Header image alt text

Southern Baptist in NC

Keeping Christ central in the world of Southern Baptists

This is my last article concerning the question asked of Dr. Al Mohler by Peter Lumpkins.  Unless there are future developments I will, after this article, stop speaking of this matter.  I have presented, what I believe to be, a well reasoned approach that neither takes unfair shots at Dr. Mohler nor allows his statements to go unquestioned.  I do pray that Dr. Mohler will respond to clarify how he sees Southern Baptists practicing a form of homophobia, and to give evidence of past lies concerning the nature of homosexuality.

With all of that said a sad by-line of this matter lies in the coverage, or lack thereof, of our denominational news organization.  When one views the article concerning the seminary reports one will notice something conspicuously missing.  Read more

Dr. Kevin Ezell, NAMB President

As a Southern Baptist pastor that believes in and supports the Trustee system, I fully support the new President at NAMB.  Dr. Ezell is the man the Trustees affirmed, reportedly by a 76% vote, to be the next President of that entity.  According to one report NAMB has a budget that consists of 17% for Church Planting. My question is simple.  Out of a $70 million budget, where is $12 million being used in church planting?  In NC we have set aside $4 million in our budget for church planting.  What part of NAMB’s $12 million is being used in cooperative agreements?  What part of that $12 million is being used in administrative costs?

Now the hard part begins for Dr. Ezell.  He will need to tie up loose ends in Kentucky and then he will be on his way to Alpharetta, Georgia.  Some question his ability to build the divide that is apparent between him and some state Executive Directors.  Will he simply dismiss those that have raised concerns or will he try to mend broken bridges?  Dr. Paige Patterson has issued a statement in favor of Dr. Ezell as a model of character and integrity.  So it seems that the entity heads are in favor of this latest addition to the Presidential Council.  It seems Southern Baptist are rallying around this newest entity president.

I have always been one that has spoken in favor of our trustee system.  I will not abandon that conviction.  The trustees have spoken and I will follow.  I will not stop questioning when there are legitimate questions that need to be asked.  I will certainly voice my concerns and not be afraid to do so.   I will not sale the call of God on my life to be a pastor for a denominational position because of political expediency either.  I will stand up and call on our denomination to do better.  I will stand up and call for our leaders to model the CP as central to their missions giving.  I will call on trustees of both missions organizations to be models for us in giving to the Annie Armstrong and Lottie Moon offerings.  I will call on the nominating committee to look specifically at those giving items when placing names before us.  I will call on those leading Southern Baptist to affirm the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, without caveats.  This I will do because that is who we are as Southern Baptist, we trust God and tell the people.

And when the votes are cast and Southern Baptist have spoken.  I will call on all Southern Baptist to rally around our leaders and move forward taking the Gospel to the world.  Anything less will not be cooperative and certainly will not be what Southern Baptist have historically stood for.

star-wars.jpgFrom over at SBC Outpost we have had some information released to the general public. This information is open to the public now because it is part of a law suit that Dr. Sherri Klouda has filed against Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminay and her President Dr. Paige Patterson.

This information has been released in an effort to place Dr. Patterson in a bad position. Now the latest information is released to try and paint Dr. Craig Blaising as some mindless lackey employed to carry out Dr. Patterson’s endless fundamentalist desires. However, it seems that this little venture of the bombastic one has now enlightened everyone to what people have been saying all along. Dr. Bart Barber has more clearly stated it than I can, but it seems that we are now finding out that SWBTS and Dr. Patterson have not kicked anyone in the street. If you do not believe me, read it for yourself.

patterson-affidavit.pdf

blaising-affidavit.pdf

A couple of items that will reveal some discrepancies in the facts as told by the Dark Side. These “facts” that some would have you to believe are clearly spelled out in these two different affidavits. Let me give you just two examples.

First, we were told from the beginning that all of a sudden in the spring of 2006 Dr. Klouda was relieved from her position with no place to go and a sick husband to look after. You can see the position stated in this post, but to whet your appetite, here is the money quote; Through a series of broken promises that eventually led to Patterson quietly not assigning her teaching responsibilities for the fall of 2006 because of her gender, and then seeking to terminate her contract and benefits in December by 2006 (the middle of an academic cycle, and the worst possible time for an academician to find a job), this popular Hebrew professor found herself being phased out. According to both, Dr. Patterson and Dr. Blaising, she was not forced out and was given a position with the same pay and the same benefits. Dr. Klouda willingly resigned in July, 2006 to take a position at Taylors University. Some have tried to point to a reduction in position as being equivelant to a Pastor being asked to stop preaching and keep employed at the church as the janitor. This is not even close to what is being presented in Dr. Blaisings affidavit. The pastor is called to the position he holds and he is called to influence people through the pulpit ministry. Dr. Klouda expressed her call was to influence people through teaching and writing. Would one not agree that the position of Associate Director of Writing would not be within the parameters of her calling?

Second, we have been told that Dr. Patterson promised Dr. Klouda in a private meeting that she would retain her position as she was on a tenured track. Also, according to this comment, there was a plan in place to bring legal action months before it was exposed to the public through the web blogs. Also, if you look at Dr. Patterson’s affidavit, you will see that he never promised Dr. Klouda her position was guaranteed. He says in paragraph #18, “I did not give her assurance of future employment.” How much clearer can one be?

It does appear that this case is going to come down to contract law. Did Dr. Patterson promise Dr. Klouda that her position was secured? He says no and he holds to scriptural authority for his guide. She says he did, but feels free to violate scripture in order to line her pockets along with her lawyers. I think I am going to believe the one that holds to Scripture in all he does.

When posting my last article concerning the Homemaking Degree at SWBTS, I got side-tracked by a comment concerning the definition of a prophet of God. Brother Les Puryear began this rabbit chase with the following statement:

Please tell me that your last paragraph does not mean that Paige Patterson is always right and those who don’t think so don’t believe the Bible. Please correct my misunderstanding about what you are saying. Please!

Les

His reference was to a comment that I made as a concluding statement concerning Dr. Patterson’s leading in establishing this degree. My concluding remark is as follows:

Well, all I can say is that Dr. Paige Patterson is a true prophet according to Scripture. Therefore, if you have any gripes about Dr. Patterson not being a true prophet and you say you believe the Bible, then take it up with God. But if you do not believe that Dr. Patterson is a true prophet, then you have just told the world that you believe the Bible, but…..

The concern that Brother Les raised was not that much of a concern for me due to the past differences that he and I have had. I knew that Brother Les and I have had, and maintain, ongoing differences concerning different doctrines and personalities within SBC life. However, what caused me more concern and is the real reason for this article, comes more with the comments from others.

First, I will admit that if you take that comment out of the context of the article you have a basis for the questions from Brother Les. I must admit that I do not understand the basis but it is possible for one to read what they would like into that last paragraph. However, you must look at the entire article along with the concluding statement.

Second, there was a statement made by my, always lurking while looking for a weakness to pounce, Brother Aaron Weaver (aka Big Daddy Weave; B Diddy). He stated;

Like Les said, as it stands the paragraph does indeed suggest that The Prophet Paige, Peace Be Upon Him, is always right and those who dare dissent just need to read their Bible’s again.

Once again, if that statement were made by itself, I would understand such a response, but the statement is in context of the Homemaking degree being on the cutting edge of education. Even, my Brother BDW gives me the benefit of the doubt.

Having said all of this let us look at a Biblical understanding of the Prophets. Is there a basic understanding that a Prophet was always right in everything he/she did or said? The answer to that would be a resounding no! There has never been any instance in the Old or New Testament that a Prophet was 100% correct in everything he/she did or said. One cannot find Scripture to support that line of thinking without doing hermeneutic gymnastics. What one can find Scripture to support is the Prophet’s voice of direction, when ordained by the True God, will come to fruition. If the Prophet spoke and said it was of God and did not come to fruition, then it was revealed to be a false prophecy. If the person continually gave false direction that he/she said came from God, then they were revealed as a false Prophet.

Also, one needs to remember that during Old Testament and New Testament times, the cannon was not closed. Thus, God was continuing to give new revelation. How did He give this new revelation? Through the Prophets. This is the reason for the Deuteronomy 18 and 1 John 4 guidelines concerning the discernment between true and false revelation. The question at hand concerns the overview of these passages. Do these passages mean that everything a prophet says is scripture? Or, do they mean that the only time a prophet speaks saying it is coming from God, then it is scriptural? I submit to you it means the latter. Do these passages mean that since the cannon is closed then we no longer have the gift of prophecy today? Leaving the continuationist and cessassionist arguments aside, suffice it to say that it is rare that a cessassionist has to argue for the continuation of a gift against some that have professed to be continuationist. But, suffice it also to say, that while I do believe the office of Prophet is no longer needed, the principle of the Prophet is still very much needed.

However, some have tried to paint me as saying in my last article that Dr. Patterson is above criticism and is infallible. Something I have never said. The Prophets of Scripture were mere mortal men and women that were fallible and prone to the same temptations as you and I. Being referenced as a prophet did not mean that you attained any mystical status with no sin in your life. As I read the Bible I am drawn to the fact that the reason these prophets were not considered prophets in their day was for the reason they were not in any mystical sense different. Many viewed the pagan prophets in mystical sense and thus the children of Israel had to be given the guidelines before they went into the Promised Land. You can look throughout scripture to find many Prophets of God that had huge failures. Jonah is one that comes to mind. Also, if I needed advice on how to raise children Eli would not be a Prophet I would choose for that kind of council. Furthermore, I do not believe you will find in the Bible any place that Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hosea, Malachi, or any other prophet was without sin and did in fact sin and make various mistakes. But when God spoke through the Prophet, or the Prophet spoke for God, whichever semantic you chose to use, it was proven to be truthful.

Therefore, in my last post I do not intend to change anything that was written. For the simple reason that I have not expressed what some are trying to say that I have expressed. As I said, if you desire to pull that last paragraph away from the post and try to make it stand alone, be my guest. That is not what I am saying. However, if you keep the paragraph attached to the post, then you have to admit that Dr. Patterson has stated he believes God has led in beginning this course because there is a huge need for it in the society from which we are getting our students. Now the secular world has affirmed this truth so Dr. Patterson, no doubt, is hearing from God concerning the need. When the secular world addresses a need that is rampant among today’s society, they are lauded as being on the cutting edge. When the Christian world tries to address the same need that is rampant in the Christian community, the ones leading the way are maligned as backwards and stuck in the 1950′s. Go figure!

Dr. Paige Patterson has proven to be a Prophet addressing a need in a non-profit world. What a refreshing wind that is blowing out of SWBTS. Dr. Patterson is speaking prophetically the direction that he senses the Holy Spirit of God is leading him and not responding to the negative issues that come out trying to derail his vision.

The Bible gives us guides as to how we may determine a false prophet. In Deuteronomy 18:21-22 the Bible says; “You may say to yourself, ‘How can we recognize a message the Lord has not spoken?’ When a prophet speaks in the Lord’s name, and the message does not come true or is not fulfilled, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.” Which brings me to Dr. Patterson.Dr. Paige Patterson is a visionary and a prophet of God. Everyone knows the stands he took and the shots he endured during the Conservative Resurgence.

Thus, everyone knows that he can see a direction that he believes God is leading and he knows how to lead us down that road. Dr. Patterson has made it abundantly clear during the question period of his SWBTS Report in San Antonio that he believes a degree that specializes in Homemaking is needed in the life of Southern Baptist today. He has been painted in a very disparaging way over his conviction. However, Dr. Patterson has openly stated that we are living in a day when the family and the home has been neglected.  I have whole-heartedly supported him in his leadership at SWBTS. So, can you imagine my surprised delight as I picked up my local news paper and saw this headline? “A BRAND NEW DAY: Home Economics classes get more specific and more popular

What backwoods Baptist preacher has infiltrated another of our elite SBC seminaries with his complimentarian ideology and his literalist theology? Oh, my dear reader, this is not a SBC Seminary. This is a public high school here in the town where I minister.
Read the article that I have linked above and you will find that our public school system seems to be concerned that we are turning out young ladies that do not know how to sew. How archaic can one get? What difference does it make whether the young ladies that graduate know how to sew or even cook? As you peruse the article you will find that the most popular courses offered are Foods I (how to plan and cook a meal) along with Apparel Development (sewing, shut my mouth) and Early Childhood (raising children).

Mr. Steve Hill the Executive Director of Secondary/Career and Technical Education for Iredell-Statesville Schools, gives us (as my bombastic Baptist Brother Ben would say) the money quote: “It’s important we graduate students who have a well-rounded basic education and it’s important they’ve had an opportunity to explore careers they may be interested in.

Well, all I can say is that Dr. Paige Patterson is a true prophet according to Scripture. Therefore, if you have any gripes about Dr. Patterson not being a true prophet and you say you believe the Bible, then take it up with God. But if you do not believe that Dr. Patterson is a true prophet, then you have just told the world that you believe the Bible, but…..

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?