Posts: 14,450
Joined: April 2001
|
|
|
Forums30
Topics7,781
Posts54,881
Members974
|
Most Online732 Jan 15th, 2023
|
|
|
#32286
Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:29 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277 |
Alright. I've done a search for this here and I'm just not coming up with any reliable answers. You all want to take a crack at explaining what this is? I'd appreciate it.
Josh "...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,865
Permanent Resident
|
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,865 |
This should be helpful. Two Views The problems with soul competency lies with the definition on the left. There are many using that definition which is dangerous. After reading it the second time, I see it is not connected with Al Mohler, just quoting him; and the presentation is written by those bias toward the moderate/liberal view. I found it via browsing, not any knowledge of it. Still, even by putting a favorable light on their view, one can see the fault in it.
Last edited by John_C; Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:35 AM.
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277 |
The fellow in your post seems to be trying to distance himself and other from the SBC. Other than that I guess I don't understand why they felt the need to split that particular hair. It seems they're saying the same thing two ways. BTW I've never heard of a mainstream baptist. I got this from the SBC website: Soul Competency:
We affirm soul competency, the accountability of each person before God. Your family cannot save you. Neither can your church. It comes down to you and God. Authorities can't force belief or unbelief. They shouldn't try.
Against this backdrop of religious freedom, it's important for us Baptists to set forth our convictions. By stating them in a forthright manner, we provide nonbelievers with a clear choice. I guess I'm having comprehension difficulties today because this just doesn't make sense to me.
Josh "...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
Needs to get a Life
|
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615 |
Tom Nettles has a sermon (I have not listened too), but he is normally someone who may be trusted: Soul Competency and Church Purity. Soul competency means thus that every individual is responsible to God. This principle undergirds our evangelistic appeals for repentance and faith. There are no sponsors or proxies in the relation of the individual to God ( Criswell Theological Journal). As B. H. Carroll put it, "This is the first principle of New Testament law--to bring each naked soul face to face with God . . . O soul, thou art alone before God!" (B H. Carroll, Baptist and Their Doctrines). Timothy George states, In Book One of his Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin gives a classic interpretation of the innate knowledge of God which has been implanted in all persons. He refers to it variously as "an awareness of divinity," "the seed of religion" (semen religionis), and "the worm of conscience." This natural capacity of the soul for God is the basis for the incurably religious bent of all human beings. Given the devastating effects of the Fall, however, human religiousness can only issue in idolatry and self-centeredness apart from the interposition of God's grace. From the standpoint of soteriology, then, we should speak more accurately of "soul incompetence."
Reformed and Always Reforming,
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,865
Permanent Resident
|
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,865 |
It's kinda like a anti-doctrine doctrine. Seemingly, it can be said that the two unique doctrines from the Baptists are Separation of church and state and the SBC's soul competency This may be the link to the paper written by George that Joe quoted.
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277 |
So what's your take on this? As Reformed individuals I mean? I'm going to read up on it but I'd like to know if you think its backwoods drivel. I'm having a hard time getting it to mesh with the rest of my theological gears so to speak.
Josh "...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,865
Permanent Resident
|
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,865 |
It's definitely not a Reformed doctrine. It was generally a bad doctrine from the outset, but now is even worse in its application. Soul Competency roots are based in the distrust of institutions, especially those institutions telling Christians what to believe. It expresses individual autonomy from the church. I guess it is the difference between solo Scriptura and sola Scriptura. The doctrine allows for the Holy Spirit guiding an individual to the proper interpretation of the Bible. Instead of the Bible being objective, it now becomes subjective. Each believer may have a different understanding. I don't think that was the intent of the original doctrine, but when you leave it for the individual for his/hers understanding; that is what you get - anarchy or chaos.
I guess the argument back to us is that we do not trust the Holy Spirit's guidance. It is not that, but when an individual declares the Holy Spirit's guidance to an erroneous interpretation the fault lies with the person, not the Holy Spirit.
In a way it puts into motion the idea of continuiing revelation. As I said, it was not the original intent. But when men becomes the barometer standard, that is what we get.
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Enthusiast
|
OP
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277 |
Thats bizarre because Baptist's generally thumb their nose at the Charismatic idea of continuing revelation--solidly affirming the notion of the closed canon regardless of how much time they spend reading it. John_C said:It expresses individual autonomy from the church. Yeah we're all about individual church autonomy--which is, in some cases like getting just enough rope.
Josh "...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
84
guests, and
17
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|