Replies

Okay, thanks for the update. Wow, did I somehow have that one turned around. But I believe that independent Baptist papers (Sword of the Lord, Flaming torch, Revival Fires, Baptist Challenger, others) also got that information turned around, ‘cause I most likely would have read about it in those papers. Of course, sometimes they are too quick to jump on something at the expense of accuracy. On the other hand, I could be the one who misunderstood the issue.

The position of the Moderates was that the Inerrantists were trying to promote a hierarchy or impose a formulaic doctrine on Baptists. This, as you know, for a denomination that emphasizes “the priesthood of the believer” and has local congregational control, is a big no-no.

However, the local churches own their own property, and, unlike what we are seeing in the Episcopal church, don’t have to sign over their assets if there is a doctrinal dispute with anybody - SBC or CBF.

I’m not taking up for the SBC in this debate. It is no surprise to me that all this drama came about within a few years of the attempt by the SBC a few years ago to evangelize the entire world and get the gospel to everybody. No sooner than that started, and here comes the controversy. I’m no theologian, but I know who was behind this (”Could it be SATAN?”, he said through pursed lips. YES!)

I wish I could find a Baptist church that preaches God’s Word, uses the Baptist Hymnal not PowerPoint, and has a pipe organ. I’d join in a heartbeat.