Pelagianism in the SBC?

One has to wonder when some of the biggest names in the Southern Baptist Convention signed a statement containing the following:

We deny that Adam's sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person's free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned.

This has raised some serious concerns. John Aloisi writes:

Doctrinal statements mean something. And those who sign them should be very careful lest they end up affirming something contrary to Scripture. The authors of this recent statement claim to be putting forth the understanding of salvation held by the "vast majority" of Southern Baptists. I can only hope they are mistaken in this claim. In addition to disagreeing with the apostle Paul on the issue of original sin, the authors and signers have also staked out a position opposed to the original doctrinal statement of the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention. In 1858, the charter statement of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary required all professors to adhere to the Abstract of Principles. Article six of the Abstract affirms that Adam's descendants stand "under condemnation" before they become "actual transgressors." In other words, it affirms that humans are born guilty and liable to condemnation prior to the act of sinning. Apparently, a number of Southern Baptist leaders believe that the Abstract of Principles now lies outside the bounds of the "Traditional Southern Baptist" understanding of salvation.

It would appear some in the SBC are not only ignorant of scripture, they are ignorant of their own history.