SBCOutpost

I’ve gotten to know quite a few people over the past two-and-one-half years as we’ve discussed the IMB policy/guideline changes.  No one seems to express what I’m thinking better than my friend Alan Cross.  Recently Alan completed quite a bit of homework on our missions work and has written down his conclusions to the information gathered from a variety of first-hand sources over an extended period of time.

Over the past few years, I have been very active in the blogosphere opposing the policies regarding private prayer language and baptism initiated by the IMB’s Board of Trustees in November, 2005. I was very excited to see others take up the struggle against these extra-biblical and extra- BF&M policies as seen through the Time to Change Statement, which I quickly signed. Even though I am a stateside pastor, I have had relationships with missionaries on the field for many years now. I have been a big advocate for the IMB and believe that they are doing great work. As the current IMB BoT chairman, Paul Chitwood recently said, “The work of the IMB is the primary thing that brings us together.” I agree. That is why it is so important to all of us.

Recently, I have begun to hear about the disastrous effects that these policies are having upon our missionary force in the field. Read the rest of this entry »

Recently Nathan Finn wrote a fine piece alerting the SBC to the realities of the Internet. In an even handed manner Finn noted the mediums used to chart a new course in the SBC by those who used, “computer mailing lists” and the like. Some recall “Town Hall” styled meetings and “Whistle Stop” tours rallying troops to stand with the assertive new leaders to stem the tide of liberalism, rescue the denomination and ensure the authority of the Scriptures. Enter Al Gore’s “Internet” and look out. Conference calls and snail mail fliers cannot compete with the speed of a DSL connection, a chat program and yes, one’s own website.

These developments give anyone, including me, an occasion to opine about something, anything. Occasionally good questions will be asked and, though not often enough, healthy conversation ensues.

Yesterday while listening to KOSU, Sooner fans don’t excoriate me, an opinion piece was aired drawing attention to the influence of the postmodern mood on our culture. The speaker considers the incessant, and petulant, chasing after conspiracy theories to be something of an expression of the loss of truth to “my truth.” Critiques in our quarters, Southern Baptist that is, regarding postmodern philosophy and its influential mood often point up the loss of meaning for a given text. Or, to put it another way, rather than let the text speak we seem to practice the literary theory to have emerged from or within the postmodern shift, namely “Reader-Response Theory.”

The assumed meaning of the text shifted from what the author may have intended to the reader’s interpretive framework - preconceptions, psychological proclivities and long-held biases. Many who read here at the Outpost, and many who say they don’t but do, want very much to rest in the perspicuity of Scripture - that is, there is a plain meaning of the text. Authorial intent and its form hold what is needed. Yet, since words are on the screen you our faithful readers and detractors will decide for yourselves what is said and what is intended. It is always a risk someone will “mis-read” or “mis-interpret” what is being typed.

I recently wrote a piece here describing my thoughts on recent Lifeway research. One interlocutor determined I lay claim to “Kreskin” like skills and wrote a piece asserting I knew the hidden motive of another thereby questioning my motives. Imagine my shock and amazement, not to mention un-mitiaged belief, that same writer who finds the Outpost a great source of material, writes a response to the recent Rodney Hammer letter released by The Biblical Recorder snooping as it were among the paragraphs and sentences for a conspiracy to expose. That’s right, Rodney Hammer looks to bring down the IMB by making his opinion public and asserting the need to re-think policy. Having sought to express himself to the point of reprimand, he wrote to me, to us, to say “I am concerned.” If the best someone can do is come along and look for a conspiracy in accountability then said person has way too much time on their hands. Furthermore, if this is the best kind of defense, we in Okie land call it “mis-direction” recalling the bygone days of the amazing “Wishbone” era of Sooner Football, critics and the like have to offer then “Nashville, we have a problem.”

Let me make my motives clear. I hold no animosity for another who seems given to twist the obvious. I simply believe that when a man stands on his convictions and is willing to take the heat in the public square then we must listen to his words and not to the ruminations or imaginations of another. Yes, yes, dear reader you will comb the archives being sure to note every instance where we here at the Outpost may have done the same. So before you do it, “Shame on us.” If we have attributed motives to another without proper verification we stand under your scrutinizing eye. But, if we have knowledge of another’s motive and for whatever reason determine not to share it - yes, I am invoking the reality of anonymity here - you will have to take extra Rolaids at what will appear to you a contradiction.

My hope, read “motive,” is that we could really engage in honest, healthy conversation. Calling someone’s motive into question, assuming we know the strength of another’s “ecclesiology” based solely on a comment in a post thread, or ramping up our rhetoric charging ecumenism or the loss of inerrancy to hijack an otherwise honest attempt at dialog is in view. No hidden agenda here. No attempt to subvert what it means to be a Baptist.

Oh, and while I am at it, there is little credibility in slamming Ben Cole, or referring to him in dark terms. Your cries and laments fall helplessly on deaf ears when you claim to want to engage in honest conversation. For our dear critics, like a good addict, you return driving site statistics with your curiosity as to who will slam Ben next or what “juicy” post will follow. Posts offering thoughtful ideas and interjections into the future of the SBC, denominations and the like to you are as boring and uneventful as watching paint dry. So, let’s, in the motive of this post, have an honest conversation. We like to read the tabloid stuff. Our leaders were masters of the invective. They could rally the troops with just the right euphemisms whether or not they accurately described the situation and or person or not.

So, the motive of this post - call attention to Rodney Hammer’s words. Read them understanding his concerns only serve as a tip of the proverbial iceberg. Southwestern Alums recently received their fund-raising letters asking for contributions to keep the lights on. Is it increasing or decreasing enrollment? We here at the Outpost often receive communiques from the mission field noting a lack of resources for “evangelism” and matters they are not to speak of but are certainly causing a great deal of discomfit and interruption in service. Let’s not spin this one. No amount of posturing is going to solve our dilemmas. Open and honest conversation will be the way forward.

I hope I have illustrated that. With that, I point you to Hammer’s letter.

The Biblical Recorder posted the full letter from Rodney Hammer which had been leaked in “bits” around the Internet according to the Recorder. We direct your attention to the letter with no commentary on the content.

After reading Dr. Yarnell’s paper on cross-cultural ministry, I was struck by the perceived necessity to create a false dichotomy. Here is a video that may well illustrate both/and rather than either/or. We are praying for our missionaries. We were tipped off to this video by an M.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

Of concerns voiced by R. Albert Mohler Jr. of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, for example, Edens said in a statement to Baptist Press that “I personally agree with him in the areas of theology and assessment of Islamic teaching about God or our Lord Jesus Christ. However, we disagree in methodology. From my experience of over 20 years living as a missionary among Muslims, I am committed to a Christian dialogue and conversation with Muslims. So, in continuity with my witness there, I signed the document.”

BP ran two articles on January 11. One noting why Dr. Mohler did not sign, “Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian Response to A Common Word Between Us and You.” The other article offered Dr. Edens, NOBTS Professor and whose words this post begins, an occasion to respond to Dr. Mohler’s contentions the move was, “not the way to get into the conversation.” These debates are tricky for once you mention a means to engage others who do not share your convictions the watchdogs come out signaling the “giving up of ground.” Conversations however are just that, conversations.

Dr. Scot McKnight suggests many Christians do not know how to have a conversation. In a blog post dated January 8, 2007, Scot offers,

… “conversation” has a noble history and because not all Christians know how to “converse.” They know how to argue and denounce and affirm and confess and assert, but the art of conversation is not its most notable feature. To foster conversation, …

He then makes a number of helpful suggestions. Before anyone considers McKnight to be soft and non-committal, read his blog thoroughly.

Dr. Edens suggested his experience serving twenty years in a Muslim context informed his decision to sign the document as a way to foster helpful conversation. Dr. Mohler served in which Muslim context? Dr. Mohler has gone on how many international mission trips?

One more amazing note. Many of us who share the heritage of the SBC did not own slaves nor would ever want to. (No this is not intended to resurrect the recent flap between Wade and Peter over Dwight)Yet, years after the Emancipation Proclamation and nearly 30 years after the Civil Rights Movement, the SBC passed a resolution apologizing for our complicity in treating African-Americans as less than human beings created in the image of God. Many of us continue to applaud that decision and are willing to admit we still have rooom to improve in our mostly white, southern denomination. So when Dr. Mohler sees no need for Christians to apologize for the Crusades fearing a Muslim Europe and possibly North America, he seems to tragically miss the point. No one suggested those signing the document wanted to bow to Mohhammed’s Allah. But, the apology seems right when we consider in the name of Christianity people were killed becuase a group of people shared a different faith. That is, we should apologize unless we think we have the right to kill those who fail to submit to the Lordship of Christ today.

Personally, it seems unthinkable that post-Resurrection of Jesus we would employ language ignorming the humanity of others by suggesting despite the sin and atrocitites of the day we are glad.

 Suggestion - Rather than run for President of the SBC, let’s move at the next Annual Meeting in Indy that the Board of Trustees of The Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, KY present Dr. Mohler with a sabbatical of not lesss than one year to travel internationally. Consign him to serve alongside our SBC missionaires in foreign coutnries  learning the art of conversation with people who may be indignant toward our faith in Jesus, indifferent to our God in their various pantheon of gods, and return prepared to engage others in conversation for the cause of Christ before denouncing a document he did not sign because he was not asked. Maybe we know why he was not asked.

So moved.

Editor’s Note:  Mississippi native and all-around Baptist curmudgeon, Jerry Grace, has weighed in on the Burleson censure with his characteristic sledgehammer, sending IMB trustees by the bushel to the nearest trauma unit for evaluation.  We at SBCOutpost.com glady reproduce an exerpt from Grace’s blog here, and we are especially pleased to do so without his permission.

In a matter of a few years, thousands of our churches withdrew into a new Baptist denomination that we described as our evil and liberal twin. Leaders of the conservative resurgence manned all the positions of leadership and most sadly of all the cause seemed to require the same obeisance in words as did the thousand year Reich of Adolph Hitler or the 40 year revolution in Cuba.

How dare I describe any aspects of Southern Baptists to communist regimes? Let me see here, philosophical purges, political purges, power grabs by leaders, domination by personalities, a recognized group of 41 people who make all the decisions for the rest of us, and now our largest agency managing more than 300 million dollars of money our people gave one cent at a time engaged in the act of controlling dissent of a single member at the IMB. Worst of all was the shoving down our throats of the BSF&M in 2000 without the opportunity for consideration by our reputed membership of 16 million people. Our leaders of the conservative resurgence just know better than the rest of us.

I am sick to death.

Frequently I receive anonymous comments from missionaries in agreement with my frequently uncivil views of power abuse in our convention. Most of them contain apologies for remaining anonymous because they fear for their jobs if they speak their minds.

Who are they afraid of? Why are they afraid? For God’s sake how could we have stooped so low?

Most of you who read blogs are far more educated and perhaps passionate about convention matters than the rest of Southern Baptists so what I am about to say doesn’t apply to you. But what most of our members and from the looks of the numbers who attend our convention, most of our pastors have just turned away either in frustration or disgust, leaving the few to continue the slaughter of our denomination. For those of you who fit into that category and still call yourselves Baptist, turning that blind eye to what is happening in the Southern Baptist Convention at the IMB has the same effect as the Germans who turned a blind eye to the disappearance of millions of Jews.

We have become no different. After all this resurging, the news is full of conflicts, lawsuits and unfortunately financial impropriety or its perception among Southern Baptists. Just what started this war? Nobody remembers, and those who do positively were the winners in the battle for spoils and power.

I am sick to death.

For a missionary who has moved thousands of miles from everything and everyone he knows to a life that will include little comfort and not much in the way of financial reward to fear for his job in an act of political retribution is downright despicable. Shameful. For a mission organization to have statements made by lawyers and resolutions prepared by them totally for the suppression of dissent are acts that disenfranchise the authority of all of those leaders involved, shame all of us, and bring discredit to the message of Christ to which we have claimed authority to advance. Don’t be confused that this is a vote against Wade Burleson, or Jerry Rankin, or to protect the convention from the evils of a private prayer language and a diminution of Southern Baptist work on the mission field. And don’t be confused that this is an effort the IMB must undertake to prevent acts on the mission field that ought to be prevented. (The recasting of Christianity within the religious confines and experiences of a native religion for example). This is just an act of control to demonstrate the power of a few.

You have no idea how odd I feel being a champion for Wade Burleson in this matter. But like so many other matters personalities and principal must be separated. The principal at stake here, not allowing the free expression of disagreement by someone elected by the convention, is devastating to the idea of Southern Baptists. Maybe this works fine in an elder led congregation, but I strongly doubt it. I know beyond any shadow of a doubt that such suppression is deadly in a church with a congregational polity.

I have never been to a convention before because of my fear of voting for any presidential candidate who may be a Baptist, a likely outcome at the SBC. But on this one, the principal is so important that I hope droves of pastors and ordinary members show up to express their displeasure and throw the bums out. That’s right. Throw the bums out.

And if you as an IMB board member support the effort to suppress dissension under any rationalized guise your lawyers may have helped you reach, shame on you. In language not proper for a Baptist business meeting, “It is high time that we put some butts in the street.”

If you are on the IMB and the shoe fits, wear it. For those missionaries out there who feel isolated from the leadership and the organization that is supposed to support you, I am so ashamed.

Not many folks remember the single event that started World War One given the tragic result and eventual death of 110 million people. And not many people other than leadership have much positive association left with the Conservative Resurgence, however noble may have been its incubus. What we need in the Southern Baptist Convention is not resurgence, but a revolution to put our denomination back in the hands of the people who do not view it as a pathway for power, wealth and vainglory.

It is high time that we put some butts in the street.