In our society today it is a commonly held belief that "Truth is Relative". Generally what people mean by "Truth is Relative" is "It's only true if you're the loudest person screaming it". For instance, though I was not able to attend the Southern Baptist Convention 2000, I personally know several friends who are Godly men, and ministers who attended the Convention. Now, as I watched television and read the news, from the slant of the liberal media it seemed like the SBC was about nothing but "putting women in their place". In other words, from all the hoopla I was certain, in my mind, that the Convention rotated around two topics: women in ministry, and homosexuality. Yet, dear friends, I was wrong. When my friends returned from the Convention they stated that the revisions to the Baptist Faith and Message passed with nearly no objection. All resolutions were overwhelmingly approved. The few homosexuals that paraded outside of the Convention were no trouble, and the air of the Convention was one of cooperation and love.

In other words, the liberal media misrepresented the Convention and the work of these Christian people. In other words, it was business as usual.

If you are curious about what the largest Protestant Organization in the United States approved as its "creed", just look here. The Southern Baptist Church has no more than 100 congregations led by women pastors, out of several hundred thousand congregations. This thing is no more than a blip on the scope, something that - if the media had not have blown it out of proportion - then it would have gone largely unrecognized by the Baptist Fellowships. Those 100 fellowships that decided to keep their women pastors .... well, frankly, who cares? If it is of God it will prosper, but if of Satan it will degrade into more evil. And so it has.

Actually the issue has not been about women in the pulpit, or ordaining homosexuals to ministry, or winkin - blinkin - and nodd. No, the issue has been about the way we as Christians regard the Holy Word of God, the Bible. Jesus made it plain in His ministry that He regarded the Word of God, the Scripture, as a holy and pure gift from the Father. He prayed (in His great prayer for the Church) that we would be "sanctified" or separated unto the service of God by that very Word. Not by our own opinion, but by the Word of God. Many have forgotten how valuable that Word is, and it is a particularly shocking thing that Protestants - Protestants mind you! - have forgotten its value.

Two groups, the "Cooperative Baptist Fellowship" (CBF) and the "Alliance of Baptists" (though the little radical Baptist Women in Ministry played a part) stepped in in the midst of the media feeding frenzy and decided to add their two cents worth. The head of the "Alliance", Stan Hastey, made the following statement:
 

Calling the Bible "everything it claims to be, but nothing more," Hastey suggested that Baptist adherence to the Reformation principle of Scripture alone as final authority has proven not to provide "an adequate basis of authority for Baptists." The inerrantists in the SBC, he said, "cannot abide the discomfort of the discrepancies in Scripture." (Baptist Press, June 30, 2000 edition)

In other words, the Bible is not "inerrant", but "just a Book". There are numerous articles on this site that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus taught the Scripture to be God's Word, that Scripture claims this distinction for itself, and that areas that liberals often point to and cry "foul" are misinterpretations of Scripture. Yet this "just a Book" attitude goes even deeper. You see, when you make a pact with Satan, you usually walk out on a slippery slope that leads to other error. For instance, Hastey also made the comments:
 

Hastey said that differences with conservatives go beyond the question of biblical inerrancy. When asked whether those who do not come to faith in Christ will go to hell, Hastey replied, "I don't know." He said he believes that Jesus is the fullest revelation of God, but, unlike the SBC leadership, he does not believe this means "we ought to be aggressive in evangelizing those in world religions."  (Baptist Press, June 30, 2000 edition)

Did you catch that? Hastey "doesn't know" whether someone who rejects Jesus Christ as Savior will go to Hell or not. Furthermore, he doesn't think we ought to "aggressively evangelize" those in other world religions. This is a common theme among those who pretend to be Christians, but really preach a Scriptureless Gospel. Do you suppose that Hastey ever read this:

John 14:6  "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

or do you think Jesus was lying? Perhaps deluded, eh? Or do you think the "Alliance" ever read this:

Acts 4:10-12 "Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.  This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

and thought that Peter and John were mad, or misquoted? Surely Peter was out of his head, for certainly - if the Alliance says so, then it's fine for us to denigrate that Word and believe Hastey over Peter. And, if I denigrate the Word of Truth, why not denigrate it at all points? Why not dispose of it totally and preach out of the Reader's Digest (a fine magazine, by the way). Why not indeed? Actually, that's what the CBF does:
 

Longtime CBF leader Carolyn Weatherford Crumpler said she agrees that the differences between the SBC and the CBF over the new Baptist Faith and Message represent a fundamental difference between the two groups' views of authority.  "We see our authority in Christ," Crumpler said. "Southern Baptists see their authority in the Bible."  "I know Jesus personally," Crumpler maintained, when asked what she knows of Jesus apart from Scripture.  Gary Parker, CBF Baptist Principles Coordinator, said that CBF Baptists and SBC Baptists have "two different visions of Jesus." The new Baptist Faith and Message is "a denigration of Jesus," he said.  "There is a place to call this heresy," Parker said of the BF&M's assertion that the Bible is itself God's revelation and not merely a record of God's revelation.  "I may become a Christian and never see a Bible," Parker asserted. "Peter at Pentecost preached out of his own experience with Christ."  (Baptist Press, June 30, 2000 edition)

The CBF and other liberals that either left or are on the verge of leaving the Southern Baptist Movement toss away Scripture in order to follow the "Jesus of the heart". You see, the Word handed down by God isn't good enough. No, I should rely on my own "inner Jesus" to determine whether I am living by truth or not. Parker erroneously makes the statement that "Peter preached out of his own experience with Christ" so, by this reasoning, he thinks that he should be able to preach solely out of his own experience. Somehow I think that Peter's experience with Christ, walking and talking with him, learning through three years of seminary at the feet of the Master, far outweighs Parker's lame perceptions of what Jesus may have been like.  You might become a Christian without seeing a Bible, but you'll never become a Christian without hearing "For God so loved the world" (John 3.16), the Scriptural Gospel message. Look how deep this slippery slope goes:
 

{Comments in red are from Didaskalos Ministries} Rev. Kristina Yeatts, associate pastor of First Baptist Church, Clayton, N. C., agreed with the messenger to this June's SBC meeting who asserted that the Bible is inspired and points to Christ, but is nonetheless "just a book."  "They [SBC conservatives] says it is God's word, fully inspired, everything it says we should do," she said. "But it is a book with the biases and traditions of biblical days."  "It is a book to guide us, but it's just a book," she said. {Jeremiah 23:29  "Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?"} Like Hastey, Yeatts said her disagreement with SBC conservatives extends to questions of evangelism and the exclusivity of Christ as well.  "I believe you need to have a personal relationship with Christ, but I would never say someone couldn't be led to him in other ways," she said. "Jews and Buddhists are missing out because they are not Christians, but I wouldn't say they are not going to heaven. I know if I was in the same situation I would take great offense if someone told me that."{I don't even believe this woman is saved, or else she wouldn't reject the words of Jesus. Colossians 2:8  "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ"}  (Baptist Press, June 30, 2000 edition)

Do you need further proof why women should not be placed in pastoral positions? Again, here is another "Reverend" telling us that Jesus lied - Jesus really isn't the only way as He said. No, the Bible, lowered to "just a book" status, now has no authority. First remove the authority from the Word of God, then remove the authority from Christ our Lord. And now that we've removed Jesus' authority, why not eradicate the authority of the Godhead itself?
 

{Comments in red are from Didaskalos Ministries} Karen Massey, professor at Mercer University's McAfee School of Theology and board member of Baptist Women in Ministry, agreed that the controversy is about the Bible.  "God's Spirit blows where it will," she said. "If we're all honest, we all pick and choose what fits our experience" from different passages of Scripture. {2 Timothy 4:3-4 "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.} "Unfortunately, Baptists have seen God defined just by Scripture," she said. "God is bigger than the Bible." {then why did Jesus defeat Satan with Scripture? Matthew 4.1cf} Amy Joyner, a Wake Forest Divinity School student from Sanford, N.C. agrees that her view of the Bible is quite different from that of the Southern Baptist leadership.  "They act like you can't be a Christian and believe in evolution, for instance," she said. "The Bible is not a science book. It is a book of faith." {and if you have your faith in evolution, then why do you hypocritically accept money for ministry of the Gospel?} (Baptist Press, June 30, 2000 edition)

Let's have a "pick and choose" religion. Evolution sound good to you? Then throw out Genesis and believe in Evolution. Want to have sex with as many people as possible, satisfy that itch with people of either sex? Go to the world famous Vend-O-Bible and toss out all those pesky passages on homosexuality and adultery. Want to dabble in witchcraft? Go for it! The Vend-O-Bible has perforated pages so you can tear them out at will. Women ministers? Sure, why not. That "husband of one wife" clause in 1 Timothy 3:2 was written by a bigot. Besides which, since we now accept homosexuality as natural behavior, I guess a woman can be the "husband of one wife". Need to accept Jesus? Absolutely not! Everyone knows Buddha was just as holy as Jesus, and in a pinch Brigham Young will do.
 

{Comments in red are from Didaskalos Ministries} Frustration with the newly revised Baptist Faith and Message characterized the annual meeting of Baptist Women in Ministry, an organization of female ministers that advocates the ordination of women to the pastorate.  In an issue of the organization's Folio magazine distributed to participants at the worship service held at College Park Baptist Church in Orlando, Fla., Rev. Raye Nell Dyer, president of BWIM, took issue with the SBC's assertion that God calls to the pastorate only men as qualified by Scripture. "This kind of exclusion is why many of us are no longer Southern Baptist," the statement read. {and rightly so - you're not Southern Baptist} An accompanying article by Linda McKinnish Bridges, professor of New Testament at Baptist Theological Seminary, was even more direct. She urged women in the SBC to leave the denomination and "travel on, sister." {amen!} "Now, my dear sister, please know that you can leave the family farm," Bridges contends. "Leave home. You will be fine. There are other places waiting for your leadership." {the Baptists do not reject the leadership of women. We do, however, believe that the pastoral candidate must be male.} Held in conjunction with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship General Assembly, the worship service represented irritation with their Southern Baptist heritage and, at times, with the apostle Paul. {irritated with Paul?} The worship service featured a sermon by Carolyn Gordon, Director of Ministries for Higher Education for the DC Baptist Convention, on the sufficiency of God's grace. Gordon encouraged the women to "soar" in keeping with God's promises, remembering that "Her grace" is enough for them. The crowd roared when Gordon joked about her choice of a Pauline epistle as her text for the morning. {now the anti-Christ has assigned a feminine role to the Father} "I'm reluctant to use Paul," she said. "He has not been our friend lately." {James 4:4 "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God"} One BWIM member told Baptist Press that the service was especially important as Cooperative Baptist women seek to respond to the SBC's new confessional statement.  "We are taking Jesus' view of women over Paul's," said Rev. Kristina Yeatts, associate pastor of First Baptist Church, Clayton, N.C. "Adrian Rogers and Al Mohler are focusing way too much on the apostle Paul's letter rather than Jesus ... . We're talking about the Son of God vs. a biblical writer." {To which I ask, "How would you know what was Jesus' opinion, and what was Paul's? To discredit one portion of Scripture is to ruin all of it} (Baptist Press, June 30, 2000 edition)

What wrong with the "Vend-O-Bible"? Well, the major problem with it is that the CBF and Alliance movement, along with the New Methodists, the Neo-Presbyterians, and so forth are all names for an ancient error. The error? Catholicism! The Catholic Church began by regarding the teachings of the pastors and elders in higher regard than that of Holy Scripture. This situation degraded, much like it has in the Protestant Church today, until July 18, 1870. On that day the Catholic Church issued the Libri Symbolici Eccl. Cath. editi a Streitwolf (a Romanisto) Gotting, 1838, Tom 2, page 343 which taught "Confessio Romanio-Catholica in Hungaria Evangelicus publice prescripta et proposita". In other words:
 

Article I: We confess that the Pope has the power of altering Scripture, or increasing or diminishing it, according to his will. Article IV: We confess that whatsoever new thing the Pope of Rome may have instituted, whether it be in Scripture or out of Scripture, is true, divine, and salvific; and therefore ought to be regarded as as of higher value by lay people than the precepts of the living God. Article XXI: We confess that Holy Scripture is imperfect and a dead letter, until it is explained by the Supreme Pontiff, and permitted by him to be read by lay people

The "Doctrinal of Papal Infallibility" led the Church away from God's Word and into whatever the Pope wanted it to be. R. Ditterich in his book Protestantism highlights several very interesting things about Papal Infallibility. Pope Honorious I was supposed to be infallible, though after his death he was declared a heretic by the Sixth Council in 680 AD. Pope Leo II confirmed Honorious' heresy. Pope Liberious accepted the Arian heresy as true, and taught the Church that Jesus was only a mere man. Pope Vigilius condemned certain books as non-Scripture, reinstituted them, then re-condemned them. Pope Sixtus V had a version of the Bible prepared he claimed was authentic, but two years later Pope Clement VIII declared that Bible to be full of errors. With all these Popes vacillating back and forth, it is a wonder the Church stood till Martin Luther and John Calvin revolted against Papal excesses.

The "new Catholics", those liberal Protestants like the Alliance and the CBF, would have us believe that it is only fitting that the Scripture be relegated to the scrap heap while we follow after "feel good" religion. Frankly, I no more want to be a "new Catholic" than I want to be a Catholic. I do not want to toss out the work that was paid for by the blood of martyrs under the Catholic Inquisition and "turn back the clock" to idolatrous Catholicism. I do not want to "feel good" bad enough to call Jesus a liar, to say that there are "other ways" to Heaven other than that which He bought for me on the Cross. I do not want to accept the lies that the CBF and the Alliance propagate in order to be politically correct. Frankly, I don't want to stand before the Throne of Christ with your blood on my hands because I preached a watered down Gospel to you.

Hebrews 13:7-9, 17 "Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.  Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.  ... Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you."

One day these preachers - women or men - will stand before Jesus Christ and give an account. They will have to account for every soul they allowed to slip into Hell while they called Jesus a liar for the world's sake. They will have to give an account for every act of deceit, and may themselves be cast into Hell for all eternity - for the tree that produces corrupt fruit, is it saved?

Catholicism started by teaching that Peter was Pope - though the word is not found in Scripture, and Peter never went to Rome. He went to Antioch, Samaria, Joppa, and Caesurae - but never Rome. In fact, W.H. Withrow in his book  Catacombs of Rome, pg 509, teaches that the term "Pope" is not evident in the catacombs until the latter part of the fourth century. This errant teaching on the "Pope" allowed a mere man to dictate over the truths of the Word of God. This led to a number of lies that hold the Catholic Church up to ridicule:
 

The Catholics Teach	The Scripture Teaches
The Pope and Priests must not marry	Peter was married (Mark 1.30; Matthew 8.14; 1 Corinthians 9.5; 1 Timothy 3.2)
The pope is the Bishop of Rome, supreme pontiff and visible head of the Roman Catholic Church, accounted by that Church the vicar of Christ and successor of Saint Peter, formerly temporal ruler also of the states of the Church, and still recognized as dependent sovereign prince (New Standard Dictionary)	Never raise any man to the position of "Father" on the earth (Matthew 23.8-12) In the early Church councils Peter never rendered decisions (Acts 15.13-20) Paul openly rebuked this alleged "Pope" (Galatians 2.11). In fact, Peter was only one of the original pillars of the Church (Galatians 2.8-10) Peter was sent by the other Apostles (Acts 8.14)
The pope is head of the Church	Jesus is head of the Church (Ephesians 1.22-23; 5.23)
The pope should be worshipped	Peter refused worship (Acts 10.25-26; 14.12-14)
Rome holds a "treasury of Saint Peter"	Peter never had a treasury (Acts 3.6; 8.20)

Do the Catholics do good? Absolutely! Are Catholics saved Christians? I believe some are, though I suspect that many are not. Yet once the Catholic Church headed down the slippery slope of rejecting Scripture for the word of man, error upon error crept in, virtually clouding the Gospel. Today if you turn on the "Global Catholic Network", EWTN, you will see that this is the "Year of Mary". Priest after priest teaches a Catholic audience how to be saved by asking Mary for salvation. Priest after priest teaches a Catholic audience how to get "special indulgences" that will allow their sins to be forgiven by the Church. Yet the Word of Jesus is:

John 14:6  "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Which means that all those who call on Mary for salvation are yet lost and damned in their sins. Mary has no power to save (Luke 1.27), needing, by her own words, a Savior. In fact, the Catholic Church did not declare Mary "sinless" until 1854. I guess before then people had to be saved the old fashioned way - by accepting Jesus Christ as Savior.

Be careful, all you who are neo-Catholic Protestants. Do you really want to walk down this Godless and God Cursed path that you've started on? What happened to the Church of Rome will indeed happen to you. Woe to the misguided who fail to look at the errors of history and refuse to learn by these errors.

God stands behind His Word, and expects each and every one of us who claim to be Christians to do the same. If you can't stand on God's Word, then please stop calling yourselves Christian, or Protestant, or even Baptist. Your actions are a shame to Baptists everywhere. Your actions mock those who shed blood for Protestant Christianity. Rather than call yourselves CCF, Alliance, or Baptists, call yourselves what you really are - new Catholics. Elect yourselves a pope, and stop straddling the fence. At least our Catholic competition^* has made a firm decision for their way of belief, and - praise God - at least they are not hypocrites.

* For those of you who think I was unduly harsh on the Alliance/ CCF Baptists, and the Catholics, then I suggest you turn on your television and open your newspapers. The "Eternal Word Television Network" spends, at my last monitoring of it, over 8 hours a day ridiculing and demeaning Protestants as lost fools. Alliance and CCF people, along with other liberal and lost groups like "Baptist Women in Ministry"  are not Southern Baptists. However they do everything they can to discredit the Conservative Christian Baptist. To remain silent is to appear to agree, and I do not agree. These people are, at the very least, fallen from fellowship with Jesus, and are in danger of Divine Discipline. At the most they are heathen parading as believers. Sadly, though, they are so perverted that I cannot tell the difference - though Jesus can! Here's what God's Word tells us:

2 Thessalonians 3:6  "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."

1 John 2:18-19 "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.  They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."