Header image alt text

Southern Baptist in NC

Keeping Christ central in the world of Southern Baptists

Mar 11

23

President of Pastor’s Conference Responds (Corrected)

Posted by Tim Rogers on March 23, 2011
Posted in Cooperative Baptist Fellowship • SBC Outpost • Southern Baptist Pastors Conference  | 15 Comments

Dr. Vance Pitman has responded to various questions and concerns raised by Southern Baptist Pastors regarding the upcoming Southern Baptist Pastor’s Conference (SBPC) in Phoenix, Arizona.  You can see various questions and concerns here here and here. The medium Brother Pitman chooses to give his response is the Associated Baptist Press (ABP), the news agency started by disgruntled former Southern Baptist because the Executive Committee (EC) terminated Baptist Press (BP) editors.  This news agency is controlled and maintained by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) the group that would not affirm the inerrancy of Scripture and splintered from the Southern Baptist Convention to form their own Fellowship denomination.  You can read the ABP article which contains Brother Pitman’s interview here. There are three concerns that I want to address regarding Brother Pitman’s response.

First, the venue he chose to respond. Brother Pitman chose to respond in the ABP.  The ABP is an organization that was started, using state CP funds, by disgruntled state Baptist editors.  Read more

Digg ThisShare via email

Nov 07

17

Crow–Eaten as a Meal!

Posted by Tim Rogers on November 17, 2007
Posted in International Mission Board • SBC Outpost • Trustees • Wade Burleson  | 49 Comments

When I was growing up I was told by me Father that words were always sweet coming out but bitter when ingested. He informed me that the most bitter words to ingest were words presented as truthful ones but dissected and turned into untruthful ones. These words he told me were the difference in eating steak and crow. Steak is good and nourishing. Crow is meat, just like steak, but not filling and bitter. Thus, I find myself with the bitter task of eating crow.

Thursday evening November 15, 2007 on SBC Outpost, I made a statement concerning Brother Wade Burleson’s offer to resign in comment #22. I said; “He thought better of it and removed that offer from the table.” After speaking to Brother Wade personally, I was told that the statement was incorrect. He never removed his offer to resign. He and I disagree on many things, but on this I can see how he views that statement as being wrong. I should have kept saying what I was saying all along instead of trying to make a stronger case. What I said from the beginning is true–Brother Wade was told to write out his resignation and he never did. This statement Brother Wade agrees with as we discussed it on the phone. He had many things to consider in writing such a statement but got distracted by something else.

Because words mean things, I can see how Brother Wade and others can say the statement; “He thought better of it and removed that offer from the table” and the statement; “Brother Wade was told to write out his resignation and he never did” are not the same. If you believe that these two statements do not mean the same thing and thus believe my use of the first placed Brother Wade in the position of being someone not telling the truth, then I am sorry. I have never said that Brother Wade was lying and thus do not believe I need to apologize for such a statement. I have not spread gossip just because I will not reveal my source. The fact is that Brother Wade was told to write out his statement of resignation and he never did–he told me that.

That is all that I have to say on the Wade Burleson issue concerning this resignation. I will trust the outcome of this issue and my heart to our Sovereign Father who judges all men’s hearts–and has assigned Wade Burleson a mansion next to Jerry Corbaley, which is located across the hall from the mansions of Paige Patterson, which is next to Ben Cole.

Excuse me while I return to my meal.

***Clarification***

It seems that Brother Wade has a point of clarification where he believes it to be worded more accurately. I have stated; “Brother Wade was told to write out his resignation and he never did“. Brother Wade believes this would be more accurately worded by saying; “I was asked to write out my proposed resolution.” His proposed resolution involved his resignation before the end of the year.

I believe that Brother Wade and I disagree over semantics here. I personally do not see the difference in a statement that says he was asked to write out his resignation and a statement that says he was asked to write out his proposal to resolve the issue which included a letter of resignation.

Digg ThisShare via email

Aug 07

15

Inconsistency Or Chicanery

Posted by Tim Rogers on August 15, 2007
Posted in Art Rogers • Dr. Paige Patterson • Oklahoma Baptist Convention • SBC Outpost • Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary • Todd Littleton • Wade Burleson  | 21 Comments

As we move from summer into autumn here in NC we will experience a drabness in our foliage. It seems that we did not get enough water and because of this drought situation we find ourselves missing much of the beauty that makes the NC Mountains famous. There are some that say too much water causes the leaves to change later and therefore never exhibit the beauty of the colors in the process of that change. While others say that the slackness of rain makes the leaves change earlier and thus causes the changes so quick it makes for a beautiful scene. Which is correct? I do not know. Are these differences of opinion a result of inconsistent data? Or could this just be chicanery on the part of the tourist industry to get tourist to plan trips earlier in order to begin the tours earlier and thus bring in extra cash?

This brings me to something that I have witnessed in the blogging world. It seems that we have been a witness to either inconsistency or chicanery.

Inconsistent is described as: not satisfiable by the same set of values for the unknowns.

Chicanery is described as: deception by artful subterfuge or sophistry.

What have I seen in the blogging world that causes me to ask this question? I can point to many examples, but will use only a few. First the Endorsements at SBC Outpost. These Endorsements were removed at the decision of one person. It appears that the removal of these endorsement statements removed the endorsements of the individuals. Here is where the question of inconsistency or chicanery comes to light. Is it inconsistency or chicanery on the part of the endorsers of SBC Outpost to allow their endorsements to be pulled after they went public without publicly expressing something about the action? If it is inconsistency, where one feels the endorsement is still valid but not listed, then the endorser needs to clarify if the endorsement is still valid. If it is chicanery, where one feel the endorsement appears that it is not valid but in the endorser’s mind it is, then the endorser is guilty of trying to trick SB.

Second, is the in the arena of pastoral moves. We all now are aware that Dr. Jefress is the new pastor at FBC Dallas. However, we also are aware this was made public before either FBC Dallas members were aware of whom the committee was preparing to present, or FBC Wichita Falls was told by their pastor. This was debated in blogland as just “scooping” a story that was going to be released by a secular news organization. However, some of the very ones releasing this information did not seem to be aware that one of SBC Outpost’s leaders was leaving his present ministry to begin in a staff position in Enid Oklahoma. While neither FBC Dallas, nor FBC Wichita Falls had the luxury to hear about these changes from within the confines of their own membership, Parkview Baptist and Emmanuel Baptist were able to announce a transition that should go smoothly because it was presented in a proper manner. If what happened with the scoop is inconsistency then those involved in reporting these items should issue an apology to FBC Dallas, FBC Wichita Falls, and Dr. Jefress. If this is chicanery then it is easily spotted when the secular media turns to these “scooping” individuals in order to further a cause against SBC Institutions.

Also, and the last one to which I point, did you see the issue of silence? This blogger, referencing this post, pointed to the silence of SWBTS when someone seeks information. From both articles it appears that the authors believe it to be due to a serious, possibly law-breaking, matter for SWBTS to remain silent. IOW, SWBTS has seriously broken the law and their silence is the proof seems to be the implication. According to the SBC Outpost article because people are now being referred to a lawyer there must be something wrong. However, when I ask a question concerning a statement here the author responds humorously here. When I press the matter here he responds with silence here. If the author was afraid that I was seeking information because I desired to use it in a legal battle that I have instigated against him this type of action would be considered inconsistency. However, to become silent when the only thing requested were the more than half-dozen names he said “had no clue about Klouda’s forced removal, much less the reasoning behind why a unanimous action of the Board of Trustees needed to be ‘corrected’ ” screams chicanery. Some may not see it that way, but they need to stop and think. SWBTS is under scrutiny like it has never been before. Dr. Patterson is battling constant threats of legal actions against him and the seminary. Then the very person who has encouraged the lawsuit SWBTS is facing accuses him of hiding something by his silence, but when asked to name names instead of placing things out there as gossip, this person refuses to do so . . .

Oh, speaking of chicanery. Remember the issues raised by Brother Wade over Mrs. Debbie Brunson being nominated to the IMB from Florida? Remember his difficulty was not with Mrs. Brunson but the fact that she had been there less than a year and there were many more people in the great state of Florida that had served longer than she. I remember it and, to his credit, the story was pulled from his blog. His reasons? To be honest, I never really understood his reasoning. However, I believe if you will look at the appointments of the current President of the Oklahoma Baptist Convention you will notice a person on the Nominating Committee that violates the very principle that Brother Wade raised with Sister Debbie Brunson. Brother Art Rogers was in Oklahoma for less than a year when the Presidential appointments were named to the Nominating Committee. Brother Art is a great man of God and I do not question his ability to serve. However, is it inconsistency or chicanery for Brother Wade to remove his article concerning his disagreement of Mrs. Brunson and remain silent concerning Brother Art? (I do not know the exact timing of the president’s appointment of Brother Art, but if I were a betting man I would bet $1k to a doughnut hole it was shortly after Brother Wade removed his article.) Also, you will notice that Brother Todd Littleton has been placed on the committee. Now I understand that Brother Todd has been in the state longer than a year. However, it was in 2005 that a member of the church Brother Todd is pastor wrote this article where the church member stated he was done with the SBC. His basis for quiting the SBC was established as something his pastor told him. Is it inconsistency or chicanery for one to lead people to quit the SBC but serve in a position to nominate people for positions in a state convention that supports the SBC. Allow me to ask the Oklahoma Baptist Convention if it is inconsistency or chicanery for the convention to appoint a pastor whose church members have publicly advocated not sending money to the SBC and point to their pastor’s leadership in making this decision?

Let me close by saying that I could care less where the Lord leads our Brothers and Sisters in service for Him. I am excited that people are able to serve Him through the denominational agencies and I support the leadership of those in their positions. Here in NC we have great leadership as I am sure Oklahoma has as well. However, it seems that many of the issues being thrown out castigating the agencies and our leaders come from either inconsistency or chicanery. Which would you say?

Digg ThisShare via email

Aug 07

7

What is Ethical?

Posted by Tim Rogers on August 7, 2007
Posted in Baptist State Convention of North Carolina • SBC Outpost  | 24 Comments

In the recent month there have been publicized moves of Pastors from one ministry to another. In this post a mega-church pastor’s move was publicized as a “scoop” of newsworthy proportions. This release of confidential source information was defended, quite well I may add, by those those releasing it. The definitive argument for me had to do with it being news and releasing it earlier than anyone else would not stop it from being news. I have to agree, an early release would not stop it from being released. I do not doubt that the Dallas Morning News knew what was about to happen. But, I do question if they would have released their story if SBC Outpost had not released it first. One will never know.

However, that brings me to another question. Is it ethical to release information of such magnitude, when the person involved has not had the opportunity to tell those in his current ministry setting? Then you have the question of the proper timing in telling those in your current ministry setting. When should a pastor inform his current ministry about his being viewed and engaging in ongoing talks with another ministry? Also, another question roams at the surface that begs an answer. How ethical is it for one that reports on others being “outed” before they tell their congregation, to have the luxury of his own news organization keeping silent on an issue just because it entails one of their own?

I celebrated my first full year on the current field of ministry on July 15, 2007. I remember when I was in conversation with the Pulpit Committee and the struggle I had about telling my former ministry. After prayer and advice from other trusted pastors and lay people, I decided to wait until I received the vote from the church calling me. I remember one particular conversation during this time. It was a conversation with a pastor’s wife as she was serving on the Nominating Committee of The Baptist State Convention of North Carolina (NCBSC). I was being nominated to serve as a representative on the Board of Directors in the NCBSC and told her of my situation. She expressed that if I accepted they would present me and then if I moved out of the region to just inform them and they would replace me. Her advice was that I did not know what God was going to do until He did it. I agreed with her advice then and I agree today. While a pastor may sense a freedom to move, he does not know that God has told him to move until God tells him. Therefore, I decided to wait until I found out what the church calling me would vote before I told those in my ministry setting. It worked out and no one “scooped” me. I had the pleasure of sharing this with the Godly people that supported me and loved me. We went through many trials in our former ministry and formed deep bonds of friendship that are still sweet to this day. Our relationship was not tainted in any way because the Godly people in our former ministry read it in a newspaper or somewhere on the internet.

As you can tell from my experience, I believe the pastor should have the luxury of telling his congregation when the pastor deems the timing is appropriate. What do you believe? Why do you believe it? As you express your thoughts let us know if you are a lay person or you are in a paid staff position.

Digg ThisShare via email

Jul 07

31

The Hypocrisy of Endorsements!

Posted by Tim Rogers on July 31, 2007
Posted in Dr. Dwight McKissic • Dr. Frank Page • Dr. Morris Chapman • Dr. Paige Patterson • Executive Committee • SBC Outpost • SBC Seminaries  | 52 Comments

Every day I examine my life in order to strive to maintain a walk of consistency. Many times I say things that counter that consistent walk and thus become guilty before God of hypocrisy. It is at such times, just described, that I have to ask and receive God’s forgiveness and then I move on. I am the first to admit that I see hypocritical things in my life that I have to deal with. This term hypocrite, we all know, came out of the Greek drama where actors were called hypocrites because they wore a mask to play a part that was not really who they were.

In a post on SBC Outpost, we see that one of the contributors, and originator, of the blog called Dr. Patterson a liar. As was pointed out to me in the not so distant past, a liar means that you have a lifestyle of lying. It does not mean that you mis-speak on something that you truly thought was the truth, it means that you intentionally live a lifestyle that constitutes lying in order to gain an advantage. The article clearly tries to point to such in Dr. Patterson’s life. Because this contributor has placed this on the news organization’s website blog, Dr. Patterson has now been labeled a liar by the entire group of people behind SBC Outpost. (This group does this with no fear of retaliation from Dr. Patterson for libel. Why? They know that Dr. Patterson still believe 1 Corinthians 6.) Not only do those who are contributors to this news organization gossip mill hold responsibility for labeling Dr. Patterson a liar, but also those who have endorsed signed onto their cause.

Here is where the endorsements scream hypocrisy. These entity heads, plus the President of the Southern Baptist Convention, have endorsed signed onto a cause to get rid of Dr. Paige Patterson as President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. First, let me say that I disagree with the direction that the SBC Outpost guys desire to take our convention. By the public endorsements, we have now been told by the President of the Southern Baptist Convention, along with other men whose salaries are paid because my church gives to the Cooperative Program, that these endorsers have a desire to push the convention in a direction different than that of the framers of the Conservative Resurgence. Guess what that means on the local church level as my church begins budget planning? Also, guess what that means when the next literature order comes due? And, guess what that means for Lottie? Isn’t it amazing that the endorsement of our Executive Director and convention President came one year after the convention voted to ensure that those holding office as trustees should come from churches that have a goal of 10% of their undesignated funds? If the convention in Greensboro would have known about the, now seemingly, planned prayer meeting after the Presidential election in the suite of the very ones that on Wednesday Morning argued for the free use of alcohol, I believe the vote would have been different for Dr. Page.

Another hypocritical act in the endorsements concerns Dr. Patterson’s publicly stated intentions regarding his actions on Dr. McKissic’s chapel message. Dr. Patterson pulled Dr. McKissic’s sermon from being presented on the website at SWBTS because he spoke against the actions of a sister organization. Dr. Patterson respects anyone’s right to free speech. Dr. McKissic’s right to believe what he believes about Scripture is not the issue. I believe I remember somewhere, sometime Dr. Patterson acknowledging he is a continuationalist in his theology. Dr. Akin freely admitted his position to the entire SBC in San Antonio, and if you remember Dr. Akin received his theology sitting at Dr. Patterson’s feet, thus there is a high probability that Dr. Patterson will fall into the continuationalist camp. Dr. Patterson would not allow that message to go forth for a number of reasons, and the public chastisement of a sister entity coming from a sitting trustee was, as I remember, the main one he noted. We now have the President of the IMB, the very entity Dr. Patterson openly took harsh statements and character assassination for trying to protect the operational integrity of said entity, endorsing a group of journalist bloggers that consists of some who have privately and publicly called for Dr. Patterson to be relieved from his position at SWBTS.

In the rule of fairness, I am being told that endorsements are no more than a blurb on a book cover. Two responses to that argument. First, SBC Outpost is not a publishing organization, neither are they a news organization. Remember their “Breaking News“? Ask Pastor Robert Jeffress if he will give them an endorsement. He may, who knows! Endorsements are more than book blurbs. If that is the case, what Seminary Presidents have endorsed this group of journalist bloggers? Has the presidents of any of our seminaries been contacted? Why were they not? Was Dr. Patterson contacted to endorse this illustrious news organization group of bloggers?

The endorsers can try to say what they like, but it is as clear as the nose on your face that there is a group of leaders jockeying for position, in order to be the voice of the SBC’s future. That, my friends, is not how the SBC has operated in the past. The Conservative Resurgence did not come about because there were irreconcilable differences in the tight circle of moderate leaders. Those who led the Conservative Resurgence did not try to woo and encourage moderates to sign onto their movement.  The Conservative Resurgence came about because the PEOPLE IN THE PEW recognized the leaders of the seminaries and other entities were not heading down the road of focused Baptist Distinctives but were trying to lead us down a road of fuzzy “Baptistic” Dissimilarity. Guess what? Inerrancy of the Scripture is just one distinctive for which the people in the pew fought. These same people in the pew have not lost their sight and they still remember that the fight then was for the Baptist distinctive of inerrancy of the Scripture–JUST ONE OF MANY BAPTIST DISTINCTIVES. These endorsers can endorse all they like but they fail to remember the words of one of the Conservative Resurgence past leaders–A skunk by any other name still stinks!

Digg ThisShare via email

Jul 07

4

Open Dialog?

Posted by Tim Rogers on July 4, 2007
Posted in Ben Cole • Censor • Dr. Al Mohler • Dr. Greg Welty • Dr. Phil Roberts • Gnosticism • SBC Outpost  | 18 Comments

It seems that the new and improved SBC Outpost is not only new and improved, but it is now censoring material that will not make the authors appear in a favorable light. It seems that Dr. Greg Welty posted a comment in disagreement with Brother Alan Cross’s article on Gnosticism. It seems that comment is still awaiting moderation. Read about it here.

Should we call the contributors at SBC Outpost back to their news release? Here is the money quote from that news release.

Intentionally designed as a bridge for the diverse constituencies of Southern Baptist life, SBCOutpost.com will bring together denominational executives with rural pastors and church planters, missional pastors with traditional pastors, seminary theologians with Sunday School teachers, and field missionaries with their prayer partners.

Oh, I know what it is. Could it be that bringing seminary theologians together with Sunday School teachers really is what they are trying to do, and there had been no Sunday School teachers that contributed. I do not think so. Brother Bob Cleveland commented at 7:58 am, so as a Sunday School teacher he could have been brought together with a seminary theologian. Maybe Dr. Welty’s article was harsh and delivered a character assassination toward an individual. However Brother Ben Cole at 8:41 am attacked, not only Dr. Mohler, but those that agreed with him and then turned his vitriolic pen toward Dr. Phil Roberts.

Dr. Greg Welty posted his comment at 11:42 am and it has never been released from comment moderation. I encourage you to read Dr. Welty’s comment and see for yourself this truth. If dialog is truly what those at SBC Outpost desires, then why censor dialog?

So this is journalism that reports the news? PUHLEASE !!!!

Digg ThisShare via email