Featured Is the SBC really Baptist?

Regarding the SBC becoming “creed driven convention that is not Baptist”:

There is a marked difference between a confession and a creed (from a Baptist perspective). The Southern Baptists generally reject creeds. The way that the SBC views creeds is that creeds establish what a church is to believe, but a confession is a statement of beliefs that are held by the church. The SBC does not prescribe a creed, but the churches established a common statement of faith as descriptive. Where creeds are prescriptive, confessions are descriptive.
The Southern Baptist faith and message was designed to address issues contemporary to its environment. It was never regarded as complete or infallible statement of faith. It was not, and is not, an official creed carrying mandatory authority.

For example, Smyth copied the Waterlander Confession almost verbatim for the Second London Confession. Baptist confessions include: Short Confession of Faith in Twenty Articles of 1609; A Short Confession of Faith (1610); Helwys Confession of 1611; Propositions and conclusions concerning True Christian Religion ; The Somerset Confession of Faith ; First London Baptist Confession ; Second London Baptist Confession; The Philadelphia Confession; The Sandy Creek Confession; The Goatyard Declaration of Faith; New Hampshire Confession of Faith; A Treatise on the Faith of the Freewill Baptists; Fulton Confession of Faith (Primitive Baptists); Articles of Faith Put Forth by the Baptist Union. None of these, to include the Southern Baptist Faith and Message, are creedal. Crabtownboy is incorrect in this aspect.

Regarding the priesthood of the believer:

Michael is incorrect in that there is no movement within the convention to dispose of this doctrine. The only thing remotely close to this claim (that I can see) is in the structure of the churches. There are churches that take an anti-Baptist stance in that they adopt a type of elder leadership that is foreign to historical Baptist ecclesiology and probably closer to Presbyterian. But this is a part of being Baptist – Baptist churches are “free church” movements with local autonomy. Each church forms its leadership structure. Interestingly, to deny the right of self government to the local church would also be contrary of the Baptist faith and message.

Wavering on autonomy and Church-State Separation

The SBC has not wavered on the autonomy of the local church (or, for that matter, other organizations within the SBC). If Michael means that the SBC encourages participation in civil matters, then he is correct. The SBC does not seem to shy away from trying to be influential regarding political and moral issues (abortion laws, homosexual marriage, etc.) – but this is not really concerning the separation of Church and State. The SBC has not advocated a Church governed State or a State governed Church. But I do think that many churches become too entrenched in worldly affairs when they should be concentrating on the church.
Soul Liberty – There is a difference between behavior at a Seminary and the convention itself (which answers to the local church) and prescribing behavior to the actual churches. (The SBC can pass a resolution that bans drinking, but this would not prevent a local congregation from having a Friday night keg party).

It is a convention, not a governing body.

 

Governing what is being taught by seminary professors, having them sign a document of their belief, is not creedal. You are confusing the church with the school.
There is a difference between having a teacher affirm a specific set of beliefs (before being hired) and prescribing a set of beliefs to a church.

 

I don't mean to come across as "carpet bombing" churches – I’m not sure exactly sure to what label you are referring. I actually reject the notion that the SBC itself is Baptist anyway because it is not a church - it's the churches that are Baptist - the SBC is a convention. It reflects the beliefs of those associated within its members but does not prescribe beliefs. Organizations and Conventions do not hold beliefs, people do. The local church is the people who make up that congregation, so the church holds beliefs. The SBC is made up of churches.

That said, seminaries are not "creedal" because they do not prescribe a specific belief. They employ professors. You can consider it a litmus test (which I believe should be in place). But it is not actually a new idea. For example, Crawford Toy was dismissed, rightfully so, for his liberal theology (interestingly enough, it also ended his engagement to Lottie Moon). He was not expected to submit to the “creed” of the school, but was dismissed because his beliefs did not concur with those of the institution (although Whitsitt did object to his dismissal). Seminaries should have the right to employ those who represent the ideals of the school. But it is not a creed.

 

Now that I think about it, I’m actually not that much against creeds. They may have a purpose depending on how you view or define the term “creed.”

I could say, for example, that I believe:

1. God is the only true and lifting God that exists. He is the Creator of the universe, eternally existing in three Persons – the Father, son and Holy Spirit – each equally deserving of humanity’s worship and obedience.
2. The Bible is entirely true. The Bible is totally sufficient and completely authoritative for all matters of life and faith.
3. All human beings are born with a sin nature and into a fallen world inclined towards sin. Only by the grace of God through the gift of faith in Jesus Christ can they experience salvation.
4. Jesus is both fully God and fully human. He is Christ, the Son of God. Born of a virgin, he lived a sinless life and performed many miracles. He died on the cross to provide forgiveness of sin and eternal salvation. He rose from the dead, ascended to the right hand of the Father, and will return in power and glory to claim His bride, the church, to exist eternally with Him in Heaven.

I do believe those statements, but they are an explanation of my belief (even though I didn't come up with the statements). If presented by a church, is it then a creed? It’s part of the eight core truths of the NorthSide Bible study (Weatherford, TX), so does it make that congregation a creedal people? Shouldn’t the pastor and teachers also share in that “creed” if it represents the belief of the church?

Or I could say that “I believe in the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and trust in His substitutionary sacrifice on the cross for the atonement of my sins.” Is that creedal? It is certainly theological and it is not a verbatim text of scripture.

Of course, I could also say that the statement “We do not accept creeds” is a creedal statement in itself.

 

“These two proposals have to do only with the confession of faith by which employees of an entity of the convention are to abide whether they be missionaries, professors or administrators."

You forgot that part. Doesn't mean a governance of the local churches - but certainly SBC entities should abide by SBC guidance. (Churches are not SBC entities).

 

Hopefully the decision to publish the resolution was a lesson learned. I don’t think that the SBC could turn itself around a second time (at least not in this environment anyway).