I’m a Little Shocked

by Dave Miller on June 20, 2012 · 98 comments

I was elected 2nd VP with about 59.5% of the vote. I was shocked.

Then, I was confronted by an angry man who called my character and desire for unity in the SBC into question. I am, he said, a fraud.

I am a lot of things, folks. I’m overweight, sinful, sometimes self-centered and angry and base and, well, you fill in the blanks.

But I will tell you two things.

1) I know that little weight or import attaches to the office if 2nd VP.

2) I will use whatever influence I have to promote a New Baptist Majority, that exalts Christ and revels in the unity we have in him, that emphasizes a partnership based on the Great Commission, the Baptist Faith & Message, and the Cooperate Program.

Question the wisdom of that position, but do not doubt my passion for it!

Thanks to the twitter army that promoted my candidacy. Alan Cross’ speech was amazing, and our twitterers were committed. Thanks to everyone.

1 Denilio Gorena June 20, 2012 at 12:47 pm

Congratulations!

2 Greg Harvey June 20, 2012 at 12:54 pm

Welcome to leadership. Looks like you got an early lesson in what it really is about…

3 Matt Svoboda June 20, 2012 at 12:58 pm

Congrats Dave. It was well deserved and we couldnt have a better man as our 2nd VP.

In fact, this years election is one of the best in the history of the SBC: Luter, Lino, and Miller is as good as it gets. Well done, SBC.

4 Bill Pfister June 20, 2012 at 1:13 pm

Congratulations Dave… I am glad about your election and believe you will represent Southern Baptist’s well.

Keep us posted on things!
Bill

5 Greg Alford June 20, 2012 at 1:23 pm

Yes, congratulations Dave… and welcome to leadership in the SBC.

I for one have no doubt about your commitment to keeping the SBC tent big enough for all Southern Baptist.

Grace for the Journey,

6 Nick June 20, 2012 at 1:28 pm

Does this mean that Iowa’s a Southern state now?

7 Brent Hobbs June 20, 2012 at 1:35 pm

Few have accomplished much of value in the SBC or churches without being confronted by that same angry man. It’s unsettling… but wear it as a badge of honor. Do the right thing and let the angry man say what he will.

8 John K June 20, 2012 at 1:52 pm

I am shocked ( Happily ) but still shocked. Exalt Christ and nothing can go wrong. That was a long hard drawn out campaign by some. Glad you hung in there.

Exalt Tribalism and self exalting plans will fall apart.

9 Doug Hibbard June 20, 2012 at 2:05 pm

So we’re more in favor of you than we are of being Great Commission Baptists?

Try and make sure we schedule that vote on Amy soon!

10 Christiane June 20, 2012 at 2:22 pm

Wishing you the best, DAVID.

that ‘shock’ . . . don’t worry,
and the ‘angry person’? . . . well, be glad it’s you he’s yelling at and not some poor soul who is not strong enough to deal with him today . . .

try to enjoy the moment, but not TOO much

you are grounded enough to know that ‘honors’ and ‘condemnation’ are two sides of the same coin . . . don’t let either one overwhelm you:
you have important work to attend to and you need for your calm center to be Our Lord

Be well, DAVID

11 Josh Collins June 20, 2012 at 3:22 pm

Apparently you were a viable candidate after all. Congrats!

12 Tim Rogers June 20, 2012 at 3:34 pm

Dave,

“Ditto” to Josh Collins

13 Doug Hibbard June 20, 2012 at 3:38 pm

What does “he Sao” mean?

Are we speaking in tongues over here now?

14 Christiane June 20, 2012 at 3:42 pm

it means ‘Amy’

15 Fletcher June 20, 2012 at 3:44 pm

Congratulations Dave. Praying God will use you through this new opportunity to bring Him glory.

16 Dan Barnes June 20, 2012 at 4:16 pm

The camera really does add. . . no, Jenny looks great, must just be New Orleans. Love ya Dave, congrats.

17 Joe Dupree June 20, 2012 at 4:22 pm

Congratulations Dave!! You, and Dr. Luter and the others serve us well to bring honor and glory to God and advancing the Gospel to the nations!

18 John Fariss June 20, 2012 at 4:59 pm

Congrats!

Since we are talking about the SBC “tent” and how big it is: will there ever be a place in this tent again for those of us who are more comfortable with the 1963 BF&M and who are less comfortable with the word “inerrant”?

John

19 Joe Blackmon June 20, 2012 at 5:10 pm

Hope not.

20 John Fariss June 20, 2012 at 6:28 pm

Coming from you, Joe, I take that as a compliment. Seriously: you either don’t know or don’t care about the discussions I have had with Dave (and others) on this very blog.

John

21 Joe Blackmon June 20, 2012 at 9:11 pm

But I do know you argued STRONGLY that we can’t say for certain that God will send people of other faiths to hell if they don’t repent and consciously trust Christ in this lifetime. You cited some pedantic example from physics about “We can’t know where particle such and such is going to go til it stops” or whatever. I’m paraphrasing.

Any group of people that could hold to such an aberant, unbiblcal view of the gospel should not be welcomed withn the SBC. The Christian answer to the question “Will people of other faiths be saved by God” would be “No one will make it into heaven without personally, consciously trusting Christ to save them and repenting of their sins which would include foresaking their false religion. No muslim, mormon, buddhist, etc will go to heaven and we know that for an absolute fact”.

22 Joe Blackmon June 20, 2012 at 9:13 pm

I should have said above “…argued STRONGLY on this blog…”

23 John Fariss June 22, 2012 at 11:24 am

Joe, I do not recall ever making such a statement. I think you either have me mixed up with someone else, or you added 2 plus 2 and came up with 17, 384. An example from physics seems consistent with something I might say, as that is what my undergraduate degree is in. I may, at some point, have talked about a degree of uncertainty, with some example from physics, viz., the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (which you misquoted, not that it is important to this discussion). I am sure I have taken the position that God is the final judge of a person’s eternal destination and not you or I–but (as I recall) the context was was about Christians being judgmental, which is rather different from an absolute claim that a person can be saved outside of a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. You’ll have to show me where I made any such statement as a person can be saved “without personally, consciously trusting Christ to save them and repenting of their sins .” And in the off chance you can show me, I will have at attribute it to illness, lateness of the hour and/or lack of sleep, or taking a position more extreme than my own in the heat of an argument. You’ve never done that, have you? Well, you may not have. MAYBE. But Dave, C.B., others here. . . ?

24 Joe Blackmon June 22, 2012 at 11:31 am

God being the final judge does not mean that we can’t say what’s going to happen to muslims, mormons, etc. He has already declared that in His inerrant word. Therefore, there is no question or uncertainty whatsoever. It’s a settled matter of fact.

Also, what I said was you claimed we can’t know for certain the fates of people of other religions, not that you said they were going to heaven. What you said was we can’t know for certain. That is a direct contradiction of scripture. Period. We do know for an absolute fact.

25 John Fariss June 22, 2012 at 12:00 pm

I suspect, Joe, that you just like to argue with what you think, remember, believe, or want to believe a person has said. Is that at all accurate? CONTEXT, Joe, context. Otherwise, you are constructing a strawman superficially resembling what I said, then arguing with that, rather than what(ever) I really said.

John

26 Bill Mac June 20, 2012 at 5:25 pm

Some observations from a long way off. It is my guess that the outcome of this vote was much more about electing someone outside of the mainstream, bible belt, megachurch model than it was about Calvinists vs “traditionalists.” Traditionalist sour grapes or Calvinist gloating is going to be minimal, I hope. For years Calvinists have been fighting off the idea that they are some sort of threat. Let’s not turn around and stick that label on the so called traditionalists.

On a different note: David Worley! Dude, you look younger than I expected!

27 volfan007 June 20, 2012 at 6:02 pm

Bill Mac,

Lol….I’m a young, good lookin’ fella. lol. I hate that Todd Benkert, Dwight McKissic, and I couldnt eat lunch together. Things get wild and crazy at the SBC…big crowds and all. But, maybe at a better day and time, Todd. I’ll buy. But, it was great to finally meet you.

Dave, congrats on the win.

Also, before anyone thinks that this was some huge statement… I tend to agree with Bill Mac. I mean, just think about this….out of nearly 8,000 Messengers…only 1,600 voted on the election of 2nd VP. 1,000 for Dave, and 600 for Eric Hankins. No offense, Dave, but I think a lot of people voted for you, who have no idea what’s going on in the blog world…but, when they heard Alan Cross mention “unity” numerous times, and heard that you were a small Church Pastor in a pioneer area…you gained votes.

Anyway, congrats Dave, and it was good to see you in New Orleans. I ran into a lot of people for the first time…DR Randle, Josh Breland, Drew Wales, Todd Benkert, Chris Roberts, and others.

Of course, I saw many, many old friends….which makes the SBC fun…. Bart Barber, Scott Gordon, Wes Kenney, CB Scott, Tim Rogers, Peter Lumpkins, David Brumbelow, and many, many, many more…..

David

PS. May the Lord give us true unity and peace in the SBC….where one group doesnt call the other one Semi Pelagians and heretics, and where Calvinism is not made into a matter of fellowship! May the Lord grant it….

28 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 6:22 pm

Always good to see you at the convention, sir.

29 Job June 20, 2012 at 9:54 pm

And if the other candidate had won, would that have not been a statement also?

30 D.R. Randle June 22, 2012 at 1:25 am

Glad I was able to see you at in NOLA David. I’m sure you are happy to be back in God’s country in West TN. Sometimes I wish I was still around there, but I hope to run into you again in Houston next year.

31 Todd Benkert June 22, 2012 at 8:55 am

Great to meet you too, David (and that goes for several others that I’ve only known previously on the blogosphere). Whether we agree with one another on all the decisions at the SBC or in all our conversations online, let’s agree on our love for Jesus, our love for the Convention, and do all we can to strive for unity around our common commitment to take the gospel to the world.

32 volfan007 June 22, 2012 at 11:03 pm

Todd,

God bless you, Bro. I owe you lunch sometime.

David

33 Frank Gantz June 20, 2012 at 5:34 pm

Congrats, Dave. I wasn’t there to cast a vote, but am thrilled with your election. I love your heart and what you intend to promote.

The critics…well, they’ll criticize. Just know that this guy is glad to have you in the position.

34 Bob June 20, 2012 at 5:55 pm

Dave, here’s the reason you won. The person who nominated Dr. Hankins said he pastored where Ole Miss is. That said in LA, where LSU is a rival, hurt him. The person who nominated you didn’t mention that you were a Yankee fam. That helped you. LOL
Seriously, I believe that God has put you in this position “for such a time as this.” I am thrilled for you, will be praying for you, and know that you will seek glorify God in this position. Congratulations brother. We’re happy for you.

35 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 6:24 pm

We thought about running on the Yankees platform. Then, two seconds later, we changed our minds.

36 Greg Harvey June 20, 2012 at 6:41 pm

Femtoseconds later…we changed our minds???

37 Clark Dunlap June 20, 2012 at 10:03 pm

“FOr Such a Time as this” I LOVE that! You might have to go into LUter’s presence without permission! Be strong and Courageous!! ;-)

Seriously, I love this. I’m gonna Gloat like a Calvinist!
(oh wait I am a calvinist… nevermind)

Clark D

38 Chief Katie June 20, 2012 at 6:08 pm

This is a very happy outcome for us all.

Dave, I rarely disagree with you, but when I do, well…………….. never mind.

We need 10,000 more just like you who long for unity.

Ces’t Magnifique!

39 Ryan June 20, 2012 at 7:07 pm

You drink Dos Equis? Better tap that Abita in NOLA instead…

40 Zack June 21, 2012 at 5:02 pm

Well, that easily wins as the top cultural reference I didn’t expect to see in the SBC Voices comments.

41 volfan007 June 20, 2012 at 6:15 pm

If anyone wants to talk about a statement…the passing of the Sinners Prayer resolution was a statement. From where I was sitting, it looked like a 70-30 vote for the resolution.

Also, from what I hear….I didnt go back to the Wed. afternoon session… but the vote on unity passed with almost no opposition. Is that true? And, if I’d been there, I wouldnt have voted No, either. I’m For unity.

David

42 Bill Mac June 20, 2012 at 6:28 pm

I would have been surprised if the Sinner’s Prayer resolution went differently than it did. I think the SP is often mishandled, and I think the resolution was a direct slap against Calvinists, but in SBC life voting against that resolution would be akin to voting against the great commission or fried chicken. My biggest objection to the resolution was not the appropriateness of the SP, but the wording that basically instructed all Christians to use it.

43 Greg Alford June 20, 2012 at 9:46 pm

I’m a Calvinist and I was not “Slapped” by this vote… at first I was upset by the resolution… Then I read it and found that it was something that I, as a Long time “Evangelical Calvinist” could vote for!

It was well written and theological careful… So could someone tell me exactly what in it was a “Slap to Calvinist”?

44 Bill Mac June 20, 2012 at 10:02 pm

Greg: Some Calvinists use a formulaic sinner’s prayer. But I would hazard a guess that the most vocal opponents of formulaic sinner’s prayers would be Calvinists. If you have followed the internet activities of Eric Hankins, you might conclude (as I did) that Hankins is being anointed as the standard bearer of the ones opposed to the so called “new Calvinists”. Why else bring a resolution like this to the floor? Resolutions are usually a response to something. This resolution was directed at some SBC Calvinists.

As I said, I did not object so much to the affirmation of using some type of sinner’s prayer as I did to the language suggesting it should be mandatory.

45 Job June 20, 2012 at 10:06 pm

It wasn’t a direct slap against us Calvinists at all. The sinner’s prayer has been a topic of debate recently (and ONLY because of the provocations of us Calvinists mind you!) so that made it legitimate fodder for the convention. The non-Calvinists who support the sinner’s prayer stood up for their convictions – as they have the responsibility to do – and for that I applaud them. And they did so in a manner that caused no injury whatsoever to the Calvinist or anyone who disagrees with them.

My view of unity, coexistence and propriety is encouraging the non-Calvinist (or traditionalist or majority or General) SBCer to be as non-Calvinist as they choose to be, and for the Calvinists to be as Calvinist as they choose to be, and for everyone to be mature (in the Holy Spirit) enough to endure it. I don’t want for one side to try to limit the other’s expression, and I don’t want either side to artificially bridle itself for fear of offending those who will choose to be offended because it is their agenda to be offended. (I know, I spoke against the traditionalist manifesto, but only because I perceive its purpose to be in service to an attempt to de-fund Calvinist church plants and other similarly harmful activities. If a plain, direct statement from the people who produced and are spearheading that statement and the movement behind it were to specifically state that such is not their intention, I will gladly retract my criticism of it, which was never based on its theology.)

46 Bill Mac June 20, 2012 at 10:26 pm

You are right that perhaps the slap term is inappropriate. But I will maintain that this resolution was in direct response to Calvinists. That’s fine. It hurts us not at all. There was a motive behind it, as there is a motive behind all action. I’m just taking an educated guess as to what that motive is. It has nothing to do with whether they have a right to their opinion. That’s a given.

47 Job June 20, 2012 at 11:30 pm

Bill Mac:

“But I will maintain that this resolution was in direct response to Calvinists.”

I never denied that. But it was just that: a response! A response to something that we started! Yes, they had a motive, and their motive was defending themselves against us! If we Calvinists didn’t want the direct response, we shouldn’t have provoked it in the first place by criticizing it. But that would have been wrong to do. Instead, criticizing it was the right thing to do because of our convictions.

We stood up for our convictions, they stood up for theirs. Good for both sides. It is proof that we can disagree while still co-existing in this convention. Only when it crosses from disagreement to harm is when the co-existence is threatened.

48 Anthony Clay June 20, 2012 at 10:44 pm

I would say that it was a statement by the Committee on Resolutions against the polemic nature of the original resolution. The Resolution that was passed hardly resembles the original.

I wholly support the one that was passed, very strong language that was in keeping with what David Platt said.

49 David R. Brumbelow June 21, 2012 at 9:12 am

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I heard a couple of people say they saw David Platt vote against the Resolutin on the Sinner’s Prayer.
David R. Brumbelow

50 Wayne June 21, 2012 at 9:29 am

What are you doing? Don’t make an accusation and then say “correct me if I’m wrong”. #irresponsible

51 Mike Leake June 21, 2012 at 10:15 am

Though I do not disagree with the resolution I would have actually voted against it had I been there. Here is why. What people in our churches will hear is not the caveats but a statement that “The SBC approved the use of the sinner’s prayer”. And though some people are arguing that “nobody believes” it’s magical I have stacks of “decision cards” and numerous follow-up meetings with teenagers that would prove otherwise.

52 David R. Brumbelow June 21, 2012 at 11:12 am

By the way, I voted for the Resolution on the Sinner’s Prayer.
David R. Brumbelow

53 D.R. Randle June 22, 2012 at 1:30 am

David,

It was great meeting you face-to-face on Wednesday. I really enjoyed our discussion on the Sinner’s Prayer. I just wish we had been able to talk longer. As you said then, we are much closer than it appears on the subject. I do hope the discussion about all Evangelistic methods and tools continues. And I look forward to your further contributions in the future.

54 David R. Brumbelow June 24, 2012 at 5:02 pm

D. R. Randle,
I enjoyed meeting you and Jared and the discussion as well. I also wish we had more time to talk. I had already talked with him, but also enjoyed visiting with Howell Scott. We all need more time at those conventions.

By the way, I lost the brochure when I went back to pick up the books. The one the fellow had given us and I was going to make copies. If any of you have it, I’d like a copy. Sorry I lost mine.
David R. Brumbelow

55 Todd Benkert June 25, 2012 at 4:48 pm
56 David R. Brumbelow June 25, 2012 at 5:09 pm

I have been corrected. I was wrong.

At the SBC I heard a couple of people say they had seen David Platt vote against the Resolution on the Sinner’s Prayer. David Platt, however, has said he voted for the Resolution.
Of course, I take his word for it.
David R. Brumbelow

57 Jason G. June 22, 2012 at 12:38 am

Exactly right, Anthony.

The original resolution was not good…the one the committee presented was acceptable to everyone. That said, I know some people voted against it because of the ways it has been misrepresented.

Some people did not feel the statement about the abuses were strong enough and didn’t vote for it….not because they don’t believe that people need to express faith and repentance (as Hankins believes….quite wrongly, I might add), but because they were worried about the ways the term has been misapplied and will be heard by those who have not thought through the actual concerns.

I am a little shocked that the concerns have been so quickly dismissed or ignored, honestly. To continually reference “have mercy on me a sinner” as an example of the “sinner’s prayer”, shows that people are just talking past each other (or ignoring the arguments). A spontaneous prayer of repentance is what we want to see…that is a good prayer from a sinner, but it should be clear that is different that someone leading him to repeat a pre-planned prayer.

All that said…I am fine with the resolution after the committee removed the nonsense from it.

58 Todd Benkert June 22, 2012 at 9:08 am

“talking past each other” is exactly what’s going on — as the debate unfolded, I found myself in agreement with BOTH Platt AND Gaines and that is why I thought the resolution as passed was such a good one. IMO, it addressed the concerns of both camps.

Now if you want something to debate…the REAL issue, IMO, is not the use of the sinner’s prayer but the declaration of eternal security based on that prayer that often follows.

59 Bill Mac June 22, 2012 at 8:07 am

OK. I didn’t realize the SP resolution had been rewritten by the resolutions committee. I think I could have voted for it, although I still don’t quite see the necessity for such a resolution.

On the other hand, I don’t see the necessity for resolutions in general. Ever.

60 Todd Benkert June 22, 2012 at 9:01 am

I often wonder if some of the people actually READ the resolution. It seems to me that most of the objections from the floor were already addressed in the resolution as reworked by the committee.

I for one would have voted no for the resolution as originally written, but gladly voted YES for the one submitted by the committee. I thought it was a wonderfully balanced resolution that addressed both sides of the debate.

61 Ronnie Murrill June 20, 2012 at 6:20 pm

Congratulations on your selection and election to the office of 2nd vp. I am sure that many people may not like many things that have happened, but that goes with the territory. I may not know you personally, by I have been reading your blog and what you present in a fair way. I commend you for being willing to serve and extend yourself to serve God and the interests of Southern “Great Commission” Baptists who are interested in promoting unity in our diversity at this time in the history of our church. I am glad to be a Southern Baptist and I join you in promoting unity, while fulfilling the Great Commission. Best wishes for you and your family in the service of the Kingdom.

62 David Rogers June 20, 2012 at 6:38 pm

As I already said on Twitter:

“Thanx to Dave Miller for his leadership role in promoting healthy dialogue and unity. Blessings and prayers for the days ahead.”

63 Don Arndt June 20, 2012 at 6:57 pm

Congratulations!!

64 Steve Hyde June 20, 2012 at 7:45 pm

Congratulations Dave!
I wish they wouldn’t call you a “small church pastor”. Don’t they know your church is bigger than many towns in Iowa! You make Iowa proud! It will be good for people to get a perspective of someone out of the south.

65 Tony K June 20, 2012 at 8:41 pm

Seriously, pencil in preaching at our church before your schedule fills up. And update the “About” page on this blog with your bio listed first.

66 Rev Kev June 20, 2012 at 8:44 pm

Based on what you wrote, my questions are…
1. Does a “new majority” mean you will be seeking to promote the expansion of Calvinism into a “new” majority?
2. What is the “Cooperate” Program?

67 Dan Barnes June 20, 2012 at 9:58 pm

Is that all you worry about is Calvinists? Isn’t the SBC more than the Calvinist, Non-Calvinist argument?

68 Greg Alford June 20, 2012 at 10:12 pm

Calvinist in the SBC is yesterdays news…

What I am concerned about is the 30% that have now identified themselves as Wesleyan…

I have often been called a “Deep Water Presbyterian”, but I never knew we had a large group of “Deep Water Methodist” in our midst.

69 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 10:31 pm

Let me be clear, Kevin (by the way, nice to meet you today).

Promoting Calvinism has not been one of my goals in the years I’ve been blogging.

Here is what I believe. I think there are some combative Calvinists out there. I think there are some combative non-Calvinist/Traditionalists out there.

I think most people are tired of fighting about it and would like to engage in theological discussion and unite to do the work. I think that may already be the majority. If not, I hope it one day will be.

70 Dan Cookson June 20, 2012 at 9:14 pm

Dave,
Congrats on the election. Something I read somewhere, “You will be worn out by the opposition of men unless God has raised you up for this task. But if God be for you, who can be against you? ”

Some opposition is good for us. It keeps us humble and depending on God.

Blessings,

Dan

71 Nate June 20, 2012 at 9:25 pm

Congratulations Dave…

72 James June 20, 2012 at 9:26 pm

Congratulations my friend. I look forward to seeing you lead as our 2nd VP.

73 Anthony Clay June 20, 2012 at 9:41 pm

Congrats Dave!

With your convincing win of the enviable and powerful 2nd Vice President of the SBC our secret takeover of the convention is almost complete!!!!

mwahaahaaahaaha!!!!!!!

Seriously though, it is my prayer that God uses your irenic spirit to further unify the convention around the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

74 Clark Dunlap June 20, 2012 at 10:06 pm

C’mon who is the Sao guy?/ Tell us Plleeeaaaaaassseeeee…

Ok fine, don’t then

75 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 10:32 pm

Sao guy?

76 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 10:35 pm

Okay, I got it now. Anytime I type on my Droid, weird things happen.

77 Louis June 20, 2012 at 10:15 pm

Again – Congrats!

I am sorry that I did not meet you. I looked, but didn’t find you.

I met Tim Rogers. He was with my friends Malcolm Yarnell and Bart Barber.

But I missed meeting you.

See you next time, I hope.

78 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 10:36 pm

I would have loved to meet you, as well. Next time.

79 Howell Scott June 20, 2012 at 10:47 pm

Dave,

Congratulations! Was a pleasure meeting you and getting to have lunch with you and your wife on Monday. May the Lord use you in the coming year to bring Him honor and glory. God bless,

Howell

80 Dave Miller June 20, 2012 at 11:00 pm

You, too. Good food and good conversation.

81 Joshua June 21, 2012 at 1:54 am

Dave,

Was glad to vote for you and even more glad that you won. I hardly ever talked to you on this blog but spoke with you at the Annual Meeting more than any other messenger. Never thought that would be the case, but was blessed by your sincere desire for unity and your genuine spirit of peace and gentleness. You are going to be a great SBC officer, by the wonderful and unfailing grace of God.

82 David R. Brumbelow June 21, 2012 at 9:16 am

Greg Alford,
You said about the Resolution on the Sinner’s Prayer,
“I’m a Calvinist and I was not ‘Slapped’ by this vote… at first I was upset by the resolution… Then I read it and found that it was something that I, as a Long time “Evangelical Calvinist” could vote for! It was well written and theological careful… So could someone tell me exactly what in it was a ‘Slap to Calvinist‘?”

I agree with you. Thanks for saying it.

Except I don’t agree with the part where you said, “I’m a Calvinist.” :-)

I think some Calvinists could have won a lot of favor if one or more of them had openly agreed with and voted for this Resolution on the Sinner’s Prayer.
David R. Brumbelow

83 David R. Brumbelow June 21, 2012 at 9:19 am

Dave Miller,
Excuse me, Mr. Vice-President. Congratulations on your election.
David R. Brumbelow

84 Mike Ebert June 21, 2012 at 9:36 am

Congratulations Dave. And great coverage of the SBC all week long. I enjoyed keeping up with your posts.

85 Jason G. June 22, 2012 at 12:43 am

The behavior of that man was reprehensible, Dave. You did not deserve that…heck, no one deserves that…and from a “leader”, no less. You responded in grace…that was evident to those who happened past that unfortunate event.

Dave, congrats…it was great to get to meet you, and it was my pleasure to vote for you and see you become 2VP.

86 Greg Harvey June 22, 2012 at 12:59 am

I’m pretty sure Sao and Amy are related…

87 D.R. Randle June 22, 2012 at 1:36 am

Dave,

Congratulations. I am greatly looking forward to you representing the SBC in the coming year. I am certain you are going to do a fabulous job. I was proud to stand next to you while the angry man berated you. You were a picture of grace under fire. Enjoy your trip home and get some rest – your election is just the first step in a journey to build a new SBC – one of greater unity, cooperation, and love. And you, Fred Luter, and Nathan Lino are the perfect men to bring this about. Hope to see you again soon my friend.

88 Bob Cleveland June 22, 2012 at 1:23 pm

Dave;

I’ll formally add my congratulations here, since I’m insecure and always want to be part of the crowd. But anyone who objects to, denigrates, or belittles your election to the office (regardless of its relative importance) is denying God’s sovereignty, or that He cares about what’s going on in the SBC and wasn’t paying attention or didn’t care, or thinks that a band of twitterers or bloggers out-powered the only He Who truly is Almighty.

Do you have any idea how much trouble the SBC is in? And of course we can’t “fix it”. we can only do the right thing where we are, when we’re there. And you did that.

It’s up to God, now.

89 Peggy Scott June 22, 2012 at 2:28 pm

Dear Dave: Congratulations on your election as 2nd Vice President of the SBC. You will need encouragement as well as prayers lifted up on your behalf. I feel as if I know you as I read SBC Voices on a daily basis and your writings. May God bless you in the coming year.

90 cb scott June 22, 2012 at 11:31 pm

Aunt Peggy,

I just want to assure you that Howell behaved himself well during his time in NOLA. He did you proud. BTW, I think I did OK this time also.

Therefore, the Scott name was above reproach during the 2012 SBC. Anyway, that is my story and I am stickin’ to it.

91 Paul Thompson June 23, 2012 at 4:19 pm

Dave,
I’ve been away at two week of camp and just catching up on all the grand things in SBC (GCB) news. I am pleased to extend a ‘congratulations’ to you. I am thankful to have known of you via SBC Voices and I’ll hope to meet you in person some day too. May the Lord grant you wisdom and boldness for the sake of His gospel.

Paul Thompson

92 Brad Atkins June 24, 2012 at 3:37 pm

David I am very happy for you and your election. I really enjoyed getting to know you a little bit while we were waiting on the election results. I pray that God will grant you with wisdom and understanding as you serve the SBC this coming year. Once again, a heartfelt congratulations my frien.
Brad Atkins

93 Brad Atkins June 24, 2012 at 3:38 pm

Friend.

94 Jeff Musgrave June 24, 2012 at 11:26 pm

I too was away at camp last week while you were taking your place among the secret elite of the SBC. :)
Congratulations and may your time in office be productive and blessed.

95 Doug Hibbard June 25, 2012 at 8:27 am

I’m just waiting for our kickbacks. Here you and I stayed away from the SBC so Dave wouldn’t be seen with us and torpedo his election chances, and yet he makes it sound like he wanted us there.

Something’s not right!

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: