Historic Baptists or Revisionists?
By David Flick

It's no secret in Oklahoma that Anthony Jordan is consumed with bitterness toward Mainstream Baptists. As an insider and retired Oklahoma pastor and Director of Missions, I witnessed this for many years. Jordan has regularly and consistently demeaned and maligned Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists and their leader, Dr. Bruce Prescott. Perhaps his bitterness toward Mainstream and moderate Baptists is out of jealousy that the Mainstream Baptists have the name he would like for the fundamentalists to own. Perhaps it's because Dr. Prescott has exposed fundamentalism in Oklahoma Southern Baptist life for what it really is. Perhaps it's because the moderate Baptists have rejected and publicly criticized the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. Perhaps it's all of the above.

     In the August 29, '02 issue of the Oklahoma Baptist Messenger, Jordan wrote an editorial that takes a pot shot at Mainstream Baptists. The pot shot, entitled "Mainstream or extreme?," compared Mainstream Baptists with lesbians and Mormons. He prefaced his article with a feeble disclaimer by saying, "Some may, no will -- misinterpret the point I want to make. They will use the word "bigoted" to describe my point of view." I won't say that Jordan is bigoted. However, he is woefully ignorant of the facts concerning Mainstream Baptists.

    The gist of his article was that Mainstream Baptists are not in line with the "historic faith and practices of Southern Baptists." Anthony Jordan is ignorant of the facts. Anyone with an understanding of the historic faith and practices of Southern Baptists will recognize that he is oblivious to the truth. He simply doesn't know his Baptist history. While Mainstream Baptists have remained anchored to the historic Baptist faith and practices, the Southern Baptist Convention of the past two decades is the ship that sailed away into the murky waters that traditional mainstream Baptists always avoided. Jordan wants us to believe that moderate Baptists have moved away from the historic faith and practices of our forbearers. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is the fundamentalists who moved. There are at least nine  points on which Jordan's camp moved away from the mainstream of Southern Baptist thinking and theology.

1) Historically, Southern Baptists never created confessions of faith and treated them as a creeds. Southern Baptists have eschewed being a creedal people. The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 now functions as a creed. Creeds require conformity of belief. Those who do not buy the creed are considered not to be true to the faith. Confessions represent a consensus but do not require conformity. There is freedom with confessions of faith. There is no freedom with creeds. Mainstream Baptists do not have creeds. With the BF&M 2000, the fundamentalist Southern Baptists have a document that functions as a creed used to exclude all who do not line up with their theology and agenda.

2) Historically, Southern Baptists never intended for the Bible to become an object of worship. In effect, Article I in the BF&M 2000 elevates the Bible to deity status on a par with Jesus Christ. The statement in Article I declares the Bible to be the Word of God. In truth, it is borderline heresy to say that the Bible is the Word of God when the text of Scripture declares that Jesus Christ Himself is the Word of God. (John 1:1) Mainstream Baptists have not departed from the belief that Jesus is the very Word of God. Fundamentalists have replaced Jesus with the Bible, saying that the inspired book is the very Word of God. Mainstream Baptists have not moved. Fundamentalist Southern Baptists have moved away.

3) Historically, Southern Baptists never used secular politics to control the heart and soul of their denomination. Over the past twenty-five  years, the fundamentalists used a devious, secular brand of power politics to gain control of the denomination. This is unprecedented among Baptists. Power-mongering is the order of the day among fundamentalists. There is nothing remotely similar to this with Baptists who adhere to the historic principles of faith and practice. Mainstream Baptists have not departed from these historic faith and practices. Whereas the fundamentalists have.

4) Historically, Southern Baptists never held their fellow believers accountable to denominational leaders and pastors. With the creation of BF&M 2000, fundamentalists are now holding the believers accountable to one another, pastors, and denominational leaders. Denominational leaders and pastors set the theology and agenda, holding all Southern Baptist accountable to them. This is a move away from the mainstream thinking of Southern Baptist traditions. It is a slam to the doctrine of the priesthood of the believers. Priesthood of the believer is out for the fundamentalists. Accountability is in. Mainstream Baptists did not move from the belief that every believer is accountable only to God, not denominational leaders and pastors.

5) Historically, Southern Baptists never isolated themselves and excluded fellow believers with whom they differed on minor tenets of the faith. The number of good and godly people, (seminary professors and presidents, denominational employees, missionaries, and pastors) who have been excluded and fired for daring to disagree with denominational leaders is legion. The purging of these people from the ranks of leadership departs from mainstream Baptist tradition.

6) Historically, Southern Baptists never attempted to force a particular view of inspiration of the Bible on the denomination. Never have Mainstream Baptists made a test of fellowship over a particular view of biblical inspiration. Yet the fundamentalist Southern Baptists developed a particular doctrine of inspiration (inerrancy) and made it a test of fellowship. Moderate Baptists, namely Mainstream Baptists, have never insisted on forcing a particular view of inspiration of the Bible on their fellow believers. Neither have they made a particular method of inspiration a test of fellowship. Fundamentalists want their view of inspiration to be held strictly and  synoptically by all Baptists.

7) Historically, Southern Baptists never required their missionaries to sign a creed in order to preach the gospel and carry the Great Commission to the lost. Southern Baptist missionaries worldwide are now required to sign a creed or face termination. Their motto is, "sign on or sign off." Such a requirement violates the freedom of missionaries everywhere. Since when have missionaries been required sign creeds before sharing the good news of Jesus Christ? Where in the Bible is the requirement to sign creeds before taking the Great Commission to the lost world. Fundamentalists require signatures. Mainstream Baptists do not.

8) Historically, Southern Baptists never restricted the freedom in theological education. Only in the past two decades have seminary professors been required to sign the confession of faith. It is true that prior to the creation of BF&M 2000, teachers of theological education signed the BF&M of 1963. But it was a voluntary action on the part of the theological educators. They did not see the older confession to be contrary to traditional Baptist faith and practices. With the changes made in the 1998 BF&M (the addition of Article XVIII, --the submissive women article) and the 2000 confession (changes in Article I, the suppression of women, and the accountability clause), many professors realized that the fundamentalists were moving away from the historic Baptist faith and practices. They could not, in good conscience, sign what became a creed instead of a confession.

9) Historically, Southern Baptists never treated women in the manner which the present day fundamentalists do. Historically, Southern Baptists left views on women's ordination and women in ministry to the local churches. With the advent of fundamentalism in Southern Baptist life, denominational leaders are punishing churches for exercising their God-given consciences. Churches are being excluded from cooperation in associations because they have ordained women. This attitude and demeanor violates the freedom of local churches to express themselves and maintain cooperation with associations. Mainstream Baptists do not treat women as second-class believers in the church. Fundamentalists do.

In the end, Mainstream Baptists are those who have maintained the historic mainstream Baptist faith and practices which our forbearers held dear. Mainstream Baptists have not moved. They did not rewrite the confession of faith and change doctrines. Anthony Jordan is fooling himself if he thinks today's Southern Baptist Convention stayed the course on matters of faith and practice. He and those of his camp have moved away from what can be accurately be called historic faith and practices. As much as he would like to think those of his persuasion are the real mainstream Baptists, he is of woefully uninformed and mistaken. He is is consumed with bitterness toward Mainstream Baptists because they possess the name which he would dearly love to have.

Historic Baptist or revisionists Baptists? It's not difficult to discern who the real "mainstream" Baptists are. I'm casting my lot with the real mainstream Baptists.

-- September 5, 2002

 (This article was written for  BaptistLife.Com Discussion Forums)