Last week the Resolutions Committee for the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution that would ban any SBC member that consumed alcohol from serving as a trustee, being a member of any entity or committee of the SBC. Click Here to Read the News Article.
The reason given for this move was that members of the SBC Resolutions Committee believe that “some Christians believe they may drink based on a wrong interpretation of the believer’s ‘freedom in Christ.’”
They are making the claim that any Christian who believes drinking is okay is guilty of mis-interpreting the Bible. Wow that is quite a charge! However, it doesn't stand up to the facts.
My simple reply to the members of the SBC Resolutions Committee is this, “Your resolution is absurd because it would actually disqualify our Lord and Savior from serving as a trustee or being a member of any SBC entity or committee.”
In Luke 7: 33-34 Jesus admits to not only drinking wine but being accused of being a drunkard because of it. Here is what the text says, “For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine; and you say, ‘He has a demon!’ 34 “The Son of Man has come eating and drinking; and you say, ‘Behold, a gluttonous man, and a drunkard, a friend of tax-gatherers and sinners!”
Now, if Jesus consumed alcoholic beverages and remained sinless, then surely all Christians have that liberty as well. I think the Resolutions Committee needs to admit their rule would disqualify Jesus from serving in the SBC and therefore is out of step with scripture. That being the case it needs to be thrown out.
In the June 18th, edition of Extreme Sunday School, I challenge this notion through an in depth look at what scripture has to say on the matter. I recommend that members of the Resolutions Committee take the time to listen and review what the Bible actually says on this matter.
---
Note: This post is controversial. Please read this site's disclaimer should you be offended by what you read.
It's amazing that we continue to see churches and Christians make more laws and rules. There is an assumption that more rules will make us more holy and acceptable to God. This is major confusion of Law and Gospel. This should not be surprising since Baptist don't have a historic Reformation view of Law and Gospel.
Posted by: Steve | June 20, 2006 at 10:41 PM
I came to the same conclusions, though with a bit less tact - on my blog (link). I also happened to give a sermon on Sunday, June 18 on John 2 and the wedding at Cana. I swear the text was chosen long before "Resolution 5" hit and I kept to an exposition on the text - not a commentary on Southern Baptist politics. As a Southern Baptist, I was stunned by such Finney-like standards of idiocy. I should note that simply quoting the Resolution as a preface to my sermon, with very little commentary, stirred up similar feelings in that little SBC church. No one could believe I was telling the truth.
The irony is that the first official SBC document - the Abstract of Principles - specifies that communion consist of bread and WINE.
For those outside the SBC, this might appear to be simply a movement of grossly legalistic motivation. It should be noted that it's even worse than that. There are some very strong indications that this is politically driven, as there have been some extreme-Fundamental partisan movements in the last year - a last gasp for one group of leadership to expel another group of emerging leadership.
Oh, and a note on Steve's comment: The proper separation of Law and Gospel would help tremendously in Baptist churches, but we aren't completely devoid of that aspect of the Reformation. It does, however, take a tremendous amount of reminding to hammer it in. Baptists have traditionally kept a delicate tension between Arminianism and Reformation theology. In America, we who consider Luther and Calvin ancestors have become a minority.
I can report that I just finished teaching Romans in our Sunday School class, and everyone (almost everyone) responded to the true gospel - the distinction of indicative and imperative - with great joy. Of course, there is a tremendous amount of Purpose-Drivenesque baggage that has to be broken through. Pray for us.
Keep up the good work Chris. I've enjoyed your appearances on Issues Etc.
Posted by: Joe Johnson | June 21, 2006 at 11:16 AM
Hey I am a Southern Baptist and I can't believe they did this. It makes no biblical sense to me. If they prohibit people who drink alcohol from serving on committees and whatever within the convention becuase alcohol can lead to alcoholism then shouldn't they prohibit cars because they can lead to speeding and speeding cars have been known to cause accidents of which have cause harm to families and loved ones of the one speeding in a car. The SBC is moving backwards toward traditions instead of toward scripture.
Gary Pierce II
http://www.theologychat.com
Posted by: Gary Pierce | June 21, 2006 at 04:07 PM