Without attempting to water things down, it is my belief that the SBC is in big trouble as a denomination in terms of the truth and Gospel of the living God. For years the SBC was liberal in its leadership and institutions. That was a horrid thing. There was then the conservative resurgence and now they have control. But what do they have control of? What was the heart of the conservative resurgence? Wasn’t it a battle over inerrancy and moral issues? Was it ever a battle over the Gospel? In other words, the resurgence was not the same thing as the Reformation. It was simply a conservative resurgence. That is not the same thing as a fight for the Gospel. It is not even close.
Liberalism is not Christianity and is not even a version of it. It is a denial of Christianity and nothing short of it. Let us not be so tolerant and gracious to declare that. But what teaching has replaced Liberalism in the offices and other positions of leadership? Has it been a thorough return to the Gospel of grace? We have seen many efforts at evangelism of some sort and baptism. Matthew 23:15 tells us that one can give a great effort at evangelism and it does nothing but condemn both the evangelizer and the one evangelized: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.” A great effort at evangelism is not a good thing if one does not have the Gospel which alone truly converts. Could it be that many conservatives have a false gospel and as such their converts are made into sons of hell too?
Without question virtually every leader in the SBC is Arminian. What does that mean in light of what the pioneer Reformers wrote during the Reformation? Arminianism [semi-Pelagianism] was seen to be a rejection of NT Christianity and in a sense a return to NT Judaism “for to rely on oneself for faith is no different in principle from relying on oneself for works, and the one is as un-Christian and anti-Christian as the other” (Bondage of the Will, p. 59). What would Luther think of the SBC? Am I attacking the SBC? I don’t think that I am, but I am pointing out that there needs to be a real Reformation and not just a conservative resurgence.
When Luther took up his pen in writing the Bondage of the Will, he said that he took up his pen in order to stand for grace. Reformed theology takes its stand on the five sola’s of the Reformation because all those points are closely linked to the Gospel of Jesus Christ which is grace alone. The five sola’s did not come out of nothing; but all were points that were all about the main issue and that was the Gospel. The doctrine of free-will is virulently opposed to the doctrine of grace alone and Christ alone and at some point all the sola’s of the Reformation. Can Arminian theology really be that which a modern Reformation can be built upon?
Evangelism and total depravity are teachings which cannot be separated which means that evangelism and the bondage of the will cannot be separated. Just because someone does what they call “evangelism” does not mean that they are proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Just because someone is getting people to pray a prayer and then be baptized does not mean that those people are converted. Evangelism is founded in doctrine and cannot happen without it. Without the true Gospel there will be no true evangelism. If the doctrine of man’s total depravity is true, then we cannot approach man as if he still has a spark of life in him. If the doctrine of depravity is true, then man is indeed dead in sin and in bondage to sin. That changes everything about evangelism. Those who do not really believe man is dead and in bondage to sin will not evangelize people in the same way than will those who believe those things are true. If a person is dead and in bondage to sin, that person must be made alive by the grace of God and delivered from the bondage to the devil. Those who deny that will teach a person that s/he needs to make a choice to be saved. Those two positions teach a different Gospel.
The SBC is still in a war for its soul though many think that the war has been won. It has not been won and perhaps it has hardly even started. Until men will deal honestly with the souls of others in evangelism, baptism, church membership and discipline, have we really dealt with the primary issues? Liberalism is an obvious departure from the Gospel. Conservative teaching is not so obvious which makes it more deceptive. Can we love the truth and grace of God with our whole being and then be tolerant of those that deny the truth and grace of God whether liberal or conservative? The SBC can survive for years as a conservative, religious institution without the Gospel. The Pharisees sure did. It might survive with a group of people calling themselves “Reformed” in it as well. That would be a deceptive unity. What must happen is for God to break some from love for anything but Himself and begin to teach the real Gospel. The kingdom and the Gospel will continue with or without the SBC.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment