You are if you speak your disagreements against a perspective of the Editor at SBC Voices! In an astounding show of arrogance the editor has posted an OP that outlines guidelines on how to spot wolves in sheep clothing. What is so arrogant about his post? He uses Scripture to justify tagging brothers and sisters in Christ with the tag of “wolf in sheep clothing.”
To be fair he opens his OP with a disclaimer that he is not speaking about those that may come to various reader’s minds.
“While certain individuals may come to your mind, and may have come to mine as I wrote this, this is not directed at any individual.”
Even in his disclaimer he admits he has certain people in mind. The arrogance is not contained just in his directive of these guidelines but explodes in his pen as he tries to justify he is not speaking about certain individuals.
The people he admits came to his mind, whoever they are, seem to be those who disagree with his perspective on things. Therefore he reveals this plastic pseudonym of referencing unbelievers. This is the entire error with his OP. He lumps (no pun intended Peter) together blogs along with others who comment in disagreement to his (and those he supports) Baptist perspectives, with those who avow themselves as unbelievers. Using the Scripture as his basis, the editor, in one sweep, condemns Baptist bloggers as being wolves in sheep clothing along with those who avow they do not know Christ. What do I mean?
The SBC Voices editor gave four perspective in order to establish how to deal with the commenting “wolf in sheep clothing”. First, does the issue touch the cross? He is speaking of lost people, not someone who professes to be a Christian, when he says:
“We need to make sure that enemies of the Cross are really enemies of Christ and his finished work on the Cross, not just that they disagree with me about some issue of theology.”
Second, the editor brings into question someone’s motive. He tries to help his readers establish a basis to determine if someone is a “seeker, or a deceiver.” He says;
“We do not battle sinners, we battle the forces of darkness on behalf of sinners. We do not fight against sinners, we fight for them.”
He makes a clear point concerning our battle. But then he softens that point and brings into the mix false teachers. Here is the rub that is exposed in his arrogance.
“The wolf must be identified and opposed – even publicly and by name.”
Who/Whom is/are the blogger(s) and commenter(s) the Editor of SBC Voices has called by name or allowed posts calling bloggers by name? It is apparent if one disagrees with the Editorial staff at SBC Voices one is placed in moderation and the comments not allowed through. That is, until the editor is confronted and then some snide backhanded swipe is made about the one disagreeing concerning the vitriol of their language and as long as they disagree without offending (mainly with the blog editor) their comments will be allowed through.
You may try to defend the open voices and free exchange of ideas some think take place at SBC Voices. That is fine and you are free to defend that. However, take special note at the responses to those who voice a disagreement. Either they are lamblasted by all as being out of step or out of date, or they are “jokingly” steered in another direction.
Third, the editor questions the affect one is having. Does the disagreeing one affect others or does the editor affect the one that disagrees. Here is another rub of arrogance. God’s Word tells me to protect the flock and to expose false teachers to my flock. But that is not what this article is about. The editor made clear this article was about blogging. What do I mean by that last statement? Look at his concluding six principles. It is about blogging. However, the editor seemingly wants one to think it is about lost people.
“If I am engaging a lost person who needs Christ, and he is sharing his doubts and false beliefs and I am sharing the truths of the Word with him – that calls for a patience that comes from Christ, regardless of how he responds.”
He speaks well concerning trying to engage a lost person. As one looks at his conclusion one will find in the very first principle; “Blogging is a tricky thing.” Thus, it is a foregone conclusion, from the outset of the OP, the editor believes if one disagrees with him they are a “wolf in sheep clothing.”
Fourth, the editor brings our attention to the level of progress being made. In this position his arrogance oozes through his pen.
“But if you find yourself going over the same ground over and over, rehashing and reviewing and there is little sign that it is sinking in, beware. You may be dealing with someone whose goal is not to learn the truth but to lead others into error.”
If he were speaking from a pastors perspective concerning someone coming into the local church this statement would not be one of arrogance. However, he is not speaking of that he is speaking of someone who disagrees with him on the blog. This someone usually will be a pastor of another church within the SBC. Thus, he believes his position is the correct one and if you disagree with him then you are not there to express truth you are disagreeing only to lead others into error.
The editor has placed a position into the public domain for us to assess. I have tried to do that and I wholeheartedly disagree with his position. The position is one of arrogance and even assigns one’s eternal destination to Hell if one disagrees with him. The editor has double-downed and tried to make sure you wouldn’t disagree with him privately because he has set up an email davemillerisajerk@….. This email, he is quick to point out, is available for all who disagree with him. The very email is condescending for the one who disagrees. As much as I disagree with him, I honestly do not believe he is a jerk. Thus, to use the email one is intimadated from the start. Why? One does not want to call another person a jerk and to do so would be the epitome of what the article at SBC Voices promotes–arrogance. I do believe the perceived status of editor has gone to his head, but no one is a jerk for something like that.
Thus, if you disagree with the position of the editor at SBC Voices, it is official–You are a wolf in sheep clothing and your lot for eternity is Hell. That is, in the mind of the editor.


[...] Excerpted Recommended PASTOR LEADERS article FROM http://pastortimrogers.com/?p=3165h148(); [...]
Neither his post nor yours would be needed if bloggers focused on building one another up instead of cross examining every post on the Internet. When is the last time you wrote something about how scripture has moved you to worship or repentance? Or when a member has served the body of saints? Why does it always have to be about what everyone else is doing wrong? Why don’t you focus on what you actually may be doing right at the church you pastor? Wouldn’t that benefit the kingdom more? Or do you not have any material to use so you resort to posts like this? Go back and read your own blog and count up the last 25 posts and examine if they are negative or positive in nature.
Brother Jamie,
Let’s see, You feel that neither post should be needed but you’ve chosen to verbalize that on my post? You’ve not spoken a word on his post about his mixing brothers in Christ in with False Teachers Jesus warned against. You’ve chosen to even imply that God does not move in my life for worship or repentance just because I do not publicly announce it. You think I should brag about what I am doing at the church as that, in some way, would benefit the kingdom. Then you challenge me to go back for the last 25 posts to examine if they are negative or positive. I know that you will place them in the negative category because I choose to point our my disagreement. So, it may be your position that I should just keep my mouth shut while Rome burns. No, I will not choose to remain silent as we see the radical man-centered theology over take the SBC. You may choose to walk away just to keep from being negative. That is your choice and I respect that. However you should remember I have thought this thing through. I do not just speak out just to be speaking out. I know the consequences and have accepted them willingly. The following verses guide me when I receive comments like yours.
Blessings,
Tim
It was just a simple observation. Look at the posts from other blogs on the right sidebar. I see book reviews, devotions, news, and political & social commentary & encouragement. What is your blog filled with? Goa head, look around at the archives.
I’m just interjecting reason into the dialogue here. We all want to be good at what we do. You’re a pastor. I’m grateful for the flock you shepherd. As said shepherd, don’t they need (and deserve) to see their pastor as a man of encouragement, love, and cooperation? Now you may be that person. But that’s not what comes across here.
And no, we don’t know one another, so I don’t know what you’re like in real life. But I’d hope that as a proclaimer of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, you treat your local congregation with more patience, love, and kindness than is typical in most posts found here.
I also understand the need to make sure convention policies are on the up-and-up. I applaud your fervor in doing such. I don’t agree with most (any) of your views, but you definitely have the right to your opinion. But is the personal blog for a pastor the place for that? Your tagline for the site is “Keeping Christ central in the world of Southern Baptists”. What about the post above (or as I counted 19 of the last 25) does that tagline have to do with the content?
Am I suggesting you stop blogging? By no means. Am I suggesting you not write critical posts? Again, No. But I beg of you as a minister of the Gospel of peace and life, please represent Christ and His Kingdom in a way worthy of the Cross.
We as Baptists talk about the Great Commission a lot. So much so that we want to change our name to that (a point which I might even agree with your take on). So to close, I ask, what about the recent content posted here is helping men and women to “Go Ye Therefore”?
I want you to succeed as a pastor. I want your congregation to succeed as a local fellowship of faith. But I just don’t see how that is possible when the words written here are filled with skepticism, negativity, doubt, and venom. You can’t just detach what is written here and what is preached in the pulpit. It just can’t be done.
If you want to moderate this comment and email me directly, by all means, proceed. I’m not trying to embarrass or scold you. I want to encourage you to become the best pastor for your people so that the Kingdom may be grown and God be made known.
Brother Jamie,
No, I do not sense a “scolding” from you I accept your words and seriously consider them. However, you must understand the reason I started this blog. It was to expose the falseness within the convention. It was not to encourage anyone in the faith but to expose the false issues found within the SBC. Now, with that information I pray you see the reason for this blog and will accept it. If not, then please know that my heart is clear concerning the purpose I sense here. You may reply that I am only to encourage as a Christian and I would agree I desire to do that in my congregation and those I come into contact with personally. However, on this blog I try to expose the falseness that is prevalent within the SBC. Now, you may reply that God has never led anyone into a ministry where the preacher/prophet speaks and exposes nothing but the false things. To which I would reply–Jeremiah.
Blessings,
Tim
Well, that makes more sense. While I may disagree with the reason, I understand.
I admittedly don’t have all the facts concerning the motive of this site. So what are your criteria for the falsities of which you speak? What sort of clearinghouse or checklist do you use to determine accuracy before decrying a falsity? Surely there is a great deal of discernment involved. For discernment would seem to be a requisite to Gospel ministry.
What about your procedure for going to a brother to restore him before publicly decrying a falsity? Is that ever attempted or even allowed by those who have perpetrated or encourage such falsities?
There are black and white issues I think we could all agree on that don’t need that treatment. One that comes to mind is the recent ordeal in Jacksonville with the sex offender as pastor. Cut and dry. Agree?
But with more opinionated decisions, or even ones where none of us had all the facts but are operating on conjecture, what lens are those events viewed? A charitable one? A critical one?
Help me understand. Please. Maybe I’m too trusting. Maybe you think I’m naive. Maybe I am both. It just hurts me to see pastors with seemingly critical spirits and dispositions.
Brother Jamie,
Where I see people saying one thing but doing different. Your second question seems a little condenscending but I give the benefit of the doubt here. There is no “clearinghouse or checklist” it simply is the issues that confront us through the direction the convention takes that is contrary to what I was taught and experienced concerning the conservative resurgence.
If the “brother or sister” is a member of my congregation I do that. If the “brother or the sister” is not a member of my congregation then in public, I place it in public.
If you are referring to Darryl Gillyard then I would caution you for using the term “black and white issues”. There are some that look at those terms and cry racism. However, I agree this issue should be dealt with by the church and if the church refused to deal with it (which they did as they called him as pastor) then the association should deal with it. The association chooses who and who does not become a member of their association. It is the same with the association in Ky that voted not to allow a church into their membership based on a theology that was not in keeping with the other churches.
I honestly do not know what you are referencing here. Can you give me an example of my “opinionated decision” that was a conjecture?
Wow!! Didn’t see that coming. You accuse me of having a “critical spirit and disposition” and you accuse me openly by using that terminology? Come on, Jamie, let’s deal with facts not conjecture.
Blessings,
Tim
And on a side note, I think most would feel that Jeremiah wasn’t an exposer of falseness as much as he was a passionate man of God delivering His message of hope and life only found in God to a people who were stubborn and not regenerate.
His message was not as much that the people were wrong but that God was right. His Message was more “look how great God is” than “look how bad you are”.
His eyes were set on God’s greatness, not the people’s depravity. So if you want to be a Jeremiah, go right ahead. Set your eyes on the greatness of God and let that be your message. When that is your message, the people will listen…or perish.
Brother Jamie,
When Jeremiah began his ministry Josiah was beginning to implement reforms. Jeremiah was in full agreement with these reforms and he called the nation to repentance. When I began this blog, the SBC needed reform and it seemed the leadership saw it and, while not moving as fast as some wanted, were trying to implement changes. There was one blogger that came against the trustee system and I spoke out against his position. The main bloggers at that time spoke harshly against leaders and even against the convention. I defended the leadership and wondered how anyone that benefited from the good people of the SBC could speak so harshly against the convention. In all my time I have not spoken against the convention, leadership, or any individual as being two-faced, or hypocritical. What I have done is spoken against ideas and how those ideas are flawed.
When Jeohoikim came to the throne Jeremiah got into trouble. His speaking out was viewed as being against the nation and he was severely punished. You may want to define how Jeremiah spoke about how great God was, but that is not the reason they placed him in the sewer pit. They placed him there because he was being negative and critical of the nation’s leaders. He was calling them to repentance not for them to reconsider their statements.
So, you continue to promote how big God is all you want. I know he is a big God I do not have to promote that He can do a fine job by himself. I will call people to repentance and when it comes to the SBC, I will point to the flaws in the positions people try to get us to stand.
Blessings,
Tim
No real surprise here. Those guys are just revealing who they really are.