They Will Know You Are My Disciples by Your Vitriol? tagged: , , , ,

They Will Know You Are My Disciples by Your Vitriol?

Posted by in Baptist Life

.There is no doubt about it, things are heating up in the SBC. The GCRTF preliminary report has been published, nominations for offices at the SBC and the Pastor’s conference are trickling out, and the rhetoric is heating up.

In recent weeks, we have seen some wild things happen in blogs.

1)  Dr. Jerry Rankin wrote a blog he called “Convoluted Priorities.” In it, he delivered a rather scathing review of a speech given by Dr. Morris Chapman to state executive directors. He called his dealings with the Executive Committee “It is just a meaningless exercise of denominational bureaucracy.” He also made this statement about the resistance to change in the SBC. “It is better to let the lost multitudes never hear the gospel and go to hell, than change the way our denomination functions.” 

I need to reveal my bias here. I am a huge fan of Dr. Rankin. I got into blogging because I felt that those IMB policies that stirred things up a few years ago were part of a movement to try to push him out. I love his passion for missions and his willingness to work beyond the narrow borders of the Baptist world. I am also a big fan of Dr. Chapman, though I wondered at the wisdom of his comments at the last SBC. I find Dr. Rankin’s perspective intriguing, even though some of his rhetoric might have been inflated.

I cannot remember, in my decades of SBC involvement, hearing two agency heads engage in an exchange such as this. Dr. Rankin clarified his comments later and apologized for the perceptions he created. But it was a unique moment.

2) The exchanges between supporters of Dr. James White and Dr. Ergun Caner have been particularly harsh – on both sides. Hard to pick a winner in this sad (and remarkably petty, even shameful) exchange. Equally hard to calculate the damage to the cause of Christ done by this brouhaha.

3) Perhaps the nadir was reached in an article on March 20 by Peter Lumpkins at SBC Tomorrow bemoaning the response of current leaders to the nomination to the nomination of Troy Gramling to be SBC Pastor’s Conference president. In the article, Lumpkins called out by name the current crop of leaders in the SBC conservative movement. He names “Al Mohler, Danny Akin, Ed  Stetzer, Ronnie Floyd, J. D. Greear, Ted Traylor, Johnny Hunt, Jerry Rankin, and others who are the public persona of Southern Baptists.” Here are some of the things he said about them:

“(N)o courage.  None.  Courage is out to lunch.”

“Here’s what I think. Girly men.  Yes, Girly men.”

He said that these “wannabe warriors are gutless.”

I plan to be at the Pastor’s conference and I will not be voting for Troy Gramling. I don’t know what the minimum is, but if someone leads a church that gives 0.18% to the CP, he does not get my vote for any SBC office.

But here’s my question. When did this kind of vitriol and name-calling become styled as a virtue in SBC debate? Peter claims to be upholding truth in his article, willing to say what needs to be said when others are behaving like cowards and “girly men”. I think Peter had a point about the nomination. But why did he have to call denominational leaders names to make his point? Why could he not state his case plainly, clearly and cordially?


My Thesis

Folks, we are only getting started. Orlando will be a decisive moment in SBC history. And it seems that the months leading up to in will be anything but boring for those of us who care about the future of the SBC. But is there no way we can discuss the issues without the vitriol? Can we not maintain civility while we disagree?

Let me make an admission here. I am going to advocate a position today that I have often failed to uphold myself. I am going to say that our debate needs to be “seasoned with grace” and I have often failed to do so. I am going to advocate for civility and kindness. It won’t take too much searching to find places where I have been uncivil and unkind. But the fact that we fail does not abrogate our responsibility to aspire to godly rhetoric.

In John 13:34-35, Jesus said, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.  By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

It would be good for us to remember that this is a command of Christ. Not a suggestion or request. It is a command of our Savior. We are to love one another. And it is through the love we display to one another that the world will see that we are disciples of Jesus. Love is to be the primary marker of Christians.

At the risk of offering simplistic answers, could it be that one of the reasons that our evangelism statistics have flattened out is because we are so quick to disobey the command of Jesus and treat one another with disdain instead of love. The world does not see genuine love and is therefore unimpressed with our message.

Paul also issued a command in Colossians 4:6. “Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.” Our speech is to always be gracious, “seasoned with salt.” Salt stops the spread of decay. Our mouths are supposed to spread grace and hinder death and decay.

Peter talked about defending the faith in 1 Peter 3:15-16. “Always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.” When you defend the truth, do it with “gentleness and respect.”

I would make the following points for your consideration.

1)  Please don’t try to tell me your harsh, demeaning words are really an expression of love!

I have an IQ well over 80. I can tell the difference between vitriol and love. But I am amazed at the creativity exercised by those who define their harsh words as an expression of the love of God.

Yes, I understand that sin destroys and that it is an act of love to face down sin and its effects. But Paul told us, in Galatians 6:1, to confront sin with a “spirit of gentleness.” Love seeks the good of the other person, it acts in the other’s interest, not one’s own. It is not real love for me to excuse a homosexual’s sin – allowing him to continue in the lifestyle that will eventually destroy him. But while I confront his sin I can treat him with respect, as one for whom Christ shed his blood.

Please don’t tell me that name-calling and harsh, unkind words; that vitriol is actually love.

2)  There is a difference between belligerence and conviction.

Frankly, there is a tendency among some bloggers to equate civility with liberalism, with a lack of conviction about truth. That is not the case.

Again, I would say two things. First, I try to do what I am advocating here. Second, I fail miserably and often.

I try to engage those who disagree with me in discussion and talk about our differences. I have been chided for lacking conviction. I think I am a man of strong conviction. I believe the Bible is the perfect Word of God. I refuse to compromise on the fundamentals of the faith. I have engaged in television debates with a rabbi, an imam, an adoptive lesbian mother and a member of the Jesus Seminar. All of these debates were civil, but I do not think that if you watched them (I’ve got the video if you want to challenge me) you would accuse me of compromise.

It is possible to make a point with conviction and still not belittle the person who disagrees with you. It is possible to show respect for a point of view that differs from your own. We do not have to be unkind to demonstrate godly conviction.

3)  The other guy’s behavior never justifies mine!

This should not need to be said, but it does. Ever found a couple of kids in a squabble and when confronted, they both shouted, “He started it!” How many times have you heard a variation of that in a blogging debate?

If you say something unkind to me, it does not justify me to say something unkind to you. If you insult me, it does not open the door for me to insult you back.

“Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them.” “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”

The measure of man comes when he is insulted or demeaned by another. How do you respond then? Do you show respect for those who are unkind to you? Do you respond in kind, or in kindness, when someone provokes you?

Let’s face it (why do I keep saying this?) – every one of us who blogs has failed in this at times. But we need to keep trying.

4)  Only those who have the omniscient insight of Christ can use his harsh words to the Pharisees to justify their harsh words.

Jesus knew the hearts of those he addressed. You do not. Yes, Jesus called them vipers and blind guides. He knew their hearts perfectly and so could give perfect judgment. I do not have that level of insight into the human heart, so I should be very careful of giving judgment and condemnation. Until I can imitate Jesus’ sovereignty I should not imitate his judgment.

The fact that Jesus issued judgment against others does not mean that our judgment is justified.

We are heading into a turbulent time in the life of the SBC. We are going to be debating a lot of important, even volatile issues. Who will be the next president of the SBC? The Pastor’s Conference? What are the real problems in the SBC? How big are our problems? What about the GCR task force report? For or against? I’m guessing the Calvinism debate isn’t going away any time soon. The Baptist Identity movement is probably sticking around and those who oppose it will probably continue to do so.

We cannot change the fact that we are going to disagree and we are going to debate the issues on which we disagree.

But, my friends, we can change the WAY we discuss those issues. We can let our speech be gracious, seasoned with salt. We can bless those who persecute us. We can return good for evil. We can debate passionately but also with a spirit of love.

This is the mark of the true disciples of Christ – our love. May the world see Christ in us because it sees the love of Christ in us.