So Many Baptists Went to Hell

So many Baptists died before 1979, and they never knew they were going to Hell, because they believed in the religious truths were without error, and not a litteral interpretation of the Bible. So if you did not believe the world was created in 6 days it was not going to interfere with your salvation, or so they thought.....
Well i am all for the return of moderate Christianity.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060829152111/religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/sbaptists.html




The biggest issue on which the two sides differed was biblical authority. Both sides saw the Bible as the central authority in one's life but the fundamentalists believed the history and religious teachings to be without error, while the moderates believed only the religious truths to be without error.

Dividing the two sides was also the issue of pastoral authority. The fundamentalists believed in a pattern of authority where a husband has authority over his wife and a pastor over his church. Due to this hierarchy fundamentalists saw it inappropriate for a woman to be ordained as a pastor. The moderates thought any believer should have a right to be an ordained pastor.

The two sides also tended to differ on various social and political issues as well. Fundamentalists were not supportive issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and the Equal Rights Amendment. The fundamentalists strongly believed in the issues they took a stand on and would fight diligently to see these issues implemented in the SBC. On the other side the moderates did not have anywhere close to a unanimous decision on any of these political or social issues.

The two sides differed dramatically on what they believed to be important about being a Baptist. The key for the fundamentalists was that they needed a way to get their views and ideas into the SBC, which was dominated by the moderate people who were leading the SBC in a direction, which they didn't want to go. 21 .

This controversy began to unfold within the Southern Baptist Convention during the late 1970's and continued to dominate the denomination's attention for the balance of the century. The conflict was presaged by a doctrinal controversy that erupted over a book published by Midwestern Seminary Professor named Ralph Elliott in 1961. Elliott argued that the book of Genesis was not to be taken literally.

Conservative Baptists believing that every word in the Bible is true and should be taken literally, Elliott's book sparked considerable controversy. Tensions mounted and grew during the 1970's, but during this period the fundamentalists did not control the majore bureaucratic structures of the SBC and, thus, were viewed as a minority. During the 1970's they made their views known, but had to maintain a stance of loyal opposition. 20 .
During the late 1970's fundamentalist, Paul Pressler, a Baptist layman and distinguished Houston judge, thought he figured out how the denomination's power structure could be wrestled from the control of the denominations moderates. He shared his views with Paaige Patterson, the youthful president of the Criswell Center for Biblical Studies, who agreed to join him in a crusade to win control of the Southern Baptist Convention for fundamentalism.

Their efforts would change the fundamentalist movement from one of loyal opposition to a movement focused at taking over the offices and key positions inside the denomination so that their ideas and beliefs could be spread throughout Southern Baptist thought.

The most basic idea underly Pressler's strategy was for the fundamentalists to successfully elect presidents from year to year. By doing so they could gain control of the appointive and nominating powers, control the boards and agencies of the SBC, and influence the SBC with their thoughts and beliefs.

In the late 70's Pressler and Patterson set their sights on 1979 as the year to win the presidency. In the years prior to this convention in 1979, the fundamentalists began organizing a way to win this election. Since the messengers at the convention vote on the president, the fundamentalists simply spread the word to others that had fundamentalist ideas to come to the convention and vote for the president. The fundamentalists basically brought more people to vote than there were moderates and as a result fundamentalist Adrian Rogers won the presidency in 1979. This signaled the beginning in the fundamentalist takeover and from here on in the moderates would never really come close to defeating the fundamentalists. 22 .

With Rogers as president, the fundamentalists began laying out the groundwork for their takeover of the SBC. The messengers who attended the convention elected the president of the SBC. The fundamentalists simply had to go to fundamentalist churches and convince people to attend and vote for their desired president.

From here the president of the SBC appointed a Committee on Committees and this committee then nominated a Committee on Nominations and this committee nominated people to fill the vacancies of standing committees and boards of trustees. When the fundamentalists won the presidency year after year the president simply would stack the Committee on Committees with people who had fundamentalist ideas and from here fundamentalists would be appointed and nominated to head boards, agencies and any other vacancies. By doing this, within ten years the SBC was under complete control of the fundamentalists. They could easily appoint the necessary people to whatever position and could pass almost Resolution they so desired. 23 .

As fundamentalists rapidly took control of the SBC they began making the necessary changes they deemed appropriate. In 1984, a resolution was passed at the convention in Kansas City, which excluded women from pastoral roles because the woman was first in the Edenic fall. By 1985, the fundamentalists had been appointing trustees for boards who were proven to be inerrantists to institute their policies. The fundamentalists were convinced that agencies were not being governed under biblical principals and they wanted the right people in office to ensure biblical principles would be applied. 24 . In 1982, fundamentalists succeeded in passing resolutions that supported the prohibition of abortion and sanctioning voluntary school prayer. 25 . For years and years the moderates continued to fight against the fundamentalists only to lose virtually every time on every issue. One can only be left to wonder how and why were the fundamentalists so successful in their endeavors to control the Southern Baptist Convention.

Despite the efforts of the moderates to combat the takeover by the fundamentalists they lost the battle for several reasons. First of all, when Rogers first won the presidency in 1979 many of them simply brushed it off as a fluke. Many of them believed that such a takeover would never succeed so they never took the takeover as anything serious. In 1980, when Pressler gave his "Going for the Jugular" speech in which he planned to takeover the convention by electing presidents and controlling appointments, the moderates finally took this takeover seriously. Even this wouldn't help the moderates much. The fundamentalists were simply more powerful and motivating speakers. They had the ability to move crowds and persuade huge churches to listen to what they had to say. It was partly this reason that allowed Pressler and Patterson to gather the large crowds of messengers necessary to help them elect presidents.

The inability of the moderates to gather support for their cause also contributed to a fundamentalist victory. The moderates could not gather enough support because only the older people who had dedicated their lives to the SBC were willing to take on the fight. Younger people simply were not willing to dedicate their lives to a fight with the fundamentalists.
Moderates also lacked the understanding of the presidential election process. They viewed nomination for presidency as a great achievement in itself and would sometimes nominate two or three people making it impossible to win the presidency with that many candidates.

Each side constituted about 35 percent of all Southern Baptists so they each faced the challenge of trying to win the support of the other 30 percent. The fundamentalists won over the majority of these people because they were such excellent speakers. They were better speakers and tended to speak to larger crowds. The fundamentalists also had the support of well-known people like Billy Graham and Ronald Reagan. Fundamentalists also were the first to mass mail their literature to all the SBC churches in hopes of winning their support.
Fundamentalists were also deeply dedicated to their cause as a clear majority went to the conventions only to vote for the president while the moderates attended for other reasons like to hear the sermons or just out of habit. Dedication to establishing biblical inerrancy throughout the Southern Baptist Convention led the fundamentalists to fight long and hard for their cause. Even today fundamentalists continue to take firm stands on their beliefs and they will continue into the future. 26 .

It took ten years, as Pressler and Paige strategized, for the fundamentalists to successfully control the bureaucracy of the Southern Baptist Convention. They controlled virtually every aspect of the SBC and the decisions made throughout the 1990's showed this dramatically. In 1992, two churches were disfellowshipped from the SBC. One for approving the ordination of a gay man and the other blessing the union of two gay people. 27 .
The fundamentalists have pursued a number of tactical programs that continue to generate internal conflict and keep the SBC in high profile the broader culture. One very controversial decision the Southern Baptists was the decision to boycott the Walt Disney Company in 1997. They objected to Disney's so-called anti-family and anti- Christian direction. They objected to Disney giving benefits to same sex partners and for having "Gay Days", where gays could come to their theme parks and celebrate openly. 28 .

Another controversy arose in the late 1990s when the Southern Baptists, having selected to meet in Salt Lake City, angered the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints by pursuing an aggressive program of proselytization among Mormons before and during the convention.
For a good many years it has seemed like a split or schism in the Southern Baptist Convention could be near. As early as 1987, some moderates, disappointed by their inability to stop the fundamentalist takeover, formed the Southern Baptist Alliance. The Alliance, formed with the goal of being an opposition group within the denomination, has attracted a substantial following. There has been talk of forming a separate denomination but it is not clear this will happen, but it is not clear that such a split in the SBC will ever happen. 29 .

In 1997, the largest state convention, the Baptist General Convention of Texas split from the SBC. This led people to believe that a schism within the SBC could be closer than previously thought. 30 . In 1999 Paige Patterson was elected president of the SBC and, perhaps in a genture to encourage dissidents to leave, predicted there would be a split.
Still, a schism within the SBC is probably not likely. A major reason for this is the high degree of autonomy that each local congregation maintains. Ministers, and their congregations may disagree with the leadership direction of the SBC, but what happens at the national level has little, if any, affect them. Thus, if churches feel that the convention is irrelevant to them, there is little initiative to leave. In the late 1980's Nany Ammerman, the leading scholar of Southern Baptists conducted a study and concluded that most churches anticipated no changes at all in their church despite the fundamentalist takeover. If people today still feel that they and their church are autonomous from the national convention then a schism is very unlikely to occur. 31 .