The Bible nowhere lists which books are canonical, so by just saying "The Bible says...." you'll never know what the Bible is. Thus a confession and creed provides that information, though obviously it (nor men) have no authority the Bible. To always go by "the Bible says" allows for over-simplistic statements and misuse of texts. i.e. OT dietary laws.

Why should I listen to that link, when that link is not the bible. That sermon becomes an unwritten creed and confession. We all have creeds and confessions, it is just some are written down and some are not.

But....Worse yet wicked sinners will have the gall to not only change confessions, but attempt to re-write Scripture, look at what the kingdom hall and Joseph Smith have done.

I did not post my comments to address Charismatic dangers and errors, but rather anyone (SBC, Protestant) who makes a verbal claim and yet is unregenerate. I do believe that tongues is a human language based on Acts 2. i would prefer doing more study in this area before making other observations.

preacherjond...if you care to read this.

The "theology" your trying to promote falls under these definitions and not the first one? -- Not True.

hard line elitist Calvinist is so confused by his own self-professed intellectual superiority,-- unsubstantiated.

Jesus is God. The Father had drawn me to the Son by learning of Jesus and learning of God before and during regeneration, after regeneration the Holy Spirit enabled me to know Jesus and place faith in the work and blood and identity of Jesus, and from thence I am justified and saved.

Osteen, Hinn, Bush would verbalize, "I believe in the Lord Jesus" as many tares, to none effect.

Double-predestination articulates that Jesus is Lord, rejecting double-predestination necessitates that MAN is LORD and determines his own future.

If man determines his election, and God were to foresee Bushes eternal rejection, then wha-la, even your mantra will not overturn Bushes eternal rejection.

You might as well throw out 66 books and preach 6 words. So you don't believe in teaching the "guilt of man"? Just as you believe in Jesus, then believing in your own goodness and abilities is fine? Many will call him "LORD" and even say we "did good deeds", but He will say to them, depart from me I never knew you.

I have been in the SBC for 34 years since birth and my dad an SBC pastor, I went to an SBC college and SBC seminary. I said a simple prayer at 13, but I was not born again until 26, and that was not due to a "simple belief" of my mind or choice, but the intervention of God.

I am a SBC pastor. I am a 7 point Owen-Gill Calvinist. I know we have many tares in the SBC, probably even 70% or more. What will the SBC think? I am sure most of us will be sorrowed. I though Bush was a nominal Methodist to begin with, so I am not sure what your question was aiming at; If it was more related to the past 70 years of bad SBC Theology, then it seems odd to single them out when every denomination has tares who might display Catholic ideals while even remaining in their own denomination.

The church probably would not follow me out. We have a very low budget and give $1200 to the CP. As far as me personally in a IBC, most are KJVO and border on legalism in other matters.

As a SBC born and bred man, who went to an SBC seminary, and is a pastor in the SBC, I am fed up with Masonic foolery and Warren foolery.

I was at a meeting 3 years ago when a pastor prayed for Saddam in a very Arminian way. My eyes rolled. Paul handed men over to Satan that they would not learn to blaspheme, and knew that even Alexander would be repaid for the evil he rendered.

I must admit there is also a point of wisdom to say, thus far there is no evidence of Oprah being drawn by the Father, and Jesus said to shake the dust off our feet against the city.

I didn't mean my prior comment to be obnoxious, it is just that I haven't posted in a while, and wanted to chime in and feel like I am in on a discussion or two. ha ha ha. So I got my 15 seconds of extroverted baby-steps this week. ha ha.