Twisted said:
Yes. I would never call the SBC "fundamentalists".
Why not? They believe the fundamentals of the faith.
Twisted said:
While true that many SBC churches preach and teach the fundamentals, the leadership is quite different.
How so? And what leadership are you talking about? The Convention officers have no means to direct the churches, which are autonomous.
Twisted said:
And isn't that why so many broke away in the first place?
Back in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s, yes. But I am sure you are aware of the "Conservative Resurgence" that began the swing in the SBC seminaries back to conservative fundamentalism and away from the liberal, modernist error that had taken control of the seminaries.
Twisted said:
Wasn't it the SBC that had "dialogue" with Rome?
The old SBC. Yes. But since the Conservative Resurgence most SBC churches believe pretty much like most IFB churches. In fact, after the Liberals were cleaned out of the seminaries, many of those teaching positions were filled by IFB professors.
You are aware, are you not, that those who held to what you are criticizing (and rightly so) left the SBC in 1990 (1900 churches left the Convention) and formed the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship leaving the Conservative Fundamentalists in charge of the Convention and the Seminaries?
I now live in the far, far south of Texas and find that the SBC churches here are much more conservative than the very few IFB churches in this area (I am aware of only two IFB churches serving a population of right around 1 million people but there are 275 conservative SBC congregations).