The future of the BGCT

Preach, that's just silly.

In Texas perhaps more than anywhere else in Southern Baptist political life the line between the fundamentalists and the "moderates" is hair-thin. It might be better to think of the moderates as "moderately fundamentalist" there.

Unlike most CBF vs. SBC conflicts - which generally center around theology - the BGCT vs. SBCT conflict is as much over politics. The Texans don't like the heavy-handed approach of the fundamentalists (even if they agree with much of their theology).

Joshua

 

The integrity of men who uphold Scripture as God's revelation. </font>[/QUOTE]As one who has worked with the BGCT I can assure you that this is not the issue. This is what some radicals on the Fundy's side have tried to make it. Their views on scripture are very close to the same, some of the more extremiest on each side could find something to debate over, but most believers couldn't even tell the difference between these two beliefs.

Do you want to know what has caused the rift?

Guilt by association propaganda. Radical fundys have written all kinds of propaganda linking someone who was employed by someone who the BGCT once supported, who knew someone who was a Homosexual female pastor. So, they deduce that the BGCT must support the ordaination of homosexual female pastors. It's ridiculous!

Bro. Bill

 

Joshua,
My BGCT friends find this laughable. For the most part, they loathe conservative theology. They try the whole "Big Tent Baptist" bit, but they only have room under the big tent for people who think, talk, and believe just like they do. They are as politically motivated as their CBF counterparts. (BTW, have you ever gotten around to listening to those Craddock tapes? Haven't heard you respond)

Go2church, your assertion that the SBC is now somehow IFB is laughable also. I came out of the IFB movement and trust me, the two shall never meet.

 

Tom,
I came out of the IFB too. I would again say, a right turn is a right turn and the SBC have headed right big time. There will be however those SBCer's now that will think they are not right and will eventually become IFB.

 

Exxon,
Why is that amazing?
Russell

 

I find it amazing because the BGCT and CBF claim to not be one in the same, yet many leaders of one group also participate in the other. I can understand both groups abhorring the rigidity of the SBC, but I wonder if there's something else that both groups have in common. </font>[/QUOTE]A common affliction. Both are under attack by the SBC.

 

A lack of integrity?

 

Hi Exxon,

I would imagine that the leadership of the BGCT also served on Agency Boards of the SBC in years past, and as officers of the convention. Is that amazing?

Russell

 

Preach,

Did you e-mail your CBF friend for that little gem?

Still waiting on your "proof" from the CBF thread 6 or 8 months ago.

 

Not really amazing, since the power wonks of the CBF used to be the power wonks of the SBC until the rank and file were freed from Egypt

 

Not really amazing, since the power wonks of the CBF used to be the power wonks of the SBC until the rank and file were freed from Egypt </font>[/QUOTE]Here's the difference: The CBF exiles were still with the SBC 9-20 years ago. I bet that the BGCT folks were on SBC boards until recently. Some may still be serving on SBC boards right now.

 

Okay folks, time out. I need some explanations. What are the differences in a NUTSHELL between the two Texas groups BGCT and SBCT ? Who would be more likely to appoint women pastors and deny the virgin birth? Is either group that incredibly liberal in stance? Or are the differences not so much liberal as libertarian? Seriously, this is important and I need a solid straightforward answer from somebody in the know. Your help is appreciated.

Thanks.

Chris Hargrove

"It was the Holy Spirit who moved the prophets to speak from God." (2 Peter 1:21)

 

The primary difference is that the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention is in full support of the so-called “conservative resurgence” of the SBC and fully supports all programs of the SBC. This group began in Houston a few years ago as an alternative to the Baptist General Convention of Texas

The Baptist General Convention of Texas has generally been much less supportive of the “resurgence” in the Southern Baptist Convention (many member churches view it as a fundamentalist takeover instead of any sort of “resurgence”). The Baptist General Convention of Texas supports any giving plan that a member church desires, but most member churches do not support some of the SBC commissions and agencies. The BGCT has taken the initiative to conduct its own specialized mission work and and allow like-minded churches from other states to join the Texas convention. The BGCT has also rejected the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message and the 1998 amendment to the BF&M and instead continues to embrace the 1963 BF&M.

There’s much more to tell, but that the basic sketch.

The BGCT does not appoint pastors for any church. But at the same time, the BGCT does not address the issue and allows each church to decide the issue on their own. (Unlike the SBC, who has written it into the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message.)

I do not know of any churches or persons within the BGCT or SBTC who denies the virgin birth of church. It would not be “likely” for either group.

No. Not at all.

The terms really don’t fit that well, but the BGCT would be the more “libertarian” of the two groups.

I’ll be happy to help you in any way possible. I am not involved with the SBCT, but I have been involved fairly heavily with the Baptist General Convention of Texas for the last decade. (I’ve attended most of the annual meetings and I keep up with the issues here in the state.)