Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary graduate accused white member of ‘generational sin’ because his ancestors might have owned slaves. The reason? The white member shared the same last name as a black church member.

SEBTS graduate promoted the welfare state and income redistribution at his Raleigh church, according to a shocking new video interview of the former church member.

A Southern Baptist pastor with ties to Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS) told a white church member that he was in “generational sin” because he shared the same last name with a black church member, according to shocking details in a new video interview with the former church member.

James High tells his story to Enemies Within The Church.

High said his reaction to the pastor’s stunning and ignorant allegation was shock.

High said he was “almost speechless to be honest.”

The video was released this morning and is a combination of infuriating and saddening. It is proof of the bitter fruits of Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality’s infiltration of the Southern Baptist Convention churches via Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

As the New York Times revealed in a shocking article, a professor at SEBTS routinely uses the teachings of black liberation theologian Dr. James Cone, but hides it from unsuspecting Southern Baptists. According to the liberal paper of record,

“It is significant that Mr. Strickland has brought a thinker like Dr. Cone into the heart of the conservative Southern Baptist Convention. Mr. Strickland spent years studying in majority-white evangelical schools, where he mastered the idiom of the Christian right. When he speaks to conservative white congregations, he is careful: ‘While Cone’s ideas are in play, I don’t mention him by name, because I don’t want to put unnecessary stumbling blocks in their way.’”

And of course, SEBTS has “given voice” to Malcolm X and had a speaker at the seminary who cited Rev. Jeremiah Wright—you know, the guy who in a sermon said G-d D… America—as a ministry hero.

Socialism & the Southern Baptist Convention

The church at the center of controversy was a plant in Raleigh and led by a pastor who taught that the welfare state and income redistribution were “a good thing.”

“The government role in terms of helping people financially was something, instead of the family and the church, should take a central role, a prominent role,” the former church member said in the video interview.

Is this the logical conclusion of Russell Moore demanding that Southern Baptists be pro-life from womb-to-the-tomb?

Another thing to note in this video is the reaction of a Southern Baptist pastor when confronted with a theological question by a church member.

In the video, High says he approached the pastor about complementarianism and what seemed to High as being the pastor’s lack of commitment to the practice. The pastor’s response was to immediately accuse High of the “generational sin” of having ancestors who owned slaves. (Something High claims was inaccurate and irrelevant.)

Is this how a Southern Baptist pastor should respond to theological questions from someone in the church?

It sounds abusive.

It illustrates that too many pastors today think they are somehow better and different than the people who sit in the pews. It smacks of an SBC Elitism that is destroying the Southern Baptist Convention.

So much for the priesthood of the believer.

We’ve entered a new time where there are one set of rules for the serfs sitting in the pews and another set of rules for the SBC Elites.

Sad times.

5 thoughts on “SBC Pastor said white member was in sin because he shared same last name with black member”

  1. The claim that a man is in “generational sin” due to his last name is theologically absurd and abusive.

    1. Penalties for the sins of one generation are not to be paid by another. “Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.” (Deuteronomy 24:16)

    2. Even if the family members of one generation were truly responsible for the sins of another, it was not established genealogically that this man and the other man did indeed have ancestors with a master-slave relationship. At most, it is a possibility. Since when do we accuse people of sin because of a possibility?

    3. When the Bible mentions the “visiting of iniquity” upon the third and fourth generation, it is generally speaking of the “reap what you sow” consequences of a sinful lifestyle versus a holy lifestyle and the fruit that each produces in the next generation as descendants inherit the traits, teaching, character, and resources either shared or withheld by every parent to every child.

    4. Even if this view of generational sin were biblical, the application of it based solely upon a person’s last name defies common sense. I happen to have direct ancestors who owned slaves in South Carolina. Their last name was Jeter. If you try to do this on the basis of a person’s last name, you’re going to miss people who are descended from slave owners and you’re going to falsely accuse people who are not. In other words, sometimes the slave owners were on the mother’s side of the family. Are we now going to check for maiden names?

    I wish the church and pastor had been named. Perhaps this is the kind of injustice that our new denominational investigation process should review. Why allow a Southern Baptist Church to discriminate against people because of their last name? I feel sorry for this man.

    1. You are correct, but that will not sway the likes of guys like this, as Scripture is no longer their guide—if it ever was. There’s a whole basketful of such woke “pastors” over at Dave Miller’s SBCuck Voices echo chamber. I can’t call a single one of them “brother.”

    2. There are far more important issues than these.

      First of all, Old Testament Mosaic law regulated the practice of slavery. Regulation can not rationally be construed as proscription.

      Secondly, neither do the ecclesiastical moral guidance and commands found in the New Testament epistles proscribe slavery:

      1 Timothy 6:
      “1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
      2 And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.”

      Ephesians 6:
      “5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
      6 Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;
      7 With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men:
      8 Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free.
      9 And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.”

      Colossians 4:
      “1 Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.”

      The Bible is entirely consistent: slave owners themselves are never condemned ipso facto in Scripture, to say nothing of the descendants of slave owners. That’s what Scripture teaches, and anyone who doesn’t accept this is not under the authority of Scripture in this matter.

  2. I give this one a hearty LOL.

    And yet also:

    Use of the phrase “Generational sin” = Calvinist nutjob.

    This pastor should be therefore investigated for probable sexual abuse following the following unimpeachable logic:

    Someone who denies free will denies the concept of consent, because consent is based on free will.

    Ergo Calvinism leads to sexual abuse because no Calvinist recognizes free will and therefore cannot believe in nor respect consent.

  3. Thank you for posting this, Dear Editor. I grew up in Raleigh, but, left 25 years ago because it had become a New England Yankee town in all ways.

    Very few Traditional White Southerners left there, like the man in this video, for they either assimilate to the new ethos, or, like me, they seek a new home deep in rural Dixie, where people like the man in this video still abound.

    That said, the populations of small Tarheel towns are getting older, this because the rural smalltown economies of The South have been so destroyed by the malicious policies of The United States’ Government that most young adults have to leave their hometowns in order to flourish.

    These processes are being compounded by the fact that we are swimming in immigrants from all over the world, many of my neighbours, in fact, who are nice people, but, they are not us, are they?

    It seems that my destiny as a Southerner, is to lose my home – over and over again.

    If this is not the price of waving the Stars & Stripes, then I want to know what it is…

Comments are closed.