{"id":18886,"date":"2025-03-05T15:22:22","date_gmt":"2025-03-05T20:22:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/christoverall.com\/?p=18886"},"modified":"2025-03-14T17:17:53","modified_gmt":"2025-03-14T21:17:53","slug":"february-intermission-from-the-doctrine-of-sin-to-the-erlc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christoverall.com\/article\/concise\/february-intermission-from-the-doctrine-of-sin-to-the-erlc\/","title":{"rendered":"February Intermission: From the Doctrine of Sin to the ERLC"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Welcome to March!!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The month where Spring begins, baseball opens, and evangelicals who know their history celebrate the missionary efforts of Saint Patrick. For Christ Over All<\/em>, March means a month devoted to the Southern Baptist Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the last two years, we have taken up topics relevant to the SBC. In 2023, we addressed biblical complementarianism<\/strong><\/a> and helped to bring biblical and theological arguments to support the Law Amendmennt. Then, in 2024, we continued that push for biblical complementarianism and what cooperation<\/strong><\/a> among Baptist churches mean. If you are newer to Christ Over All, you can find close to twenty essays and podcasts for each subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This year, we are continuing to engage with SBC issues, by looking at the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission\u2014its history, current ministry, and relationship with the convention. As I will explain below and outlined in detail in this month\u2019s first longform essay<\/a>, our aim is to initiate a conversation among Southern Baptists about the ERLC\u2019s recent failures and its future correction. Yet, far more than moving Festivus to March, we do not intend to only list our grievances. We want to be equally constructive, even casting a vision of what Christian public engagement should look like when informed by biblical conservatism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, before introducing that subject, it is worth answering a question: Why bother with the SBC? And why devote a month to conventional matters?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To those two questions, let me offer two answers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First, devoting a month to the SBC is a matter of real life impact. As bothersome as it can be to engage in a convention whose doctrinal commitments are wider than our own, there is goodness is seeking to bring reform, health, and change to a denomination that has an oversized impact on all churches in America. As I argued last summer<\/a>, working for reform in the SBC is worth the cost. And equally, if we flee the convention, it will continue to slide Left. But by working for biblical change, it can prevent churches, institutions, and missionaries from theological drift. And in fact, there is a renewed effort to bring the Law Amendment to the floor of the convention in Dallas<\/a>, which promises to help stem the tide of egalitarianism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second, devoting a month to the SBC is a matter of proximal stewardship. Our current board is composed of Southern Baptist professors, pastors, and men trained by SBC institutions. In God\u2019s providence he has put us in or near the SBC. Likewise, many of our authors and thousands of readers and listeners are in Southern Baptist schools and churches. So, instead of merely providing online resources that develop the mind and contemplate theology in the abstract, we also want to be a part of working for change. And that means addressing topics that are pertinent to the SBC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For those remaining faithful in the SBC, even while experiencing various degrees of frustration, this month is for you. We pray it serves you well, as you lead your congregation and make your plans for Dallas. Equally, for those who are not in the SBC, thank you for your patience. I trust the resources this month will not be so parochial as to be of no value. And in fact, it is our aim to do more than simply talk about the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you notice, the month\u2019s title is \u201cEthics and Religious Liberty Conundrum.\u201d Yes, this highlights the questions and concerns that swirl about the ERLC, but more than that, we want to posit constructive arguments for the best ways for Christians to support religious liberty and organize themselves to impact government. That\u2019s the aim, and below I\u2019ll share a few more thoughts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For now, however, let me offer a look back at last month\u2019s theme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whatever Happened to the Doctrine of Sin?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"Macintosh<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Going into last month, we argued that the doctrine of sin has gone missing. To be sure, sin has not been lost. And humans living in the age of unfettered transhumanism are finding radical new ways to enervate old idolatries, but the doctrine itself has fallen on hard times. And so for the last month, we focused on recovering this doctrine. And in God\u2019s kindness, he gave us a series of articles from learned scholars, wise mothers, and expert evangelists. And here\u2019s what we found.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Biblically, Steve Wellum explained the absolute necessity of understanding Genesis 3<\/a>. Tom Schreiner gave us a rich exposition of Romans 5<\/a>. And Ardel Caneday explained how the gospel announces God\u2019s last day verdict<\/a> for all who believe in Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Theologically, David Dockery described the difference between the new and old natures<\/a>, while Harrison Perkins outlined why talking about sin is hard<\/a> and how the covenant of works requires moral and even legal speech. Terry Mortensen provided a critical argument for believing that Adam was a historical person<\/a>. Likewise, Hans Madueme and Kyle Claunch both provided insights into the way in which sin is passed down from one generation to the next\u2014Hans focusing on the biological question<\/a> and Kyle honing in on the nature of traducianism<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Historically, Brad Green reflected on the debates between Augustine and Pelagius on the effects of original sin<\/a>, while his friend, and ours, Leonardo De Chirico described the errors of Roman Catholicism and its doctrine of sin<\/a>. Louis Markos added to the mix considering C. S. Lewis\u2019s views on sin and punishment<\/a>, while Brad Green offered a second article related to Herbert Marcuse<\/a>. This comes from his forthcoming book on Critical Theory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then practically, Colin McCulloch counseled us to seek the means of grace to help us fight sin<\/a> and seek holiness, while Abigail Dodds articulated particular ways that sin\u2019s subtleties can target women<\/a>. Similarly, Ginna Cross overturned the lie that women who intentionally kill their children can shelter behind a \u201csecond victim\u201d narrative<\/a>. And finally, Jared Moore explained what Tim Keller, Sam Allberry, and Preston Sprinkle got wrong<\/a> with their descriptions of homosexual desire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All in all, for those with eyes to see, this month brought into the light the darkness of sin. If this doctrine was missing before, these faithful friends have helped us to see it more clearly. And by that fresh illumination, I pray that all who read these articles would be better equipped to highlight the moral ugliness and spiritual deadliness of sin. May it lead us all to see the beauty of Christ and his cross, as well as the good news of justification by grace and through faith alone in Christ alone would bring hope to sinners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For a full list of the articles, see below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n