Published on June 22, 2024, 12:44 am

In a move that reaffirms the growing concerns of those engaged with religious discourse, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) has once again showcased its tendency to yield to societal pressures instead of staunchly advocating for biblical principles. The recent failure to pass the Mike Law Amendment signals an alarming progression of theological decay within this reputed bastion of conservative Christianity.

Historically, church denominations that have compromised biblical doctrines, especially regarding Women’s role in pulpit, have spiraled into complete apostasy. Notably, some mainstream Protestant denominations provide a compelling case in point—once they accepted female pastors, numerous compromises on biblical principles followed leading to ordination of practicing homosexuals and questioning the authority of the scripture itself.

The Mike Law Amendment was proposed as a final attempt to arrest this precipitous decline. It aimed to clarify in SBC’s constitution that only men, as per scriptural qualifications, can serve as pastors or elders within cooperating churches. Despite aligning with existing doctrines expressed in the Baptist Faith & Message 2000, SBC members let slip an opportunity for unequivocal affirmation choosing instead what appeased cultural norms and feminist sympathizers within its ranks.

A substantial number like ex-SBC president JD Greear and presidential nominee Bruce Frank advocated against this amendment sighting possibilities of unnecessary divisions. However, claiming division avoidance as an excuse only glosses over their inability to deal with hard truths exposed by scriptures. Truly, unity in church is predicated upon shared commitment to God’s Word rather than embracing superficial harmony at cost of truth.

Sadly though, despite securing majority votes, the amendment failed since it did not meet the required two-thirds majority threshold—a clear indication that close-to 40% voting members are either unfamiliar with Scriptures or more intent on appeasing cultural forces at expense of upholding Biblical truths.

Any argument attributing failure of such a clear scriptural statement primarily due to logistical factors does not underscore severity or seriousness associated with such election results. Any opposition to such straightforward pronouncement requires a critique of the authoritative scriptural discourse itself. For instance, the Bible clearly cements gender roles within religious settings in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 which states, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man”. This isn’t open for interpretation—it’s an explicit commandment.

Unfortunately, a sense of fear of being branded ‘misogynistic’ appears to have influenced SBC’s decision more than their commitment towards upholding biblical fidelity—a telling sign of how theological recessions begin and then spiral out-of-control.

However, this predicament isn’t merely about women in the pulpit. It’s fundamentally about Scriptures’ authority—whether we regard God’s Word as adequate across all issues pertaining to faith and practice—or whether we believe it needs updating according to society’s whims. Towards those opposing this amendment, anyone should remember that divine scripture does not sway before cultural tides. Its word is eternal and incapable of accommodating transient societal trends. By defaulting on standing by Biblical truth, not only did they compromise personal integrity but also set dangerous future precedents.

In summary, SBC’s refusal to ratify Mike Law Amendment signals an unfortunate testament of theological regression—an evident message that they are more invested in societal acceptance than demonstrating allegiance towards Word. And if history holds true, total apostasy could then ominously be just around the corner.