Should Southern Baptists Witness to Jews?

by T. C. Pinckney                                                                                       Vol. IX, No. 9, October 1996

           Once again I hesitate to put my byline on this article because, as you will see, the great majority of it is written by others. But I will remind readers that in June the SBC passed a resolution calling on Southern Baptists to witness to Jews. That resolution provoked a lot of press coverage and numerous expressions of opinion from a wide variety of people. The September issue of SBC Life printed seventeen of these views. I reprint three of them below.

           First, the view of one Jew, Ira Rifkin, the Religious News Service: “I see no reason to get worked up over the Southern Baptist Convention’s recent decision to appoint a missionary whose task is to oversee the denomination’s efforts to convert Jews. Winning converts is exactly what evangelical Christians who take their faith seriously are supposed to do. Moreover, it’s what Southern Baptists have almost always done. ... We’re not talking about forcible conversion. Contemporary America is a religious free-trade zone where every faith -- from the most sublime to the most ridiculous -- has the right to promote its world view. ... Rather than worry about what Southern Baptists are up to, Jewish leaders would do better to concentrate on creating “intentional Jews” -- Jews who take their faith as seriously as Southern Baptists take theirs. ... Phil Baum, executive director of the American Jewish Congress, said the ‘First Amendment accords (Southern Baptists) the right to try to sell their notion of exclusive access to God. It accords us the right to say that view is misguided, and that no matter how we try to make allowances, it smacks of offensive doctrinal arrogance.’ That sounds like a pretty good recipe for religious pluralism. Let Baptists practice their version of Christianity and let Jews practice Judaism. And may the theological tensions that result serve to sharpen each group’s understanding of God.”

           Second, Dr. Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, writes, “In ... (passing the resolution), the Convention declared itself solidly in line with the New Testament. The Apostle Paul, who identified himself as a ‘Hebrew of Hebrews,’ reminded the Christians in Rome that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation to the Jew first, and also to the Gentiles. (The Southern Baptist resolution) is not a case of religious imperialism or intolerance. Evangelical Christians such as Southern Baptists are the most fervent advocates and defenders of religious liberty for all persons, including the Jews.”

           Finally, in contrast to the above two rational views, consider the evaluation of Dr. R. Kirby Godsey, president of Mercer University, the large “Southern Baptist” school in Georgia, which he wrote in a letter to the editor of the Macon Telegraph. “As one person who calls himself a Baptist, I want to apologize for the religious bigotry and misguided rhetoric of a people who call themselves Southern Baptists. There is no evil quite like religious evil and the actions of a recent gathering of Southern Baptists toward the Jewish community should be characterized as prejudice and cowardice, wrong in spirit and substance. Perhaps we Baptists should remind ourselves that Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian. Whenever we act with such self-indulgence and in these self-centered ways, we are acting more as the children of darkness than the children of light. Is it any wonder why so many Baptists, even Southern Baptists, reach for other contexts to celebrate their faith? As for me, I more than disagree with the actions of the Southern Baptist Convention. I am grieved by the arrogance of that assembly and embarrassed by the apparent abandonment of the Baptist principle of respect for religious liberty.”

           Comment: Dr. Godsey seems to focus so intently on the religious freedom of Jews to remain Jews that he loses sight of the religious freedom of Baptists to try to evangelize Jews as well as anybody else. What Godsey means when he writes “that Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian” escapes me. Does he intend to say that Jesus did not believe He was the Son of God, that He did not know that He was the only way for men to reach the Father? If so, Godsey calls Jesus a liar, for He said, “No man cometh to the Father, but by Me.” Perhaps Godsey is saying that Jesus was not divine and that there are other routes to salvation.

           Godsey has recently published a book, When We Talk about God ... (Smyth & Helwys, 1996) in which he writes on p 133, “Christians seem to become remarkably troubled about whether Jesus is humankind’s only savior. Is Jesus the only word? The simple answer is ‘Of course not.’”

           As you may conclude, Dr. Godsey is a strong “moderate”, as he would claim, or liberal heretic as I maintain. When one rejects the inerrancy of Scripture, sooner or later he rejects the divinity, the uniqueness of Christ.

           As to our Jewish friends, let us in love and concern tell them of their Messiah, Jesus came of their lineage through Mary, and surely He yearns to bring them into the Kingdom of God at least equally with us Gentiles.