Dear “Calvinists on the Internet,”
Words mean things and language is adequate to convey meaning. Calvinist scholars are clear. Their words mean what they say.
Calvinism is not jello that can't stick to a wall and be pinned down.
If these Calvinist scholars didn't want to be accountable for their words (that mean things), then they wouldn't write them.
If you want to identify as Calvinists because you believe Calvinism is true, then own it and quit saying everything Calvinists clearly write and mean doesn't mean what it clearly means just because you don't like it.
I have enjoyed much Calvinist scholarship, but only “Calvinists on the Internet” apparently seem to believe that Calvinist scholarship is the most incomprehensible, nonsensical, convoluted jibber-jabber that no one understands or that one must have a super secret decoder ring to understand what they mean when they write things.
Calvinism is not an anachronistically postmodern movement writing a bunch of bullpooh. They have an original intent and mean what they write with the intent of it being understood as they meant it to be when they wrote it.
This gnostic behavior insults not only the critics of Calvinist scholarship, but it insults the Calvinist scholars themselves writing in the Calvinist tradition.
Calvinists on the Internet need to stop insulting Calvinist scholars past and present by implying that they are dumbest, poorest communicators on the planet who can not possibly be rightly understood by anyone else.
If you never seem to find yourself agreeing with standard Calvinist literature and rhetoric when it is quoted to you, then do everyone, including solidly Calvinist folks, a favor and stop considering yourself a Calvinist.
Sincerely,
JP
P.S. To everyone else (including the many solid Calvinists I know): Many people in this generation of Neo-Calvinism are the most intellectually stunted, chicken-weenie bunch of theological posers of our age. Their Calvinist forebearers would be utterly ashamed and embarrassed by them, and their solidly Calvinist contemporaries should be as well.
Saturdays are for Satire: TBN Announces New Apologetics TV Program
Among Evangelical circles, the past fifteen years has been labeled “the Golden Age of Apologetics,” and Matt Crouch wants to bring the gold to the Trinity Broadcasting Network.
Up-and-coming Internet apologist Moe Cents recently caught the attention of the network with the success of his seven page ebook entitled The Kalaim It Cosmopolitan Argument for God’s Blessings. Crouch told reporters, “Moe Cents has really stepped up in the past year defending the prosperity Gospel, and we are pleased to give him the widest audience possible.”
The new program, entitled Pro$perou$ Apologetic$, promises to be more than just about money. Cents states that the aim of the program is to answer the bigger questions within the life of the prosperity movement.
These bigger questions include why Creflo Dollar needs a new plane, how come followers of prosperity preachers are still broke when their favorite televangelists get richer every year, and why Benny Hinn only goes to hospitals when he is sick. The program promises to provide viewers with a robust defense of name it and claim it ministries.
In discussing his new show and success, Cents told reporters, “I read the first six or seven pages of a lot of Apologetics books, and they all basically said the same three things. They mention William Lane Craig, said to be winsome, and said that apologetics is not about saying you are sorry. So that’s what I do. If people don’t like what I’m doing, I just smile and say ‘I’m not sorry’ as winsomely as possible.”
Professor Pritchett’s Verse by Verse Exposition of His Playlist: “Take on Me” by A-ha
Talking away, I don't know what I'm to say. I'll say it anyway.Today's another day to find you. Shying away, I'll be coming for your love, OK?
Talking away This seems to be the Dobler way of love. It is, of course, not always a good idea. This is so with love as it is with prayer. (Matt. 6:7) Just as the phrase hearkens images of Llyod Dobler, even he learned that it is often better to shut-up, hold up a jambox, and let Peter Gabriel take over communications. I don't know what I'm to say This is likewise a predicament often found among the deeply religious. Infirmities in life, as with love, will often leave the person with unspeakable groaning. (Rom. 8:26) We do find ourselves not knowing what to say as we ought, given that we are beings made in the image of a God who is love. (Gen. 1:27, 1 John 4:8)
I'll say it anyway This, of course, is rarely a good idea and rarely ends well. (James 1:19, Prov. 10:19; 17:27; 29:20) Today's another day to find you Shying away Here, of course, are two lines that need some close exegetical examination in relation to the wider context. Is this a statement of the obvious fact that a new day is another opportunity, to which it is shied from being availed? Is the shying away person instead the “you” rather than the speaker? The later usage of the shying theme specifically states the one shying is the other. This could be the same here, but not necessarily so. If it is the same, then the next line makes sense in its declaration: I'll be coming for your love, OK? This declarative statement is followed by a question in the form of the interjection “Ok?” This concluding question most likely signals intention seeking permission. That there is pursuit of “your love” suggests that the pursuer also has love just as the one being pursued has love. This would be the preferable option, and most likely given the chorus. This is so because love always seeks being freely welcomed as opposed to being forced upon another.
Take on me (take on me),Take me on (take on me). I'll be gone, In a day or two
Take on me (take on me) Naturally, this is an outward expression to the other, not a statement in converse in which the speaker is insisting on taking the other. Thus, it is a statement to be taken on by the other. Take me on (take on me) The idea is repeated more straightforwardly. Love is not being imposed upon, but seeking reception. (1 Cor. 13:4-5) I'll be gone In a day or two Again, we are faced with some exegetical decisions. Is the being gone in a day or two a reflection of the coming seeking permission? Is it a statement of abandonment of the “coming for your love” after too little time for the request to “take me on” has passed? Taken in consideration of the wider context, the former option is highly more probable given the last statement in both the first and last verse.
So needless to say I'm odds and ends. But I'm me stumbling away, Slowly learning that life is OK. Say after me,"It's no better to be safe than sorry."
So needless to say I'm odds and ends Human relations of love are tricky. Part of the ambiguity in the first verse above lends credibility to this notion. It is obvious that the perplexing nature of love not yet fully reciprocated leaves people in such a state. But I'm me stumbling away Slowly learning that life is OK Learning to live in this tension is part of having a love life in the first place. Like the Christian dealing with the now and not yet tension of blessings in Christ (Eph. 1:3-12; 2:6), the person in love stumbles about and finds a place of “okay-ness” in this tension in anticipation of an already cemented reality. The interjection “ok” is no longer a question, but a statement of status. Say after me, "It's no better to be safe than sorry." Here is recognition that the opposite sentiment expressed popularly is inapplicable. The idea of safety being better than sorry in matters of love leads to having the high probability of not finding and sharing love at all. There is always a chance of disaster, and the plea here is that the risk is worth the reward in this instance.
(chorus)
See above.
Oh, things that you say, yeah— Is it life or just to play my worries away? You're all the things I've got to remember. You're shying away. I'll be coming for you anyway
Oh, things that you say, yeah— Is it life or just to play my worries away Confusion is not uncommon in these matters. Sometimes things can be said to pacify the other. Other times, it is just the realities of life, love, and relationships. While the question is being asked in light of the things said, it is nonetheless a real possibility that the question presents an either/or that may simply be a both/and. Even so, up to this point, we can see why tension exists here. You're all the things I've got to remember. Note that it is not the things said that need to be remembered. It is the person that needs to be remembered. This is highly poignant in light of the situation. Naturally, this includes the things said by the other, but goes beyond that. It makes the point that the total person is what is to be remembered here. You're shying away. I'll be coming for you anyway Here we see that it is explicitly the other who is shying away. This removes any confusion as to the party experiencing apprehension. While the “anyway” at first glance suggests a subtle shift to indifference as to whether the love would be freely requited. However, it is not. Shying away is not identical to having removed oneself completely. This statement is one of pursuit before there could no longer be the opportunity.
Take on me (take on me),Take me on (take on me). I'll be gone, In a day.
Here in the last chorus, we see that the timeline for departure has been shortened. Gone is the “or two.” There is the realization not only that windows of opportunity can and do close, but delaying longer than necessary is typically a bad option in these situations.
Social Media and the Death of the Church Library: Still dead
Back in 2013, I wrote an article entitled “ Biblical Illiteracy and the Death of the Church Library” Go read it here. With 0 “Likes” and a whopping three comments at a heavily trafficked site, it is easy to think that this isn’t a big thing. Maybe it isn’t. But, I think it is a big thing.
It should be a thing. (Num. 7:18) It isn’t like people aren’t reading. People in the modern West, thanks to technology, are probably “reading” more than they have in decades. This includes Christians. (2 Pe 1:16) Whether on laptops, smartphones, or tablets, people are staring at screens “reading” something. Some are even buying books or ebooks. What they are not doing, if the bestsellers lists are any indication, is reading much of anything that is meaningful or actually matters. Again, this includes Christians.
With respect to getting better books in the hands of our church folk, I asked this question in my previous article:
Are they somewhat pricey? Well, that depends -- certainly not any more pricey than many people's Blu-ray collections.
I remember being asked if the “bookstore model” was a viable alternative. Here is the thing. Just having book stores next to the coffee shops in the foyer of larger churches won’t do. Smaller churches, of which there are many, do not have such things. Also, not everyone has the cash for a Blu-ray collection or good books, let alone overpriced coffee before worship. (Is. 26:8)
So, has biblical literacy increased in the past three years since I wrote my first article on this? Hardly.
Some people are fooled by the theological discussions in their social media circles. If these conversations among the interested laypersons (often mixing it up with seminarians and scholars) is any indication, my “hardly” becomes a resounding “NO.” Neither this blog nor other blogs are good sources for increasing Biblical literacy. (1 Tim. 5:12) They may be good for flippant arguments and good polemics, but little else. Thankfully, normal churchgoers don’t even bother with those circles. That only would exacerbate the problem. There is nothing worse than smug people who know little believing they know a lot.
Yes, I am speaking generally. Yes there are always exceptions. (Prov. 23:7) But seriously, even if the case could be made that if blogs and other avenues were to elevate their game to higher levels of depth (and civility), do we really want to use the banner of accessibility of the media available through technology to replace reading books? My answer is no.
This is not to say blogs and social media circles dedicated to this sort of thing are bad. They can be quite good and often can be used as a force for good to inspire people to move on to deeper study, think about issues critically, etc. Blogs and social media circles have their place, but they are not to be the only place, or even the primary place for increasing biblical and theological literacy. Too often, they are on both counts.
In addition to the Church Library, we need to rebuild attention spans. (Amos 9:14) Christians need to be able to settle down with a thick book (Neh. 2:14), moving beyond the skimming nature of online “reading.” The “Church Library” emphasis and an emphasis on developing a culture of reading in the churches can do just that. (Ps. 126:5)
Christianity is a religion of resurrection. So again, I call for a resurrection of church libraries.
NOTE: When reading blogs, I wonder if anyone bothers to actually look up Bible verse references used to support points in articles. None of the verse references above have anything to do with what I am saying. Be honest. Did you read them or not? Did you assume they were used correctly?
Revisiting Evangelistic Ideas Part 1: Love, wonderful, plan.
At the 2016 SBC Pastors Conference, leave it to Ed Stetzer to pooh-pooh the smug, “we’re above it” crowd when it comes to evangelistic methods. This is not to say that the SBC pastors are above evangelism, but dumping on evangelistic methods is a far more prominent activity among many of the SBC pastors than bothering do to any. Were it not so, baptisms and attendance would not be down...again, for the SBC. But at the Pastors Conference in St. Louis, Stetzer was right. Evangelistic methods of the past have become punchlines in the present.
In any case, this begs the question if F.A.I.T.H., 4 Spiritual Laws, Evangelism Explosion, “Do you know where you would go if you died tonight?” are all relics of the past best left there, or are they still of use today?
Evangelicals are often a silly bunch. John MacArthur, Russell Moore and others mourn the loss of words like “Evangelical.” Others, like me, like to use words others so willingly surrender to either the media, culture, or even Joel Osteen. Words like happy, wonderful, best, etc.
Maybe I am old fashioned, but I honestly believe that it is still okay to say to people, “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.” Whether in those exact words, or in so many words. Everyone who has ever used something like the 4 Spiritual Laws more than once knows that you don’t actually go verbatim and rehearsed anyway. That rarely happens when you speak to actual people. “Wonderful” has never meant “easy,” and apparently everyone but Evangelical snobs who make fun of evangelistic methods seem to know this.
Talking to normal people, who often see little awe-inspiring wonder in their daily lives can and should be told that they are loved by God, and that they are right in sensing that they, like the whole of creation, are crying out for justice and redemption. They need to be reminded that the folly of living for self or other humans can often blind them and other people from living lives of true passion for their Creator. This Creator is a God who has set upon a wicked world an undeserved redemptive plan in and through Jesus Christ. He is a loving God who invites us all to participate in loving purpose to bring about the redounding of God’s glory from all creation when He finally and fully floods the cosmos with His radiant beauty that we only can get an approximate glimpse at on cloudless nights (if we bother to look), and He fills it with immeasurable joy in the final defeat of all evils.
In other words, God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. Moreover, it could be your “best life now,” relative to your life so far without Jesus. It sounds like a wonderful plan to me anyway.
The Gospel Coalition Gives a Pass to Supporting Abortion
Thabiti Anyabwile, and people in his church, want to help support killing babies in the United States of America. (yeah, I said it)
This, of course, gets a pass from The Gospel Coalition.
Why is this not a bigger thing?
How is it "thoughtful" or "helpful" to give a voice and credibility to nonsense?
Being against Trump is one thing. However, being FOR Clinton is quite another...
Here are some things, despite the rhetoric, that will not be on the political agenda at the Republican National Convention this year:
1. Adultery
2. Racism.
3. Misogyny
4. Casinos
Here are some things, given their own rhetoric, that will be on the political agenda at the Democratic National Convention this year:
1. Celebrating Abortion
2. Celebrating the LGBT activist’s radical agenda
There are perhaps some economic, immigration, education, or entitlement policies where an Evangelical Christian may plausibly find agreement with the Democrat platform.
However, and this is a big however, here are a couple of things on page ONE of the Bible:
The value of human life
The biological sex of human life
(Genesis 1:26-27)
On page TWO of the Bible we find this issue:
God’s design and intention for marriage
(Genesis 2:24)
Now, while conservative Christians can differ on any number of policies or political issues, we should at least be able to get pages one and two of the Bible right. Let us first and foremost get these priorities in order, and then haggle about the rest of the issues, none of which register as being remotely as important as these foundational issues, especially in this election cycle.
I get not voting FOR Trump. But a vote for Trump is still not a vote for adultery or casinos or whatever. Those aren’t on the Republican agenda.
I absolutely do not understand voting FOR Clinton. A vote for Clinton is a vote for abortion and the LGBT agenda. Those are on the Democrat agenda.
I also don’t get The Gospel Coalition giving a voice to nonsense. This is in no way “thoughtful” or “helpful.” It is just asinine.
Contrarian Commentary is pleased to announce the Contraspectives Series
Contrarian Commentary is pleased to announce the Contraspectives Series, coming soon. This new series is sort of like Zondervan's Counterpoints series, or B&H Perspectives series. It will have theologians, pastors, and ministry leaders discussing and debating their differing views on a particular subject. Each contributor will make a case, and the others will offer a response. Unlike those other series, this one will cover topics most people actually talk about in church. Topics will include watching R-rated movies, listening to secular music, smoking, drinking alcohol, dancing, art, going to bars and nightclubs, hosting ministries in bars and night clubs, vaping, worship music styles, gambling, politics, dating, parenting, attire for worship services, and so much more. Stay tuned!
UPDATE: It looks like Seth Dunn needs a new Nominator.
On June 14-15, the biggest choreographed[i] SBC non-event of the year will take place. The denomination will gather for its Annual Meeting, and accomplish very little. Of what little they do accomplish, they will elect a new President of the denomination. Now, the average pewsitter probably has no idea that the denomination of which they are a part even has a President.[ii] Despite the bogus boast of having 16 million members, a teeny, tiny fraction of them will send representatives to St. Louis to pass resolutions that have no impact whatsoever in their church, and elect a President who can serve for one year and can re-up for a second one-year term.
This has not only been an interesting campaign season for those running to be POTUS, but also for those seeking to be SBC President. For one thing, there is much more campaigning than usual occurring. For another thing, the two primary nominees for the office, J.D. Greear and Steve Gaines, have come to represent what one either loves or hates about the Southern Baptist Convention. A third guy, David Crosby, has actually stuck to tradition and not bothered to campaign aside from answering questions for various Baptist blogs and news outlets that ask him the obligatory questions out of duty and desire to look unbiased given their interest in covering the hoopla surrounding the other two candidates.
Overlooked in all this, but certainly appropriate for this circus year in SBC Presidential campaigning, is the candidacy of layperson Seth Dunn, who is to be nominated at the convention for the office. Unfortunately, he hasn’t received much traction so far, being that he isn’t a celebrity pastor. This itself affirms one of his points about the SBC. In any case, in an effort to be fair when the respected outlets haven’t been, I have decided to offer him this platform for a Q & A, such as it is.
For full disclosure, I agree with very little of what he says below. I believe the SBC needs to be intentional from the President to the Trustees on down in promoting real racial unity and diversity in the SBC, and not mere tokenism. I also think the IMB model is often contrary to the instructions Jesus gave about moving out from the center (Acts 1:8), in which Christendom is advanced by forming robust communities of faith expanding its territory. There are other disagreements as well, but I am supporting him running for SBC President because it is a nice change of pace. Seth Dunn bothers people. One of his professors at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary affectionately referred to him as a troublemaker. He apparently caused a “stir” at FBC Woodstock one time. I like troublemakers. They often say what needs to be said.
Many people have said of Seth they agree with some or most of what he says, but don’t like the way he says it. I’m the opposite. I don’t agree with much of what he says, but I like the way he says it.
Below are my questions and his answers.
Me: I wouldn't call your campaign “negative,” but why are you so critical about the SBC structures as they are now? What do people need to think about that they are not thinking about in regards to these issues?
Seth: I think my campaign may seem negative or critical to some because of the current tone at the top of the Southern Baptist Convention. SBC President Ronnie Floyd recently wrote, “Refuse disunity within our ranks! There is nothing biblical or godly relating to creating disunity.” He is also reporting that God is “clearly” revealing certain things to him. Since at least 1997, he’s been making prophecies about spiritual revival in America. However, since that time, the moral decline in the United States seems to have gotten worse. This is decline took place despite the efforts and massive spending of NAMB and the ERLC. However, if anyone (like me) comes forth to criticize the leadership and what the SBC is doing, they are instantly doubting the man giving prophecy from God and interfering with “unity”. To question the leadership is to question God himself! It’s creates “ungodly” unity. I don’t buy that at all.
I consider Bob Dylan to be America’s greatest poet. There’s an old Dylan song entitled With God on Our Side. In the opening stanza, Dylan reminisces about growing up in Midwestern America. He sings, “I’s taught and brought up there the laws to abide and that the land that I live in has God on its side.” He then goes on to point out several incidents in American history that indicate that God, in fact, may not be on the country’s side. The song is a protest about the foolishness of not questioning the platforms and agendas of those in leadership. As a Southern Baptist in our educational system, I’ve been taught about the importance of giving to all of our SBC entities and how great they all are. However, I’ve never seen much criticism of them from leadership. It’s as if I’m not supposed to question anything, and if I do, it needs to be questioned in secret instead of our in the blogosphere for everyone to see.
Our Cooperative Giving program is almost 100 years old; I don’t think it’s the most effective method of funding missions. It diverts money that could go to the foreign mission field or stay in state conventions to expensive, ineffective, and sometimes unaccountable entities like NAMB and the ERLC. Yet, people don’t seem to pay attention to this because the Cooperative Program is pushed as a panacea administered by modern day prophets of God. I think if churches who are so used to just sending money in every month to the CP would stop and take a look at how the entities are structured and run, they’d support change and restructuring. People need to stop and think about efficiency and effectiveness. “Because we say so” is not an acceptable answer for supporting every SBC entity. We’re called to be stewards. To me, it just seems like churches are funding certain things and barely paying attention to where their money goes.
Me: Even though the deck is stacked against you, what do you consider a win, if you are not elected SBC President?
Seth: I’m a very logical person so it’s hard for me to say that anything other than an electoral victory on the floor of the convention is a “win.” However, there are other issues at stake and there are quite a few things at which I and my supporters can “win”. There are a lot of good ideas out there and they don’t have to come from well-connected megachurch pastors. There are a lot of competent leaders out there and they don’t have to come from multi-million dollar multi-site megachurches. If other Southern Baptists consider my platform and see me out there competing for the nominations and say, “Why not me?” that’s a win. There is an illusion that the only real choice is between various megapastors. That’s not true. I’d like to see 10 or more guys run next year. I’d like to see all of them putting out campaign websites like mine and putting for their ideas. To borrow a concept from economic thought, competition makes the marketplace better. The convention can be a marketplace of ideas. It’s not a very good marketplace if the only choices are “ask Jesus into your heart” megachurch pastor and “don’t ask Jesus into your heart.” megachurch pastor. I don’t think our local churches need help telling people how to get saved. We have that covered. They need options for more effective and wise cooperative giving. That’s what my platform offers. That’s what many other platforms could offer if other men had the courage and boldness to challenge the status quo. It’s a win if they take that challenge in Phoenix and beyond. At the very least, I want to start conversations.
Me: Racial unity has been an issue among the other candidates. From the horrifically evil slave-owning origins of the SBC to the slightly less wicked and embarrassingly shameful racial tokenism we've seen in the SBC lately, even from Gaines and Greear (look at the church staff pages on their church websites here and here), and the abysmal track record of racial diversity among faculty and students at SBTS and SEBTS, and those employed at the ERLC, how are you going to lead the SBC to true racial unity and diversity?
Seth: I don’t think it’s the job of the President of the Southern Baptist Convention to lead people to racial unity and diversity. That’s the role of local pastors. I also don’t think it’s a feasible goal for an SBC President. I’m a proponent of what economist Thomas Sowell calls “the unconstrained vision.” According to this way of thinking, an intelligentsia at the top of society can’t know “the right thing” to do and make everyone do it. As a Christian, I am indwelt by the Holy Spirit. He testifies to the truth of scripture. In scripture, the Apostles have told the church “the right thing.” In the church, Paul writes, there is neither Jew nor Gentile but we are all one in Christ Jesus. The Apostle Matthew reports a commission from our Lord to take the gospel to people of all ethnicities. It’s just plain not Christian to exclude people based upon racial differences. At the same time, it doesn’t make sense to contrive racial inclusivity for “diversity” sake. We certainly can’t make the United States, as a whole, less racist. It’s full of lost people! It we lead those people to Christ, racial unity amongst them should follow. It will follow as they join local churches, loved, and lead by their own local pastors.
I strongly believe that unity has to happen on its own. If the SBC keeps proclaiming sound doctrine, God’s people who happen to have black skin may leave the TD Jakes and Creflo Dollar crowds and join with the SBC. I’d sure hate for them to come and find TD Jakes in LifeWay, though. As far as the ERLC goes, I want to shut it down. No one of any color should work their support by Southern Baptist money that is better spend on evangelism. The stated job of the SBC President is to appoint committee members. I don’t care what color someone is. If they will help me shut down LifeWay and the ERLC, I’ll gladly join hands with them and get to work.
Me: Why do you think the Southern Baptist Convention, and Evangelicalism in general, mirrors secular culture in its obsession with celebrity? Why is this bad for the SBC to continue promoting those with name recognition? Are they more or less or just as qualified than rank and file pastors, theologians, etc. in your opinion?
Seth: I’m not a sociologist, I’m accountant and theologian. So, I’ll answer from the perspective of the latter two. People like money and people like idols. What’s the name of America’s most successful celebrity show? American Idol. It made lots of money in its day and drew lots of interests. Churches with giant buildings to fill up and pay for have taken notice of such successes. Trying to fill seats by playing on people’s idols is a dangerous game…one which American evangelicalism is losing. It’s time to stop playing it. The leadership books promoted in our convention such as Pastors Handbook by John Bisagno and Being Leaders by Aubrey Malphurs literally made me feel ill when I read them. They were plainly and unashamedly worldly. Why are they being promoted? I think because these men can draw numbers.
There’s nothing wrong with having name recognition or even having a big church. I do think there is something wrong with blindly trusting someone just because he has name recognition and a big church. Everyone can make mistakes or use bad judgment. I think we have a tendency to see mega leaders as “too big to fail”. That’s dangerous. I can’t think of a time in history when it was wise to follow a charismatic “too big to fail” leader without question. The only man I know who can’t fail is Jesus.
Me: Here is a blitz of related questions. You want to reevaluate the need for six seminaries, dump Lifeway, NAMB, the ERLC, and give more to missions. Why is elimination your primary platform? Do you think those other entities interfere with missions? Is that not the same kind of bogus argument as saying that kids are starving somewhere because Seth Dunn doesn’t send them his dinner leftovers? Is the IMB even all that effective when, on average, missionaries only baptize 45 or so people in a year (and falling). Youth groups for two weeks a summer in places like Haiti and South America do as good or better than that for less money, as do other missions organizations.
Seth: It’s not as if Russell Moore has locked David Platt in a closet. I’m certainly not arguing that the ERLC, for example, is interfering with missions. To address this issue I will again take an economic perspective. Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses. If I have $4M, I can spend it on anything I want. If political lobbying is more important to me than foreign missions, I’ll spend it on political lobbying. That’s what the SBC does with the ERLC; it spends $4M on political lobbying that could be spent elsewhere. If Southern Baptists as a whole reconsidered our structure, I don’t think we’d do that anymore.
Now, I’ll turn your argument around. The IMB isn’t interfering with youth groups going to Haiti and South America for two weeks. Churches can choose not to send money to the IMB and instead invest in youth short term mission trips. Personally, I wouldn’t do that. Many of the places that the IMB works are deadly dangerous. Is that where we want to send youth groups? Furthermore, short term missions can be an industry. One of my seminary classmates, a man named Aaron Brewer, once told me he met a homeless man who told him that he’d been saved hundreds of times “for chicken.” I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that many of those Haitians to which you refer get baptized every two weeks, every time a new youth group comes down to give them goods.
I’m an auditor; I just don’t take numbers, especially baptism numbers, for granted. I’d like to see verified figures on those youth group salvations. I actually trust the 45 reported by IMB. It sounds too low to be faked. Furthermore, I hope these short term youth mission numbers you report are better than the youth salvation numbers reported by local churches. Some of these kids, all grown up, can’t be found in our churches. Furthermore, when Johnny Hunt is promoting “missions cruises” to Jamaica with John Hagee, I’ll throw my lot in with the IMB missionary out amongst hostile peoples.
Me: What is the clear alternative to Cooperative Program way of funding things in the SBC? How would it work and what changes would be necessary for the typical small Southern Baptist church in the way they want to cut checks to SBC entities and structures?
Seth: An alternative that is available now is direct giving. Anyone can log on to the IMB website or a seminary website and send it an online donation. Also, anyone can just send in a check. Instead of just sending a monthly check to the state convention through the CP, the church could send several checks to the state conventions and national entities it supports. Another way to do things would be line item giving. The church could send in an online payment and designate the percentage of the gift to apply to each entity. This would be simple and I’m pretty sure if church finance people had to actively type in a percentage of a gift to give to the ERLC instead of the IMB, our lobbying crew would shrink really fast.
Me: Thanks for your time. Have the last word. Add whatever else you think needs to be said.
Seth: I want people to know I’m not running for SBC President to further my career or sell books. I’m not in the religion business in any way. I don’t draw an income from a Christian vocation. I’m not claiming God has anointed me as “the man for the job.” I am claiming that God has given me certain spiritual gifts and blessed me with certain abilities. I love Jesus and I would like the opportunity to put these gifts and abilities to work helping my fellow Southern Baptists work together and spread the gospel. I think the “Simple SBC” platform is the best way to carry this out.
Lastly, thank you for helping to give me a voice. It’s a blessing to have the opportunity to answer your questions.
[i] See Point 7
[ii] Some Southern Baptists have no idea they are even Southern Baptists. Guess what, if you are a member of The Summit Church in North Little Rock, or the Church at Rock Creek in Little Rock, big surprise, you are a Southern Baptist and not “non-denominational,” as many of you ignorantly claim to be.
Saturdays are for Satire: Racial Tokenism the Path Forward in the SBC
After months of Trump-bashing, the 2016 election for the President of the United States has become far less important among the Southern Baptist faithful. In recent weeks, the nominations of Steve Gaines and J.D. Greear to become the next President of the Southern Baptist Convention have taken priority.
In the 2016 SBC Presidential election to be held this June in St. Louis, racial diversity within United States’ largest denomination has become a central issue for both of these candidates. As Greear states, “The Summit Church is the best model for the SBC going forward. The goal at all levels is to place ethnic minorities in high profile positions underneath white superiors.”
Danny Akin, President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, is encouraged by the discussion of this issue among the candidates. He believes the candidates are taking cues from the SEBTS initiative launched in 2014 to double ethnic minority enrollment to 14% from the current 7%. Akin notes, “The way to begin the process is to fake diversity by doubling the number of photographs of our current minority students and prominently featuring them on the SEBTS website and other marketing materials. The rest of the SBC should take notice.”
Steve Gaines echoes the need for more ethnic diversity within the life of the Southern Baptist Convention. Making mention of his Bellevue Loves Memphis program, he notes that despite the almost complete lack of ethnic minorities on staff at Bellevue, his large church sanctuary has four or five pews that reflect the diversity of Memphis. He says, “Our vision is to be more inclusive within the volunteer ministries of the church to meet the needs of the city. In 2012, the historic election of Fred Luter provided confirmation that the SBC can have true racial diversity without having to pay ethnic minorities anything for their contributions to SBC life.”
A third candidate, to be nominated by former SBC President Fred Luter, was announced as well. This person is some New Orleans pastor very few people have even heard of, and whose election or defeat is not a statement about everything everyone thinks is either right or wrong with the Southern Baptist Convention.
Note: This article I wrote originally appeared somewhere else. I can’t remember where or when.
We often hear two things about the economy. These days, the first thing you are likely to hear is that the economy is bad. This may be a temporary condition that could get better. The other thing, which is more often heard about the economy in general during any climate is that we now live in a global economy. This is often discussed in the news and talk radio, and even pastors bring up this issue in our churches. What is often neglected when it comes to getting any attention is that we also, as has always been the case, live in a 24 hour economy.
The number of people working second and third shift has greatly increased in the last couple of decades, and in many cases during this sort of economic climate, these shifts fill up quite fast because people will work any hours they can get. Whether the economy is good or bad, those people who work the late shifts often get little interaction with those who live and do business during the daylight hours. Men and women with families are hardly getting the kind of quality time with their loved ones compared to those who work during regular business hours. Imagine being a parent, married or single, and you are sleeping when they are at school, and you are either headed to work before they come home, or just waking up for work when it is their bedtime. Imagine being single with no kids. What is there for you do ever do to meet people or fellowship? For people working these shifts, their free time is usually when everyone else is at work or sleeping.
In any city or town big enough for a Walmart, chances are that it is also bound to have at several all night service stations and restaurants, as well as factories and manufacturing plants in the area as well. This means there are potentially hundreds, or even thousands in some areas, who get forgotten or left out when it comes to church or community activities, and these people are a vital part of our communities.
There are two things that are usually true about what is available to people working these second and third shifts when it comes to having any sort of social life beyond what little they already see of their families, and the too often lack of sleep when trying to fit in doctors appointments and other important scheduled tasks that must occur during normal business hours. So when it comes to a social life, the options are usually bars and diners. That's about it. Furthermore, those two kinds of establishments are the only kinds that usually cater to the people working the later shifts.
The question then becomes, what is the church doing to meet the needs of these people in their communities? During the week when the church staff members, and most church members, are usually heading to nighty-night time, someone is just getting off work, and someone else is going to work. Well, God loves these people, and Jesus died for these people (John 3:16), and Christians are Great Commission people, so something must be done in an effort to reach those who get lost in the mix or just plain forgotten. Some of them may already be Christians, and even members of a church somewhere, but many are probably not. What is true for everyone on the late shifts is that there is far too few things involving the church that caters to their needs.
Need some ideas on how to reach out to these late shift folks? Want to see more people meet Jesus? Do you want your church grow? There are hundreds and in many cases thousands of people out there working in the night and early morning who need Jesus, and who need His Church to give them some help and attention. Below are some ideas to help get people started in reaching out to these late shift workers. Before I list them, the best place to figure out what can be done is talk to those second and third shift workers already in your church and see what they need and what ideas they have. Chances are good there are one or two in your church already. If there are none, you now have a target demo to reach out to with the Gospel. In any case, here are some ideas to get started.
1. For second shift workers, churches can usually cater food from a restaurant to their places of employment. This is an excellent opportunity to stuff some tracts or other materials along with some pizza boxes or BBQ plates. For third shift workers, it may be harder to cater, but get some folks together to cook some delicious food and take it to them. Food always goes over well. Another idea is to have the occasional hot breakfast waiting for them at the church when they get off work, or schedule an occasional dinner before they go to work.
2. Find some people who can host Bible studies that can fit their schedules.
3. Have some night owls in church willing to go into these places of employment during these odd hours and share the Gospel with them at work, or at least pass out information to them regarding what the church has specifically for them. People working the second and third shifts at gas stations are always looking for company.
4. Get some volunteers to offer babysitting services (cheap, or even free!) to give them a break on day off once in a while if they need it, and many will need it. Very rarely can anyone working these shifts find people who can schedule the time to fit their hours and schedule. Are these people members who would receive this benefit? Doesn't matter. Chances are they will become members of a church that gives them a helping hand.
5. Dare to have an odd hour worship service for them! A lot of folks are working late Saturday or early Sunday these days, or can't make the Sunday night or Wednesday night services if the church has them.
6. Schedule some fun events at the church either late at night or early in the morning. Show free movies with pop corn and soda, have some sports tournament if the church has a gym, or perhaps talk to some of the family entertainment establishments like the bowling alley to open up early once or twice a month.
Most importantly, whether or not they are members of the church, and whether or not they are believers, someone needs to spend some time with these folks on their time schedule. There are lots of people out there these days and too few churches are reaching out to them on any level, whether it is sharing with them the Gospel message, or just giving them something else to do besides go to the bar, Waffle House, or just go home.