Revised April 26, 2002 (first published Nov. 10, 1996) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article)

In October 1996, Jerry Falwell, pastor of the Thomas Road Baptist Church and president of Liberty University, Lynchburg, Virginia, announced they would begin making monthly contributions to the newly formed conservative group within the Virginia state Southern Baptist Convention. In announcing this, he said that he was happy to join hands with the SBC, testifying, "[W]E FULLY INTEND TO TAKE OUR PERMANENT STAND WITH THE NATIONAL AND VIRGINIA BIBLE-BELIEVING CONSERVATIVES WHO HAVE RESCUED THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION FROM THEOLOGICAL LIBERALISM" (Baptist Press, October 24, 1996).

The Thomas Road Baptist Church's contribution to the Southern Baptist conservatives of Virginia qualifies it to send messengers to the SBC annual meeting and allows members of the church to serve on trustee boards of the SBC. This right was exercised in July 1998 when Dr. Falwell and other representatives of the Thomas Road Baptist Church attended the annual convention in Salt Lake City. Falwell is also aligned with the Baptist Bible Fellowship, a fellowship of pastors of independent Baptist churches.

WHEN WAS THE SBC RESCUED FROM THEOLOGICAL LIBERALISM?

I have a question for Dr. Falwell. When was the Southern Baptist Convention rescued from theological liberalism? It is true that men who are theologically "conservative" have been elected president of the Convention for several years, and it is true that steps have been made to move some liberals out of positions within the Convention. It is also true that the national seminaries are much more conservative today than they were 15 years ago. TO SAY, THOUGH, THAT THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION HAS BEEN RESCUED FROM THEOLOGICAL LIBERALISM IS NONSENSE IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT LIBERALISM REMAINS DEEPLY EMBEDDED WITHIN THE CONVENTION.

The Southern Baptist Convention is an association that yokes Bible-believing Christians together with people, philosophies, and organizations that are disobedient to the Word of God. It is a mixed multitude of New Evangelicals, Modernists, and Ecumenists.

LIBERALISM SPREAD THROUGH THE SBC VIA THE INFLUENCE OF LIBERAL SCHOOLS

Even by the admission of the present conservative SBC leadership, Southern Baptist seminaries were shot through and through with theological liberalism when the "conservative renaissance" began in the late 1970s. This has been carefully documented in many books, including S.B.C. House on the Sand? by Dr. David O. Beale (Bob Jones University, 1985). Year after year, decade after decade, thousands of Southern Baptist pastors and missionaries were trained at the feet of men who denied that the Bible is the perfect, infallible Word of God and who denied or questioned other cardinal doctrines of the New Testament faith.

To illustrate the condition of the Southern Baptist schools in the 1970s, consider a survey that was taken in 1976 by a Master of Theology student at the Southern Theological Seminary, the oldest and most prominent of SBC seminaries. Three faculty members--G. Willis Bennett, E. Glenn Hinson, and Henlee Barnette--signed that they had read and approved the thesis containing this survey ("Liberalism Brews within the Southern Baptist Convention," William A. Powell, Sr., Fundamentalist Journal, February, 1984, p. 21). One statement was -- "Jesus was born of a virgin: completely true." Of the first-year students, 96% said they agreed with this statement. Of final-year seminary students, only 66% agreed. Thus, after three years of training in this SBC school, 30% of the students had learned to question the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. It gets worse, though. At the Th.M. level, only 33% agreed that Jesus was born of a virgin, and only 32% of Ph.D. candidates agreed. Thus almost a full 70% of advanced Southern Seminary students in the 1970s questioned the virgin birth. When asked if they believed Jesus literally walked on water, 96% of first-year students believed this, while only 59% of fourth year students believed it, and only 44% of Th.M. and 22% of Ph.D. students believed it. When asked if they had any doubts that Jesus Christ is the Divine Son of God, 100% of first-year students said they had no doubts, while only 87% of fourth-year students, 63% of Th.M. candidates and 63% of Ph.D. candidates had no doubts. This means that almost 40% of the graduate-level students at this SBC school questioned the Deity of Jesus Christ. In fact, it is probable that a much higher percentage questioned the true deity of Christ, since the term "divine Son of God" is commonly reinterpreted by Modernists to mean something other than the fact that Jesus Christ is Almighty God. Further, roughly 30% of the fourth-year students and 35% of Th.M. and Ph.D. candidates said they had doubts even about the existence of God.

This was the condition of the SBC flagship school in the late 1970s, and Southern Seminary was only one of many liberal seminaries in the SBC. Most of the schools, in fact, were thoroughly permeated with theological Modernism by the 1950s. This is the fruit of liberal seminary training. Each year that students remain in a liberal environment, fewer of them hold fast to the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

Southern Baptist supporters are quick to reply that since the conservatives have taken control of Southern Seminary the teachers are required to profess commitment to biblical inerrancy. This is true, but my reply is as follows: Where are those thousands of men and women today who were trained at the feet of Modernists? The answer is that they are pastors and deacons and teachers in Southern Baptist churches and they are Southern Baptist missionaries. When did they give up the liberal influence with which they were infected during seminary training? The fact is that most of them are still infected. These generations of liberal-trained graduates have permeated the Convention with theological confusion and weakness. According to a survey that was done in 1995, a full 11% of Southern Baptists questioned said, "The Bible is the inspired word of God, but it may contain historical and scientific errors" (Atlanta Journal, June 18, 1995). That reply represents the fruit of liberalism that is gradually permeating the Convention at the grass roots level, in spite of the conservative renaissance at the national level.

Furthermore, though the national seminaries have been turned back somewhat from theological modernism, nothing has changed at the state and local level of the convention. There are six national seminaries with a total enrollment of roughly 12,700. These have been turned in a more conservative direction during the last 15 years. On the other hand, there are 54 Southern Baptist colleges and universities that are [for the most part] openly and unquestioningly modernistic, with a total enrollment of roughly 113,500 students (R.L. Hymers, Jr., Battle for the Bible in the 21st Century, pp. vii-ix, citing Bill Sumners, Director and Archivist, Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archives, Jforbis@edge.net). Thus, even today, after 30 years of conservative leadership at the national level, 90% of the students in Southern Baptist-supported institutions are being trained by modernists.

LIBERALISM IN THE SBC IN VIRGINIA

CONSIDER, AS ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT LIBERALISM REMAINS IN THE SBC, THE SITUATION IN VIRGINIA. The new Virginia SBC apparatus was formed a few years ago and is called the Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia (SBCV). In 1996, the SBCV voted to become a separate convention. It works alongside of the older Baptist General Association of Virginia (BGAV). This means there are now two conventions in Virginia associated with the national Southern Baptist Convention.

Why did the Virginia conservatives form a new group? BECAUSE OF LIBERALISM WITHIN THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION. One of the conservative leaders in Virginia, T.C. Pinckney, testified, "The BGAV IS RAPIDLY DEPARTING FROM ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY" (Baptist Press, September 17, 1996). Outgoing president of the SBCV, Bob Melvin, testified that the thing that brought the SBCV together is "our uncompromising stand on the inerrancy and infallibility of the Word of God" (Ibid.). He is saying that there are many others within the SBC who do not have such a stand, and this is what sets the SBCV apart from others within the Virginia SBC convention. IT IS AN IRREFUTABLE FACT THAT THERE ARE MANY MEN WITHIN THE SBC WHO DENY THE INFALLIBLE INSPIRATION OF THE HOLY BIBLE. There are heretics and false teachers within the SBC, and there are many others who, though themselves conservative in theology, are sympathetic with the heretics.

This does not sound to me like the Southern Baptist Convention has been "rescued from theological liberalism."

The Virginia SBC conservatives want to make a statement against error, but it is a weak statement. Churches can remain members of the old liberal SBC Virginia state convention (BGAV) even while participating with the new conservative convention (SBCV). Some 20% of the 292 churches in the SBCV are also a part of the BGAV (Fundamentalist Digest, March-April 2001, p. 11). This is strange. On one hand we are told by conservative Virginia Baptist leaders that the BGAV is rapidly departing from orthodox Christianity, but they refuse to actually separate from this apostasy and they allow churches affiliated with this apostasy to join hands with them in their new convention. This reminds me that even the most conservative men in the Southern Baptist Convention are compromising New Evangelicals who refuse to exercise biblical separation from error. Further, one-half of the $774,000 budget of the SBCV will go to the SBC Cooperative Program, a portion of which will go to pay salaries of some men and women who deny the position of the SBCV on the infallible inspiration of Scripture. This is a strange form of protest against liberalism, but it is the denominational mentality. It appears that it is the best protest the denominational mentality can make, but it is not enough and it is not scriptural.

The Baptist Theological Seminary in Richmond is an example of the modernism that permeates the Southern Baptist Convention at the state level. This seminary, which was formed in 1989, receives thousands of dollars each year from the Baptist General Association of Virginia. In April 2001, for example, the BGAV allocated $12,962 to the seminary. In addition, the seminary is supported by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, the Alliance of Baptists, and by Southern Baptist churches in North Carolina and the District of Columbia. John Ippolito, who was a student at Baptist Theological Seminary for more than a year before transferring to a more conservative seminary, documented the rank modernism of the school in a journal that was published by the Baptist Banner, in April 2001. He observed, "The professors here, as well as many of the students, continually question the authenticity of the Bible. They close their minds to classical, traditional interpretation, under the guise of theology, but they do not realize that they are pulling away from the Lord." Instead of learning to believe and rightly interpret the Bible, he "learned to dismantle the Bible." He said that one of his professors taught that there is no revelation of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. The Bible is viewed through the lenses of the modernistic documentary theories that claim the Old Testament is a mixture of myth and history. Homosexuality and feminism was openly promoted by some of the students. Ippolito's testimony was confirmed by others who have attended Baptist Theological Seminary.

LIBERALISM IN THE SBC IN GEORGIA

Mercer University is the largest and most prominent SBC educational institution in Georgia. It receives $2.5 million a year from the convention. Southern Baptist churches that give to the Cooperative Program pay the salaries of professors at Mercer. The President of Mercer since 1979, R. Kirby Godsey, published a book entitled When We Talk about God ... Let's Be Honest (Smyth & Helwys, 1996) which denies that the Bible is infallible. In fact, Godsey claims "the notion that God is the all powerful, the high and mighty principal of heaven and earth should be laid aside." That is wicked heresy of the highest degree. (We review this book in Chapter Four: "President of SBC University Attacks the Word of God.") It is true that the book was pulled from the shelves of bookstores operated by the Southern Baptist Sunday School Board (though the store owners were told they are free to order the book). It is true that the SBC executive committee issued a resolution that stated that Godsey has "departed significantly from Baptist doctrine" and which meekly requested that Godsey "prayerfully reconsider his theological convictions." It is also true that there have been attempts since 1987 to have Godsey step down, but the fact remains that the heretic Godsey has been head of one of the most influential SBC schools since 1979, and he is still the head of the school. In December 1996, the trustees of Mercer voted unanimously to support Godsey's presidency under the banner of "academic freedom." In September 1997, a committee of the Georgia Baptist Convention (GBC) determined that Godsey's book is "punctuated with heresy." In spite of this, on September 11, the GBC voted overwhelmingly to continue its relationship with the school.

This does not sound to me like the Southern Baptist Convention has been "rescued from theological liberalism." To say that Mercer is only a state-supported school and that it is not supported by the national convention is to dodge the issue. The fact remains that Mercer is supported by Southern Baptist churches in Georgia, which in turn are part of the national Southern Baptist Convention. If the Southern Baptist Convention does not have the will and means to deal biblically with false teachers, it should not exist.

LIBERALISM IN THE SBC IN MISSOURI

On November 21, 1996, the Associated Baptist Press noted that "for the second straight year, Missouri Baptists refused to require convention leaders to embrace 'inerrancy,' a view, held by conservatives, that the Bible is literally true." In this statement, we see the liberal bias that controls even the Baptist reporting agency. Is inerrancy merely a view held by Southern Baptist conservatives? Of course not. It is the view held by the Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles. Biblically speaking, any other view is rank heresy, but the Baptist Press pretends that many different views of inspiration are equally feasible for God-fearing Christians. Getting back to the situation in the Missouri branch of the Southern Baptist Convention, we see that heretics are so strongly in control in Southern Baptist churches there that they cannot pass even a simple requirement that leaders believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. That is very basic, friends. I refuse to have anything whatsoever to do with such a weak, Christ-dishonoring convention. The Bible plainly instructs God's people to mark and avoid false teachers and to reject them from the churches (Rom. 16:17-18; Titus 3:10-11). The Southern Baptist Convention does not require obedience to these Scriptures.

LIBERALISM IN SBC IN CALIFORNIA

Meanwhile, in 1996 California Southern Baptists failed for the third year in a row to refuse participation by a church pastored by a woman. This is the 19th Avenue Baptist Church in San Francisco, which in 1993 called Julie Pennington-Russell as pastor. "Conservatives" have challenged the church repeatedly, but they have failed to have the church removed from the state convention, regardless of the fact that the Scriptures plainly forbid a woman to pastor a church. This is evidence of the extremely weak spiritual condition of Southern Baptist churches overall in California. Conservatives in California also failed in their efforts to amend the convention's constitution to make it easier to discharge churches on doctrinal grounds (Associated Baptist Press, Nov. 21, 1996).

LIBERALISM IN THE SBC IN ALABAMA

At their 1996 state convention, Alabama Southern Baptists overwhelmingly approved a "covenant of sacred trust" aimed at reconciliation with Samford University. The school has grown increasingly liberal over the years, and conservative Southern Baptists have attempted to bring change through the appointment of like-minded trustees. In 1994, Samford's trustees voted to disallow participation of the state convention in the appointment of board members. By the new agreement, trustees will be jointly nominated. This move demonstrates the liberal character of Alabama Southern Baptist churches in general. If they cared about doctrinal purity, the Southern Baptist churches in that state would have separated themselves unequivocally from Samford years ago. Instead, they continue to pour church offering money into this institution. In June 1996 Samford University's Beeson Divinity School honored Bishop Lessie Newbigin with a banquet and featured him as a speaker. Newbigin was a member of the inaugural assembly of the World Council of Churches in 1948 and has been a leader in and a supporter of the apostate WCC ever since. He took a major part in the formation of the extremely modernistic Church of South (CSI) India. (See the O Timothy Computer Library from Way of Life Literature for documentation of the CSI's apostasy.) Newbigin has been a lifetime apologist for the most radical and unscriptural aspects of the modern ecumenical movement. An article in the Evangelical Missions Quarterly, October 1979, noted that Newbigin is a universalist.

At a conference on October 2-3, 2001, Beeson Divinity School featured Roman Catholic priest Richard John Neuhaus, co-author of the Evangelicals and Catholics Together statement.

The artwork in the $10 million chapel at Beeson Divinity School features many scenes from church history. In the dome are several depictions of key figures, including William Seymour, one of the strange fathers of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movement. The mission established by Seymour on Azusa Street in 1906 has become famous as the birthplace of Pentecostalism. Meetings were held three times a day, seven days a week, for three years. Visitors attended from around the world, seeking their own "personal Pentecost," and these and missionaries sent out from the Azusa Street mission created a whirlwind of growth for the burgeoning Pentecostal movement. Many of the phenomena associated today with the weird Laughing Revival were evident at the Azusa Street mission--slaying in the spirit, singing in "tongues," rolling on the floor, animal noises, jerking, people trying to speak and being unable to do so, etc. One visitor described the meetings as "wild, hysterical demonstrations." The seekers would be "seized with a strange spell and commence a jibberish of sounds." A Los Angeles Times reporter noted that the participants "work themselves into a state of mad excitement in their peculiar zeal." There was little or no order to the services. Seymour rarely preached. Instead, much of the time he kept his head covered in an empty packing crate behind the pulpit. He taught the people to cry out to God and demand sanctification, the baptism with the Holy Ghost, and divine healing. When Charles Parham, another father of Pentecostalism and the man who had taught Seymour, visited the meetings in October 1906, even he was shocked by the confusion of the services. He was dismayed by the "awful fits and spasms" of the "holy rollers and hypnotists." He described the Azusa "tongues" as "chattering, jabbering and sputtering, speaking no language at all." The Azusa Street meetings were so wild that Parham condemned them with the term "sensational Holy Rollers." He testified that the Azusa Street meetings were largely characterized by manifestations of the flesh, spiritualistic controls, and the practice of hypnotism (Sarah Parham, The Life of Charles F. Parham, Joplin, MO: Tri-state Printing, 1930, p. 163). According to Parham, two-thirds of the people professing Pentecostalism in his day "are either hypnotized or spook driven" (Life of Charles Parham, p. 164). In his writings about Azusa Street, Parham described men and women falling on one another in a morally compromising manner. We say much more about Seymour and the history of Pentecostalism in our book The Laughing Revival from Azusa to Pensacola.

It is unconscionable for a Southern Baptist school to promote William Seymour to their students and visitors in this manner with no accompanying word of warning about his confused and errant theology and practice.

The chapel also prominently features a bust of neo-orthodox theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who denied the virgin birth of Jesus Christ and the objective infallibility of the Scriptures. In August 2001, our co-laborer Brian Snider and I visited Beeson chapel and participated briefly in a guided tour. We were told by a school representative that Bonhoeffer was featured because he was a martyr for the faith in the 20th century. Yet that does not answer the question of why an allegedly "evangelical" school would honor a man who denied many fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. Upon further questioning, our guide, a Beeson seminary student, said that he does not think that belief in the virgin birth is necessary for salvation. When we asked how it is possible for Jesus Christ to save men from their sins if He was not virgin born and if therefore He had inherited sin, he had no answer. This conservative Southern Baptist educational institution has brainwashed its students with the ecumenical attitude that a chief Christian grace is positivism, tolerance, and non-controversy among profession brethren. They do not plainly and boldly mark and avoid false teachers. Rather, they follow the New Evangelical philosophy of presenting the truth within a positive framework.

LIBERALISM IN THE SBC IN LOUISIANA

The situation among Southern Baptists in Louisiana is similar to that in the states previously mentioned. In 1996 conservative Louisiana Southern Baptists attempted to add a statement of faith to the convention constitution and to require that the convention's work be "in accordance with principles that the Bible is the Word of God." That is a simple enough proposal, one would think! It didn't pass, though. Almost half of the convention participants opposed the measure (a two-thirds majority was required for approval).

LIBERALISM IN THE SBC IN TEXAS

The same theological battle is raging within the SBC in other states. Texas is another example. Pastor Rick Scarborough (First Baptist Church, Pearland, Texas) ran for President of the Baptist General Convention of Texas. Why? BECAUSE OF LIBERALISM WITHIN THE SBC. In an interview with Jerry Falwell, Scarborough stated why he was running for denominational office. "I BELIEVE IT IS MY RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE THIS ELECTION A REFERENDUM ON LIBERALISM IN OUR STATE CONVENTION" (National Liberty Journal, Nov. 1996, p. 10).

When asked what he would do if he lost the election in Texas, Pastor Scarborough said: "If the majority of churches speak out that they want to continue moving down the path to modernism and the CBF, then our church will simply keep winning souls, growing Christians AND REMAINING LOYAL TO THE SBC."

This man well represents the "conservative renaissance" within the SBC. He is concerned enough about liberalism to participate in denominational elections, but he is not concerned enough to do what the Bible says, and that is to mark and avoid the liberals (Romans 16:17), to come out from among them (2 Corinthians 6:14-18). He will remain loyal to the SBC in spite of the fact that it is infiltrated with theological apostasy. (Pastor Scarborough and his conservative allies lost the election.)

THE SBC ASSOCIATES WITH LIBERALISM THROUGH THE CHINA CHRISTIAN COUNCIL

The deep theological error with which the Southern Baptist Convention is riddled is further evidenced by its ecumenical relationships with and support of institutions that are permeated with theological Modernism. A case in point is the China Christian Council.

In November 1997, Louis Moore, associate vice president for communications with the SBC foreign mission board stated that the Southern Baptist Convention has worked closely with the China Christian Council (CCC) from its beginning and there are currently eight "career Southern Baptist workers" assigned to the Council.

K.H. Ting, longtime head of the China Christian Council, is a rank Modernist who denies that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and believes that truth is in all religions and philosophies. Ting became president of the China Christian Council's Nanjing Seminary, and turned it into a hotbed of theological heresy. Ting is a universalist, who believes there is light in all religions. In a lecture on September 23, 1984, at Rikkyo (St. Paul's) University, Tokyo, under the sponsorship of the Anglican-Episcopal Church of Japan, Ting said we should reject the type of arrogance Jonah had toward the Ninevites. Instead, "We should welcome any and every move Godward on the part of men and women, no matter how slight" (K.H. Ting, "Theological Mass Movements in China," International Bulletin of Missionary Research, July 1985, p. 98). In the same speech, Ting said we should see the logos (the Word in John 1:1) in every man. He denied that there will be a judgment upon sinful mankind. He praised liberation theology, which replaces the salvation of the individual sinner with the salvation of society. Ting has always referred to the brutal Chinese dictator Mao and his murdering hoards as "liberators of China." He refers to the 1949 revolution as China's "liberation."

During the 1980s, the CCC implemented the "Ten Don'ts," which were ten rules for the churches. These included such things as forbidding young people under eighteen to attend worship services, forbidding night time gatherings, forbidding the reception of overseas Christians, and forbidding any preaching from the book of Revelation. "Local Christian meetings which refused to register with TSPM or the Religious Affairs Bureau were systematically closed, and itinerant preachers who refused to join the TSPM were either arrested or made fugitives. Even today, unregistered meetings are considered illegal. Independent churches in China continue to be persecuted today. Pastors are jailed because they refuse to buckle under the China Christian Council's "authority" and regulations. All the while, the leaders of the CCC to lie to the world, claiming there is no persecution, that there is religious liberty in China.

In chapter six of our 117-page book "Has the Southern Baptist Convention Been Rescued from Liberalism" we have documented the Southern Baptist Convention's relationship with the liberal China Christian Council.

THE SBC ASSOCIATES WITH LIBERALISM THROUGH THE BAPTIST WORLD ALLIANCE

Another example of the Southern Baptist Convention's close affiliation with Modernism is its relationship with the Baptist World Alliance:

"The Southern Baptist Convention is by far the largest member body of the apostate Baptist World Alliance. A large percentage of BWA member bodies relate to the World Council of Churches. It is estimated that BWA member bodies in the World Council of Churches would make up 15% of the total (BWA's 7-9/97 Baptist World). Some BWA member bodies such as the SBC have engaged in ecumenical conversations with a whole variety of other bodies including the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church. The BWA article said Baptists who were suspicious of any move toward organic union between churches in the 1950s and 1960s are much more likely today to feel comfortable in an ecumenical milieu. Those who claim the Southern Baptist Convention is now 'conservative' have to ignore its links to apostate one-world church movements. Be warned, be wise, beware!" (Calvary Contender, August 15, 1997, 1800 Sparkman Dr., Huntsville, AL 35816)

The Southern Baptist Convention provides a whopping 35% of the total budget of the Baptist World Alliance. In 2000, SBC Executive Committee President Dr. Morris Chapman stated that Southern Baptist churches will "benefit by remaining very active participants in the Baptist World Alliance" (Foundation, Nov.-Dec. 2000, p. 45). Anglican archbishop Desmond Tutu, who denies Bible miracles and calls for the ordination of homosexuals, spoke at a Baptist World Alliance meeting in 1988. Brutal communist dictator Fidel Castro spoke to the Baptist World Alliance in 2000. On January 24, 2002, Denton Lotz, general secretary of the Baptist World Alliance, joined hands with Pope John Paul II and the leaders of many other denominations and 11 pagan religions at the third Day of Prayer for Peace at Assisi, Italy. The ecumenical pagan prayer gathering featured some 200 religious leaders, including representatives of such "Christian" denominations as Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Reformed, Baptist, Lutheran, Mormon, Methodist, Quaker, Pentecostal, Mennonite, as well as representatives of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Bahai, Confucianism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, Tenrikyo (Japan), and members of African and North American "traditional religions." That the general secretary of the Baptist World Alliance would participate in such a thing is irrefutable evidence of his apostasy. Among the denominations that are united under the BWA umbrella are the American Baptist Convention and the Baptist Union of Great Britain, both of which are permeated with the most blasphemous and heretical modernism under the sun. We have further documented the apostasy of the Baptist World Alliance in chapter seven of the book "Has the Southern Baptist Convention Been Rescued from Liberalism."

THE SBC ASSOCIATES WITH LIBERALISM THROUGH THE AMERICAN BIBLE SOCIETY AND THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES

Another example of how the Southern Baptist Convention affiliates with Modernism is its close relationship with and support of the American Bible Society (ABS), and through the ABS, the United Bible Societies (UBS). The United Bible Societies was formed in 1946 and now coordinates the work of most of the world's Bible societies, including that of the American Bible Society. As of 1998, there were 135 member societies participating in the United Bible Societies. The annual budget of the UBS is almost $40 million, and almost half of that is underwritten by the American Bible Society. The Southern Baptist Convention, in turn, gives large annual grants to the American Bible Society.

The mainstream Bible societies represented within the UBS are absolutely permeated with theological Modernism. We have documented this extensively in our book Unholy Hands on God's Holy Book: A Report on the United Bible Societies. [See the Bible Version section of the End Times Apostasy Database at the Way of Life Literature web site -- http://www.wayoflife.org/]

Here I will offer one example among hundreds that could be given to document the Modernism that is rife within the American Bible Society and the United Bible Societies.

The example is Robert Bratcher, chief editor of the American Bible Society's Today's English Version, otherwise known as Good News for Modern Man. The Southern Baptist Convention funded its own edition of this perverted translation and has distributed multiplied thousands of copies of it.

As a Southern Baptist missionary in Brazil in the 1950s, Bratcher denied the deity of Jesus Christ. As editor of the "Questions and Answers" department of the O Jornal Batista [The Baptist Journal], Bratcher wrote in July 9, 1953: "Jesus Christ would not enjoy omniscience. That is an attribute of God. . . . Jesus did not claim He and the Father to be one--which would be absurd" (M.L. Moser, Jr., The Devil's Masterpiece, Little Rock: Challenge Press, 1970, p. 73). In 1957, Bratcher began working with the American Bible Society and become the chief translator of the wretched Today's English Version which exchanges the term "death" for the term "blood" in reference to Christ's atonement and which perverts practically every passage which deals with Christ's deity. Bratcher has also taught at Southern Seminary, the SBC school from which he received his first doctorate in 1944. He has continued his heretical ways. In March 1981, at a Southern Baptist Christian Life Commission seminar in Dallas, Texas, Bratcher denied the infallibility of Holy Scripture in these words:
"Only willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty can account for the claim that the Bible is inerrant and infallible . . . To invest the Bible with the qualities of inerrancy and infallibility is to idolatrize it, to transform it into a false god. . . . We are not bound by the letter of Scripture, but by the spirit. Even words spoken by Jesus in Aramaic in the thirties of the first century and preserved in writing in Greek, 35 to 50 years later, do not necessarily wield compelling authority over us today."
This was reported in the Baptist Press and we have reprinted it from the SBC North Carolina state paper, the Baptist Courier, April 2, 1981. Due to the outcry that followed these public remarks and a significant loss of financial support, Dr. Bratcher was forced to resign from the Society, and the ABS apologized for his statement. This was a mere political smokescreen, though, for Bratcher has continued working with the United Bible Societies, of which the ABS is a member. In fact, as already noted, the UBS receives a large percentage of its funds directly from the American Bible Society, which in turn receives large grants from the Southern Baptist Convention! The American Bible Society's apology for Bratcher's remarks was incredible hypocrisy, for there are many men in its ranks who hold precisely the same heretical views that Bratcher expressed in Dallas in 1981 (though they are not necessarily as outspoken). Thus SBC Cooperative Program funds supported this man as a missionary and helped support him as an ABS translator and continues to help support him in his United Bible Societies job via the ABS. Southern Baptist Convention funds have published thousands of copies of this man's corrupted translation (the SBC commissioned a special edition of the TEV through the American Bible Society).

Stories such as this could be multiplied. SBC funds have supported many others like Bratcher, both on the mission field and in the schools and through SBC participation in ecumenical programs such as the World Baptist Alliance.

CONCLUSION

HOW MANY MODERNISTS HAVE BEEN DISCIPLINED OUT OF THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION IN THE LAST 30 YEARS? We do not know of any. Even if a few have been forced to leave, the "conservatives" have not aimed to purge the SBC thoroughly of heresy. The goal has been merely to replace the liberals at leadership level. In fact, many of the conservative leaders have stated that their goal is only to achieve "parity" in the schools and in leadership positions in the Convention. This means they are satisfied merely to have a representation of "conservatives" equal to that of the "moderates"! That is disobedience to the biblical injunction to put heretics away (Titus 3:10-11), and it will not work on a practical level. The Bible warns that a little leaven, whether it be sin or theological error, leavens the whole lump (1 Corinthians 5:6; Galatians 5:9).

I praise the Lord for Baptists who have had the conviction and courage to take a biblical stand for truth and against error by coming out of the Southern Baptist Convention and other inclusive denominations and by building sound New Testament Baptist churches that are not affiliated with apostasy and from which not one red cent goes into the pockets of false teachers or their sympathizers. Such convictions have formed the backbone of the Independent Baptist movement of the last seventy years. Today, though, there is a spirit of compromise leavening this Bible-believing movement. Jerry Falwell epitomizes this compromise.

May God stir up a rock-ribbed Bible conviction in the hearts of men in this evil hour. The only statement against false teachers that really means anything is the statement of separation. The only protest against theological liberalism that is pleasing to God is the protest of separation, because that is what He has commanded. TO SAY THAT YOU ARE OPPOSED TO THEOLOGICAL ERROR WHILE SUPPORTING A CONVENTION WHICH IS PERMEATED WITH THE SAME IS ABSOLUTE CONFUSION.

See also "Why I Am Not Southern Baptist"