“first as a Christian”: Yes. I agree. I’m a Christian first.

“second as an evangelical”: Hmmm…Do I agree or disagree? I guess first I’ll have to wonder what Dockery means by that. A Frank Beckwith, let’s-affirm-Roman-Catholic-indulgences-this-week-but-I-think-I’m-an-evangelical-anyway evangelical? An Evangelical Theological Society, let’s-avoid-theological-definitions-like-Denny-Burk’s kind of evangelical? If we’re talking about the Bebbington quadrilateral, then I’m content to say that I’m an evangelical second. I’m not like Francis Beckwith first, second, fortieth, or last. And as far as ETS goes, you can paste that kind of evangelicalism on whatever you like, because it means nothing.

“thirdly as a Baptist”: Absolutely. All that “Baptist Identity” doctors wish to do with their patients is to get them to be Baptists third. It is simply that everyone needs to be Baptist third, without exception. So, for those out there who are more of an “I’m Baptist third because that works for me, but you be whatever you like and it doesn’t really matter” kind of person, yes, a “Baptist Identity” person tends to rub them the wrong way.

“and then as a Southern Baptist”: Without a doubt. I can easily imagine scenarios in which I would be a Baptist not affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. I’m thankful for the SBC. I love the SBC. I want the SBC to become healthier and more faithful. But God is bigger than the SBC. “Southern Baptist” in its best sense merely means “Baptist who sends missionaries through the SBC.” It has come to mean more than that because, regrettably, the label “Baptist” still applies to things like (Heaven help us) the ABC and the CBF.

<Begin Analysis & Diagnosis>

&ltResume Vitriol & Misconstruals of “‘Baptist Identity’ doctors”>