Southern Baptists Elect a New President, Ed Litton, Who Is Seen As a Bridge Builder

[Paidiske]

This was from his church’s website. It’s since been removed without comment.

View attachment 300820

That’s heretical, by the way.

Given that the statement first says that the Trinity are three persons, it seems to me that they are (clumsily) attempting to point out the co-equality of the three (as per the Athanasian Creed), which is more of a current theological issue. I agree parts is a poor word choice, but I'm not sure I'd call it heresy in the context of the whole statement.

As to whether a statement on a church's website reflects on a particular pastor's views, that's trickier. He may never have had anything to do with the drafting of that statement. It may have predated him or been done by the someone else (or worse, a committee!). I'm not sure how much control Baptist pastors typically have over such things. I know I don't tend to micromanage church website content...

 

[Hammster]

Given that the statement first says that the Trinity are three persons, it seems to me that they are (clumsily) attempting to point out the co-equality of the three (as per the Athanasian Creed), which is more of a current theological issue. I agree parts is a poor word choice, but I'm not sure I'd call it heresy in the context of the whole statement.

As to whether a statement on a church's website reflects on a particular pastor's views, that's trickier. He may never have had anything to do with the drafting of that statement. It may have predated him or been done by the someone else (or worse, a committee!). I'm not sure how much control Baptist pastors typically have over such things. I know I don't tend to micromanage church website content...

When someone is the undershepherd of a flock, they are fully responsible for how the church looks to the community. To say that he was unaware of the website could be worse than the poor theology it espoused.

 

[FireDragon76]

Your complaint seems to be an issue of word choice. What does parts mean from your quoted definition in your estimation? How does this differ from your definition?

It has to do with the doctrine of divine simplicity. Something that is made of parts cannot be irreducibly simple.

It's a fairly common error, and might be considered picayune, especially in an environment of widespread American Pietism where all the matters is a "personal relationship with Jesus".