Something DANGEROUS Is Threatening the Southern Baptist Convention

[°Leprechaun]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXkNX0dVa6o

[YouTube video from a conservative SBC perspective warning of the threat of theological liberalization]

Interesting what is going on with the largest Protestant denomination in the USA.

[Cokeland Saxton]

Absolute clowns. But it is the SBC after all. Can't expect anything different than upholding sexism.

[jojoju1998]

Absolute clowns. But it is the SBC after all. Can't expect anything different than upholding sexism.

Upholding sexism while rejecting the Nicene Creed.

[Person Man]

Absolute clowns. But it is the SBC after all. Can't expect anything different than upholding sexism.

Upholding sexism while rejecting the Nicene Creed.

It's not a religion inasmuch as it is an authoritarian geopolitical phenomenon.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I find it fascinating that the SBC is the only large Protestant denomination to have had much success in resisting theological liberalization, and that it has done this even in the face of many churches leaving for nondenominational pastures. While our challenges are not the same, I think there's room for people in the Orthodox Church to analyze how this has happened and to what extent we can replicate this ourselves.

[gerritcole]

     I find it fascinating that the SBC is the only large Protestant denomination to have had much success in resisting theological liberalization, and that it has done this even in the face of many churches leaving for nondenominational pastures. While our challenges are not the same, I think there's room for people in the Orthodox Church to analyze how this has happened and to what extent we can replicate this ourselves.

given that most everything in american society is pseudo political in that it's clear the political leanings of most adherents/that particualr organization the SBC has gone all in on the right/GOP to sustain itself and so it most naturally resists theologic liberalization by fashioning itself as the alternative to so called 'liberal' churches. the orthodox churuch may not be as organized or have the political clout to move all in on the GOP/right

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I find it fascinating that the SBC is the only large Protestant denomination to have had much success in resisting theological liberalization, and that it has done this even in the face of many churches leaving for nondenominational pastures. While our challenges are not the same, I think there's room for people in the Orthodox Church to analyze how this has happened and to what extent we can replicate this ourselves.

given that most everything in american society is pseudo political in that it's clear the political leanings of most adherents/that particualr organization the SBC has gone all in on the right/GOP to sustain itself and so it most naturally resists theologic liberalization by fashioning itself as the alternative to so called 'liberal' churches. the orthodox churuch may not be as organized or have the political clout to move all in on the GOP/right

     I think the biggest difference (and what makes its example largely irrelevant) is that the SBC is a distinctly American phenomenon and so it is able to define itself in relation to American politics. Even if we were to restrict the Orthodox Church here to mean the OCA (which is headquartered in the United States and therefore not directly dependent on foreign nationals), our context is still very different. Our head bishop recently went on a trip to visit his colleagues in Ukraine, Romania, and Turkey; those people and the institutions they represent are much more important in defining who we are and what we do than the Democratic or Republican Parties are or realistically could be. Another way to look at this is that while Southern Baptists and Eastern Orthodox can both be described as conservative, what they mean by this are extremely different to the point that their conservatism can lead them to opposite conclusions on some theological points, e.g. infant baptism.

     What interested me about this most and got me thinking was the idea that liberalizing factions tend to follow a similar playbook to gain ground and influence in the churches where they operate, i.e. start in the seminaries and fill the clergy with likeminded fellows. I don't know too much about the history of various Protestant denominations, though I know many Protestants who lend credence to the idea that there are certain common strategies that one sees time and again.

[jojoju1998]

     I find it fascinating that the SBC is the only large Protestant denomination to have had much success in resisting theological liberalization, and that it has done this even in the face of many churches leaving for nondenominational pastures. While our challenges are not the same, I think there's room for people in the Orthodox Church to analyze how this has happened and to what extent we can replicate this ourselves.

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, Presbyterian Church in America, Anglican Church in North America,

are denominations that are " conservative ".

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Interesting thread, but please keep in mind the R&P board rule that if you post a social media or video link you need to explain briefly what it is so that people can decide whether or not they want to give it a look.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I find it fascinating that the SBC is the only large Protestant denomination to have had much success in resisting theological liberalization, and that it has done this even in the face of many churches leaving for nondenominational pastures. While our challenges are not the same, I think there's room for people in the Orthodox Church to analyze how this has happened and to what extent we can replicate this ourselves.

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, Presbyterian Church in America, Anglican Church in North America,

are denominations that are " conservative ".

     Keyword is "large". LCMS is fairly big, but I didn't count it since it's not the biggest Lutheran denomination in the US. PCA and ACNA are both well under a million adherents.

[°Leprechaun]

Interesting thread, but please keep in mind the R&P board rule that if you post a social media or video link you need to explain briefly what it is so that people can decide whether or not they want to give it a look.

The point of this thread is to better understand what "evangelical" Christianity is.
I don't know if this is acceptable (to the board moderator) for the R&P board.
If not please explain why.
Also, I don't know if the speaker in these videos is typical
of evangelicals or at least "conservative" evangelicalism.
Of course, there are many differences among traditional evangelicalism.
I don't think, for example, that all evangelicals are calvinistic.


from the same speaker from the OP:

"The United Methodist Church Has Gone Off the Deep End..."
I think that the title itself in this case says what the point of
this video is. He talks about the Methodist Church back to its founder
and where it is today. (Women were ordained in 1956)
... now they have LGBTQ clergy etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-4WUt5w2qM

...

"I’m Sorry, But This Popular Teaching Is NOT Biblical."
The idea from Oprah that you need to focus on yourself and "fill yourself"
This, the speaker argues is the opposite of the true Christian message.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQHhGMiclP0

...
We NEED to Beware of This New Fad Among Evangelicals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLVpLK86cbE
In this video the speaker talks about "manipulators" like
Charles Grandison Finney:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Grandison_Finney
He also talks about the need for preaching rather than just feel good stuff like music.

Finally, I think it is important to hear what someone believes from the person in question,
rather than just  from a critical biased second-hand observer.

Edit: the speaker's name is Todd Friel

If anyone is interested I could link to a second-hand page about this man.

[RINO Tom]

     I find it fascinating that the SBC is the only large Protestant denomination to have had much success in resisting theological liberalization, and that it has done this even in the face of many churches leaving for nondenominational pastures. While our challenges are not the same, I think there's room for people in the Orthodox Church to analyze how this has happened and to what extent we can replicate this ourselves.

given that most everything in american society is pseudo political in that it's clear the political leanings of most adherents/that particualr organization the SBC has gone all in on the right/GOP to sustain itself and so it most naturally resists theologic liberalization by fashioning itself as the alternative to so called 'liberal' churches. the orthodox churuch may not be as organized or have the political clout to move all in on the GOP/right

I agree with almost everything you said, but there is absolutely no reason to add "so-called" or to put "liberal" in quotes.  To say that nearly all of the Seven Sisters of the Mainline are not objectively liberal organizations is to have a truly bizarre Overton Window divorced from reality.  I mean, yeah, they're churches ... but that doesn't indicate in any way, shape or form some type of inherent conservatism or even moderate nature.  They're all effectively mouth pieces of whatever the current DNC policy is on a given issue, and I say that as a member of the ELCA myself.

[°Leprechaun]

There is a big difference between being a religious (or secular for that matter) liberal and being a political liberal, or at least there used to be.
A person can be very conservative religiously and liberal politically or vice versa.
A person can, for example, support ordination for women, and human rights for all, and in many ways still be a traditional religious conservative.

An excellent example of this is William Jennings Bryan who was very liberal politically and extremely conservative religiously.

A more modern example is former President Carter.

[RINO Tom]

There is a big difference between being a religious (or secular for that matter) liberal and being a political liberal, or at least there used to be.
A person can be very conservative religiously and liberal politically or vice versa.
A person can, for example, support ordination for women, and human rights for all, and in many ways still be a traditional religious conservative.

An excellent example of this is William Jennings Bryan who was very liberal politically and extremely conservative religiously.

A more modern example is former President Carter.

I would argue none of the Seven Sisters are "religiously conservative," either.  The most extreme example, the UCC, would remove a pastor for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding based on his/her interpretation of Scripture, but they would never remove a pastor for saying the Resurrection didn't actually happen or that God is an idea to help promote social justice and might not exist.

[°Leprechaun]

There is a big difference between being a religious (or secular for that matter) liberal and being a political liberal, or at least there used to be.
A person can be very conservative religiously and liberal politically or vice versa.
A person can, for example, support ordination for women, and human rights for all, and in many ways still be a traditional religious conservative.

An excellent example of this is William Jennings Bryan who was very liberal politically and extremely conservative religiously.

A more modern example is former President Carter.

I would argue none of the Seven Sisters are "religiously conservative," either.  The most extreme example, the UCC, would remove a pastor for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding based on his/her interpretation of Scripture, but they would never remove a pastor for saying the Resurrection didn't actually happen or that God is an idea to help promote social justice and might not exist.

You are right that the UCC is more liberal than most Christian denominations. In mainline churches the clergy is more liberal than laity. It may be the opposite in the Roman Catholic Church. The official doctrine is conservative, but the average Catholic doesn't feel obligated to agree with the doctrine.
Many members of mainline Protestant denominations are Republicans.

[jojoju1998]

There is a big difference between being a religious (or secular for that matter) liberal and being a political liberal, or at least there used to be.
A person can be very conservative religiously and liberal politically or vice versa.
A person can, for example, support ordination for women, and human rights for all, and in many ways still be a traditional religious conservative.

An excellent example of this is William Jennings Bryan who was very liberal politically and extremely conservative religiously.

A more modern example is former President Carter.

I would argue none of the Seven Sisters are "religiously conservative," either.  The most extreme example, the UCC, would remove a pastor for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding based on his/her interpretation of Scripture, but they would never remove a pastor for saying the Resurrection didn't actually happen or that God is an idea to help promote social justice and might not exist.

You are right that the UCC is more liberal than most Christian denominations. In mainline churches the clergy is more liberal than laity. It may be the opposite in the Roman Catholic Church. The official doctrine is conservative, but the average Catholic doesn't feel obligated to agree with the doctrine.
Many members of mainline Protestant denominations are Republicans.

The Catholic Church challenges all political stripes.


The official doctrine condemns abortion, but also is very critical of capitalism. Read Caritas in Veritae.

When that Document by Pope Benedict XVI, was released in 2009, American conservative Catholics such as George Weigel sought to downplay it.


And the Catholic Church remains very sympathetic to Palestine.

[°Leprechaun]

One of the main differences between the Roman Catholic and Protestant denominations is worthy of discussion.
The former has remained united and the latter is divided into many denominations. What is keeping certain denominations from merging? Is there that much difference between mainline denominations? Likewise why are evangelical denominations so divided? I know that there are differences, but why should those differences divide?

[jojoju1998]

One of the main differences between the Roman Catholic and Protestant denominations is worthy of discussion.
The former has remained united and the latter is divided into many denominations. What is keeping certain denominations from merging? Is there that much difference between mainline denominations? Likewise why are evangelical denominations so divided? I know that there are differences, but why should those differences divide?

I mean in the Catholic View, the Catholic Church HAS split before.

Aka the Protestant Reformation, the 1054 split.

[Associate Justice PiT]

One of the main differences between the Roman Catholic and Protestant denominations is worthy of discussion.
The former has remained united and the latter is divided into many denominations. What is keeping certain denominations from merging? Is there that much difference between mainline denominations? Likewise why are evangelical denominations so divided? I know that there are differences, but why should those differences divide?

     The big difference is that Catholics value ecclesial unity whereas Protestants do not, the former holding to a concept of a singular visible Church and the latter instead believing in an invisible Church that unites all true believers across ecclesial lines. It's similar to how the Orthodox Church received the Macedonian local church back into communion after 55 years of schism; had we been Protestants there would have been no return to communion and nobody would care.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Aka the Protestant Reformation, the 1054 split.

     The Protestant Reformation happened in 1517. The 1054 split was the Great Schism. Also you have the Chalcedonian and Nestorian Schisms which happened long before even that.

[RINO Tom]

One of the main differences between the Roman Catholic and Protestant denominations is worthy of discussion.
The former has remained united and the latter is divided into many denominations. What is keeping certain denominations from merging? Is there that much difference between mainline denominations? Likewise why are evangelical denominations so divided? I know that there are differences, but why should those differences divide?

In addition to what has already been said about the Priesthood of All Believers and the general idea held by Protestants that "the Church/Body of Christ" is not as simple as one visible institution, I will add these notes:

1. No, the Mainline denominations are not that different from an outsider's perspective.  However, their styles/tones are still pretty different.  The Episcopal Church might have abandoned many traditionally orthodox stances regarding cultural issues, but it still sees itself as a longstanding institution that has apostolic succession and values that image.  Similarly, while the ELCA might be liberal enough to be in open communion with a denomination like the UCC that fundamentally does not share our (official) stance on what communion is in the first place, we would still probably not be okay with being in a denomination that did not perform that ritual weekly or something like that.

2. There is still a pretty significant cultural aspect to the Mainline denominations.  It might seem on the surface that a group like the Presbyterian Church in America is more "united" than many Mainline denominations because it enforces theological conservatism (at least as they see it).  However, it is barely 50 years old and has already shed many aspects of traditional Presbyterian (and therefore Scottish) heritage such as only accepting some of the historical confessions, having way more churches adopt contemporary worship styles and even allowing a more Baptist/symbolic view of communion that is directly at odds with historic Calvinist views on the sacrament.  Compare that to the PC-USA, which sees itself as a continued lineage of the Church of Scotland in the United States and is much more traditional in feel/tone.  America has an odd dynamic where it is very difficult to find a theologically conservative Protestant church that is also traditional.