In this article from Ronnie Floyd’s Advancing the Vision series, Floyd writes, “The future is not in having cultural conversations apart from the Bible. This will always lead to division. Southern Baptist pastors, leaders, and churches need to be having biblical conversations about cultural matters.”
Conventional wisdom tells us that neither political side has a corner on the Christian faith. Christians should not pledge allegiance to any political party, but evaluate issues individually and vote on candidates individually. Some Christians will naturally fall toward more conservative positions, and some toward more liberal positions. But at the end of the day, politics must not divide us because our opinions on political matters are less important and less clear from Scripture than what we share in common as believers in Christ.
This post is the fifth in a series addressing New Liberalism and the Southern Baptist Convention. “New Liberalism” is a catch-all term for what some see as a theological threat similar to the liberalism of the previous century. This series does not assume that New Liberalism is in the SBC, but is intended to more clearly delineate the concept of New Liberalism in relation to the SBC.
Psychology and sociology most often function as all-encompassing, transcendent, ideological approaches to understanding the world, operating upon assumptions decidedly opposed to God. One sees this as much in Jordan Peterson as one sees it in Critical Theory. The conclusions may be different from one another, but their foundations are the same. Scripture appears in both, but not as Scripture appears in conservative Christian theology. The difference between secular psychological or sociological approaches to Scripture and conservative Christian theology is not the use of Scripture and religious language, or lack thereof, but the way in which Scripture and religious language are used as either building upon a secular theory or as bedrock for an explicitly Christian theology. We are not saying that those promoting the former set of ideas are not Christian. We are saying that what they promote is not Christian. And we are concerned about which will be preached from our pulpits.