I think it's finally dawning on some well-meaning folks in the SBC that they are increasingly at odds with members of their denomination who have no use for an expression of Christian faith that cannot be manipulated to serve their own ends.
Here's the difficulty: they're all painted into a corner. For the most part, in order to exercise any influence within that subculture, one must participate in a system that ostensibly bases all knowledge of morality and theology on common sense.
What does the Bible mean? "It's common sense. Just read it. It means what it says. The Bible is clear. Scripture is sufficient." We all know the stock phrases.
What do people deserve and what do we owe to others in our political community? Again, the answers are common sense. "Let the market decide. Limited government, work ethic, make better choices, etcetera."
The obvious question here, which this "common sense" technique of knowledge pathologically ignores, is: *whose* common sense counts as the real common sense?
Every one of the stock positions I just alluded to is controversial. The alleged obviousness of those answers is heavily conditioned by one's experience and cultural milieu.
If you were to ask a random sample of evangelicals over the last 200 years whether scripture permits or forbids the institution of slavery (as practiced in the US), the median answer would depend on the century.
Ask that same sample of evangelicals what scripture says about white supremacy and racial segregation. The median answer would depend on the decade.
Ask them how old the earth is. Again, depends on the decade--even among fundamentalists.
Heck, ask a handful of current evangelical gatekeepers whether personal character matters in a political leader, and you'll get completely opposite answers on different days of the week.
Heck, ask a handful of current evangelical gatekeepers whether personal character matters in a political leader, and you'll get completely opposite answers on different days of the week.
Ask them what constitutes plagiarism and how serious an offense it is, etc. I could go on, but I think you get my point.
So the corner into which the SBC has painted itself is this: the most abiding theological commitment of many of those in power is not the truth of scripture, or even the truth claims of Christianity.
Their deepest theological conviction is the sovereignty of their own judgments with respect to truth and the mind of God. That conviction is their gospel. And thus questioning the intuitions of men in power is tantamount to renouncing the gospel itself.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
