Does the Southern Baptist Convention Still Have a Stain On It? by Ed Dingess

Theology and Politics from a Conservative, Biblical Perspective

In 1995, leadership in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) apologized for, repented of, and issued a statement repudiating racism in all forms. Twenty-two years later, instigated by William McKissic, the SBC leaders once again had to apologize and issue not just another statement affirming its belief that racism in all its forms is sinful, but a resolution that decries racism in every form. Apparently, repentance and repudiation of racism by SBC leaders are not enough. Apologizing for someone else’s sin isn’t enough either. And this demand is coming, not from the non-Christian world, but from a Christian pastor nonetheless.

I think racism in all its forms ought to be repudiated and treated as a form of hatred, a practice that no true child of God with genuine faith can actually perform (1 John 2:9 & 11). Here is a serious question for you: can you repent for a sin that you didn’t actually commit? If Bill offends you, wrongs you, treats you unjustly, how is it possible for me to repent and apologize for Bill’s behavior? I find it all very confusing and I am very curious to know what is really going on here. I suspect there is more to this than meets the eye. There almost always is.

The original resolution presented at the 2017 SBC Convention in Phoenix can be found here: Original Resolution. The resolution that ultimately passed can be found here: passed resolution.

Now that the SBC has passed a resolution, I suppose that settles it. This is what “done” looks like. There, we killed racism with one document, one resolution. It’s over. Next issue, please! Yes, I am annoyed. I am already wondering how the next apology for racism will take shape at next year’s convention, or the one after that. I am not annoyed that the church preaches that racism is a sin and is inconsistent with true faith and life in Christ. That should be part of our preaching and teaching the same as any other sin we preach and teach about, like, you know, adultery, or fornication, or lying, or drunkenness. Right? I am going to go out on a limb here and risk it all: I bet you that adultery, fornication, drunkenness, and lying are far bigger problems for people in SBC churches than racism. I bet if you add the numbers up, it would be embarrassing. So what are we to do? I know, let’s pass a resolution condemning these things. That will fix it!

What exactly are the SBC leaders doing? What exactly is William McKissic doing? Are we to think that unless the SBC adopts a resolution condemning something as obviously sinful as white supremacy that our members and churches may be deceived into adopting it? I find even the hint of such a suggestion outrageous.

I hate politics. I hate even the smell of politics. The church entered into a long, dark period when it embraced Constantinianism. This commingling of politics and Christianity was devastating from beginning to end. And I cannot help but wonder if what I am seeing now is simply political pandering. We want to be “seen” as condemning racism. So we issue this resolution for the appearance it gives. What other reason could there be? We don’t have a problem with white supremacy. If there are those in the SBC who have embraced it (if you can actually define what this alt-right-white supremacy thing actually is), issuing a resolution isn’t going to produce repentance. Scripture already condemns it. If Scripture won’t convince them, what chance does a resolution have? So, what are the leaders doing? What is William McKissic doing?

(Post continues at Pulpit & Pen)

Theology and Politics from a Conservative, Biblical Perspective