In this blog post, Denny Burk addresses how a, “widening of what evangelicals will tolerate as plausibly Christian is how false teaching often advances through the movement. It’s why what was unthinkable to me ten years ago (that evangelicals might give up ground on homosexuality) is now very much ‘thinkable.'”
In this podcast episode of The Briefing, R. Albert Mohler, Jr., addresses the recent Christianity Today article on polyamory.
In this Twitter thread, Jonathan Leeman warns of how, when we undergo doctrinal drift, “people outside of us began to notice a shift in tone and emphases. If they say something, our initial response can be defensive. ‘I haven’t changed. Look, same doctrines!’ Yet something has changed. Our sympathies and intuitions are no longer what they were.”
On this episode of The Sword and the Trowel, “Dr. Coppenger shares his insight as an elder statesman into the the current state of the Evangelical world in North America.”
In a 2013 essay, Thabiti Anyabwile wrote regarding same-sex marriage, “Turns out that being civil about indecency actually hurts the traditional cause.” His point was that polite discourse about abominable behavior plays a role in normalizing such behavior. It is not difficult to see why that would be the case. Polite discourse minimizes and, over time, neutralizes the instinct of moral revulsion. While moral revulsion alone is not enough to sustain ethical practice over time, it is an important community-shaping element. Healthy communities express moral revulsion at that which is truly abominable, and the healthy effect of such revulsion is a natural deterrent toward said behavior within the community. People who are socialized into being appalled at what is appalling to God have the blessing of a moral compass shaped according to truth. Anyabwile’s “gag reflex” argument highlights an important component of the effects of our discourse about sin. It is entirely possible to speak of sin in a way that is technically correct, while still lacking entirely in true moral fiber, leading to the further erosion of social norms and the withering away of a protective moral revulsion.
Egalitarians base their argument for indifference with respect to gender in society, the home, and the pulpit on the idea that men and women are created equally. This post series has argued that when it comes to creation order and its implication for ‘gender roles’ in the church, Southern Baptists do not all differ from the world or from egalitarians. Recent rhetoric regarding women teaching, and even preaching, to men in the SBC, is of some concern. It seems like everywhere we turn, we find ourselves covered up in egalitarian patterns of thought.
In this article, Tom Nettles responds to a post wherein, “Oklahoma Baptist Pastor Wade Burleson has attacked (again) the idea the Bible prohibits women from holding the New Testament position of pastor-bishop- elder.”
In his 2006 article, “After Patriarchy, What? Why Egalitarians are Winning the Gender Debate” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, vol. 49, no. 3, September 2006, pp. 569–76), Russell D. Moore describes how, “Egalitarians are winning the evangelical gender debate, not because their arguments are stronger, but because, in some sense, we are all egalitarians now.” (576) The current state of the SBC is even worse than Moore predicted. In fact, Moore seems to have not only given up on resisting what he calls a feminist movement, but may have contributed to it.
This article is about a church seeking, “affiliation with the Southern Baptist Convention, based on the denomination’s trend toward fundamentalism.”