Why the SBC is no longer traditional Baptist

[FreeBaptist]

I posted the following two articles in another thread. I thought the topic important enough to start a new thread on it.

An Analysis of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Baptist Freedom and Conscience Series: An Unconscionable Confession

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I posted the following two articles in another thread. I thought the topic important enough to start a new thread on it.

An Analysis of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Baptist Freedom and Conscience Series: An Unconscionable Confession

‘Tis changing

 

[JonC]

The major issue, IMHO, is not the BF&M but the resolutions. While not binding they are often politically motivated.

The article is not quite accurate. "No creed but the Bible" is often a fundamentalist creed but is not a baptist distinctive.

The BF&M also fails as a creed for the denomination. The SBC is not a church. Some SBC churches may use the F&M as a creed (I do not personally know of any, but it is possible).

I believe the problem with the SBC is not in its doctrinal statements (actually, I applaud the SBC for its stand on biblical issues). I believe the problem is that it has become too political (externally, but more to the point internally). It has become too large a machine.

 

[Rob_BW]

Bruce Gourley, is that you? lol...

But seriously, you're free to believe what you'd like. But if you want my money to go to your seminaries and your missionaries, there's going to have to be some ground rules.

We can all open our history books and watch again how the old Puritan churches and schools slipped into Unitarianism, Universalism, and apostasy. I say, no thanks.

 

[church mouse guy]

The people who opposed the BF&M of 2000 have already left. The new problem is that J.D. Greear, Russell Moore, and Albert Mohler, among others, have brought into the Marxist communism that not is prevalent in American society. That is where the new crisis is coming from. If Greear is re-elected, then we know that the SBC is not ready for reform. As for the 2000 BF&M, the current crowd of Greear, Moore, and Mohler are not going to support that either. The situation in the SBC is very much like what is going on in the RCC: clean sheep; filthy shepherds.

 

[JonC]

There is a difference - the SBC is not a shepherd. The SBC has no authority over churches that comprise its membership.

The question needs to be how much the SBC reoresents those churches it is designed to represent.

 

[Revmitchell]

I posted the following two articles in another thread. I thought the topic important enough to start a new thread on it.

An Analysis of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000

Baptist Freedom and Conscience Series: An Unconscionable Confession

"We have taken the great, sanctified Baptist doctrine of the priesthood of the believer and made it to cover every damnable heresy that I could imagine," ~ W.A. Criswell

 

[church mouse guy]

There is a difference - the SBC is not a shepherd. The SBC has no authority over churches that comprise its membership.

The question needs to be how much the SBC reoresents those churches it is designed to represent.

No one said or implied that the SBC is a shepherd and I don't know what you mean by that. I am merely saying that the SBC preachers are more liberal than the people in the congregations. And we have some extreme liberals in people like Greear, Moore, and Mohler, among others. It is doubtful that these liberals care anything about either version of the BF&M.

 

[Revmitchell]

No one said or implied that the SBC is a shepherd and I don't know what you mean by that. I am merely saying that the SBC preachers are more liberal than the people in the congregations. And we have some extreme liberals in people like Greear, Moore, and Mohler, among others. It is doubtful that these liberals care anything about either version of the BF&M.

You and I usually agree. Here you are way off base. Your brush is too broad.

Edited to add a second line. I surely wouldn't want a "one liner".

 

[The Archangel]

No one said or implied that the SBC is a shepherd and I don't know what you mean by that. I am merely saying that the SBC preachers are more liberal than the people in the congregations. And we have some extreme liberals in people like Greear, Moore, and Mohler, among others. It is doubtful that these liberals care anything about either version of the BF&M.

I think it funny to characterize Mohler, Moore, and Greear as "Liberal." They are anything but. I am a Southern Baptist, but I do not walk lock-step with the denomination. Some things the denomination does frustrates me to no end. However... there is a BIG difference between what should rightly be called the "Traditionalists" and the "Biblicists." (Yes, I know traditionalists will object to the uses of biblicist, but grant it for the sake of argument).

Mohler et al. are in many, though not all, cases far more biblical than the Traditionalists (Trad). And if the Trads feel threatened by the biblicity of the Biblicists, welll, of course they are going to be labeled as "Liberal."

The Archangel

 

[Jerome]

If you recall, the so-called Conservative Resurgence started out rallying under the banner of the 1963 Baptist Faith & Message:

In Search of the New Testament Church: The Baptist Story

a network of persons was developing who believed that seminaries and other denominational agencies needed to be purged of liberalism. The most visible group of critics was the Baptist Faith and Message Fellowship, organized in Atlanta in 1973, which featured Charles Stanley and pastors of some other large Baptist churches.

Of course, they replaced it forthwith once their political ascendancy became secure in the 1990s.

 

[church mouse guy]

You and I usually agree. Here you are way off base. Your brush is too broad.

Edited to add a second line. I surely wouldn't want a "one liner".

It looks as if Mohler, Greear, and Moore are here to stay.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Actually, that phrase wasn't used by the Fundamentalist in their battles with the Modernists in the Northern Baptist Convention. It was used by the Modernists and their Moderate collaborationist to oppose the Fundamentalist push to adopt the New Hampshire Confession as a Statement of Faith. The NHC was to be supported by the convention's missionaries and seminaries.

The article is not quite accurate. "No creed but the Bible" is often a fundamentalist creed but is not a Baptist distinctive.

 

[Revmitchell]

I think it funny to characterize Mohler, Moore, and Greear as "Liberal." They are anything but. I am a Southern Baptist, but I do not walk lock-step with the denomination. Some things the denomination does frustrates me to no end. However... there is a BIG difference between what should rightly be called the "Traditionalists" and the "Biblicists." (Yes, I know traditionalists will object to the uses of biblicist, but grant it for the sake of argument).

Mohler et al. are in many, though not all, cases far more biblical than the Traditionalists (Trad). And if the Trads feel threatened by the biblicity of the Biblicists, welll, of course they are going to be labeled as "Liberal."

The Archangel

Sigh maybe you should learn what you are talking about before making comments.

 

[Revmitchell]

It looks as if Mohler, Greear, and Moore are here to stay.

But you said "SBC preachers" as if all preachers in the SBC are that way.

 

[The Archangel]

Sigh maybe you should learn what you are talking about before making comments.

I do know, thank you very much.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Revmitchell]

I do know, thank you very much.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No your last post doesn't reflect that. Apparently you don't know what the issues are that cause the term liberal to be used or you would not have made that post.

 

[The Archangel]

No your last post doesn't reflect that. Apparently you don't know what the issues are that cause the term liberal to be used or you would not have made that post.

Or... and I’m just speculating here... your apparent agreement with those referring to Mohler and the rest as “liberals” demonstrates the ignorance is yours.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Revmitchell]

Or... and I’m just speculating here... your apparent agreement with those referring to Mohler and the rest as “liberals” demonstrates the ignorance is yours.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aaaannnnndd.....he continues to prove my point.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Actually, speaking from a Historic Northern Baptist perspective, "Mohler and the rest" are not liberals. In the battle for the Northern Baptist Convention, there were the same sort of men. In one corner, stood the Liberals and Modernists. In the opposite corner, stood the NBC functional equivalent of the SBC's Conservative Resurgence. In the battle, the Modernists pushed out the CRs because they could get the votes of Collaborationists. These were otherwise Conservative men who didn't want to push out smooth talking, civilized, cultured, moneyed, etc. Modernists.

No your last post doesn't reflect that. Apparently, you don't know what the issues are that cause the term liberal to be used or you would not have made that post.