Southern Baptist Blogs: Dolts in our Denomination

After reading today's post from this blog,  I think I just experienced an epiphany...an insight into much of our difficulty in the Southern Baptist Convention.  As the post demonstrates, we are receiving the most ridiculous, outlandish criticisms about the people known as Southern Baptists, that it's hard to take seriously much less spend the time and energy to offer an answer  >>>

What do you say to a charge that Southern Baptists are on the verge of being a 'benign cult'?  This morning I had two older ladies come to our door peddling Watchtower materials.  The Watchtower religious community qualifies for the definition of 'benign cult' in the aforementioned blogger's view.  For him, 'benign cult' can be described like this:

The term 'benign' softens the word cult. Benign speaks of harmlessness - possibly powerlessness. The followers of David Koresh were in danger. The followers of any benign Baptist cult are not in danger of anything except religion without the power of the Spirit...Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Unitarians are all good people with a religion that is powerless to transform lives and restore the souls of men and women with a desire to know God...

Contrasting a dangerous cult like Branch Davidians with harmless, powerless cults like Mormons, Unitarians and the two elderly ladies from the Watchtower community above, the writer is deeply concerned we Southern Baptists are rapidly racing toward these softer, milder more harmless cults.  What does one say to such dribble?  For my part, I have not the faintest clue.

I do possess, however, a much more pressing concern*.  While Wade Burleson wonders about our being a benign cult, I wonder if we Baptist bloggers--at least some of us--have not already become denominational dolts. 

With that, I am...

Peter

Comments

[Chris]

Has it moved from dissent to destroy?

[peter lumpkins]

Chris

I don't have a clue. But I for one am losing interest in attempting to balance out perspective. Posts like Wade just launched offer no real analysis, genuine commentary or sober evidence. Rather it is exploited resources for personal point-making--at least that's the way it comes across to me.

Grace today and much more tomorrow, Chris. With that, I am...

Peter

[Katie]

I no longer visit Burleson's blog since there's rarely anything worth reading there. The word "benign" should never be used to modify the word "cult" at least not by sincere Christ-followers. What's "benign" about dying and going to Hell, separated for eternity from our loving Creator? I agree with you when you say, "it's hard to take seriously much less spend the time and energy to offer an answer."

[JIm Champion]

I guess you know that disagree with you on this one Peter - and we had such a good roll going on!

I dont know that I would have used Wade's phraseology - but I am in total agreement with his statements. Missouri is being idiotic in my opinion to dissasociate themselves from ACTS 29 churches solely because of the Journey and a bible study that took place in a brewery. The Journey went where the people were that most needed to hear the message of Christ.

The MBC continues to to alienate the people of missouri by continuing to narrow the parameters. Hopefully thier last election will do some good. I have friends who are in missouri - a couple pastors, laymen and a few nonchristian friends up there as well. The pastors and laymen are totally put out with the convention, my nonchristian friends think SBC churches are a joke. They never hear anything positive - only lawsuits and what they are against.

I guess I would ask you - are there things in Wades most recent post that you agree with.

Thanks Jim

[peter lumpkins]

Jim,

Thanks Jim. It's hard to agree with something so darn superficial. And, for my part, to even remotely suggest Southern Baptists are trending toward cultism is unmitigated dribble.

Your own assessment of MO Baptists is perfectly acceptable. Maybe or maybe it's not 'idiotic' for them to disassociate with ACTS29. But being 'idiots' and being cult followers are entirely two distinct realities.

Why did not Wade say MO Baptists are acting idiotically? Why castigate Southern Baptists as becoming cultic?

In addition, as Katie indicated above, what is so 'benign' about any cult? Is any cult ultimately benign?

The problem I see right now, Jim, is, given the choice between Wade's patients and Wade's prescription, I'd rather be on the sick bed than swallow his pill.

Grace. With that, I am...

Peter

[Trish]

Thanks for the link Peter, I pray it opens some eyes today. I know the problem I wrote about is just one of many out there to be battled by Christians, but we are in battle.

We need to remember that the real enemy is Satan and we can either choose to be the instruments of God or the instruments of Satan. Sadly, I see too many people choosing to be Satan's instruments and he is having a good laugh right now with how we constantly fight among ourselves.

We fight over things that limit our freedoms here on earth when we should be fighting for the gospel. People forget that in Christ we are free, but our freedom is in His service. We are free to do His work and we are to do it His way so that He gets all the glory and all the honor.

Christians are not to look like the world, we are to look different, we are to be noticeably different so that others can see and desire what we have. We are not to look like the rest of the world so that we will be accepted. Christ did not say we would be accepted. He said we would be hated, we would be persecuted.

The gospel is foolishness to the lost, we are not supposed to dress it up and make it look acceptable, people have to accept it as it is and that it comes with a promise of eternal life in heaven with our Lord and Savior, it doesn't come with promises of an easy, fun, healthy, wealthy, and exciting life.

Blessings,
Trish

[Joe Stewart]

I don't go to Wade's Kool-Aid land anymore - it's just divisive. It was my choice. I heard you were disfellowshipped from the site. hmmm?

[Steve]

I agree with Joe's comment.
No sense in commenting there... waste of time and energy on rubbish.
Steve

[selahV]

Peter...like you say...not worth discussing...I couldn't get past the title and first paragraph.

Trish...we need fervent prayer. selahV

[volfan007]

peter,

i too went over there and was shocked that someone would even dare to suggest that the sbc is becoming like a cult. talk about your slippery slope and straw men arguements....wow!

peter, was this not the most idiotic post you've ever read? i'm sorry for using such harsh language, but this one took the cake.

david

[Jim Champion]

Peter

I was thinking about Wade's post this afternoon, as well as the post that you put up - then I saw volfies response to your post. I have always been a glass half full kind of guy. Ususally when I read one of Wades posts, I find one or more things in his post that I agree with. The main theme that run through his posts is that the SBC is in danger of losing itself by the continual narrowing of parameters. I strongly agree with that sentiment and typically see some version of that sentiment in each of his posts.

I typically find stuff in your posts that I agree with (at least when not hating on Wade), as I do volfies, sbc today, bart etc.

If I were a glass half empty kind of guy, I would sieze on title and not look to see what Wade is trying to get across - which is what I think that volfie has done.

I have been told from time to time that I am somewhat naive and only see the good in people, I do seem to have a gift for reconciliation.

One thing I am confident of is that you and wade and volfie and most everyone that is a regular commenter on these blogs is are sincere born again believers who believe in the fundamentals of the faith. You have to get pretty far down the line to start finding differences - reformed, non armenian, non burlesonite (yea I read chadwicks blog)

Wades point is that we should all be able to work together to further the gospel - even if we differ on a few minor issues (ppl, reformed, some (not all) baptism issues. I AGREE

Do you agree that missouri is making themselves less relevant by thier narrowing - or am I misreading you?

[Ron P.]

Peter,

It is most sad the direction that Wade's blog continues to go. I made the following comment on Bart's blog RE: the use of the word cult.

The most basic definition of a cult I learned is: The adding to, or taking away from the Person or Work of Christ. The SBC is far from a cult or even a benign cult. I think that the word cult has been used irresponsibly and pejoratively as a vehicle of hyperbole to make aspersions and political points. How tragic the name calling has become.

Blessings,

Ron P.

[volfan007]

well, i just want to say that i would not be for churches being started on cp money if they were serving pre-worship cocktails. i'm not talking about the mbc right now. i'm talking about my view on alcohol, and what is apparently the majority of the sbc's view on alcohol use. we believe that the bible does call any use of fermented, strong drink as being foolish....proverbs. and, it's absolutely sinful to be high, or drunk, on alcohol according to eph. 5.

but, anyway, be this as it may... even with my narrow views on alcohol and supporting churches that drink during the services, or whatever. i just want to say....in light of wade's post...that my wife wears pants, and she wears make up. i like the nasv as my favorite version of the bible, not the kjv. and, i listen to rock and country music, as well as christian music.

the post by wade was a straw men, slippery slope arguement that went way over the line. saying that the sbc is becoming a benign cult was ridiculous.

david

ps. i dont hate wade. i'm not trying to be mean to wade. i'm not angry.

[Byroniac]

Although Katie raises a good point concerning the use of "benign" as a modifier for the word cult, I want to point out two things in Wade's defense that I believe remove any cause for alarm. First, Wade said, "drift *toward* becoming a benign cult" [emphasis mine]. That is not the same thing as implying we are already at that state. Second, on his third point just beneath that he states, "Benign speaks of harmlessness - possibly powerlessness" and in context, he is speaking not in a (Christian) salvation context but a social and cultural one (specifically from the standpoint of religion). He speaks in the salvation context without explicitly echoing Katie's point when he says, "The followers of any benign Baptist cult are not in danger of anything except religion without the power of the Spirit." Though I believe (correctly, I hope) that I understand where Peter is coming from on this, I find myself agreeing with Wade and basically echoing Jim Champion's posts.

[peter lumpkins]

Byron,

Wade writes that "Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Unitarians are all good people with a religion that is powerless to transform lives and restore the souls of men and women with a desire to know God."

He lumps SBs in with them as on a course from which he hopes we do not continue. From my perspective, I do not know how clearer you would need him to be,

Nor could one, as far as I am concerned, make a case for a 'benign' cult. Do you honestly think any of the three listed above are 'benign' in any real sense? Wade may make his 'distinction' all he wishes. The question is, is it a legitimate distinction?

With that, I am...

Peter

[Byroniac]

Peter:

With all due respect, I don't see Wade lumping the SBC in with the likes of those you mentioned. He did explicitly write "drift toward becoming a benign cult" rather than that we have become such. That's my perspective, but I'm honestly trying to understand yours.

And yes, those three listed above, are indeed benign, not in a Christian salvation context of course, but in the context which Wade implicitly (at least) addresses, the religious-oriented one and its effects on culture and society.

I'd have to ask Wade to be sure, but I think his context would certainly reference as a central point the concept of cult as defined, for example, by dictionary.com, "a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies."

I perceive (perhaps wrongly) that there is a strong pressure in the SBC to conform in order for fellowship to be celebrated, and that bothers me. For example, I'm still Southern Baptist, but only nominally so, because in this area where I live at least (which is all I can speak for truthfully) my beliefs on secondary and tertiary matters of the faith place me outside the pale of establishment SBC orthodoxy, and enjoying genuine fellowship can be challenging (and not suprisingly, rare).

People like us do not mind strict membership requirements which are Scripture-based. In fact, we seek and affirm such, I would hope. What we do mind is when we perceive that systems of religious worship are being established where the litmus tests of fellowship sometimes rest on popular church tradition, and secondary and tertiary issues (like in Missouri with the Acts 29 network) of Scriptural interpretation.

I'm sorry, and with all due respect, but that just plain bothers me. Perhaps I'm just overreacting, and that's entirely possible, but I'd like to think that the SBC will continue to learn to exercise the spiritual discernment to base tests of orthodoxy and granting of fellowship on Scriptural patterns as the supreme authority. With the Missouri case, I'm not so sure now. Please don't misunderstand me; I'm not arguing in any shape, fashion, or form for a lessening or cheapening of authentic Christian orthodoxy based solely on the inerrant Word of God. What I do argue against is perceived neglect of the supreme importance of the Scriptures, the unreasonable or excessive tightening and control of fellowship parameters, and the unhealthy desire to control the interpretation of Scripture to the extreme we just witnessed with the MBC--a job responsibility not of the MBC but of the Holy Spirit.

I'm sorry for the extreme language, but this is my current viewpoint on the matter. All is not well with the SBC. Yet I have high hopes for the SBC, love for my brothers and sisters who dwell in it, and most of all supreme confidence in the One all of us genuine believers serve and seek to obey.

[Scott Gordon]

Peter,

As one who is about to become a MOBapt, I am not so certain that the convention's decision is a bad idea. I remember an interview recently with Dr. Danny Akin in which he sounds a cautionary note regarding any SBC affiliation with the ACTS 29 crew. I must admit a fair bit of ignorance regarding the latter's scope for their 'ministry', but I must admit to being duly warned by Dr. Akin's words.

(see SBCToday audio resources for the complete interview...and now back to our regular programming...)

With all movements back to a solidly biblical framework for our ministries (associational, state conventions, SBC) there are some kinks, some extreme swings, and some time needed for adjustments. I believe time will prove that the MOBapts are heading the right direction.

Sola Gratia!

[peter lumpkins]

Byron,

Unfortunately, it seems to me, you commit equivocation on 'cult'. I do not deny the sense of 'cult' you desire to suggest as "a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies". To the contrary, every religion--including Judaism & Christianity-- may be referenced as such.

Yet, that is definitively not the way we employ 'cult' when referring to JWs, Mormons or others. You must know this.

Thus the analogy Wade employs simply and utterly is ridiculous. A better metaphor Les Puryear brought up to Wade which, as usual, he ignores--moral legalism. This fits your 'tightening' etc much better and certainly does not cast the debate in such false categories.

If you do not agree, Byron, be my guest...

Scott,

Thanks for the words about Dr. Akin. I wish you the best in MO. I want to know more about the ACTS29 network.

Grace. With that, I am...

Peter

[Byroniac]

Peter:

With due respect to you and others, I do not agree. My personal perceptions in this matter have alarmed me, and I have not seen a Scriptural focus in agencies such as the MBC (even in their own writings on the matter!). But as usual, your words make me think. I don't plan to comment on this issue again for a while, but I will try to give the matter some thought and most of all, pray about it.