Are There Parameters of Cooperation?

Below is a response to an article Wade Burleson posted to his blog (www.kerussocharis.blogspot.com) dated May 29, 2006. It dealt with the five points of the Christian Union Church. I felt a little confused about the blog and so I commented back with a few questions and comments in the comments section. Bro. Wade has wisely made the decision to monitor the replies to his blog. I don't know if this will appear. If it doesn't it will most likely be Wade being graceful by keeping me from being embarrassed on his site.

If you don't know about Bro. Wade, he is a pastor in Enid at Emmauel Baptist church and has taken some pretty important stands against what he conceived as being wrong. I am thankful for him and his witness.


Bro. Wade,

I want to thank you for keeping us aware of the situation concerning the new rules that are being formed. I do agree with you that we are narrowing the conditions of service beyond the scope of the BF & M. I appreciate your demeanor when you were at the meeting in Albuquerque. It is a true witness on how we should act when confronted with accusations against our character.

I am concerned over this last blog. What do you mean by “emulate” concerning the five principles of the Christian Union? If our desire should be to maintain Christian union without controversy, should someone address a situation they think is wrong, knowing that it will create controversy? How can ideas be explored if controversy is our measuring rod of whether to discuss them or not? Frankly, as you know, the gospel is controversial.

If we were to “emulate” the five Union points, could this keep our BF & M from being a doctrinal tool for accountability as stated in the 2000 preamble? From what I have read from you, I believe you want to stay within the framework of the 2000 BF & M. If you remember seven years ago some controversy was generated over the changes proposed in the 2000 BF & M. I was at SWBTS at that time and there was controversy. Should the changes have been made from the 1963 Confession? I would say yes.

I have also read in other blogs where you feel we should be an organization of cooperating Christians. Yes, I believe we are to be Christians before we are Southern Baptists, but does this mean that should cooperate with “Open Theology” Christians in doing missions? Or how about cooperating with such people as Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, or any other “name it and claim it” preacher? Yes, I do believe we are to share the Gospel so others can be saved, but we are called to make disciples. As you have shown this through your leadership at Emmanuel, it doesn’t end with leading them to the Lord. This means that after they are saved, we are to help them grow in their new relationship to maturity in Christ. Do we want an “Openness” person teaching their view on the sovereignty of God to new converts? Do we want to support someone who denies eternal security of the believer? Yes, salvation is of primary importance, but I think there are some differences that can lead to confusion in converts rather than growth.

Someone might say that all this doctrine divides us. But on the essentials we must worship God both in spirit and in truth. I believe that the 2000 BF & M is a good rallying point for us to cooperate in missions. Again, from what I have read from you, I believe you agree with this. If I have misstated your view, I ask your forgiveness.

I know you and your family have been hurt from this stand. I do pray that the hurts are healed. No wife should be in a meeting and have to hear what was said. I am disappointed that the conduct was not better.

If I have a sent this comment with out a proper understanding of your article, please forgive me. I do not wish to cause you anymore pain. I just didn’t understand the premise of the blog.
Thank you for serving Christ. Thank you for serving our convention.

God Bless,

Bro. Robin