« Was the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message Calvinistic enough? Mark Dever vs Tom Ascol and Tom Nettles | Main | Hobbs in his own words on "imputed guilt" in 1963 Baptist Faith and Message »

Dec 13, 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Craig

Peter...
This brought tears to my eyes. Dr. Rogers was right. It's sad seeing something as great as the SBC riddled with it's own bullets. Again, for those unfamiliar, I graduated from an SBC affiliate school but I don't attend an SBC church and as of yet never have. It's not that I have anything against them, I just never have.
But I have enormous respect and admiration for the great people of this Convention and the great scholars and teachers she has produced. As a semi-outsider it is sad to watch the infighting and to realize that the energy and effort expended in this battle isn't being used to expand the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I've stated before that I think you all should merely sever the baby and resolve this forever. Let the Reformists start their own Convention or vice-versa and be done with it. The issue...as in any divorce...is assets.
I also think that deep in the hearts of all, there abides a love for the SBC too deep to deliver a mortal wound.
Sadly, what some of you may be missing is that slow poison is still death. It just takes longer and thus appears to be something other than death.
Resolve your differences, men of God, and be about your Father's business. Peter, I do and always will admire your passion that remains coupled with loving civility. Carry on, dear friend.
Craig

Max

Craig writes "As a semi-outsider it is sad to watch the infighting and to realize that the energy and effort expended in this battle isn't being used to expand the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I've stated before that I think you all should merely sever the baby and resolve this forever. Let the Reformists start their own Convention or vice-versa and be done with it."

As this debate within SBC ranks continues to rage (yes, rage describes some of the brethren), I find myself agreeing more each day with Craig's thinking as we face the prospects of a new year clubbing each other with Scripture. There's no doubt that SBC's reputation and effectiveness have been tainted in the minds of outside observers (both saved and lost).

While the Reformers in our midst much despise Charles Finney, he provided some good counsel in this regard in his book "Revivals of Religion":

"It is evident that many more churches need to be divided. How many there are that hold together, and yet do no good, for the simple reason that they are not sufficiently agreed. They do not think alike, nor feel alike ... and while this is so, they never can work together ... they are only a hindrance to each other and to the work of God. In many cases they see and feel that this is so, and yet they keep together, conscientiously, for fear a division should dishonor religion, when in fact the division that now exists may be making religion a by-word and a reproach. Far better would it be if they would agree to divide amicably ... Let them separate, and each party work in its own way ..."

Agreeing to disagree is not unity. Getting along to go along is only a temporary patch on a deep wound. How can two opposing messages regarding God’s plan of salvation co-exist in a single denomination going forward? Mixture in the camp has tremendous ramifications regarding Biblical instruction to the next generation of Southern Baptists, as well as a consistent SBC message for global evangelism. Perhaps its time to lay the club down and divide the camp ... so that those who desire to reform will have an easier row to hoe, while those who don't can focus again on winning a world to Christ without internal distraction.

The comments to this entry are closed.