;)
tagged: Great Commission Resurgence, Mark Driscoll, Obama, SBC, SBC Annual Meeting, Southern Baptist ConventionSBC 2009: GCR Task Force, Resolutions, Obama, Mark Driscoll, & the Turning of the SBC
Posted by Guest Author in Baptist Life
This post is by Alan Cross, and a republication of his thoughts published earlier today on his blog. We will be re-posting (with his permission, of course) some of his impressions ov the SBC annual meeting over the next couple of days.
***
I am kind of in shock regarding what I am seeing at the SBC (in a good way). It is clear that there is new leadership emerging within the SBC. A friend of mine emailed me last night asking me if he thought that these new leaders would end up in the same situation that our previous leadership found themselves in: mired in bureaucracy and institutional survival. I told him that it was possible because institutions have a way of taking over movements and good leadership. But, then I said that all that most younger leaders and pastors wanted was a denomination that stood behind them as they initiated the work that God had placed on their heart and facilitated gospel movement and partnership, not control. We would also be really happy if the SBC was not an embarrassment to us. O.S. Hawkins, the president of Guidestone financial, in his report, said that the GCR would unleash the churches of the SBC to engage the mission of God personally. Amen. That is what we are hoping for.
Johnny Hunt appointed the GCR Task Force that will meet over the next year to explore how the SBC can better carry out the Great Commission. The 18 members are (including Johnny Hunt): Ronnie Floyd (chairperson), Jim Richards, Frank Page, David Dockery, Simon Tsoi, Donna Gaines, Al Gilbert, J.D. Greear, Tom Biles, Danny Akin, R. Albert Mohler Jr., John Drummond, Harry Lewis, Mike Orr, Roger Spradlin, Bob White, Ken Whitten, and Ted Traylor. This looks like a good team. I am happy to see Ronnie Floyd have a significant role. He is a good man and I know that when he did not win the presidency in 2006, it was a blow. It is troubling that only one woman is on the team. She will be pretty lonely, I would think. I don’t think I’d be very comfortable serving on a team if I were the only man, but the SBC has often struggled to find a way for women to serve. Still, I would have had more than one woman on the team. Donna Gaines is the wife of Steve Gaines, pastor of Bellevue Baptist in Memphis, Adrian Rogers’ old church.
One thought on this: While this team is full of wise statesmen that will be listened to, I hope that they bring in the thoughts of more people outside of the establishment and more younger leaders. I could give them a list of people that have great ideas that they should at least talk with as could many others who have been paying attention over the past few years. I will be interested to see what they come up with.
SBC Resolutions: I praise God that the resolutions were not a complete embarrassment.
There was one that promoted adoption that was really wonderful. It expressd God’s concern for the 150 million orphans in the world and called us to do something about it.
Another resolution affirmed President Obama for his family and his accomplishments in becoming the first African American president. It then made critical statements over his positions on several areas. We must affirm what is good and speak against what is not. We should do this for both Democrats and Republicans. If Southern Baptists do this, we can regain our integrity in the public sphere.
There was also a resolution on sexuality that spoke against homosexuality and its protection in the public phere. I am coming to the point where I think that the public acceptance of homosexuality is inevitable. We are going to have to figure out how to keep standing against this practice while also engaging a culture that accepts it. We haven’t figured this out yet.
Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle and the leader of Acts29 remains the topic of conversation at the SBC, at least informally. He was NOT boycotted and his books were NOT banned yesterday. Motions were brought up to that point, but they were not passed. Our church is about to partner on some level with Acts29 (in a sense) through the Journey Church in St. Louis in India. This is the future of engaging in the missionary task in the SBC. I am glad that we decided to not address Mark Driscoll because he talks about things in the pulpit that we might disagree with. He isn’t even Southern Baptist and the annual meeting has no business dealing with things like this. But, I think that the future of the SBC will look more like Mark Driscoll than not, at least in his missional engagement if not in his more controversial attributes.
Turning of the SBC: As I said last night, the SBC is turning. The torch has been passed to a younger generation of leadership. We are headed to more grassroots involvement and decentralization (I hope). Many are still understandably skeptical, but I refuse to live my life in a constant state of cynicism and criticism. I am going to go out on a limb here, have some faith, and believe that God is working to raise up something beautiful in the SBC among all those who will choose to obey and cooperate with the Holy Spirit. Many churches are going to die in the next 10 years, but many more will live and thrive. I believe that there are good days ahead for the SBC IF we return the mission to the local church and IF the local church engages with the mission that God gave her and IF the SBC really exists to assist the local church in carrying out her mission. Basically, if we would stop fighting, repent of our sins, unite around the gospel and the person of Jesus Christ, partner together in MANY different ways and networks to advance the gospel locally and globally, and be the people that God has called us to be, then there are many bright days ahead and God will do amazing things. He already is through the church I’m a part of and through many other churches I know. That can spread because God’s Spirit knows no boundaries. We just need to cooperate with Him.
Let’s cooperate with the Spirit of God.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
but I refuse to live my life in a constant state of cynicism and criticism. I am going to go out on a limb here, have some faith, and believe that God is working to raise up something beautiful in the SBC among all those who will choose to obey and cooperate with the Holy Spirit.
this is a beautiful statement…i think this is first step of repentance for many to live in love and unity in the SBC. Love hopes all things, believes all things, endures all things…
if we have not love, we are nothing…
How is the SBC an embarrassment “to us?”
I can think of a couple of issues that have caused me concern. Truly Alan, though, how is a group of people who in the main have the best at heart “an embarassment.” That sounds awfully like someone talking about their mentally challenged relative – when the relative spouts off, the “sound” person just cringes and is “embarrassed.” Of course most of the time the relative just says truthful things that are obvious without tactfullness.
You have made a charge – what are some of the things that are “embarrasing” to you that some of your more “challenged” brothers have said and done?
Rob
Union at the expense of doctrine=apostasy.
The “Obama” resolution will only be used for political gain by Obama. It was a travesty the way it got railroaded through without ANY discussion. But that may be a parlimentary issue. I am a biblical theologian, not a Robert’s Rules of Order expert.
Driscoll is a fad. Platt deserves more attention.
The SBC reached a turning point at Louisville. Despite Chapman’s polarizing address, most of the meeting was positive and a good place to start to move in the right direction.
I believe Alan said he hoped the SBC wouldn’t be an embarrassment to us, and seems to conclude that it wasn’t. Where’s the charge? He does allude to some embarrassing motions, with which I have to agree, like calling for an “investigation” of Ed Stetzer et al.
Rob,
Bill has it right. My point was that our desires for the SBC are really not that impossible to attain. One of them is simply that we not be embarrassed by things that the SBC does or says publicly so that we can do ministry without having to explain that the name on our church sign is not synonymous with things that we find irrelevant to our biblical mission or that unnecessarily alienate people from God. At times in the past, when a silly resolution was adopted or things were said that were not biblical, it was embarrassing. I am not the first person to say such a thing. Desiring that we NOT be embarrassed by actions that the SBC might take is a far cry from actually saying that I AM embarrassed by the SBC, which I am not.
I was very proud of the SBC the past few days and praise God for what He is doing. That was clear in my post and I still feel that way.
Brother Alan,
I think you are right concerning the difficulty of how men “view” allowing women to be an encouragement on political committees. This Task Force should include more women and frankly more men from “normal” size churches (75 members or less), since the norm for churches in the SBC is not reflected in the Task Force.
There seems to be some confusion concerning what constitutes a church and what constitutes a political body (i.e. conventions, seminaries, book stores, etc.)….so, that may be where and how leadership loses perspective on input….along with not recognizing what represents the overwhelming core of the convention (normal 75 member churches).
Good post,
Blessings,
Chris
Alan,
What brought me to ask of you the question is a poster on a bulletin board I frequent, Mike Rasberry. He read your article here on Impact, and had the following commentary about your “embarrassed” statement (I reprint here with his permission):
“Are they embarrassed because the SBC has a prohibition against funding those who seeming promote the use of alcohol?
Are they embarrassed because the SBC continues to hold the line for
traditional family?
Are they embarrassed because the SBC continues to have members and leaders who are willing to boldly challenge methodology?
Are they embarrassed because the SBC has a significant majority who
still sing from hymnals?
Are they embarrassed because the SBC has a significant majority who do not use “The Message?”
Just what is this edge of embarrassment to which young pastors have been brought?
I read recently about some older football players who say that the young players have no sense of respect for what happened yesterday, or for the players who played yesterday. They live only in the “here and now.”
Is that creeping into our churches, with the belief that anyone over
forty is passe’?
I fear for our convention, especially with the older folk who seem to be agreeing with this philosophy. Young men don’t always need to be told that their way is best. Sometimes they need to hear that they need to stay the course.”
As to your “biblical” statement, it seems to me that the term is subject to a certain level of “interpretation.” While (in example)the Bible does not contain “you must sing hymns from a hymnbook” it also does not have a statement in negation either. Most of the major schisms in Southern Baptist life today are theological in orientation that then contain a certain level of interpretation. Both sides then accuse the other of being “unbiblical.” So as far as your argument for that is concerned, then it is unpersuasive to me. I can be as just as embarrassed for a Pastor who wields a bed on a stage and talks intimately about his sex life, as one who makes a motion to ban books from certain authors some consider outrageous. It truly depends upon your point of view and oreintation.
Biblical truth needs no apology. The truth about “sexual orientation” cannot be contextualized – it is what it is without sugar coating it. We either stand upon the Rock of truth or we will sink in relative sand. When counted upon to claim the name of Jesus, we will deny we ever knew Him. Now that is something to be embarrassed about.
Rob
Alan,
My impression of your missive was that some of the younger pastors were/had been embarrassed by positions/actions of the SBC. The tenor of your message was very positive, but the implication that those who believe differently and/or act differently are silly is evocative of the 1950′s, 1960′s, and early 1970′s when dissent and/or opposition was treated as if it were being presented by skulls full of mush because we did not follow the prevailing company line.
I’m seldom embarrassed by the actions of God’s people assembled. Some actions might cause me to participate less, or more, but to imply that resolutions and/or actions passed are an embarrassment simply because one doesn’t agree with them causes me great concern.
Again, I enjoyed your article and believe it was a very forthright representation of what transpired. The “embarrassement” aspect seemed out of place and almost pandering to an audience, in my respectful opinion.
Aren’t these just the usual suspects on the Task Force?
JND,
You are right. No church who has 75 in attendance or less is represented on the commission as far as I can tell. And they make up the bulwark of churches in our convention! It seems the folks who are making this thing up are people who run in the same circles. While I supported in the main GCR, this concerns me greatly.
Rob
Rob,
I really am confused as to what you are talking about or who you are addressing here. If you want to take a swipe at the cultural accomodation of “young pastors” be my guest, but I am not promoting embarrassment over any of the things that Mike Rasberry listed. I am also not interested in engaging in some type of generational warfare pitting young pastors against old. I was clear that I was NOT embarrassed by the SBC and then stated that the things that I would be embarrassed over are things that we have done in the past that are unbiblical. I do not think that what is biblical or unbiblical is relative to one’s interpretation as you seem to assert when you say that I am unpersuasive in using that argument before you say that you don’t buy into theological relativism in your last paragraph. I don’t either. I think that the Bible is very clear that when we engage in fussing, fighting, divisions, slander, pride, racism, lying, and worldliness, it is wrong. When we do those things, it is embarrassing. That was spoken throughout the convention and I agree. Dr. Akin apologized for Dr. Chapman’s mischaracterization of Calvinists and called it shameful. I don’t want to do those things or be known for that type of stuff. It is a hindrance to the gospel. We are not doing those things to the degree that we have in the past, so I am NOT embarrassed. I actually praise God for the repentance that has been taking place in those areas and I hope that it continues. I care nothing for pandering to a lost culture or playing nice over issues of sexual ethics just to be popular. That is not what I am talking about. I am talking about when we disobey Scripture without remorse or awareness and I don’t think that those things are up for interpretation.
Alan my brother,
You have been very persuasive in terms of your biblical orientation, and I am very much persuaded and impressed. I do not question it. Your work on the “prayer language” issue at the IMB I printed out and handed to friends, and referred it to others in e-mails and posts. But would you not agree that this particular issue within Southern Baptist life is subject to “interpretation?” As you know, those who held to an opposing view in both the “language” issue and the “Baptism” issue at the IMB used biblical methodology to buttress their argument. And while I with you felt that they had taken great liberties of interpretation and eisegesis to make their point, they in turn accused us of the same thing. Right? We can say “we are more biblical than they” but the final arbiter is He who is greater than our struggles.
Peace is not the absence of conflict. We as Christians ought to know better than that. We are promised that while we have the Prince of Peace in our lives, that “peace” in this world is fleeting. It is under the pain of disagreement(s) that the heat forges and shapes us into objects of great worth – ask any jeweler. It is the disagreements of the past few years that has and will make possible the GCR – even those discussions that to you seem trivial, meaningless, and unimportant.
It does not embarrass me in the least that some bring up contentious or “stupid” resolutions. It merely demonstrates that the SBC is alive and well, and that congregationalist polity is still at work among us – a system that may have it’s quirks, but nevertheless has shaped Baptists and their views for centuries. I think Mike in #9 said it well: “I’m seldom embarrassed by the actions of God’s people assembled. Some actions might cause me to participate less, or more, but to imply that resolutions and/or actions passed are an embarrassment simply because one doesn’t agree with them causes me great concern.”
I too found your article positive – with the exception of my comments here (and on your blog by the way too). And such I believe that your article could stand on its own very well without the “embarrassing” critique. Just IMHO.
Rob
Rob and Mike,
I see your point and will think through language like that a little more in the future. It made sense to me because I fully understood the context of my feelings, but I can see how in this environment of methodological and generational conflict, it could be taken any number of ways. My primary source of embarrassment, so to speak, when it comes to the SBC is when we seem to get off track, turn on one another (not in a righteous way), and behave in ways that sour our witness. That is what I was trying to say. I apologize that the use of that word tripped up some readers.
By the way, just to be consistent, I am not embarrassed by the IMB policies. I disagree with them, but they do not embarrass me. They were based on a biblical argument that I find faulty, but each side has the right to make such arguments and defend them. The source of any embarrassment that I have ever had regarding the SBC was when we acted sinfully, not when we simply disagreed with one another. Mike is right, families disagree and from such disagreement can come good things. However, even in such disagreement, we are commanded to act in love.
Rob,
You said, “You are right. No church who has 75 in attendance or less is represented on the commission as far as I can tell. And they make up the bulwark of churches in our convention! It seems the folks who are making this thing up are people who run in the same circles. While I supported in the main GCR, this concerns me greatly.”
Thank you!
I’m glad someone came out and said it (so I didn’t have to say it first …). It looks like the folks who are pretty much “running things” and have the most influence are the ones given the task of studying the resurgence. Mega-church pastors, seminary and college presidents, and even a mega-church pastor’s wife … frankly. Great people, I know, but yet another attempt to let the “system” seek self-transformation.
Frankly, I’m not holding my breath for any great amount of change.
Geoff
Geoff,
Thank you for the affirmation. I am currently writing a letter to Dr. Hunt on this very issue – and will post it as an open letter on IMPACT as my next offering. Also, Dr. Akin will be coming to Camp Branch in September, and I look forward to our conversation about this topic (unless he cancels out now). It’s great to be the “point of the spear” here!
Rob
I should also add that some of the way that we have represented what Christians are about has been embarrassing to me. The Disney Boycott comes to mind. Next year we will go to Orlando and many Southern Baptists will go to Disney World without much concern. What has changed in Disney? Nothing. So, I think that was a mistake and misrepresented what Christianity is really to be about. I do not affirm what Disney stands for, but when we called for a boycott and it hit the papers, it was a hard to understand and explain. I think that we should find other ways to stand for righteousness and I think that the behavior of the SBC at the most recent Annual Meeting seems to agree with that assessment.
Rob,
Your perspective on this issue gives me hope. Our church, over the next year, will be watching very carefully the direction that the SBC takes regarding the GCR document. Dr. Akin was not only one my favorite profs but he is also a friend, as friends in the SBC go. But he is only one of many. I am more interested in the response of the SBC as a whole. I look forward to reading your letter to Dr. Hunt.
Sincerely,
Scott Bradley
Ahh Alan. Invariably whenever someone talks about “embarrassment” with the SBC and it’s resolutions they will refer to the “Disney” boycott.
Frankly, the publicity gave me a great opportunity to witness to folks who otherwise would not have given me the time of day! Seeds were planted, and harvests won because of an “embarrassing” resolution that the media did not like. With one soul being won with all the angels rejoicing in heaven, was it not clearly an “embarrassment” we could live with?
Clearly Disney is schizophrenic in it’s approach – but clearly the days of Eisner and some of his more lamentable decisions are over with. I had a colleague at the college who worked for Mr. Disney (both Walt and Roy Sr.), and retired from the company while Mr. Eisner was CEO. Some of the stories he told were shocking. Mr. Disney (though not known for many religious virtues) was nevertheless a “family man” who built his empire with the intent to entertain families. Mr. Eisner co-opted the Disney family, and brought in a “freak show” of personalities. Roy Disney (the son of Roy, and nephew of Walt) after many years of being co-opted, attempted a coup to unseat Mr. Eisner. A small part of Roy’s argument was the boycott of religious groups away from Disney, including Southern Baptists as evidence of a “soul-less” company run amok away from her founding principles. My friend was at the company when the convention approved the boycott. While the suits downplayed and ridiculed the vote, he felt that his division (“Walt Disney Feature Animation”)would suffer as a result – not Cause and Effect, but the compilation of many variables the boycott being one of them. Disney today has sold most of it’s other holdings (with the exception of the boondoggle ABC)and has done better as a result. It’s movies today are more “Disney.” And while that may not have been the purpose of the boycott, it did have in a very small way a determination for righteousness – in both individuals to whom we witnessed, as well as others for the stand that was taken by a few messengers in a convention meeting.
Rob
Rob,
Of course, God is sovereign and “in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose.” But, I am being honest about the feelings that emerged after the infamous Disney boycott. I was 21 years old and a youth minister in a rural baptist church while I finished college. It was a resolution that made no sense to me. I wasn’t embarrassed to be a Southern Baptist, but rather, that action caused me to shake my head. Embarrassment is a feeling that is brought on by the way that certain events affect a person. Different things embarrass different people, I guess. I am glad that good came out of it for you and that God used it in a redemptive way. Overall, I think that it characterized us in an unhealthy way and represented us as people who majored on the minors. If you boycott one company, where do you stop? How arbitrary do you want to be?
Anyway, all of this is far afield from the main point of my post which is that the Convention was very positive and I am hopeful about the future. As so happens in the blogosphere, one line is seized upon and the comment stream devotes itself to one aspect of the original post that is not the main thesis. I regret that and would have gladly left that sentence out to keep the main point the main point.
Touche’ Alan. Thank you for the conversation. I hope you get some more comments about this post other than what I brought up – I think we discussed that through.
Grace,
Rob
The GCR committee are all BFM 2000 signers it appears to me.
One reason it doesn’t include any high ranking WMU folks is the WMU will not sign BFM 2000.
Alan Cross says the best days of the SBC are still hoped for and he talks a lot about the Holy Spirit and Jesus.
In some ways he sounds like a closet CBFfer.
Wade Burleson was getting close when he said the Conservative Resurgence did more harm than good.
Until Johnny Hunt’s new committee can own up to that; and until they can work with the likes of Billy Graham’s daughter Anne Graham Lotz and the BWA; I can’t see how the Holy Spirit is going to pour down Renewal, no matter how much hair splitting Rob Ayers attempts.
Stephen Fox,
Lots of labels and insinuations there. Why can’t we just recognize and accept each other as brothers and sisters in Christ (provided we are teaching the gospel, and not “another gospel, which is not another” Gal. 1:6-7)? And why can’t we, with an open Bible, graciously discuss each others’ viewpoints, and work together to try to bring them more in line with what the Bible teaches?
Whether or not smaller church leaders should have a more active role in the leadership of the convention, it is important to remember a few things and think on them before getting offended.
For one thing, it is easier (not necessarily better) to pick from a group of candidates who’ve proven themselves and have lived righteously among the brethren and outsiders that you know. Would you ordain someone who you didn’t know that well?
Also, It would be very difficult to go through and analyze each pastor of a 75 member-or-less church to see if they qualify for this or that team. The logistics would be crazy, especially when there are people willing to serve with whom you’re already familiar.
A suggestion I have is that instead of waiting for (or worse, complaining about) the SBC President to appoint pastors of smaller churches to these teams, perhaps those who serve in smaller churches should try to dialogue with those of influence to try to volunteer. The squeeky wheel gets the grease (or replaced, as my Dad likes to remind me), so it would be beneficial for those who lead smaller congregations to make some noise–in the form of volunteering. Someone has to take the first step.
Also, I’m sure the SBC leadership wants those who serve on committees that could affect the future of the convention to involved in the higher levels of the convention. You’d never appoint someone to a state-level position who’s never been involved in association-level ministry.
I’m not justifying Hunt’s picks. I just think it is important to try to look at the situation through his lenses.
David:
Believe it or not, I have an abiding respect for you. Not to name drop here, but as Randall Lolley emailed me not long ago, you seem to have a kinder spirit than your Dad.
For some reason I can’t quite explain, I think you are getting to a place as I have alluded before, had your Dad been at the place you are arriving, been there in 79, it is quite likely the the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC the likes of Wade Burleson now regrets, would never have taken place.
I think you are closer to Anne Graham Lotz than you are to Danny Akin and Johnny Hunt. And if you opened your heart to the conviction and wisdom of the likes of Barbara Brown Taylor and Diana Butler Ross–see thoughts on her book at religiondispatches.org about memory and the community of truth as to why she is still a Christian–you would be more transparent in what I am convinced is a troubling you have about the SBC’s breach with BWA, even the WMU.
Though this may be becoming a little obscure for you
consider this bond we have with water and baptism as sons of Baptist ministers.
It is the following kinds of notions that Johnny Hunt must own up to, and repent from the takeover as Robert Parham has noted, if the SBC is to have any semblance of a noble vehicle for the Gospel
As my friend the Baptist shaped Ron Rash is explained in part, so are we; the following from a Columbia State profile of him a few years ago:
Quoting:
Water
Water is beginning and end and transition in Rash’s novels. The living and the dead meet at water, and often communicate.
As Luke waded out of the water, his chest was heaving. … The look on his face was more than just serene, it was beatific, like the faces of the raptured in Renaissance paintings …
“It was like eternity,” Luke had said as we’d made our way back up to Bear Sluice. “That’s what the Celts believed — that water was a conduit to the next world. Maybe they were right.”
— “Saints at the River”
After a while water gathered beneath him, lifting the weight from his body, lifting him away from the pain as well. The water made a soothing sound as it moved around and under, and he was so glad he wouldn’t have to crawl out of the gorge after all, because he knew the water would take care of that, would carry him all the way down to Marshall and not only there but then into the French Broad and on west to the Ohio and the Mississippi. …
— “The World Made Straight”
End quote
Incidentally, I am pretty sure if not classmates Hunt and Rash were within a year of each other as undergrads at Gardner Webb in the mid 70′s.
Also incidental we have enough of a shared memory I was struck by a similar notion as Johnny Hunt when he picked up on the final word, Laodicean, in the national spelling bee couple weeks ago and the significance it has for us shaped in Biblical language
Stephen Fox,
Wade Burleson, Randall Lolley, et al. Lolley had his day. He messed up Southeastern with his liberal theological and social agenda. When people like Burleson begin saying the CR did more harm than good, they demonstrate their ignorance. One only needs look at the United Methodists today to see the results of unchecked liberal theology. They didn’t respond to the “Interpreters Bible” and its poison permeated the United Methodists.
Southern Baptists reacted to the Broadman Bible Commentary, and such as Elliott, Francisco, Allen, Lolley, on to Vestal came to realize that we Southern Baptists would not follow that path of folly.
I know nothing about David, but I did know Adrian. In my forty plus years of ministry I’ve known few men who would take the thrashing he took from men he had befriended simply because he believed in and fought for a cause; then return for another bout because he believed so fervently in what he was doing.
The word is Character: something vitally missing in those who counsel you seek.
I may split hairs – but I am not a broken record.
I don’t believe that Christianity or being a Christ follower has any relation to Gaelic paganism and their beliefs about water – or that listening to the “wisdom” of a former Episcopalian priest (whose philosophy has more in tune with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi than with Jesus Christ and his disciples) has any validity with anyone here – certainly not with Adrian Rogers, and especially I believe David (certainly not speaking for you David).
There was a reason why the CR occurred man. I think you epitomize the reasons why.
Rob
Mike Rasberry,
Amen and amen!
David
Alan,
I was not at the convention so maybe you could help understand by being more specific. What is the evidence of new leadership emerging at the SBC? I only see the same names and their followers listed in all leadership positions. You quoted O.S. Hawkins as saying the GCR will unleash the churches to engage the mission of God personally. How have they been leashed? My church has always been free to engage the mission of God personally. At the IMB, we have always been willing to help any church reach out internationally to engage the mission of God personally and I think most state conventions and the NAMB have done the same.
You say the GCR Task Force is a good team. In what way? You say Ronnie Floyd is a good man. Did you know that he was also on Visioning Task Force that was responsible for the last convention study and restructuring. Many of us consider that report did more harm than good. I am from Arkansas. Floyd has never been a strong supporter of our state convention and I fear the main result of this task force will be to try and weaken the state conventions instead of looking at the problems on the SBC level. You are right that there should be more women on the task force. Why not Kay Miller the national president of WMU? If Hunt was truly wanting to unite us around the Great Commission, why not Randell Everett of the BGCT or former IMB missionary John Upton of the BGAV. I am afraid Hunt did not want to open this committee up to people who would ask the hard questions that need to be asked about waste in CP funding on the SBC level or the bloated bureaucracies at some of our seminaries.
David Rogers, I have always appreciated your integrity and common sense approach to issues. As one of your fellow missionaries with the IMB, I hope you will always keep your contact with the IMB and continue to support us. I especially appreciate your quote as follows. I wish you were going to be on the task force and would hold them accountable to this statement.
• Lots of labels and insinuations there. Why can’t we just recognize and accept each other as brothers and sisters in Christ (provided we are teaching the gospel, and not “another gospel, which is not another” Gal. 1:6-7)? And why can’t we, with an open Bible, graciously discuss each others’ viewpoints, and work together to try to bring them more in line with what the Bible teaches?
Many of us have been saying that since 1979 and have been ignored by leaders of the conservative resurgence who were not interested in working together regardless of what gospel you were teaching. We would like to have worked together to bring each other in line with what the Bible teaches but soon discovered 99% of the actions taken in the name of the conservative resurgence had nothing to do with the gospel or theology. For example when IMB trustee Ron Wilson, a hero of the conservative resurgence, called our missionaries neo-orthodox heretics controlled by liberals, we asked to discuss this with an open Bible but the leaders of the CR would not support us or refute him. When Russell Dilday was fired, the professors at SWBTS asked for an explanation of why we couldn’t work together as brothers and sisters in Christ and for a gracious discussion with an open Bible as to why he was fired but we were ignored again. When Paige Patterson and Keith Eitel were using CP funds at SEBTS to launch attacks of Jerry Rankin and our missionaries there was no effort on their part for a gacious discussion with an open Bible or a missiology textbook.
In the 80s the Peace Committee was formed and failed completely in its mission to bring peace. I fear this Great Commission Resurgence task force will do nothing to support the Great Commission and will only continue the process of putting more and more power and control and money in the hands of fewer and fewer people.
Ron West
Ron,
I am no mouthpiece for the establishment. Anyone who has read my writings over the past few years knows that. I am also not giving guarantees over how the GCR task force will do. They might screw this up royally. However, based on what was said this week and the spirit of the meeting, things seem to be headed in a positive direction and I praise God.
I find that those who were hurt by the CR never stop looking for targets to unleash their anger, and that is really a shame. For years it was Patterson and his crew. Well, he is clearly no longer calling the shots. That is what I meant by new leadership emerging. But now, the problem is with those on the GCR task force. It is not a perfect team, but I think that there are some good people on it, and yes, by all that I have seen, I think that Ronnie Floyd is a good man. But, I don’t know him so I suspend that judgment.
At any rate, I think that we have good reason to hope for good things based on what was said. Let’s try and suspend cynicism for a moment and believe that maybe, just maybe, God is doing something. If, in a couple of months we see that its the same old same old, we call them on it and broadcast it far and wide. But for now, let’s believe the best.
That’s my attitude anyway.
30 years later and some people are still throwing around the L word. That one word always wins the day with some. The battle rages on. So many that supported the CR are still paranoid that the “moderates” are going to come back and takeover. Takeover what?
Conservatives fighting against conservatives is the way I see it.
Excuse me.
I believe we have gotten outside of the parameters of the discussion here. I may have split a few hairs, but at least I kept it in the ballpark and talked about the post. There may be some sites where such discussion or bomb throwing is welcome. It is not here.
Some want to re-fight the battles of 30 years ago, or throw a few bombs and snide remarks displaying their bitterness and resentment of wars long lost and over. No way. No how. Not here. Not now.
I remind everyone of the purpose of this blog SBCImpact:
* A point of dialog for all Christians and, in particular, all Southern Baptists, to gather, read, and share insights about the victories and trials that we encounter day by day, and in so doing make an impact upon one another’s lives and ministries.
* A resource for local churches and missionaries by sharing life and ministry experiences and finding solutions to everyday problems that we encounter on our mission fields, thus making an impact by lifting up Christ to the nations.
* A network that provides information and Christian fellowship within a wholesome, God-honoring environment in the blogosphere, so that we might seek to make a positive impact through this cutting edge venue … to the Glory of God!
Also here are the important posting guidelines:
# Please exercise grace and humility when making comments. We understand that there will be opportunities for healthy debate from time to time. But please keep your comments focused upon the issues in question. Please do not attack, slander, or malign any individual. If you step outside the bounds of Christian honor and dignity, you will be warned. We sincerely hope that we will never have to suspend any commenting privileges.
# Try to stay on focus in your comments. There will always be times when we may stray off topic and “chase a rabbit” or two. That’s fine. But if a comment thread really gets off-course, one of the contributors will help refocus. Please respect his/her direction.
# Please don’t gossip. It’s not a Christ-like behavior. If you make a claim, back it up with a reliable source.
This is my final warning. Keep to the subject area and avoid personal attacks.
Thank you Alan for being our guest. I hope there are some “positive” comments, or at the very least healthy dialogue in interaction with your post.
Rob
Rob:
You said–”This is my final warning. Keep to the subject area and avoid personal attacks.”
Are some of us getting ready to be banned or just me?
Mike sure seems to be attacking WB and Randall Lolley for being the L word in his estimation.
Who did I personally attack?
Ron West,
I’m sure a goodly number of IMB Missionaries disagree. However, those I’ve spoken with personally do not seem to agree with your assessment. The WMU has made their choice. I see no reason to appoint someone to an important task force from an entity which has demonstrated a failure to agree with the BF&M 2000. It is a sure way to become more divisive.
Placing Randall Everett of the BGCT on such an important task force would be to spit in the face of the gains we have made over the last thirty years.
We DO NOT want to return to the days of Keith Parks. The BGCT still doesn’t know which way it will go in regards to the CBF, and we just don’t need that kind of situation.
I’m sorry to hear that SBC Missionaries would be supportive of people and entities which do not support the direction of the convention in regards to theology and/or methodology.
Russell Dilday showed his true colors when he left SWBTS. I hope you will remain an IMB Missionary, but I hope you search your heart to determine that you’re willing to serve with the understanding that the vast majority of those who support you believe strongly in what you seemingly disavow.
You obviously are serving under conditions which cause you considerable stress. I just don’t know if I could serve in such a situation where I believe the leaders were such nefarious characters.
As a U.S. Marine during Vietnam, I had plenty to gripe about. Marine Sgts. traditionally talk negatively about the officers who give the orders, but we also were extremely grateful for their presence. I hope you are that way. Should you not be, I’m afraid of the consequences.
I’ve served on the foreign field, it was only for four years, but I’ve returned again and again on short term missions around the globe, and I’m grateful for those who gave of themselves to bring us back to The Book. I hope you are.
I want to apologize for being so forceful in my statements. I do appreciate those who serve, even when I don’t agree with you. I have no animus toward anyone.
God bless you.
Alan and Rob,
Excuse me if I was getting outside the parameters of this post. I personally thought the whole Disney thing was a little off subject. I was trying to ask Alan questions about his statements concerning the GCR which is of great concern to each of us and responding to David Rogers excellent suggestions for conversation between Christian brothers.
Alan, I do not think I suggested you were a mouth piece for the establishment. I know I do not believe that. I am trying to understand your excitement for the task force and why you think this is the start of new day and new leaders are emerging. As I look at the task force, every person I know, Ronnie Floyd, Jim Richards, Al Mohler, Danny Akin, David Dockery, Ted Traylor and Simon Tsoi, have been some of the most hard line supporters of the Conservative Resurgence and its political tactics since the 1980s. I believe they will control the committee and its outcome. You said that you, “find that those who were hurt by the CR never stop looking for targets to unleash their anger, and that is really a shame.” I did not think I was unleashing anger as much as pointing out situations I wish David’s suggestions could have been followed. I do not think there was anything there I should be shamed for. Actually, I think a better case could be that the CR never stops looking for targets to unleash their anger. You might ask the BWA, WMU Wade Burleson, the BGCT and this Driscoll fellow and even Ed Stetzer. I am sure Ronnie Floyd is a good man. That does not mean that he is the best person to lead this task force. I wish Ed Stetzer and some others with innovative ideas were on the task force. I have heard good things about JD Grear but don’t know much about him. I have never heard of some of the others.
Rob, I take it you are an administrator of this website. I am thankful you are providing a resource for local churches and missionaries by sharing life and ministry experiences and finding solutions to everyday problems that we encounter on our mission fields, thus making an impact by lifting up Christ to the nations. I would love to discuss missionary life and ministry experiences. For instance you may or may not be aware the IMB is going through a major reorganization at the present time. I would enjoy hearing what those of you in the US are hearing about it and your feelings. I would also like to hear how some with IMB experience such as David Rogers, feel about it. Of course that would be a subject for another post. Unfortunately too often all we hear in Baptist circles and on the blogs and from our trustees centers around issues such as private prayer languages, baptism administrators, claims of doctrinal problems on the mission field and so on.
Rob, I am an Arkansas Baptist, Ouachita and Southwestern graduate and have spent 30 years with the IMB. I love the SBC and thankful for its impact on my life. Tell me a little about your background in the SBC and mission experience. I could not find anything on this site. I am trying to understand the comment about “throw a few bombs and snide remarks displaying their bitterness and resentment” if that was directed at me. I am constantly hearing remarks about the SBC I knew as being sliding into heresy and liberal theology and worse. I didn’t experience that and point that out from time to time. Is that being snide?
Mike Raspberry, I don’t understand your remarks at all. What assessment did I make that other missionaries do not agree with? I did say that I agreed with David Rogers’ statement. I don’t know any missionaries that would disagree with that. The only choice I know that the WMU has made is to support our missionaries and the Great Commission. I know Kaye Miller and think she could add a lot to the task force. I also know Randell Everett and served with John Upton on the mission field and fail to see how having them on the task force would be spitting in anyone’s face. I also know Keith Parks and have a lot of respect for him but I don’t see what that has to do with this discussion. I think Russell Dilday always showed his true colors and they were fine. I think it was Owen Collins and the trustees that fired him who showed their true colors but what has that to do with this discussion. Is this an example of staying on target with the post? I would be happy to keep the discussion about the GCR.
I thank you for your service in Vietnam. We are probably about the same age. I did not serve in combat but I served on active duty and in the Guard and Reserve so I understand your comments about complaining about officers and being thankful for them. I support those in authority over me even though I do complain from time to time. You can ask those at the board who know me. I do not see any place in my post where I complained about people in authority over me. As a theological conservative and an inerrantist, I am thankful for those who help others back to the Book who have drifted away. I am thankful that in Arkansas and at Southwestern and at the IMB we did not drift away and did not need anyone to bring us back. We were faithful to the Book.
Ron West
Brother Alan,
I guess my issue with a task force that does not represent the current normal size SBC church is obvious. “It does not represent the normal size SBC church”,….. To me, it really does not have much to do with names and fame. What would be too wrong with a task force of 300 instead of 18? Eighteen is not what I call a “force” at all. Three to Four hundred might begin to get a little more depth of conversation and it would bring about focus on the subject.. “Great Commission” and less about the people of the task force.
Brother Rob, maybe in your letter…ask Johnny to expand the force to 300 so some type of depth can be had on the subject.
Blessings,
Chris
Ron,
I have found your comments insightful most times. You were on topic. I was not speaking to you – though you and I would probably agree with the idea that we have differing points of view about things. We have discussed those things before in an amicable way. Rest at ease brother.
As to your other comments, I will choose to defer to Alan and his post. I have taken up enough time in chasing rabbits. Perhaps in a future post – or you can email me at rob@sbcimpact.net.
Rob
Rob:
You said–”Some want to re-fight the battles of 30 years ago, or throw a few bombs and snide remarks displaying their bitterness and resentment of wars long lost and over. No way. No how. Not here. Not now.”
I really have not seen any bitterness or resentment in this blog topic.
I’m still confused by your above statement. Could you be just a little bit clearer in what you are trying to say? My thanks in advance.
Tom,
I will not further take away from this post. If you would like to discuss this topic privately, my email is above.
Rob
Rob:
Thanks, but no. You are a funny guy.
Rob:
Your comment 27 is interesting indeed.
Let’s try it this way.
What would be wrong in having David have dialogue with the likes of Wade Burleson, Ginny Brant, Ben Cole, a representative of Chic Fil A ( I understand Mr. Cathy as a trustee of Mercer supported Kirby Godsey at Mercer and is now supportive of Underwood); have these folks and others friendly to Memphis Declaration discuss the SBC and where it is now.
What is to fear in that amount of transparency.
Anne Graham Lotz preached in the same pulpit as Barbara Brown Taylor; and Anne Graham Lotz preached in the same pulpit this past February at Samford as Johnny Hunt.
What’s to fear in discussing these matters; or are you ready to kick Billy Graham’s daughter cause of the above pulpit sharing and her affinity for BWA out of the SBC as well.
I think David Rogers is at a different place than you on that; surely he is at a different place than Ronnie Floyd who chairs this GCR.
That is my point.
If you saw the movie No Country for Old Men, or are in fellowship with church members who saw and appreciated it, you are already on the slippery slope of appreciating Luc Sante’s ruminations on Billy Sunday and the sawdust trail of the last Century’s turn and his musings on baptism.
Rob:
You said the following to Stehen Fox–”I may split hairs – but I am not a broken record.
I don’t believe that Christianity or being a Christ follower has any relation to Gaelic paganism and their beliefs about water – or that listening to the “wisdom” of a former Episcopalian priest (whose philosophy has more in tune with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi than with Jesus Christ and his disciples) has any validity with anyone here – certainly not with Adrian Rogers, and especially I believe David (certainly not speaking for you David).
There was a reason why the CR occurred man. I think you epitomize the reasons why. ”
You also said–”This is my final warning. Keep to the subject area and avoid personal attacks.”
Did you not personally attack Stephen Fox by saying to him–”There was a reason why the CR occurred man. I think you epitomize the reasons why. ”
I don’t think you are following your own advice to others.
[...] in Louisville. Several have already written helpful responses to this years convention (see Ascol, Cross, Rainer, Reid, IMonk, and Stetzer). Here, I will express my own response. I will give you three [...]
The Great Commission was started a lot longer ago than with Dr. Akin, or anyone else. I believe that it was started by the Lord Jesus. Southern Baptists have been trying to carry out this commission for a long, long time. More missionaries have come out of Southern Baptist Churches than any other denomination ever. Would that not be a fair statement to make?
After saying all of that…I truly hope that the GCR will result in us doing more for missions…to win more lost souls for Christ… to lead to more Churches being started for the glory of God…to advance the Kingdom of God even more…to see more people go to Heaven than what would have gone! That’s really what the Great Commission, and any resurgence in the Great Commission is/should be all about…to get more people saved.
David