PDA

View Full Version : SBC - Conservative Resurgence vs Fundamentalist Takeover



Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 01:08 PM
In another thread, I brought up the SBC "Conservative Resurgence" (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?8903-Waterproof-tearproof-Bible&p=261386&viewfull=1#post261386). Our detractors, of course, call it the "Fundamentalist Takeover".

It is, to my knowledge, the only large denomination that has ever "drifted left", then came back to conservative roots.

It began in the late 70's / early 80's with a systematic election of conservatives to SBC boards and committees, as well as the presidency. The aim was to take the SBC from a liberal trajectory to a clear declaration of inerrancy.

I remember well the liberals pitching fits and yelling about those "Fun-DAMN-mentalists". :blush:

I, of course, was one of the conservatives pushing for the removal of some of the more liberal elements. I believe that the majority of Southern Baptists are conservative at heart, and it was only the bigger churches at the time that were more liberal, and tended to have more liberal pastors. That has changed a lot, with some of our bigger Churches now being some of more conservative Churches.

What helped, of course, was that the vast majority of SBC Churches are NOT "big" at all, but are comprised of less than 125 active members.

In our convention, the local Churches send "messengers" (not delegates) to the annual meetings, and these "messengers" vote on issues pertaining to the convention's business. No Church can have more than 10 messengers, regardless of size. This is so a couple of Churches of 40,000 cannot overrule the vast majority of church congregations who might only be able to send 1 or 2 or 4 messengers (depending on the Church's size, but no more than 10 total).

Over time, and through some pretty contentious annual meetings, the conservatives began to win ballot after ballot (the key being the Presidency, of which Adrian Rogers of Memphis was the first) until the liberals got mad and decided to start their own state conventions. (the strategy was to elect ten conservative presidents in a row, because they appoint heads of boards and committees)

In Texas, the Baptist General Convention of Texas is the predominant STATE convention, so a bunch of us conservatives started up a new State Convention - the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention.

I think that's enough for an introduction for now.

One Bad Pig
11-07-2015, 01:34 PM
:popcorn:

Jedidiah
11-07-2015, 01:57 PM
CP, you must recognize the need for liberals to distort what they do not agree with. This is evidently true even among Christians.
In another thread, I brought up the SBC "Conservative Resurgence" (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?8903-Waterproof-tearproof-Bible&p=261386&viewfull=1#post261386). Our detractors, of course, call it the "Fundamentalist Takeover".

It is, to my knowledge, the only large denomination that has ever "drifted left", then came back to conservative roots.

It began in the late 70's / early 80's with a systematic election of conservatives to SBC boards and committees, as well as the presidency. The aim was to take the SBC from a liberal trajectory to a clear declaration of inerrancy.

I remember well the liberals pitching fits and yelling about those "Fun-DAMN-mentalists". :blush:

I, of course, was one of the conservatives pushing for the removal of some of the more liberal elements. I believe that the majority of Southern Baptists are conservative at heart, and it was only the bigger churches at the time that were more liberal, and tended to have more liberal pastors. That has changed a lot, with some of our bigger Churches now being some of more conservative Churches.

What helped, of course, was that the vast majority of SBC Churches are NOT "big" at all, but are comprised of less than 125 active members.

In our convention, the local Churches send "messengers" (not delegates) to the annual meetings, and these "messengers" vote on issues pertaining to the convention's business. No Church can have more than 10 messengers, regardless of size. This is so a couple of Churches of 40,000 cannot overrule the vast majority of church congregations who might only be able to send 1 or 2 or 4 messengers (depending on the Church's size, but no more than 10 total).

Over time, and through some pretty contentious annual meetings, the conservatives began to win ballot after ballot (the key being the Presidency, of which Adrian Rogers of Memphis was the first) until the liberals got mad and decided to start their own state conventions. (the strategy was to elect ten conservative presidents in a row, because they appoint heads of boards and committees)

In Texas, the Baptist General Convention of Texas is the predominant STATE convention, so a bunch of us conservatives started up a new State Convention - the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention.

I think that's enough for an introduction for now.

heartablaze
11-07-2015, 02:48 PM
It began in the late 70's / early 80's with a systematic election of conservatives to SBC boards and committees, as well as the presidency. The aim was to take the SBC from a liberal trajectory to a clear declaration of inerrancy.

I remember well the liberals pitching fits and yelling about those "Fun-DAMN-mentalists". :blush:


So you really are that old :lol: What were some of the big issues that liberals wanted to push? How far did they get? Was the president at one time liberal? What was it like for you at that time?



I, of course, was one of the conservatives pushing for the removal of some of the more liberal elements. I believe that the majority of Southern Baptists are conservative at heart, and it was only the bigger churches at the time that were more liberal, and tended to have more liberal pastors. That has changed a lot, with some of our bigger Churches now being some of more conservative Churches.

What helped, of course, was that the vast majority of SBC Churches are NOT "big" at all, but are comprised of less than 125 active members.

In our convention, the local Churches send "messengers" (not delegates) to the annual meetings, and these "messengers" vote on issues pertaining to the convention's business. No Church can have more than 10 messengers, regardless of size. This is so a couple of Churches of 40,000 cannot overrule the vast majority of church congregations who might only be able to send 1 or 2 or 4 messengers (depending on the Church's size, but no more than 10 total).


Ok, so it works like a cross between the Senate and House? There are differing numbers based on size of the church, but the difference isn't huge?
How does this work with the whole autonomy of the local church belief? Are rulings binding on local churches?




Over time, and through some pretty contentious annual meetings, the conservatives began to win ballot after ballot (the key being the Presidency, of which Adrian Rogers of Memphis was the first) until the liberals got mad and decided to start their own state conventions. (the strategy was to elect ten conservative presidents in a row, because they appoint heads of boards and committees)

In Texas, the Baptist General Convention of Texas is the predominant STATE convention, so a bunch of us conservatives started up a new State Convention - the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention.

I think that's enough for an introduction for now.

Leave it to Texans to do that :cp: So are you then just a member of the SBTC or also a member of the SBC?

Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 03:36 PM
So you really are that old :lol:

I'm not older than dirt, but I helped carry the first load. :smile:


What were some of the big issues that liberals wanted to push? How far did they get? Was the president at one time liberal? What was it like for you at that time?

Funny story - I grew up in a very conservative independent fundamentalist Baptist Church. The preacher was always talking about how liberal the Southern Baptists were. I think he talked more about the SBC than he did about Jesus. One of the big issues was the Broadman Commentary, which had some pretty liberal commentary about the first 5 books of the Bible. I think the Genesis commentary was the biggest challenge.

Anyway, I was going through some teenage rebellion at the time, and when I got old enough (17) to leave home, I did, and I figured I'd go check out these really liberal Southern Baptists. Well, God has a sense of humor, because the SBC Church I started attending was a very CONSERVATIVE Baptist Church where they preached the Bible, and didn't waste time blasting other denominations. That pastor (still "my pastor" to this day) preached about Jesus a whole bunch! :smile:

But, back to the topic - there were some very liberal professors at our seminaries (I think we had 6 seminaries then) and there was concern that our seminarians were not getting a good sound biblical education.


Ok, so it works like a cross between the Senate and House? There are differing numbers based on size of the church, but the difference isn't huge?

Kinda like the Senate only has 2 Senators from each state, but, yeah, each Church can have UP TO 10 Messengers based on the size of the congregation. And we (the local Churches) elect our Messengers annually.


How does this work with the whole autonomy of the local church belief? Are rulings binding on local churches?

There are no "rulings" - basically, we hammered out the Baptist Faith & Message (http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfm2000.asp) (updated in 2000 to deal with "the Family"), but each Church is CLEARLY autonomous, and does not have to abide by anything the SBC decides. (The BF&M is not a "Creed", because we (Southern Baptists) boast of NOT being a "creedal people", although the BF&M spells out what we believe, kinda like ... um... well.... like a Creed! :smile:)


Leave it to Texans to do that :cp: So are you then just a member of the SBTC or also a member of the SBC?

Most of our Churches belong to......


An "Association" - which is a local group of Churches, usually a county or several counties or parishes of a state.
(In some cases, there are also "Areas" - made up of a collection of Associations. Our "Area" is comprised of 4 Associations)
A State Convention - In Texas, it's the BGCT (if you're liberal) or SBTC (if you're conservative) or BOTH if you're confused. :smile:
The Southern Baptist Convention - which is the National organization that also hosts the North American Mission Board and the International Mission Board.

robrecht
11-07-2015, 03:47 PM
So, basically, you're part of a liberal renegade sect seeking to undermine the Southern Baptist rejection of creeds.

Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 04:11 PM
So, basically, you're part of a liberal renegade sect seeking to undermine the Southern Baptist rejection of creeds.

When I'm not infiltrating Catholics from their closets, yes.

robrecht
11-07-2015, 04:28 PM
When I'm not infiltrating Catholics from their closets, yes.Are you also trying to undermine the Baptist belief in the inviolability of conscience? You probably don't even believe that the Baptists date back to John the Baptist. Damn liberals!

rogue06
11-07-2015, 05:04 PM
Are you also trying to undermine the Baptist belief in the inviolability of conscience? You probably don't even believe that the Baptists date back to John the Baptist. Damn liberals!
I betchya he's even got a commie flag tacked up on the wall inside of his garage 11196

Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 06:10 PM
Are you also trying to undermine the Baptist belief in the inviolability of conscience?

You mean "the priesthood of the believer"? I can't confess to that, or folks will know I've got some Catholic in me. :no:


You probably don't even believe that the Baptists date back to John the Baptist. Damn liberals!

I sure do! Why, I once attended a Baptist Church what had the restroom stalls labeled "1st John, 2nd John and 3rd John"!

robrecht
11-07-2015, 07:00 PM
You mean "the priesthood of the believer"? I can't confess to that, or folks will know I've got some Catholic in me. :no:No, I mean the inviolability of conscience. Am I the only Baptist left around here?


I sure do! Why, I once attended a Baptist Church what had the restroom stalls labeled "1st John, 2nd John and 3rd John"! Sounds like you're referring to epistles not John the Baptist. You are so confused. I'm going to pray for you.

Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 07:03 PM
No, I mean the inviolability of conscience. Am I the only Baptist left around here?

But I like the priesthood of the believer better cause I can do anything I want and blame it on the Bible! :glare:


Sounds like you're referring to epistles not John the Baptist. You are so confused. I'm going to pray for you.

John, who wrote the gospel telling us about John the Baptist, also wrote .... hey, wait! the LADIES bathrooms would be named after the epistles, cause those were the wives of the apostles! :yes:

robrecht
11-07-2015, 07:08 PM
But I like the priesthood of the believer better cause I can do anything I want and blame it on the Bible! :glare:

John, who wrote the gospel telling us about John the Baptist, also wrote .... hey, wait! the LADIES bathrooms would be named after the epistles, cause those were the wives of the apostles! :yes: I like the priesthood of all believers too, but I'm surprised that you think it is an indication of your crypto-Catholic tendencies. Most Catholics only rediscovered the priesthood of all believers with Vatican II.

Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 07:12 PM
I like the priesthood of all believers too, but I'm surprised that you think it is an indication of your crypto-Catholic tendencies. Most Catholics only rediscovered the priesthood of all believers with Vatican II.

All seriousness aside, when I was a kid, the neighbor down the street was a Catholic. I asked him to come to Vacation Bible School with me, and he asked his mom, who threw a wall-eyed fit. I will never forget her literally screaming "you don't have any business reading the Bible for yourself - that's what the Priest does!" Now, she was, indeed, a little nutty, but I began to find out that several of my other Catholic friends were NOT allowed to come to VBS unless they had special permission from the Priest, and they were NOT encouraged to (or, in some cases, they were discouraged from) reading the Bible on their own.

That would have been circa 1957 or so... when was Vatican II?

Cow Poke
11-07-2015, 07:14 PM
Which reminds me.... my Mom used to get REALLY upset when, at the beginning of each school year, we had to fill out a little form with our home address, phone number, nearest relatives, etc... and there was a place for "religious affiliation"...

The choices were...

Protestant
Catholic
Jewish
Other

Mom would get really mad because they didn't have "Baptist", and we for SURE weren't "Protestant!" :smile:

rogue06
11-07-2015, 07:20 PM
All seriousness aside, when I was a kid, the neighbor down the street was a Catholic. I asked him to come to Vacation Bible School with me, and he asked his mom, who threw a wall-eyed fit. I will never forget her literally screaming "you don't have any business reading the Bible for yourself - that's what the Priest does!" Now, she was, indeed, a little nutty, but I began to find out that several of my other Catholic friends were NOT allowed to come to VBS unless they had special permission from the Priest, and they were NOT encouraged to (or, in some cases, they were discouraged from) reading the Bible on their own.

That would have been circa 1957 or so... when was Vatican II?
Easy enough to answer (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Vatican+II)

One Bad Pig
11-07-2015, 07:28 PM
Which reminds me.... my Mom used to get REALLY upset when, at the beginning of each school year, we had to fill out a little form with our home address, phone number, nearest relatives, etc... and there was a place for "religious affiliation"...

The choices were...

Protestant
Catholic
Jewish
Other

Mom would get really mad because they didn't have "Baptist", and we for SURE weren't "Protestant!" :smile:
That tends to be the POV of those who think "Baptists" go back to John the Baptist. :yes:

I don't know that I'd be happy with sending an Orthodox kid to VBS; as long as they go to church, they already know about Jesus, and VBS is (at least theoretically) used as a means of reaching the unchurched. Reading the Bible is encouraged, however.

robrecht
11-07-2015, 07:33 PM
All seriousness aside, when I was a kid, the neighbor down the street was a Catholic. I asked him to come to Vacation Bible School with me, and he asked his mom, who threw a wall-eyed fit. I will never forget her literally screaming "you don't have any business reading the Bible for yourself - that's what the Priest does!" Now, she was, indeed, a little nutty, but I began to find out that several of my other Catholic friends were NOT allowed to come to VBS unless they had special permission from the Priest, and they were NOT encouraged to (or, in some cases, they were discouraged from) reading the Bible on their own.

That would have been circa 1957 or so... when was Vatican II?
Most Catholics were only concerned about whacky interpretations of the book of Revelation, I suppose especially those Protestants who claimed that the Pope was the antichrist. Catholics all had family bibles, but thought it was more important to live according to the teachings of the Bible (as interpreted by the Church) than to actually read it ourselves.

Adam
11-07-2015, 08:39 PM
The council, through the Holy See, formally opened under the pontificate of Pope John XXIII on 11 October 1962 and closed under Pope Paul VI on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception in 1965
Wiki

Faber
11-08-2015, 11:59 AM
You probably don't even believe that the Baptists date back to John the Baptist.
Never heard of a miqveh?

Pentecost
11-08-2015, 03:41 PM
It is a little bit related but I was visiting a church for a conference my friend invited me to (it was terrible by the way, they were everything wrong with the charismatic movement and I felt the presence (that they were supposedly drunk off) more when I was walking to Jack in the Box (mid-service) than when I was participating in their worship service, anyways the event was hosted by charismatics who were renting the chapel from a Presbyterian church that just left PC(USA) for ECO due to the liberalization of PC(USA).

robrecht
11-08-2015, 03:47 PM
Never heard of a miqveh?
Sure I have.

Cow Poke
11-08-2015, 03:49 PM
Sure I have.

Didn't I order you out of this thread? :glare:

robrecht
11-08-2015, 03:50 PM
Didn't I order you out of this thread? :glare:
No, I don't think so. Anyway, I have to follow my conscience.

Cow Poke
11-08-2015, 03:51 PM
No, I don't think so. Anyway, I have to follow my conscience.

Oh. Well, then. Alrighty! Carry on!

One Bad Pig
11-08-2015, 04:38 PM
No, I don't think so. Anyway, I have to follow my conscience.
ECREE. Assumes Catholics have a conscience.

heartablaze
11-08-2015, 06:31 PM
Thanks for the answers, Cowpoke. It's crazy how God pulled you into the Baptist fold ;) What would you say are big issues of division for Baptists today?

Cow Poke
11-08-2015, 07:00 PM
Thanks for the answers, Cowpoke. It's crazy how God pulled you into the Baptist fold ;) What would you say are big issues of division for Baptists today?

I think there's a lot of healing going on, particularly in the Texas State conventions -- we've pretty much agreed it's silly to duplicate things "the other" convention is already doing, and we're getting better at sharing resources. Our Disaster Relief stuff, for example, works better when we're coordinating together. There are theological things we won't agree on, probably, but there are plenty of operational things we do together.

I can't really think of anything that is a major divider right now. I think there's too much realization that the enemy is out there, and it's not my brother.