Customer Reviews

A Hill on Which to Die: One Southern Baptist's Journey

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

This book is relevant to a wide variety of readers, from conservative Baptists who want an historical account to pass on to their children, to conservative Christians confronted by liberalism in the pulpit and seminaries and wondering, "what can I do?" This book is an autobiographical account of one man's courage to resist complacency, to build a network of friends, and work to restore an existing denomination with a tendency toward theological liberalism. It records the history of a man who was born into the highest ranks of privilege in Texas, who chose not to enjoy the full benefits of that privilege, who confronted theological liberalism at Princeton, who won and discipled Christians at an early age, and who never waivered in his faith. This book demonstrates how people, both young and old, inside or outside the establishment, may be strong and courageous Christians and faithfully transmit the gospel, against strong opposition, to this and future generations.

After years of seeing liberals spin the conservative takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention to their liking, Paul Pressler's book is refreshing.

Pressler is to conservative Southern Baptists what Ronald Reagan is to Republicans. In "A Hill on Which to Die," Pressler gives documentation of rampant liberalism throughout the convention. Pressler did not, as some liberals would have us believe, "Burn down the barn to get rid of a few rats." Liberalism was prevalent, and a conservative takeover was the only way to reclaim the seminaries and colleges.

The book offers countless surprises: how Adrian Rogers did not want the nomination the night before the 1979 convention opened; how and why Pressler watched the 1979 convention from a skybox; how the "Donahue" show helped the conservative movement; how former president W.A. Criswell, himself a conservative, had failed to make changes when he was president; how Pressler tried to make changes before 1979, only to get the cold-shoulder.

Throughout the book, Pressler tells how the conservative movement was misunderstood and misrepresented. The battle was not over the interpretation of Scripture, but rather its integrity and inerrancy. And, surprisingly, it was not very organized. Conservatives did not use countless vans and buses to get messengers to conventions, as liberals charge. Rather, it was mostly a grass-roots effort which began with conservative churches wanting to change the liberal establishment. The conservatives were in the majority throughout the churches, but were not being represented in the presidency and on the committees.

And, as some may claim, it was not a hate-filled movement. The book is filled with examples of Pressler's Christian love for all believers - liberals, moderates and conservatives. However, throughout the battle, Pressler's beliefs and motives were mischaracterized and spun by the opposition, leading to the negative opinions about him that abound today. Occasionally, there were even flat-out lies. Finally, he gets to respond.

Liberals will not want to read this book, but they should.

This should be required reading for all Southern Baptists.

Upon receiving my copy of this book I first turned to the portions where I had personal knowledge of the events. I found those sections to be succinct, accurate portrayals of complex circumstances -- a readable, journalistic summary that caught the flavor as well as the facts. The author has apparently been thorough.

I believe this book will be of greatest interest to (1) those thousands who were personally involved in the situations being discussed, (2) the 16 million Southern Baptists whose denominational apparatus has been reformed by these events, and (3) students of crucial turning points in America's religious history. Finally, though few readers will wade through this book because of this, the book is also an excellent case study on denominational politics and on successful strategies for changing large bureaucracies from within.

Of least interest to the casual reader will be the personal kudos that the author lavishes on those who played key parts in the battles discussed -- if the reader was not directly involved, these sections will probably be of little interest other than to suggest what virtues (e.g., loyalty under persecution) are held in highest esteem by the author.

Paul Pressler has done historians, Southern Baptists, and religious conservatives a great favor in writing this book. This insider's look at what really happened before during and immediately after the conservative resurgence in the SBC is very insightful, correcting some misconceptions along the way as portrayed by the left wing press. For anyone interested in the unprecedented return of a denomination back to its historical roots, this is a must read!

From a prespective of a leader and major participant, the book offers an excellent insight into the battle for control of the Southern Baptist Convention and its institutions. No one else could have written such a comprehensive account.

This book opened my eyes up to the behind the scenes Baptist life in my home state of Texas. Before I was a blissfully unware big box Baptist, but the stories and thoughts shared by the author caused me to rethink what each big box Baptist church normally gives to (liberal professors of Baylor, etc). Basically, the book would offer you a framework to see why it is that 'moderate' Baptists stab you in the back so often in a local church, as they scramble to protect their turf and buddies (uncle so and so, somebody's dad at the bgct, etc). Not all Baptist churches are equal, go to one that actually puts its money where its mouth is when it comes to the Bible actually being true, you can see why in this book! I might add that when I bought this I had a random chance to meet the author a short while later, and he was a very level-headed, impressive person to talk with. He's also very approachable, which made me think even more that he is well-intentioned in what he has written, because he will talk to anyone about things.

Missouri Synod Lutherans contend that the Christ centered Holy Bible is God's unerring divine scripture. Thankfully, conservative Judge Paul Pressler agrees. The Southern Baptist Convention should be most thankful for his tireless efforts and wonderful literary report. This book should be read, set aside for a very short time and read again and again!

This provocative book addresses one of the most significant events in modern church history. Baptists, as Pressler suggests, are not the only group to be ripped asunder by the conflict between traditional Bible believers and modernists; but the clash has been especially painful among a group known heretofore as "the People of the Book." By whatever name they choose (modernists, liberals, moderates), they reflect the infiltration of materialism/naturalism into the church. The difference between them and tradional Bible believers is revealed when they approach a difficult passage of Scripture. The former immediately assume the Bible is in error and try to explain it away. Others of us recognize our finite minds must struggle to comprehend infinite Truth. We rely on the Holy Spirit who wrote the Book to interpret it to our hearts. As Pressler explains, this requires an open minded humility missing in some readers. The liberal's innate arrogance and scepticism produce what Pressler calls a "Dalmatian theology." They only believe the Bible in spots! Judge Pressler readily admits there have been mean spirits and a deplorable lack of love on both sides of the battle. Nonetheless, those of us who hold with saints through the ages that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for instruction in righteousness" owe a great debt to Judge Pressler and others like him. We and our children have been ridiculed and sometimes persecuted for our faith--even in our churches and Baptist schools (no, ESPECIALLY there!) Liberals call our RESTORATION to traditional Biblical principles a "takeover." But THEY pulled off the "takeover" in the 50's and 60's. Pressler correctly maintains they have the same vote they've always had--which happens to be a minority voice in our denomination. Judge Pressler's genius was to understand how a small, arrogant (sometimes ruthless) group held our denomination hostage through committees, through educational institutions, through editorial boards, and through the willful ignorance of many "sheep" in the pew. He is unappreciated by many who should bless his name, and hated by those whose chicanery he exposed. His book should be required reading for students (and professors) in Baptists universities and seminaries.

As a non-Baptist, I nonetheless have an interest in the struggle for Biblical fidelity in any denomination or institution. I have read several books on the "liberal vs. conservative" theological battles in different venues. It is crucial, in a time where most mainline denominations have cascaded down the slippery slope of liberalism (while consistently losing members) that believers in the authority of God's Word not be forced out, ridiculed, or left bereft of power in the few churches where theological conservatism still has at least some representation. I did not realize the extent liberalism had taken hold in the Southern Baptist Convention until I read this book. The story of how conservatives retook the ground lost to liberalism in this denomination is a story that needed to be told.

Some of the book, especially dealing with denominational structure, is somewhat confusing, although I'm sure through no fault of the author. When you have a structure where a Committee on Comittees appoints a Committee on Boards, which now has a different name, and they appoint other boards and committees with varying term lengths, you can see where it would take a legal mind just to wade through all the folderol. The writing, in general, could have used some "spicing up". I think the author could have benefitted greatly by using a collaborator. Nevertheless, I recommend this book for liberals and conservatives alike, Baptist or not, who have an interest in this ongoing battle between the theological right and left.

I am no reviewer. I have read the book, though. I was in all of those Convention meetings in the 1970's and '80's. I notice many reviews by non-Baptists and even though a few gave it good reviews, I don't think this book is for non-Baptists. I think Judge Pressler wrote if for Baptists to understand what really happened during the conservative resurgence in the SBC.

He is right, that the Baptist Press did not tell the conservative side well and like the MSM today was spoiled by liberal thinking. In some ways, it still suffers in that way. I appreciate his tenacity and wisdom to see it through amidst personal and political sacrifice. The Baptist seminaries were teaching things that were opposed to what Southern Baptists believe. My husband was in a Baptist Seminary (SWBTS) during that time and was actually called, "The Adversary" by one of the professors because he challenged him on tenets like a literal hell and inerrant scripture.

Did I think the whole book was interesting? I did, but if I was not a Baptist or knew nothing of the CR, I probably would not like it. The first 11 chapters would be boring for anyone that only wanted the facts about the actual events immediately leading up to the 1979 convention, even though he gives much insight into why he decided to take up the cause. He also seems to drop a lot of names, but I think it was for commendable reasons like giving credit (good or bad), helping you understand who Paul Pressler was, and for historical purposes.

It's a case study as well as a historical/auto-biographical work and not for everyone, but it is a must for Southern Baptist pastors, seminary students, any Baptist that is curious, and any non-Baptist that is concerned about the liberal/heretical theology that has crept into their denomination. However, the last group will not have the same denominational structure that the SBC has and might not be able to use the same strategies to affect change.