Shallow Preaching, Cultural Adaptability Behind Baptist Decline, Says Leader

I agree with the last quote in the article:

However, what Patterson and other leaders and followers of the fundamentalist takeover have focused on is their opinion of the spiritual poverty and doctrinal impurity of others. Many of the up-and-coming Baptist preachers, who have chosen to go to non-SBC seminaries, have been quoted as saying that the continuing turmoil (this year marks the 30th anniversary) in the SBC is a major factor in their decision. Other takeover leaders, Jimmy Draper and Morris Chapman, have wondered whether they went too far. Perhaps it is time for Patterson to assess the possible spiritual poverty of his own actions over the last three decades.

Tim Reynolds

 

Tim, you guys lost (Thank God) and it's time to move on and get over it. Had we gone the way of the liberals I can only imagine the state of the church today.

 

You are correct Tim. I have followed the SBC conflict from the beginning. Grew up in the SBD, was in the SBC until a few years ago when our church, to maintain our Christian integrity, stopped funding the SBC and took that affliation off our correspondence. The fundamentalists in the SBC have been much more interested in their own power and in politics than in preaching Christ. One of our biggest problems is the word "Baptist" on our sign. Most people here, who are unaware, see the word Baptist and do not think Christian, but bigots, narrow minded zealots, right-wing, war mongering dim wits.

How do I know this? We have asked people and that is their basic reply.

The unethical methods used by the fundamentalists to take over the SBC was anything but Christian.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fundamentalism
Apparenly people who believe the bible are fundamentalists.
What does that make those who hate fundamantalists?

After reading on what a christian fundamantalist is, I'd be ashamed to be anything else, anything else is nothing less then compromise, compromise of scripture, compromise in the christian life, nothing but compromise. But of course thats what liberals are, cmpromising their christianity for the sake of the world.

 

With thee attitude you espouse towards others just here on BB it is no wonder so many FLEE your "movement".

The IFB is not innocent of your attitude and many realize the damage arrogance and ego driven mentalities have caused.

In response to your attack on Tim, GET OVER YOURSELF!

 

Glad I have never been in the SBC and getting real selective about IFB's.

One of the "icons" of the faith/ of IFB fame, the one and ONLY Tony Hutson, is allowed to quote word for word some one using profanity in the pulpit and then asked to come back.

My family will NOT be attending that service he has been asked to come back to.

The arrogance and egotistical attitudes are birthed from the bully and king of the hill mentalities.

God HELP US!:godisgood:

 

This is an interesting discussion. Our church is affiliated, but we have great freedom in what we teach. As someone in ministry I can tell you that it makes no difference whether you are SBC or Independent - the preaching and direction of the church is still up to the preacher. There are good in bad in all the Baptist affiliations - there are Independents who are KJVO and act more like the Holiness movement! But the thing that stands out here in this discussion (pardon me) is how some reference Baptists in negative terms. This is very true in some instances, but guess where this notion comes from? The secular media! There is an attempt (if you haven't noticed) to villainize anything Christian and we should not be ripping one another apart because of our Baptist affiliation! Hold renegade pastors accountable, yes, (Phelps comes to mind) but remember that we also have some of the finest of the finest now (Paul Washer) and of the past (Charles Haddon Spurgeon.)

It's all in how you look at things. I've attended approximately 28 churches and about 10 different denominations - Pentecostal, Assemblies of God, Presbyterian, non-denominational, Brethren, etc. before I "settled" into the Baptist denomination, believing it to be the most doctrinally sound. I was a member of an Independent Baptist Church and then Southern Baptist after I moved - NO DIFFERENCE.
Uh...so what was the question??? lol. :tonofbricks:

 

How old are you? The SBC conflict started decades ago, not in the 80s.

Interesting idea of Christian integrity. Can you enlarge on this for us?

So people are ignorant. That's not new.

Elections? Yes, very unethical. The subversion used by the liberals at places like Southern were okay?

Perhaps being in the moderate wing of the SBC has clouded your view. I think the story is far different than you are letting on here.

 

Absolutely.

A surprising number of the so-called "conservative resurgence" leadership has shown a complete lack of morals in the way they have conducted themselves. (I could name a long list of names, but it serves no purpose.)

In the same way, there are a number on the "moderate" side who are just as guilty of unethical behavior as those they reacted against.

The real solution to all of these issues (both doctrinal and moral) is a refocusing of Baptist life on discipleship, learning and practicing the commands of Jesus as individuals and communities of faith instead of feeding the CEO model of local church polity and unyielding agenda-driven power plays.

That's the truth.

As one who in the 1980s was very much on the so-called "conservative resurgence" side, and then, because of close relationships and connections with some of the "resurgence" leaders, saw through the facade and gradually shifted to the "moderate" side, I understand the concerns of biblical conservatives. As a biblical conservative and denominational "moderate," I realized that things weren't rosy on that side either. I attended CBF events and associated with CBF people, but discovered I didn't really fit into that mold. Both sides are polarized toward the most extreme elements of their constituents.

Then I cast my lot with my state denomination, the Baptist General Convention of Texas. Of course, after years of trying to take over the BGCT, "conservative resurgence" SBCers decided to start their own state denomination that has worked hard to dismantle the BGCT. The BGCT has had to spend much of its time, energy and resources to defend itself in the hearts and minds of the people of Texas leading to lax oversight of important projects leading to things like the Rio Grande Valley Mission scandal.

I know for sure that at least one of the two mentioned in the above sentence is certain they went too far... of course, that person may not say it in public for a number of reasons.

Like so many other things, there's plenty of blame to go around. One side was rightly concerned about the need for their brothers and sisters, so they violated many of the commands of Jesus in order to try to ensure that others "believed" the Bible the way they though they did. By their actions, they proved they really don't believe the content of the Bible very well.

On the other hand, the other side was rightly concerned about the need for Christian liberty and the importance of rightly interpreting the scripture, that they compromised on encouraging their brothers and sisters to hold a high standard of theology and ethics and let "whosoever" into full fellowship. By their actions, they have shown their heart may be in the right place, but they have ignored some of the less popular teachings of scripture.

As for myself, I have joined various human causes, found myself on the inside, and realized I can't in good conscience be a part of it. It's like learning how sausage is made. While it taste good if you are just a consumer, the more you know about it, the less likely you will have a stomach for it. Too many good and bad things get ground up and stuffed together into a pre-formed mold that certainly may be pleasing, but is very bad for your spiritual health. And of course I am there with everyone else, stuffing both good and evil into the mix, both blessing and poisoning the church through my efforts.

But there's a better way.

Jesus calls me to work for His Kingdom here on earth, within a community of believers. At this point in my life, I'm taking care of my own garbage. I'm learning to be a disciple of Jesus in word and deed, and teaching others to do with same within my church. God is blessing this activity and we are seeing the Spirit draw all sorts of people to our congregation for redemption and healing. Our church is also starting to work with the vast homeless population in Fort Worth, doing things as a congregation as well as working with other Christian groups to provide opportunities for people to help themselves (if they are able) and to help the helpless. We are combining a conservative biblical viewpoint with the social implications of the gospel (a literal reading of scripture demands that a Christian look after their neighbor... including people we don't necessarily approve of).

I am convinced the future of the Christian church is post-denominational.

 

I agree 100% !!!!

 

One must wonder if that same "shallow preaching and cultural adaptability" are behind the decline of the seminary which the leader presides over.

Maybe there are other issues at play.

 

Whoa, a new term for me. Could you define the term, and how you see its playing out in concrete form?

 

Here's some info-

http://www.founders.org/blog/2007/02/its-post-denominational-world_09.html

 

Right. After all, most people watch the internal politics of the Southern Baptists with unwaning vigilance.

 

No proof as usual. Just another ad hominem non-argument. The fundamentalist takeover has thrown the SBC into decline. Baptisms are down for the third straight year.

 

I don't know, just asking......Does this takeover include dispensationalism?

Cheers,

Jim