What's the difference between a Georgia baptist and a republican congressman?

Answer-

Nothing-neither of them has a clue.

Republicans in congress want to continue the totally failed policies of the totally failed presidency of gw and the Georgia baptists want to continue the totally failed policy of discriminating against those who refuse to discriminate.  I won't say much more about the repubs in this post. That will come later as the story plays out.  The short-sighted mysogyny of Georgia baptists (who are generally representative of southern baptists as a whole, but sometimes slightly less regressive than their Alabama neighbors) have waged a full-scale battle against First Baptist Church-Decatur for the last two years.  The church's sin was to call a woman as pastor.  They called Julie Pennington-Russell in 2007.   That, of course, is a clear violation of the Baptist Faith & Message (2000 perversion) which states: “the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” Do the Bible study. How many times does the NT talk about the “office of pastor?” How many times does the word "pastor" even show up in the NT?The modern model of pastor as CEO is not biblical.  Look at the older versions of the BF&M. They are much more true to scripture than the modern perversion.

 

Ms. Pennington-Russell had been serving at a baptist church in that hot-bed of denominational rebellion known as "Jerusalem on the Brazos." For the uninitiated, that's Waco, TX. I have commented on the lack of biblical support for the sbc's position in other posts and on other blogs and will not repeat it here unless someone is interested. 

The sbc elite pride themselves on taking a stand against the demands of culture. One pastor, Bobby Braswell Jr. of Guyton, Ga., wrote that the convention's action is "not a popular position in today's cultural climate, but we are following the dictates of Scripture, not culture." What is abundantly clear is that rather than taking a stand against culture in their objection to women in church leadership positions, the sbc is actually supporting the same culture that brought us racism and slavery.  

If you have not followed this story, I have provided a series of links to Associated Baptist Press stories.

18 June 2007

Pennington-Russell set to make history as pastor of large Decatur church 

2 February 2008

Regain respect by rejecting exclusion, author Grisham urges fellow Baptists

13 November 2008

Opinion: Georgia Baptists isolate themselves 

14 November 2008

Georgia Baptists reject church with woman pastor 

27 January 2009

Church with woman pastor expects further rebuke from Georgia Baptists 

Baptists Put An End To Tolerance

The fundanazis in charge of various southern baptist organizations continue to demonstrate that lack of concern for historic baptist distinctives. Among the things that baptists of the sbc type have claimed as deeply held spiritucal convictions is the idea of the autonomy of the local church. The moderates who were run out of the sbc over the past few years were always strong supporters of this doctrine even when it led to them being verbally abused by those who felt called to judge the behavior and belief of some congregation other than their own. Among the big issues back in the 70s that got the moderates in trouble, was allowing churches that practiced the more controversial spiritual gifts, like speaking in tongues, to remain members in good standing. But the current leadership has consistently just given lip service to this historic baptist doctrine. This is nowhere more apparent than in today's press release from the Associated Baptist Press, an alternative to the sbc's official mouth organ, the baptist press. The first article which demonstrated this lack of concern for local church autonomy was about NC baptists who will no longer allow cooperating churches to funnel their gifts through the convention to anyone but "approved" baptist concerns. Particularly targeted with the gifts to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, a splinter group formed by some of the aforementioned moderates. The statement which reveals the somewhat lack of Christ-like spirit from those opposed to the open giving plan came from Eric Page, pastor of Victory Baptist Church in Columbus, who said "that refusing
to take a strong stand would promote "tolerance" of a group with which most North Carolina Baptists disagree. (We certainly wouldn't want any church to promote tolerance now would we?)
Page illustrated his point by saying the cartoon character Popeye took abuse only so long before he "popped out" a can of spinach and put an end to it."

Are you ready for this line?!?!

"It's time for us to pop out a can of spinach and put an end to tolerance," he said.

Farther down in the same ABP release we find baptists isolating themselves even more.

"On Nov. 12, in a front-page story, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution broke the news that the Georgia Baptist Convention has approved a new policy giving GBC executives the freedom to refuse donations from churches it finds to be out of step with Southern Baptist beliefs. The policy move is aimed (for now) at First Baptist Church Decatur, because it called a woman, Julie Pennington-Russell, to serve as pastor."

So now Georgia baptists don't even have to vote on it. Their executives can decide for them which churches are "out of step." This is even more tragic when you consider the number of times Georgia baptists and other "good" southerners refused to censure churches for blatant racism because of local church autonomy. If you want a a good example of this just google "racism beyond the grave."

You people out there who have remained in your southern baptist church with its connection to the sbc better be aware. It is only a matter of time before "they" find some reason to come after you.

Baptist Leaders Backpedal After Palin Nomination

After years of using their interpretation of certain biblical teachings to beat women into submission-

"A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband" and "has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation." (Excerpted from the Baptist Faith and Message)

The current leadership of the southern baptist convention is rapidly backpedalling in order to support Sarah Palin for vice president. The uniquivocal voice of the SBC leadership in the past few years has been that the wife's first responsibility is to be in the home. One large church in Oklahoma went so far as to fire all of the church secretaries who were church members because they were not supposed to be working outside the home.

Now, however, that Sarah Palin, a mother whose home obviously needs attention, has been nominated by the republican party, they are claiming that that teaching was never intended to speak to women in secular leadership positions only to women in church and family where she is commanded to submit to the headship of her husband. Let me get this straight, according to this teaching there is nothing wrong with Sarah Palin serving as vice president or even president of the United States as long as she serves as Todd's helper in managing the household and nurturing their five children including a special needs baby.

Don't get me wrong, I think there is nothing wrong with a woman trying to do that. I am just amazed that people like Albert Mohler and the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission can believe that anyone with half a brain will believe their illogical extrapolations. There is at least one southern baptist pastor who is sticking with his beliefs,

"I don't see this as a pro-family pick at all!" said Voddie Baucham, a popular author and conference speaker who serves as preaching pastor at Grace Family Baptist Church in Spring, Texas. "In fact, I believe this was the anti-family pick."

"My point is simple," Baucham said in a blog. "The job of a wife and mother is to be a wife and mother. Anything in addition to that must also be subservient to it. There is no higher calling. Moreover, I believe Paul's admonition should lead us to reject any notion of a wife and mother taking on the level of responsibility that Mrs. Palin is seeking."

You can read a fuller account of Baucham's statement at Baptist Preacher Terms Palin VP Pick 'Anti-Family'

Another good source for analysis of this issue is Robert Parham's article, Politician Palin Forces Theological Revisionism at the EthicsDaily.com website.

Are You Going To Be Next?

First, they went after the moderates. Then they went after the non-signers of BFM2000. Then they went after the tongue-speakers. Then they went after the scripturally baptized. Then they went after the women. Now they are going after the Blacks (see the Dallas Morning News article). Are you going to be next?