On Ethnic Candidates: Can’t We Just Ignore Race?

We were all pleased two years ago when the Southern Baptist Convention took the next step in racial reconciliation, in plucking the roots of racial discrimination and oppression that have dug so deep into the soil of the SBC, by electing Fred Luter as the president of the SBC. But can I be honest? His election was more of a coronation. Somehow, word got out a year or so in advance that Pastor Luter would be nominated and the collective SBC whispered a quiet, “amen.” There was no opposition. None. It would have been denominational suicide to run against him.

But the question has been whether the election of Fred Luter will be a Calipari-style “one-and-done” or if it would be the start of a new era of racial unity and reconciliation in the SBC. I certainly hope it will be the latter. So I was very happy a couple of weeks ago when I was approached by a friend to ask if SBC Voices would run an article announcing the candidacy of a Korean pastor from Maryland, Dennis Manpoong Kim. I did not know him at the time. Since then, as I’ve read about him I’ve grown more enthusiastic about his candidacy. He is a qualified Southern Baptist leader, active in denominational affairs in his state and across the SBC.

He is also Korean.

Does that matter? Should it?

That is the question of the day in SBC life. What role should race play in an election for president in the SBC. Should we ignore it? Should we intentionally elect candidates to demonstrate racial diversity? Does promoting minority candidates promote further racial division or racial reconciliation?

On the discussion of Pastor Kim’s nomination, there have been several objections raised to identifying the candidate as Korean. Why should race be an issue in the election of officers in the SBC today? We’ve moved past our racist history and we ought to seek the glory of the kingdom in which all human distinctions are subsumed in Christ. Why can’t we just elect a candidate regardless of his race?

Permit me to offer a few random thoughts on the topic.

1) An officer of the SBC should be elected based on his QUALIFICATIONS for office, not his race.

Absolutely. The election of Fred Luter in 2012 was not a Baptist form of affirmative action in which a less qualified candidate was elected because of the color of his skin. No one could ignore that he was black and the historical significance of the event was undeniable. The SBC elected a black president. Wow. But make no mistake about it – we elected a qualified, capable, Southern Baptist leader to be our president. If Fred Luter were a lily-white guy like me, he’s have still been qualified to be president. The way he has conducted himself in office has given evidence to that fact.

And if you vote for Dr. Kim, it should not be just because he’s Korean, or a minority. It should be because he is a qualified candidate for the office. Ronnie Floyd, the front-runner for election, is eminently qualified and capable. If he is elected as SBC president we will be well led in the next two years (assuming a second term). He can handle the job. He’s demonstrated by his increased CP giving and his involvement in denominational life that he is a qualified and capable leader. But the more I read about Dr. Kim, the more I realize that he is just as qualified and just as capable.

There is no sense in which we must lower our standards for office in ANY WAY to vote for Dennis Kim as president. 

  • He has been heavily involved in national SBC life – on the recent Pastors’ Task Force, on the Committee on Resolutions, at other levels.
  • He has been an active part of the Maryland Convention. It was his fellow Marylanders (?) who sought him out to encourage him to run. Those who know him best are most enthusiastic about his candidacy.
  • He has experience in leadership with his church – the largest of any type in Maryland. (By the way, pastoring a large church is not a prerequisite for office, but neither is is a shameful thing that disqualifies someone from office. It is not a sin to have a large church. I can’t believe I actually had to say that.)
  • His church gives 4.5% to missions through the CP. If you look at larger churches, you will find that this is a comparatively high percentage. I think it’s in the same range that Floyd’s church now gives after he led them to raise their giving.
  • His church has been exemplary in evangelism and missions. Read the Shannon Baker article for more details (link below).

All that to say that if Dennis Kim’s name was Dennis Smith and he were the pastor of First Baptist Church of County Seat, Alabama, his character and work would qualify him as a candidate for president of the SBC. Of course, that is my opinion. There are no official standards as to who is qualified and who is not. Each of us has to decide what qualifies a man for office and vote accordingly.

But a presidential candidate ought to be qualified to do the job. I have come to believe that Dr. Dennis Manpoong Kim is qualified for the position, not because he is a Korean, but because he is a Southern Baptist leader. Read the article by Shannon Baker at Baptist Life Online to get more information. What would anyone want in a president other than what Dr. Kim is? Each of us is free to vote for the candidate of our choice, but I think we have to recognize that Dr. Kim is a qualified candidate for the position.

2) The goal of color-blindness is noble, but we are not there yet.

One day, we will all be dwell in the visible kingdom of heaven in which nothing matters but our oneness in Christ. Whether one is male or female, what race a person is, what social or economic strata he or she was a part of – none of these things will matter. What a day that will be! A glorious day.

This is not that day.

I am currently reading Alan Cross’s new book “When Heaven and Earth Collide,” a powerful account of the relationship between the white church in the south and the civil rights movement. (It is a must read. Order it. Read it. Don’t argue with me, just do it.) I’ve only read one chapter, but it made me depressed to read what CHURCHES did to brutalize black people, what “good, Christian people” did in gushing hate on people simply because of their race. I am convinced that the biggest problem among Southern Baptists today is not Calvinism or Traditionalism or anything in-between, it’s not our stands against homosexuality and immorality, but it is that we are still dealing with the after-effects of our racist past as a denomination

Yes, we repented. I was there and I am glad we did that. It was a good first step. Yes, we elected Fred Luter, another good step. We’ve elected a few people to responsible places in our entities. But in 2014, as we head to the SBC Annual Meeting, we can still say that 100% of the entity heads and seminary presidents in SBC history have been white. Every single one. Of all the presidents of the SBC in our history, one and only one has been black. None have been Hispanic, or Asian or any other ethnicity. Is that accurate?

So, we have come a long way, but we cannot grasp our lapels and say, “mission accomplished” because we elected Fred Luter as president. There is still much to be done.

3) The path forward is not self-flagellation, but intentional engagement.

We need not beat ourselves up. The vast majority of white Southern Baptists are not racists, despise our racist past and wish we could undo it. But just because I did not perpetrate racism does not mean that I am relieved of the burden of correcting it in our denominational structures. I am part of the racial majority (at least for now) in America and in the SBC that treated blacks and other races with disdain. Our forbears (just a generation ago) did not just turn a blind eye toward discrimination – many actively participated in it.

And there is nothing I can do about that.

I cannot change what white “Christians” did in the name of God and Country in the last few hundred years in America. It does no good for us to beat ourselves up and berate ourselves. We have repented, and I believe that repentance was sincere. But the by-product of repentance is change.

Now, what we must do is intentionally engage people of minority descent and work to include them in the inner workings of the SBC. That means that we intentionally find qualified black, Asian, Hispanic and other minority candidates to run for SBC office. It means that we seriously examine and eventually hire a minority seminary president or entity head. It means that at every level of participation and leadership we include people from minorities. We must do it intentionally, purposefully and consistently, until the job is done.

We cannot be colorblind until people of color are just as rooted in the SBC as white guys like me are. We should look to the past to inform ourselves (again, even after one chapter I STRONGLY recommend Alan’s book) but we need to look forward. Our question ought not be, “Why were our forbears so awful in the past?” but “What can we do to make the SBC as multicultural as the kingdom of God?” We need to rely on God’s power to seek a more Christlike future.

Racial issues are a minefield. I tread lightly when I speak of them. It is easy to give unintentional offense to minority brothers and sisters and there are many whites who are defensive about people “playing the race card.” But what we need to do is to continue the path of constructive and intentional engagement towards racial reconciliation.

So each of us must decide for ourselves whether a candidate is qualified and whether we want to vote for him. But I am hoping that both the nomination AND the election of minority candidates for the offices of the SBC will become so regular that soon it will not even be new anymore.

One step along that process is to elect a minority candidate in a tight race against other qualified candidates. That will be quite a day.



  1. Ron F. Hale says


    Two things stung a little while reading your article:

    1. You called it a “coronation.” No, it was an election and Pastor Luter won or earned this election based on a lifetime of service to His Lord and the SBC. He has preached in more state evangelism conferences, associational meetings, and Bible conferences than any person that I know and he has made thousands of friends along the way.

    2. I have not heard anything concerning the following– as you say, “On the discussion of Pastor Kim’s nomination, there have been several objections raised to identifying the candidate as Korean.” Really; are you serious?

    Pastor Kim is a very viable candidate. I will be very interested in seeing their CP giving, and other areas of giving to SBC work. If these things look good, then … I wish him well.

    • Dave Miller says

      As to point 1, I in no way meant to denigrate the election of Luter and I reaffirmed my belief in his qualifications. But he was elected unopposed. That was my point with the word “coronation.”

      As to #2, read the discussions. The point was made that we should not mention his ethnicity in any way. It was not that his ethnicity was shameful, but that it should not be mentioned in any way. Read the last post to see the comments.

  2. Ron F. Hale says


    Thank You for your clarifying points, they are well taken.


  3. Jess says

    I’ve had the pleasure of meeting several South Korean young people. I can tell you they were the most well mannered, and polite young folks I have ever met. I could only wish that young folks in this country were more like them.

    With Dr. Kim being a citizen of this country, I would have no problem with him being SBC President. The young folks from Korea made a lasting impression on me, and they were not even citizens.

  4. Tarheel says

    “So each of us must decide for ourselves whether a candidate is qualified and whether we want to vote for him. But I am hoping that both the nomination AND the election of minority candidates for the offices of the SBC will become so regular that soon it will not even be new anymore.”



    The only objection that’s been made to delineating him as Korean is to that being a reason to elect him.

    I think his qualifications are certainly profound enough that adding a “sweetener” of his ethnicity is unnecessary and irrelevant.

    I agree Dave that the goal is, to use your term, color blindness – but we ain’t there yet.

    I call for it because I hate racism and think that preferences based on race (whether positive or negative) exacerbate rather than reduce it.

  5. says

    It was my privilege to start two Korean congregations as a pastor. One in 1984 and another in 1991. It was one of the most enjoyable experiences of my life. The congregants of both missions were some of the most gracious and spirit filled people I have known.

  6. Jess says

    It doesn’t matter about the race of a person that will lead the SBC, matter of fact I also think to much emphasis is placed on degrees. Some of the smartest preachers I’ve ever known only had Bible College. I think we must look at one’s life and what they have accomplished for the Lord. That is what’s important to me. That should and must be the number one qualification.

    • says

      Well said! I would add also that i want a man who would present us well to the world. The President is the SB face as he travels.

  7. Dale Pugh says

    I will repeat what I said when Luter was elected: I look forward to the day when race is not mentioned in any election of any kind whatsoever. It doesn’t matter. It shouldn’t matter. Good points, Dave.

    • Dave Miller says

      Agreed Dale.

      But our challenge today is to be so welcoming, so encouraging, so intentionally inclusive, etc, that we convince minorities that it doesn’t matter.

      I’m not sure they are as convinced as we are that race is not an issue in the SBC.

  8. Tarheel says


    Is there a point where going, as you like to say, the second and third miles appears or perhaps worse – becomes patronizing/pandering?

    • Tarheel says

      Shouldn’t we simply strive to treat everyone fairly and in a godly manner and consider people for office within the SBC without any kind of preference or disdain relating to ethnicity. If that’s as you said….noble and right….let’s just do it.

      I know we aren’t there yet , but we ‘ll never get there without striving for it.

      Quotas whether official or unofficial and personal in my mind are counterproductive.

        • John Wylie says

          I personally don’t have a problem with be one factor in our consideration. All else being equal it could very well be the deciding factor for me because sometimes a vote is not only a vote for qualifications but it’s a statement. Dr. Luter was both qualified and we as the SBC were making a statement.

          • Tarheel says

            Dr. Luter (as qualified as he is) was unopposed because no one dared to do so…as Dave said it sound have been denominational suicide to do so….we need to examine why that is so.

            How was his nomination and non opposition not the dreaded oligarchy that everyone is decrying now? Weren’t we “fed” him and dared to oppose?

            Please understand, I love Fred Luter! I would vote for him for president for life of the SBC … Lol….but the truth is we all knew to vote for him and we all knew why. It had nothing to do with his qualifications as astounding as they are. Honesty compels us to admit that, does it not?

            I don’t see that as bridging any gap…I actually see it somewhat as SBC affirmative action.

            and I see affirmative action is “well intended positive racism”, but racism indeed.

          • says

            Tarheel and John
            Admittedly I can get conflicting thoughts as i wrestle with this. Tarheel you are correct, we really did not bridge a gap because of the circumstances you enumerated. However it was a bridge that we needed to cross. I see Dr. Luters election as that first step that needed to be taken. It is not where we want to be, but it is a long way from where we were at one time.
            John the Luter vote and the Kim vote will be statements. I wish we were beyond that but we are not. So i will celebrate that at this point.

            There is a lot of work to be done for racial equality. I still favor celebrating steps even small one and taking larger steps next time. It will not be solved in Baltimore but could be a stepping stone.

            I want to be very clear, I would not support Pastor Kim solely to make a statement on race relations. I don’t think Pastor Kim wants that. But as has been said he is well qualified as is Ronnie Floyd. However there are some thing I favor in Kim over Floyd.

          • says

            God phraseology. I suspect that the problem both of us have is that it seems awfully slow sometime. Patience is not my best quality. Why would I feel that we share that :-)

  9. Jerry Smith says

    I’m not SBC, but it should be about SBC Bible values only, & no one should be elected just because of their race so the barrier can be broken. If they are not elected because of their SBC Bible values them you will leave behind SBC Bible values & walk away from Jesus. Break that barrier only when they withstand the test of Baptist Bible values.

    Most seems to stand on that from what I’ve read in the post made lately, yet there is always a few that will not, & never had the SBC Bible values in their heart, they only want to change the SBC Bible values to suit them.

  10. says


    I must admit that you have convinced me that Pastor Kim has a better chance of winning the election than i had originally thought.

  11. volfan007 says

    I want to say this…..I also look forward to the day when race is not even an issue….at all. But, as others have said, we’re not there, yet. One day, hopefully, before Jesus comes back, we will be there.

    But, right now, in the life of the SBC, and due to the ebb and flow of the society we live in….I think having a Black man as Pres. of the SBC was great! And, he was more than just a Black man. He was a qualified, Spirit filled man, who happened to be Black. And now, we have an opportunity to elect a qualified man, who is Asian, who has a heart for souls. This would speak volumes to not only the Asian Believers in the SBC, but also to every minority group in the SBC. Next time, we should find a Spirit filled, qualified, Hispanic man to be Pres. of the SBC!

    I just don’t see a problem with making a BIG statement to the Churches of the SBC, and to the nation……we aint just a bunch of Southern, truck driving, biscuit eatin’ honkey’s in the SBC, anymore!


    PS. I’m a Southern, truck driving, biscuit eatin’ honkey…and, I aint ashamed of it, either!

    • Tarheel says


      “PS. I’m a Southern, truck driving, biscuit eatin’ honkey…and, I aint ashamed of it, either!”

      Lol….I was about to ask you that….because fir some reason – I picture you as being exactly that!

      (He said affectionately) :-)

      • volfan007 says

        I’m just a rough ole corn cob, Tarheel. I come from a long line of rednecks and hillbilly’s. :)


      • Dale Pugh says

        If you want a really good picture of Volfan, you need to see his special baptism video. It’s classic!

    • says

      Oh My! So very well said….Amen and Amen

      P.S. Volfan and Tarheel, We have biscuits and trucks in Montana also. In fact I drive a pickup. No I do not have a rifle hanging in the back window….I do, however, have under the seat a…..well let’s let that go……

  12. Mike Bergman says

    Hey Dave–I’m gonna disagree with your use of “colorblindness” as an aim/goal…

    By what I think you mean–a person should not be either opposed or supported b/c of ethnicity–I agree. By broader connotations of the term–that differences should not be “seen/noticed”–I disagree. I think places like Revelation 7, etc. show us that godly differences should be celebrated, not ignored. Piper in Bloodlines and Newbill in United argue this point well.

    That said, the biggest thing about Kim that’s caught my eye is his emphasis on personal discipleship and that in leadership training. Combine that with what we see of his character and other work, and I like this choice…

    • Tarheel says

      I’d say – Celebrated but not emphasized as defining who a person/group is and how they deserve to be treated as a result of ethnicity.

    • Dave Miller says

      I will concede that the use of that word may not be the most accurate. It was meant to convey what people were saying about not looking at race at all.

  13. Ben Stratton says

    We need to know more about Bro. Kim’s doctrinal beliefs. Does he hold to inerrancy? Does he support women’s ordination? Does he believe in speaking in tongues, either in public or as a prayer language? Where does he stand on the ordinances? What about Calvinism? Etc. These are important subjects that many grassroots Southern Baptists are concerned about.

    I do find it interesting that Bro. Jared Moore is the only one of three who is not ashamed to still use the Baptist label on the name of his church. That may be enough to get my vote.

    • says

      Ben Stratton, the name Baptist has always been very important to you. Extremely important, I would say. So, vote your conscience there, by all means.

      As for your questions, Dr. Kim has been involved in SBC life for many years now at the highest denominational levels serving on task forces and committees. He has been vetted by those forming those committees and by those inviting him. If he is not doctrinally sound, then we can say that SBC leadership over the past decade that has invited him to participate in national committees and task forces are also not doctrinally sound or had no interest in putting dotrincally sound leaders in place.

      Also, the fact that he affirms the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 should give you some idea about his theology. If it does not, then it is a worthless document.

      I trust SBC leadership and if they believe that Dr. Kim is worthy to serve the way that he has over the years, then I trust their judgment as to his doctrinal qualifications. I also just Maryland Baptist leadership and people that I know there who vouch for him theologically and according to his character.

      I spoke with a high level SBC leader today who also vouches for Dr. Kim, his theology, and his ministry and said that he is a great pastor and leader and had the finest Christian character. I trust this man too.

      We should ask questions and be excited to learn the answers. But, I do think that there should be a certain base-line acceptance of someone who has served as long and as illustriously of Dr. Kim. Just because YOU do not know him does not mean that he is not well known by SBC leaders.

      Dr. Kim is well known and is much admired.

      • Ben Stratton says


        The name “Baptist” is very important to me, just as it was very important to our spiritual forefathers. I’m not just talking about the 1950’s when being a Baptist was popular. The label was equally important in the 1850’s and 1750’s when being a Baptist was not popular. I wish it was more important to more Southern Baptist pastors today. (Thankfully it is to many!)

        That being said, of course I’m more concerned with the doctrine of a church rather than it’s name. And I like the BFM, 2000, although I disagree with it in a couple of places.

        However your attitude that if a man says he affirms the BFM, 2000 and gives to missions, then he is fit for SBC leadership, is exactly how we got in the mess we got in back in the 1970’s! Men said they affirmed the BFM, 1963 or the Abstract of Principles and supported missions, and so they were elected to leadership positions. In reality, they were liberals who almost destroyed the SBC. That’s why we must ask questions about doctrine. I guarantee any SBC presidential candidate will be asked about his views on calvinism, by those on both sides of the fence. Why shouldn’t candidates be asked about his views on inerrancy, women’s ordination, tongues, and ecclesiology?

        I’m not saying Kim is liberal or not fit for SBC leadership. I’m saying the average Southern Baptist pastor doesn’t know anything about him and he should be asked questions about his doctrinal views. The same is true of the other candidates. That is my point.

        I agree that everything I’ve heard about him with regard to missions sounds great and is much to be admired.

  14. says


    I honestly don’t know where Dr. Kim would stand on all the questions that you raise? But, is not his record of strong missions, discipleship, and evangelism success, along with his belief in the BFM sufficient? If we require Dr. Kim to specify and detail those answers, shouldn’t we also require it of Ronnie Floyd and Jared Moore? In light of his proven track record why would we allow those to become issues to deal with? Most of the issues that you raised are not in the BFM, so why make them a issue now? If they are that important shouldn’t they either be listed as criteria for running for President or be in the BFM? Dr. Kim’s record speaks for itself. Maryland Southern Bsptists fully embrace and accept him. We would be well served by his leadership. We have an opportunity to say to the world that we truly are a global International convention. If the SBC is looking for someone whose history of successful evangelism, missions, and discipleship is impeccable, they want find a better man than Dr. Kim. And that’s really all that should matter.

    • Tarheel says

      Dwight, I agree the BFM is enough and some of those issues are secondary but we know we’re more influence than we don’t know that about Kim.

      That’s part of the problem – no one knows very much about the guy but we do know we like but we just don’t know much about him.

      Know what I mean?

      • Tarheel says

        “Dwight, I agree the BFM is enough and some of those issues are secondary but we know we’re more influence than we don’t know that about Kim.”

        Should read…

        “Dwight, I agree the BFM is enough and some of those issues are secondary but we know much more about Moore and Floyd than we know about Kim.”

  15. says


    I understand the questions. I don’t place the necessity and value of having to have the answer to these question the same as you and others might.

    If these are litmus test or sticking points in SBC life shouldn’t we codify those, or place the correct answers in some document so that persons who are serving, giving, and leading in SBC life know whether or not they qualify. I have not seen previous SBC candidates have to answer these questions. It’s very interesting that these questions would come up now. That might explain why some feel welcome and wanted in SBC life and others do not.

    Tarheel, why don’t you and the others who believe that these are important questions make a motion to adopt official answers to these questions at the convention, and then these will be valid questions for a candidate.

    • Adam Blosser says

      “It’s very interesting that these questions would come up now. That might explain why some feel welcome and wanted in SBC life and others do not.”

      This is not a fair statement. The questions are coming up now because most of us know very little about Dr. Kim. Ronnie Floyd has been a very public figure for quite a while. Jared frequents this site. I did not know who Dr. Kim was until his nomination was announced. I like what I now know, but still want to know more.

      Insinuating that these questions are being raised because Dr. Kim is Korean is deplorable.

      • Tarheel says

        Thanks, adam!

        Dwight, I was not insinuating that we should need to know these things because he is Korean that’s ludicrous I’m the one arguing that his ethnicity shouldn’t matter.

        I’m only saying we know about Floyd he is a known quantity so to speak ….we know about Moore he also is a known quantity ….the FACT is that we know very little about Dr. Kim what we know we tend to like but we truly don’t know much.

        • Tarheel says

          If the race card is going to be flashed in every dog gone discussion I have a few then I’m through I’m doing alright I’m done!

          And yes I am very angry!

          • Tarheel says

            Typos I’m using my phone. Here’s another try.

            If the race card is going to be flashed in every doggone discussion I have with you – then I am done! I am done!

            You really need to find a new one trick horse, pal!

          • says


            I have gone back and read the statements and the time stamps.

            Are you serious?

            I am glad that you cooled off, but how in the world is Dwight calling you a racist or is playing the race card? He could have just as easily been talking about some people being accepted and some not? Why do some have to answer the questions and others don’t? What do we know about Ronnie Floyd except that he has a large church in Arkansas and is on every SBC committee? Well, Dr. Kim has a good-sized church in Maryland and has served on many SBC committees and has been vetted by SBC leadership. Just because you don’t know him does not mean that he is not known.

            And, this sensitivity about the issue of “race” is really alarming. I really don’t see where Dwight was saying anything out of bounds or accusing people of being racists. He was asking why some were asked questions and why others weren’t. I don’t think that that is really a pertinent question, though. I would simply say that the same credibility that Ronnie Floyd has because of his participation in Southern Baptist life should also be afforded to Dr. Kim.

            When has anyone ever grilled Ronnie Floyd on his theology? Point me to the link. We accept Floyd because we know his name and because of his leadership and because he is included by people that we trust. The same can be said of Dr. Kim, just on a less well-known level.

            His work, credentials, background, and ministry are impressive. I would give him the same degree of acceptance for his work among Southern Baptists that I would give anyone else. I knew nothing of Frank Page when he was nominated in 2006, but I never had to grill him theologically. His participation in Southern Baptist life up to that point (that I learned about), let me know that his views were acceptable to people that I knew and trusted and that was enough.

            There is no questionnaire.

            That said, I have been granted an interview with Dr. Kim to be posted here next week, so I am going to get to ask him questions related to his life, ministry, and how he would lead the SBC, if he were given a chance. But, I will go in with a certain level of assumption that I am dealing with a godly man who has theological beliefs that are in line with Southern Baptists. If we have a heretic in our midst, then the presidential election is the least of our problems as our entire structure seems broken because of Dr. Kim’s consistent participation with us over the years. I will just assume that his theology is kosher.

        • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


          Please see my response to Adam and answer those questions please? I have no idea how Ronnie Floyd or Jared Moore would answer these questions. Maybe you do. I am not overly interested in how Floyd or Moore would answer these questions. But, if these are now going to become important questions all of a sudden, then i would like to know Jared’s and Ronnie’s answers to these questions, so that I could compare their answers to Dr. Kim’s.

      • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


        Would you agree that the exact same questions that Dr. Kim would be asked concerning these matters, ought to be asked also of the other two candidates? Do yo know for sure how Jared Moore and Ronnie Floyd would answer each of those questions? If you know for sure, then your statement about my statement being “deplorable” is a fair and accurate statement. If you do not know how they would answer each of these questions–and neither gentleman is on record to my knowledge of having given answers to those question– then your statement about my statement being deplorable is an unfair and inaccurate description of my statement. I accept your apology before you ask.

        Please tell me where I can read or listen to Jared’s and Ronnie’s answers to these questions? Please tell me when and where they answered these questions? Please tell me when and where they were asked these questions? Why is it assumed that those two would hold acceptable or orthodox answers to those questions and Dr. Kim would not? What are the acceptable and orthodox answers to those questions in SBC life?

        Are there certain answer to those questions that disqualifies a person from leadership in SBC life? If there are, shouldn’t we make clear to all SBC persons what the right and wrong answers to these questions are so that they will know? Until you can document to me that you know exactly how Moore and Floyd would, answer these questions, and at what point did you discover their answers, I find the timing of these questions suspect. Thanks in advance for answering my questions.

        • Adam Blosser says

          Dwight, I am not the one asking the questions. None of the questions Ben asked are deal breakers for me. However, they are fair questions to ask of any candidate for President of the SBC.

          Also, I feel confident that I know enough about Ronnie Floyd and Jared Moore to make an informed decision regarding their candidacy for President of the SBC. Ronnie Floyd has been a very public figure for quite some time. Jared frequents this site. I am growing more comfortable with the level of info I have on Dr. Kim, but am not there yet. I expect I will be by the time of the SBC and am currently leaning toward casting my vote in his favor.

          I don’t think anyone has said they expect unorthodox responses from Dr. Kim. They have not even said that his answers to the questions listed would be the determining factor deciding for whom they vote. You accused those asking the questions of racism.

          No forgiveness for me is necessary. I have not apologized and do not intend to. I stand by my statement that accusing those asking the questions of racism is deplorable. I am sure those whom you have wronged will be willing to forgive you should you seek that forgiveness.

          • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says

            I have accused those of asking the questions of not having asked the other two the questions. You still didn’t indicate that you know the answers that the other two would give to these questions. And it’s because of that I see the questions to Dr. Kim as unfair. I didn’t raise the race issue in this thread. You did.

          • Tarheel says


            Ok, I’ve cooled off.

            I’m no longer angry with you, Dwight.

            You certainly did play the race card and call me a racist for asking questions. I object strongly to that. Very strongly.

            I don’t have to ask Floyd or Moore about Calvinism….Moore is one, Floyd is not. This is well known.

            I don’t have to ask either about women pastors…they’re both on record as being opposed.

            I don’t have to ask either about cessationism as Jared has blogged on it and I’ve heard Floyd myself speak to the issue.

            Like I said…these are known quantities…..we know nothing about Kim except what you’ve told us and a baptist press article or two….his website is in Korean….it’s not unreasonable or racist or suspect to ask these questions….

            I have stronger words than deplorable for your behavior but I will withhold using them.

  16. Adam Blosser says

    Now you are backtracking.

    You said, “It’s very interesting that these questions would come up now. That might explain why some feel welcome and wanted in SBC life and others do not.”

    What else did you mean by “might explain why some feel welcome and wanted in SBC life and others do not” if not that the questions were being asked because of Kim’s ethnicity?

    Also, my first response said, “Insinuating that these questions are being raised because Dr. Kim is Korean is deplorable.” Your response to that statement only questioned my use of the word “deplorable”, not that I interpreted your statement as referring to race. To attempt to turn this back around on me as if I am the one who brought race into the discussion is less than honest.

    • Adam Blosser says

      I did not hit the right reply button apparently as this comment ended up in the wrong place. It is in response to Dwight’s comment on May 22, 2014 at 12:10pm, currently comment #53.

  17. Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


    Do you think the missionaries that were booted out because of their disagreements with the IMB policies feel welcome? No! Do you think that those persons who have been denied missions opportunities because they were baptized in evangelical churches but are now SBC feel welcome? No! Do you think political moderates, but theological inerrantist feel welcome? No! Do you think Democrats feel welcome at the SBC? No! Do you belive that persons who believe in the BFM but are social justice advocates feel welcome? No! Do you belive that persons who don’t appreciate the positions, or lack thereof that the SBC has taken on protecting victims of abuse feel welcome, and keeping a registry of such persons? No! Do you believe that persons who don’t appreciate how Sheri Klouda was treated, Ms. Wendy at the IMB, Karen Bullock, Dianne Garland, and others feel alienated? Absoultely, these people have been bruised and wounded by the SBC.

    There are a long list of persons who feel alienated from the SBC. And again, watching the questions being directed to Dr. Kim that have not been directed to the other two would create a new set of folks who feel alienated. Again, you, my brother, introduced the race issue. Not, I.

    • Adam Blosser says

      “Again, you, my brother, introduced the race issue. Not, I.”

      Dwight, this is dishonest. We cannot continue this conversation until you acknowledge that fact. Good day.

      • Dave Miller says

        Adam, I think if you read back through this, there may have been an aggressive tone (using words like deplorable) that do not lead to productive discussion.

        And, from my observation, it was you who focused on the racial component of this.

        So, perhaps you ought to engage in discussion without the anger. Just an observers viewpoint.

        • Adam Blosser says

          You are right. My use of the word “deplorable” immediately made Dwight defensive and did not contribute to my goal of pointing out how wrong the quoted statement was and is. “Deplorable” was an accurate description, but in hindsight should have been left out.

          I focused on the racial component, but did not introduce it to the conversation, Dwight did. I have clearly demonstrated that to be false.

          I am not angry. Dwight did not accuse me of racism. Had he done so as he did two others, you can bet that I would be angry.

        • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


          I laid out a list of persons and the list could have been much longer of persons who feel unwelcome by the SBC. I also said, asking certain questions of Dr. Kim that aren’t asked of Pastors Jared Moore and Ronnie Floyd could possibly alienate even others. Where and why do you see race in those comments? I am arguing double standard, not race.

          Your answer to the question of double standard–familiarity–is somewhat of a plausible answer. I don’t disagree that Moore and Floyd are more familiar to readers of this blog. But my point is, once we start down the trail of asking these type of specific, precise questions to candidates–they need to be asked of all–and asked the exact same question. I still maintain to ask of one, and not the other two, is fundamentally unfair, and a double standard.

    • says

      Fair or not, comments like this do a lot to not only discredit you Dwight but also the nominee you are supporting. If you are going to call people racists for wanting to know more about the theological understanding of your candidate than you are just resorting to personal attacks.

      • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


        I called no one a racist. I did not insinuate that anyone was/is a racist. I said that questions were being asked of Dr. Kim that were not being asked about Floyd and Moore. That is an undeniable fact. I also said that unless the same questions were asked of the other two, it leaves certain persons feeling unwelcome in the SBC. What persons? The person being asked the questions, and the people that support them. I also listed a series of persons and groups that have been that have been alienated from the SBC. That list of persons was who I was referring to when I said that, a line of questioning for one candidate, that was not addressed to another, leads to certain persons feeling unwelcome. No mention of race is insinuated or implied in my remarks. I cannot control the fact that you and others have chosen to read race into my remarks.

        Adam and Tarheel introduced race to this discussion, not me. You have falsely accused me here of calling persons racist for asking questions of Dr. Kim. No such statement has been alleged or implied. The record has now been set straight.

      • says

        Brother Dwight,

        No one here can know for sure what was in your heart when you made that reference…whether you had race in mind or not…but you say you didn’t, so I think we should take you at your word and move along from that.

        Having said that, have you stopped to think about why more than a few here might think that? Have you wondered why more than a few see most of your comment interactions as racially based? With all respect due you, it appears quite common for you to project explicitly or implicitly that many or most of us have racial slants to our comments and views.

        Might be something to think about brother.

        • says

          Dr. Dwight
          I think Les has given some sound counsel. I have come to hasve s great deal of respect for you, even though i have never met you. I like what you stand for. However, mostly I have come to respect your mind and the sharpness that God has given you. Therein lies perhaps a problem. People that have the kind of ability that you have and who have been put in places of leadership and influence as you have are sometimes held to a higher standard than folks like me. I can say something but it does not cause a stir because it really does not matter. People of influence and ability such as you it is different. I know that might seem unfair, but sometimes this ole world can be rather mean.
          My point: When I read your statement regarding the timing of raising these questions, my mind went to the race issue, as did others. You tell me that was not your intent so i accept that. But as you know perception can become reality.

          I love you in our precious Savior, my brother.

          • Tarheel says

            After taking some time in prayer though and discussion with others today….I too will say that I cannot know the intent of your heart, Dwight….I apologize for assuming I did….you say race was not the inference and I choose to take the word of you my brother in Christ.

            Sometimes our words fail us and convey meanings we don’t intend to hearers….I know that certainly that has happened to me on more than one occasion .. So I extend grace to you and will assume that you are being truthful as to your intents.

            Also, blogging when angry is a really bad idea. I’m sorry for behaving in such a jerky way to you today, Dwight. I sinned against you today with the way I spoke (posted) toward you. I’m sorry.

        • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says

          Les, D. L. Tarheel,

          Thanks for your comment here. It is because we don’t know each other personally, and generally–as in we usually don’t fellowship together as Black Baptists believers and White Baptists believers, because we go to different churches and travel in different circles. Those White brothers who know me personally, would not have interpreted my remark the way the rest of you did. The problem is-we simply don’t know each other, therefore we misread and understand each other. And yes, I am guilty of that as well, which explains several of you all being frustrated with me. Thanks for your prayers, patience, forbearance, and seeking common ground, rather than battleground.

          I seriously and prayerfully hope that NAMB would start to intentionally planting multiracial/multi-cultural churches, because that is what it is going to take for the next generation to live together as brothers and sisters. and to substantially reduce the racial distrust and animosity that exist today.

        • says

          One question that I have consistently is why it makes white Christians so uncomfortable when a black Christian talks about race.

          Maybe we all need to let people talk about what they want to talk about and listen to their perspective. Dwight talks about race from a desire to see people come together.

          I talk about race a lot too. It is a big deal. But, I get the same response from white Christians a lot too. It normally goes something like, “why does that matter and why do we talk about it.” Well, turn on the news. They are talking about it right now. The church has something to say and when we are like the world on this issue, then it hinders our witness.

          • says

            Yes not only is it history it is current events. We may get tolerance and a certain amount of justice by legislation. But true equality will only come as as we let our Lord and Savior transforms the hearts of His people. The Church of the risen Lord has the answer, that is why we must be careful, constantly diligent, and seeking the leadership of God so that someday there might be true equality under His Lordship. God grant that it might be so.

  18. Tarheel says

    Dwight are you really missing this?

    Floyd has been a fixture in the SPC for decades …

    Moore is known to everyone who reads a post on this blog.

    Those things are not true of Dr. Kim we like what we know but truly we don’t know much, that’s all this is about.

    And for you to pretend that racial and friends and implication was not in your comments is Patently ridiculous, demonstratively false, and just a plain stupid contention really. No one buys that Dwight.

    • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says

      You still have not asked these men the same questions. I don’t know what their answers would be to these questions. Neither does Adam; neither do you. As soon as they are asked and answer these questions, I’m sure Dr. Kim will answer them too.

      • Adam Blosser says

        Dwight, one last comment. Show me where you ran to Jared Moore’s defense when he was being berated over his views concerning the criminalizing of homosexual behavior. Those were fair questions then, and these are now. It is not necessary to ask the same questions of every candidate to make them valid questions.

        I have adequately demonstrated that you introduced race into the discussion. You refuse to acknowledge that fact. Like I said before, we cannot continue this discussion until you do.

        • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


          Thanks for the dialogue. I enjoyed the conversation. I regret that you won’t receive my answers. But, it objective fair minded person would have to coincide that you introduced race into this dialogue. I introduced the double standard notion that I didn’t attribute to race. I still want to know why the questions to one and not the others. It appears that I will not get an answer to that question, so I too am weary of going around in circles and am very willing to bid this conversation adieu. Good day.

        • Wm. Dwight McKissic, Sr. says


          People were responding to published views of Jared on the homosexual issue. They are not responding to the published views of Dr. Kim, at least none that I am aware of. That’s the difference here.

  19. says

    Per Ronnie Floyd on his blog talking about young pastors:

    “They are not only believers in inerrancy, but can rightly defend why they believe it. Thank God for the fabulous seminaries they have attended that have taught and affirmed this in their hearts.”

    No need to ask him that one.

  20. says

    I’m not sure where to put this, but since this thread is active I’ll put it here. Below are some links providing more info on Dennis Kim using the latest internet translation technology. :)

    I’m not implying any personal opinions as it seem Pastor Kim is more than qualified. I’m just passing on information since there have been inquiries and most here do not read Korean.

    First, there is an “English-language congregation of Global Mission Church” called Higher Connection Church.

    Then, from an online translation, here is part of the pastor’s introduction page.

    Rev. Dr. Dennis Manpoong Kim is the senior pastor of Global Mission Church of Greater Washington (GMC). He has been serving faithfully as the senior pastor of this church for 23 years with a great passion for evangelism, discipleship, and world missions. Fulfilling the Great Commission is the all-consuming passion of his ministry. He has devoted his life in training believers as true disciples of Christ. He has travelled to more than 40 different countries to witness the gospel, serve in various evangelistic ministries, and give lectures for local pastors and seminary students. He is fully bilingual in Korean and English with a keen understanding of multi-cultural worldviews. Under his leadership, the Global Mission Church has been faithfully partnering and collaborating with the Southern Baptist Convention in all areas of Christian ministry including cooperative program, world missions, local out-reach, relief efforts, community service, and pastors’ fellowship. The church is training and sending more than 10 short-term mission teams every year and it has produced more than 50 career missionaries working for International Mission Board. It has also planted five churches in various locations including Baltimore (Maryland), Fairfax (Virginia), Seattle (Washington), Cary (North Carolina) and Bundang (South Korea). The Global Mission Church has been growing not only in its membership but also in spiritual maturity deeply rooted in the Word of God… click to read the whole thing.

  21. Tarheel says


    Thanks mark!

    That answers so many of my questions. I’m glad to have this information….

    Now I can objectively, for myself examine him along side the other two and make an informed choice….not having only to take the word of others.

    • Tarheel says

      I continue (as I said earlier) to be impressed by what I’m seeing and hearing from Dr. Kim.

      I’m still not committed to a candidate – but I’m thinking I have enough info now to adequately compare the three candidates and make an informed choice.

  22. Tarheel says


    I “read” a racist accusation from Dwight’s post and it went downhill from there. I reacted badly. I felt attacked…but instead of asking for clarification and talking it out….I went off.

      • says

        I don’t want to start this all over again. However a lot of things were said here that should not have been said, by more than one person. It is not all on you, my brother, it is all on US.

        This has been settled with apologies etc., and in all candor Alan needs to let it alone. It is done.

        • says

          D.L., I let it alone when I saw the apology. That is the problem with saying stuff online like this. Did not see the apology until after I wrote the other. Some pretty strong things were said and I wanted to give the other view.

          Tarheel, I like you and you seem like a good guy. Hope you did not take any offense to what I said. You apologized and that takes courage and grace. I respect that.

  23. cb scott says

    Dave Miller is closing down comment threads today faster than the Feds closed Bars during Prohibition. Therefore, I am going to hijack this thread to make a statement.

    I intend to thank God for the American Armed Forces and the ultimate sacrifice so many have made today during the worship service. I will also thank God for the sacrifice of His Son for my freedom from the curse of sin and death.

    I am just wondering if any of you guys will be doing anything today to remember the sacrifices of Americans who gave their lives to keep us free? I wonder if any of you will intentionally make mention of Memorial Day and the men and women who died to make and keep this nation free?

    I wonder this because many guys do not think it proper to do such things in church services anymore. What say ye?

    • Dale Pugh says

      Yes, I will, SEC CB. Even though it has fallen “out of fashion” and some say it doesn’t “make much of Jesus,” I say, “Honor those who have given so much for our freedom. In doing so, also honor God Who has given us complete freedom in Christ.” Two birds, one stone.

      • cb scott says

        Thank you, Duckman Dale.

        I kinda thought you would be of similar convictions as I.

      • Tarheel says

        We usually have the local JROTC come in and present colors on both memorial and veterans days after which we sing “God Bless America” or a song like that. We recognize vets on these days as well, and on memorial day we make mention of the ultimate sacrifice made by soldiers in furtherance of the freedoms we enjoy.

        I am very patriotic and it’s a special time for many. On the times we’ve not done it people in our church miss it. I think it’s appropriate in our context. I enjoy it, and in our context it’s appropriate and even expected. Even so, we make mention that we love our country but the USA holds no more special place in the gospel than does Argentenia, Austraili, or the Congo.

        Well, with that said – here goes….if I served in a church that was not in such a patriotic area, or a church where the possibility of a visitor who hails from another nation was more like a high probability (or certainty) …. If we had lots of multi national membership….I dont think would I do it…at least no like we do it.

        Why exacerbate nationalistic pressures when it’s all but sure to offend?

        The gospel is for every nation tribe and tongue….why risk appearing to be linking the gospel to USA nationalism.

    • says

      In our church where my son pastors we will have a time of remembrance which includes reading the names of those currently serving in the Armed forces and prayer.

      Actually the reading of the names of those now serving is done monthly.

    • Doug Hibbard says

      We make that part of our prayer time in the service, to intentionally remember in prayer those who have suffered the loss of loved one’s lives for our freedom.

      It seems that God typically uses people, even for His greatest purposes: Noah builds an Ark; Abraham sacrifices a ram; Moses leads the people; Paul and Peter preach.

      While none approach Jesus in perfection and blessing, certainly we have no problem remembering these men and being grateful for their work in the plan of God. I see no harm in honoring those whose lives were given to provide my earthly freedom of worship. Because God used men and women to secure freedom in this country, we do not have a governing official as head of the church–no concerns that the next President will bring us a Presbyterian who changes the rules, no fear that we may be required to update the Baptist Hymnal to match the Chief Justice’s song preference, no worries that the Speaker of the House will excise part of our confession of faith.

      God has always used people to accomplish His purposes. Angels are a side note in Scripture, and are usually only seen to carry messages to…people, who accomplish God’s purposes. There is no harm in honoring people, and much wisdom in demonstrating how to honor people without venerating them or worshiping them. The church is the best place I can think of that we should teach that practice (after the home), for within the body of Christ we worship only the One True God, and so should better see how to honor individuals without distracting from that worship.

      Even the greatest action of God in human history, the Incarnation was about God becoming man, the Son of Man, Jesus.

  24. Dave Miller says

    Dear Dr. Scott,

    Thank you for your tribute to which I agree. I have hoped to put up a memorial day post, but time has so far escaped me.

    But you may hijack a thread for a message like this any time.

  25. volfan007 says

    “It was a good Memorial Day service but having a Recruiting Officer give the invitation was too much.” #MemorialDay

    Rev. NoRespect