No one has the authority to say it is permissible to willingly violate the Lordship of Christ as expressed in His Word. So ultimately, this issue is about the authority of the Word of God and the authority of Christ Himself. I will not make a biblical case for complementarianism in this article. But I must reiterate that the failure to pass the Law Amendment was a massive failure on the part of the SBC to submit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The SBC has a biblical authority problem.

At the end of his life, Charles Spurgeon faced a great controversy in the Baptist Union, which he called the “downgrade.” The Baptist Union would even censure him for his outspoken warnings against it in his magazine, The Sword and the Trowel. The Baptist Union would go on to adopt a compromised doctrinal statement on biblical inerrancy by a vote of 2000 to 7.

Evidence of Downgrade

By God’s grace, the Southern Baptist Convention is nowhere close to that type of compromise. However, the evidence of theological downgrade within the Convention is present. How can I utter such a statement when nearly everyone within the SBC affirms biblical inerrancy? The downgrade in the twenty-first century evangelical church is not primarily over inerrancy but on biblical authority—specifically on the issues related to human sexuality. It is at this point that Satan is attacking. At this year’s Convention in Indianapolis, a super-majority of 66% was needed to pass the so-called “Law Amendment,” which delineates that partnering churches should only have qualified men serving in the office of “pastor” or with the title of “pastor.” Specifically, the amendment proposed adding this clause to the SBC Constitution:

Affirms, appoints, or employs only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture.

Unfortunately, the amendment did not pass, receiving a solid 61% of the vote but failing to reach the super-majority of 66%, which was needed. The bright side is that there is a broad majority within the SBC, which stands as thoroughly complementarian and affirming biblical authority in the area of men’s and women’s roles. The bad news is that nearly 39% of the Convention voted against the amendment. Arguments were made that there are better ways to convince churches to comply with the SBC’s doctrinal commitments. Or there is just a problem with nomenclature and not theology (I am not sure how you can legitimately argue that a title in a church is not theological). My friend, David Schrock, does a very helpful job of summarizing all the more egalitarian-leaning arguments against the amendment here.

However, these arguments fail to consider what the Bible plainly states about the issue. The question is really about biblical authority and Christ’s Lordship over His church, or in this case, a denomination.

Read More