Responding....

I'd like to sort of respond to a few posts that were made on the forums I've been reading:

Meanwhile, the scriptures seem to be treated like statutes. I could see little difference in how scriptures were researched and applied and how the secular law was researched and applied. Both seemed to be handled pretty much the same way. And I kept asking 'where is the Spirit of the Lord in all of this teaching we are getting at church?" That I had read the scriptures for myself at 17 did much to beg this question. How anyone who really knows the Lord can read the Gospels and not ask that, I don't know. I think this is the chief reason I left the traditional conservative church I was in and was drawn to check out the charismatic movement. I was never fully a part of that movement in the classic sense of calling myself charistmatic or being in a church that claimed to be. But I understood the hunger for the Spirit of God. I think there were alot of people like me in those days (late 70s), and many of them did eventually become "charistmatic." I also saw how some of them compromised the scriptures in order to seek after a spiritual experience. I didn't agree with that either. So I found myself somehwere in this no man's land between these two factions. [posted by "bzirk"]

This is familiar territory to me. My original church seemed to treat Scripture in the same way. From what I recall, it was used to suit the church's own ideals, etc, and I was left wondering about soooo much. Thank the Lord, God delivered me from that church, and I am now able to see past the legalism! I am now able to see how much I missed out on!

For example, reading Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" for the first time, I wondered about whether or not some of it was actually true! And, although I'm a born-again Christian, and although I was brought up in the church, I didn't honestly know! I had never been taught the history of Christianity (even in the Christian schools I attended from Kindergarten through Grade 12!), and so I had to go searching for answers. Thank the Lord for Bart D. Ehrman's, "Lost Christianities"! It was just the thing I needed.

But, how sad that, even having been surrounded by Christianity -- church, Christian schools, Christian friends & family -- I still wasn't taught the foundations of my faith! Sure, I was taught, "Jesus loves me", and *some* of what the Bible says, but there was sooooo much that was missing!

In some groups, statements of belief have the same authority as Scripture. We call this creedalism. Baptists also make statements of belief, but all of them are revisable in light of Scripture. The Bible is the final word. Because of this distinction, we are generally more comfortable with the word "confession." Still, we are "creedal" in the sense that we believe certain things, express those beliefs and order our institutions accordingly. There have always been Baptist limits. And within these limits, there have always been Baptist preferences. (Emphasis mine)
[from the Southern Baptist Convention's "BF&M"?... I think]

That's the important point, when thinking of this "emerging church" business... If you're going to revise statements of belief & such, it's okay ONLY as long as it's "revisable in the light of Scripture"... as long as "the Bible is the FINAL word." Aside from that, it's heresy.