Biblical Ignorance Brings Further Losses

DURING the 1950’s American churches rapidly grew. Congregations swelled. New sects branched off from the main denominations. Nowhere was the rosy dream of ‘converting the world to the Kingdom of Christ’ rosier than in the “Bible Belt” region. But, beginning with the 1960’s, the heat went out of religion. In the South, as we have seen, many church members and ministers were sidetracked with concern over social and political issues.

But what about those who sincerely sought spiritual food in the churches? Did they find the Bible clearly taught as the Word of God and were they shown how it could be used as a guide for life? A clear answer comes from church leaders. For instance, former Southern Baptist Convention president Carl Bates admits: “We reared a generation of Baptists who are almost totally ignorant of our doctrine.” And Baptist Dr. K. L. Chafin says: “They don’t know how to articulate their beliefs.”

Why Biblical Ignorance Among Church Members?

But why are church members “almost totally ignorant” and unable to “articulate their beliefs,” which should be Bible-based? Could it be that the clergy have nothing substantial to offer their flocks from the Bible? Do the southern clergy really believe the Bible to be “inspired of God,” as did the apostle Paul?​—2 Tim. 3:16.

For one church’s answer, consider the twelve-volume Broadman Bible Commentary prepared by Baptist scholars. It casts such doubt on the authenticity of the Bible that its appearance has created a furor in Southern Baptist circles for several years. But, now, fewer and fewer churchmen challenge the commentary. Says the Christian Century regarding the 1972 Southern Baptist Convention business sessions:

“The issue that had threatened to provide the most ear-shattering bang at SBC deliberations​—the perennial inquisition involving the 12-volume ‘Broadman Bible Commentary’ and its editors—​went out with a whimper . . . [conservatives] introduced a resolution requesting the recall and rewriting of the work because of its inconsistency with Baptist belief in the absolute inerrancy of the Bible.”

Did most of the delegates favor rejecting a commentary that questions the Bible’s “absolute inerrancy“? Did they want it rewritten to show unquestionable support for the Bible? The report continues:

“The [delegates] refused by an overwhelming standing vote to endorse the withdrawal of the commentary . . . No head count was taken, but the resolution appeared to have been defeated by a 4 to 1 ratio.”

How can ordinary church members be expected to “know how to articulate their beliefs” if even the church’s leading members are divided on such fundamentals as “the absolute inerrancy of the Bible”? There are sure to be wide variations in belief as a result of doubt about the Scriptures’ role. But the uncertainty will not be limited to belief.

Christian conduct should be guided by the Bible. So, would there not also be doubt about what is proper as regards Christian action, conduct?

Yes. And the confusion that has resulted can be illustrated with a specific example. Two Southern Baptist ministers were asked by a Georgia public relations firm if political voting, military service, saluting national emblems, interfaith activities, patriotic ceremonies and supporting the UN made one a “part of the world.” One minister said “Yes” to every point in question. The other said “No” to each point. Yet one of the two pastors also noted on the questionnaire sent him that “God is not a god of confusion.”

True, God is not confused, nor is his Word, the Bible. But is there not obvious confusion among the clergy within the same Baptist denomination? The ordinary person will be no less confused. It is not surprising that many “almost totally ignorant” laymen are simply forsaking their churches.

Failure to adhere to the Biblical standard of conduct is also creating a divisive issue among “Bible Belt” Methodists. What issue is that?

Methodists and Homosexuality

The issue is homosexuality. The Bible clearly says: “Make no mistake . . . none who are guilty either of adultery or of homosexual perversion . . . will possess the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor. 6:9, New English Bible) Yet, when four Methodist ministers in the Atlanta area were asked if Bible principles are violated by homosexuality, only one said Yes!

In 1971 a periodical, The Texas Methodist, surveyed members of that church regarding homosexuality. In response to the question, “Do you believe a person can be both a Christian and a homosexual?” 41 percent of the total 533 responding said “Yes!” And 60 percent of the ministers said “Yes!” Some even referred to homosexuality as “natural.”

The divisive effect that the homosexuality issue has had on Methodist churches in the area is clearly observed in this letter from one older church member to The Texas Methodist: “I have been a Methodist for over seventy years and have never seen such filthy things as are going on in the Methodist Church, and which seem to be accepted by the leaders of our church. No wonder that so many members are leaving.”

Hypocrisy Turns Many in “the Bible Belt”

There is another reason why many​—especially younger people—​have turned from fundamentalist “Bible Belt” religions. What is that? An answer comes from Paul H. Johnson of the Martin Street Baptist Church in Raleigh, North Carolina: “A lot of youngsters see Christians preaching one thing and practicing another.”

Strict requirements have long been imposed on most “Bible Belt” church members, forbidding them to smoke or drink alcoholic beverages. But have church people really believed these teachings? Well, over 90 percent of the United States’ huge tobacco crop still comes from the South. And Kentucky remains a leading American whiskey-producing state. Should today’s intelligent youngsters be expected to ignore such obvious inconsistencies? Hardly!

Nor can they overlook the hypocrisy within many of the “Bible Belt” churches themselves. A woman in Decatur, Georgia, says: “I was raised the daughter of a Baptist minister, which meant no makeup, no jewelry, no cards in the house, no dancing of any kind, no short hair on girls, no music on Sundays, and absolutely no tobacco or alcohol. Nearly everything was ‘no.’ By the time I was twelve or so I realized that everyone was saying one thing and actually living another. Most of all my father. He preached on Sunday against everything that he did all week.” Such hypocrisy is just one more cause for many to turn aside from the South’s churches.

Certainly, failing to believe the Bible by steadfastly adhering to its teachings has resulted in division, uncertainty and hypocrisy within the “Bible Belt” religious organizations. It has contributed to their loss in membership. Yet, many sincere people honestly ask if there is any sound spot at all in the religious picture in America’s “Bible Belt.”