst other things Bob is objecting to the Southern Baptist rule against drinking alcohol. He says it’s a “ridiculous man-made rule with no basis in Scripture.” Bob points out Colossians 2 where it says “Don’t let anyone condemn you by insisting on pious self-denial…” (New Living Translation). Bob (I originally said Makeesha but that was a mistake – sorry Makeesha!) also commented that “There is no greater good being served in requiring anyone to abstain from something, be it marriage or alcohol or anything else, that God specifically created for our enjoyment and pleasure. All it serves is a spirit of pharisaism.”
Bob wrote in his latest comment to me “Helen- you are not hearing or misunderstanding the actual question I am asking.”
I don’t know whether I am or not. I understand the principle of not submitting to unnecessary rules. I read the Bible verses given to back it up. But I can’t help that it sounds the same to me as “it’s morally superior to refuse to do anything which personally inconveniences me”. That’s the opposite of what I believe. I’ve yet to see anyone in this discussion prove that their refusal to submit to rules they find ridiculous is not motivated by the simple selfish desire “I want to do what I want to do”. I’m not saying it is. I’m saying “How can you tell the difference?” No-one has explained to me how. Read the rest of this entry »
05-22-2007 |
49 Comments »