Header image alt text

Southern Baptist in NC

Keeping Christ central in the world of Southern Baptists

In a recent Baptist Press article, that is nothing more than a public relations article, we see something that is sandwiched in the “Other Action” section of a report on the recent North American Mission Board (NAMB) Trustee meeting. The report reads:

“Trustees approved guidelines for NAMB church planters in relationship to other church planting networks.”

After contacting the Vice President of the Communications Group with NAMB, Mike Ebert, and being caught up in the voice mail network and finally leaving a message I still cannot find a copy of the guidelines.  To be fair it maybe Ebert is traveling and will not be in the office until Monday. NAMB is within their rights to make this decision. The problem exists that we are now partnering with other church planting networks and no one I can find has any idea what those guidelines are that we operate within.

Let me make this as clear as I know how.  NAMB is an autonomous entity and they constantly scream that we need to trust them in their appointments and those that are funded.  I say, fine I want to trust you.  However, with the trustees recently removing the 2006 Presidential restrictions and now announcing “guidelines for NAMB church planters in relationship with other church planting networks” without producing such guidelines it seems something is not above board. If we are asked to trust someone then that someone should produce the openness and transparency needed for us to support.

According to William Thornton the Partnership Guidelines are five statements.  You can see them here.

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

In a recent double video posted at Praisegod Barebones Dr. David Platt is seen at the latest Verge conference speaking negatively of using the Sinner’s Prayer.  Dr. Steve Gaines is seen, speaking from his pulpit, in the other video responding to the use of the Sinner’s prayer.  Dr. Platt called our use of the Sinner’s prayer a “superstitious” practice and said that is was “damning” people to Hell.  He also said the Bible never once uses the term of asking Jesus into your heart.  Dr. Platt even went to describe discipleship in a way that one could term “osmosis” due to his aversion to anything resembling works on the part of humans.  Dr. Gaines eloquently responded with a clear Biblical position in the exposition of the word “received” and how it is used in the Scripture.

Dr. Bart Barber, in his post, explains the sinner’s prayer from the perspective of the wedding vows.  Dave Miller, at SBC Voices, responded in his usual way by posting his “two cents” which in turn reveals nothing but riding the fence between the two positions. Peter Lumpkins picked up these two videos and responded using the very words of Dr. Platt and Dr. Gaines. Trevin Wax tries to calm the waters with a post about this controversy.  However, his post really is no more than Dave Miller’s expounded into a more articulate fence straddling position. Dr. JD Greerar has now posted on his blog the position he takes as he has written a book and deals with this very issue in a not yet released manuscript.  Dr. Greear positions himself with Dr. Platt, but uses less abrasive words to do so.  However, Dr. Greear tries to position himself with Dr. Gaines and Dr. Platt in his position but really devolves to a position of fence straddling also.

With these various positions of others one has to ask a very simple question; Why the controversy?  For me the answer lies, not in what is being said, but in what people are not saying.  While these mentioned above are articulating their positions on the subject, they are not really speaking to the issue of the controversy.

The issue is we have a leading pastor that is promoted within the SBC Leadership by heading up prime conferences throughout the SBC that said the Sinner’s Prayer is a superstitious recitation.  The problem is not being dealt with at all.  The reason this controversy is continuing is the mere reason that this leading pastor is being defended by people that will not take a position in support of his position.  Instead Wax, Miller, Greear, and others who are talking about this issue are not in support of Dr. Platt’s position.  Instead they are trying to tell us what Dr. Platt means by the words he uses.  NEWS FLASH–When someone uses words then they either own them or explain them.  Dr. Platt has preached the message and no one has heard anything from him.  He has not so much as belched since he made this statement.

What step(s) should be made to bridge this divide?  There is only one.  Dr. Platt needs to speak clearly what he means when he called the Sinner’s prayer a “superstitious” prayer used to fool people into thinking they were saved and that it was being used in “damning” people instead of bringing them into a right relationship with God.

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

Completing my recent survey from LifeWay Research made me begin thinking about surveys.  It seems that one can find, at Dr. Ed Stetzer’s blog, a weekly research recitation that tells us what the pastors, people in the pew, or most anyone is thinking. However, I believe it is the way these surveys are formed and used that call into question their validity. If one studies political science one will find that surveys are not used to inform an opinion but to market an opinion. There is a quip in the political circles that reveals exactly what I am saying; “Want a survey? Then buy a survey.”

This being an election year gives evidence of what I mean.  Read more

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

I have been away for the past week preaching revival in the church my mother is a member.  We had a great time and enjoyed seeing people from my childhood.  It was good to see people I went to school with and also some that I met after my school days.  Also, it was good meeting students at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary as some attend the church.  Oak Grove Baptist Church is the church I just completed a series of sermons and it is located approximately five miles from the seminary campus.

The church is doing ministry projects in the community and also mission trips as they took three trips in 2011.  I am certainly praying for them along with their pastor Rev. Tom Ravan and his family.  They are a precious family whose heart’s desire is to glorify our Lord.  Pray as Pastor Tom leads Oak Grove.

I also had a chance to met with an old professor who attends Oak Grove.  Rev. Julian Motley retired at Gorman Baptist Church in Durham, NC and was given the title Pastor Emiritus by the church upon his retirement.  Read more

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

There is a move by the Executive Committee to allow Southern Baptists to choose between calling themselves by the official name or referring to themselves by an officially proposed unofficial official name–The Great Commission Baptists.  While this is an “unofficial” name the convention will “officially” vote on it in June at the convention held this year in New Orleans.

I only have one question to ask; “What is our leaders thinking?” Do they not remember when the Alliance of Baptists formed?  Have they forgotten how much chaos that caused within the convention? Do they not remember the competing Pastors Conferences?  Do they not remember the constant fussing and fighting that marked the convention during those days?  The amazing thing that has caught my attention is the reason being placed before us in favor of a name change new nickname-because we have a past of fussing and fighting.  This  move to officially/unofficially change our name add a nickname certainly has not diminished the fussing and fighting history, but exacerbated it.

Read more

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

There is a saying in the world of politics; “Need a poll, buy a poll.” It hinges on the understanding that the human psyche is geared toward a desire to be apart of the larger crowd.  You see, no one desires to be known as being “outside the mainstream” of society. Thus, the various election polls you see at this time of the year.  Many of the media outlets release various polls depending on their likes and dislikes.

Polling data is something that I find interesting but it is not something I always place a dependence on.  If you will notice the election polls mentioned earlier, you will find that CNN commissions the polls they report and Fox commissions separate polls for their reports.  If the polls do not come back affirming their position it is never released.  However, most polling experts agree they can predict how the polls will be returned based on the questions asked.  Not only can they determine the data results but they can do so simply because of the way the questions are worded.  These polling experts study how they are not supposed to word questions because of a “leading” quality in the question.  However, it is that discipline used in forming the poll that can be misused in order to bring about desired results.  Which brings me to my title questions; Why another poll?  How does it help?

Why another poll?

The Lifeway SBC Pastor Survey 2012 covers a gambit of issues.  It begins with leading questions about the upcoming recommendation to the convention concerning the addition of a nickname.  It ends with statements concerning the percentages of Cooperative Program (CP) giving.  When I say leading I mean the survey presupposes a nickname is a foregone conclusion. There were three questions asked about the nickname with two questions being presented with statements of fact before the question.  Notice the first “statement of fact” that is given.

In February the task force appointed to consider a possible name change for the Southern Baptist Convention recommended that its legal name remain the Southern Baptist Convention.

Read more

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

Matt Svoboda over at SBC Voices presented an OP concerning the debate of Calvinism in the SBC.  After realizing in order to respond to all 10 items it would run to 1200 words.  Therefore I decided to make it into a post and place it here.  Basically, Brother Matt wants the Calvinism debate to stop.  It certainly is a large step for him as in 2006 he was in the midst calling for this debate.  My response to his 10 important items is below.

You do not want us to debate the Calvinist/Non-Calvinist debate any longer.  It seems the day has come when the Calvinist are in control of the major part of the convention so there is no reason to keep debating this.  However, in 2006 it was a huge reason to debated this because Founders was telling everyone there was a movement on to rid the SBC of Calvinists.  So, all the Young Restless & Reformed (YR&R) came out with both barrels blazing shouting they wanted a seat at the table.  Now within 6 years the YR&R not only has a seat at the table they own the table and are placing their orders. As a result, we have you a YR&R person now informing us that we need to stop the debate because there are at least 10 things more important than this Calvinist/Non-Calvinist debate.

Allow me to dissect these 10 items along with your thesis for each one. Read more

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

Take three minutes and watch the following video.  A clear presentation of the Gospel both in song and in the act of Baptism.  You can follow David Horner on his blog Equipped for Life.

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email

When I entered my office on Monday morning and looked in my box to retrieve my mail I saw something interesting–an envelope from Lifeway Research.  I opened the large envelope to find a survey of forty-three questions that began with a question concerning the Task Force that was appointed through a “back-door” reading of our constitution by the current President, and ending with questions concerning the giving of the church.

Well, it doesn’t take rocket scientists observing questions to realize the desired outcome of the Research team at Lifeway. Over the next couple of posts I will observe the questions and see if you agree.  Therefore in this opening article I want to look at two statements to help you see the theological bend the Research Team seems to desire.

  1. My church is theologically reformed or Calvinist
  2. My church is theologically Arminian or Wesleyan

The statements above represents the theological positions one my choose from.  From the look of things it is a clear straight forward statement that defines what one believes.  But, this is a Southern Baptist survey and the survey is designed to find the theological beliefs of those pastors in the convention.  That being said there seems to be one question.  Where is the position for Baptist theology?  Are we seriously giving credence that there is no such position as a baptist theology? One other thing about the statements.  They are designed to cause a certain response. What person in a Southern Baptist Church is going to say their church is “Arminian or Wesleyan”?  Therefore a pastor has only to choose between “reformed or Calvinist”.  Is there really a secret as to what we will find from the surveys with these statements? I am not an Arminian, and neither am I a Wesleyan.  These theological positions places one in the uncomfortable position of arguing one is not saved forever.  Thus, we must choose “reformed or Calvinist”. Why?  Because “reformed or Calvinist” is the only theological position to choose from that affirms Salvation is forever.  But, I am neither reformed nor Calvinist.

I presented this to a friend of mine that holds a PhD in theology.  Here was his reply:

This is pitiful. The vast majority of SBC churches are neither Reformed or Arminian. They are something of a hybrid of the two known as “Baptist.”

To which I must say; AMEN!!

Share on TwitterDigg ThisShare via email