Response to 'Devil's advocate questions'

by Rod Benson

Here’s a quick response to Matthew's five questions:

1. A Baptist may certainly be a “liberal” Christian, in the sense of subscribing to politically and/or theologically liberal views. To say “No” and to enforce that position through church instruments would not be Baptist. Nor would it be something Jesus would have done. My approach to problems of orthodoxy/heterodoxy is to be gracious and tenacious toward those who view things differently, believing that “truth will out.”

2. The notion of the Bible as our “sole authority” is untenable. Where does it leave road rules, professional codes of ethics, or moral matters not dealt with by Scripture?

3. The issue this question raises for me is that we are not dealing with separate and autonomous groups (such as, for example, distinct species, or spiral galaxies) but groups with distinctive AND overlapping (and sometimes contradictory) allegiances. This is normal for advanced human communities, and should be celebrated. There’s more to enlightenment than The Enlightenment.

4. I know many evangelical Christians who are not Baptist. Jesus, for example. Paul. In fact, millions of Christians before 1500. You get the point. And I know some Baptists who are not evangelicals (but I can’t name them or the Baptist thought police will track them down…).

5. We are free to define Baptist identity according to all three lines of thought you noted. I think that would be very helpful. For my part, what is most important in the expression of my faith is devotion to Jesus Christ and obedience to Scripture, properly interpreted in the evangelical tradition. I think that aligns me with a lot of good Baptist Christians. Contemporary and historical consensus counts for very little, except in helping me to understand and appreciate the strange ways of most 21st century Christians in the West.

Rod Benson is an ethicist and public theologian with the Tinsley Institute. He attends Dural Baptist Church.