J. D. Greear, to the surprise of no sentient person, will be nominated for SBC president this June in clammy Dallas.
What I thought was a great moment in 2016 between Steve Gaines and him has already been recounted here and still appreciated by most of us I believe even if it has been discounted if not forgotten by those who populate the SBC’s alternate universe. Greear’s candidacy has predictably created a disturbance in that universe. It was expected, especially after the declaration of, ahem, “non-war” war in the form of another Conservative Resurgence-like protracted, year-after-year-after-year “non-fight” fight to rid the SBC and her offices, entities, and trustee boards of Calvinists or at least until some degree of equilibrium is achieve in the unforseeable future. Like one longtime church member told me when I had been at a new church for a short time and there arose serious conflict, “We expected it.” It was expected and there have been virtually instantaneous promises of opposition candidates. So be it. We are battlin’ Baptists, after all.
But it is sad to see some of the alleged rationale behind the opposition. If it were mere anti-Calvinism, that would be easily understood. But now it’s a meld of anti-Calvinism and negative spin of a stellar record of evangelism, church planting, mission support, and Cooperative Program support.
Cooperative Program: Megachurches always have lower Cooperative Program percentages. J. D. Greear’s church, The Summit, is at 2.4% of undesignated gifts. That is below the SBC average of around 5% but in my estimation a rather healthy percentage for a megachurch. Steve Gaines’ church is higher but still below the SBC average. The Summit has been North Carolina Baptist’s top CP giving church for the past two years of record. Sure, we used to be in double digits as a CP average…a generation and a half ago. Those days are gone. They are not coming back. Thank God for the churches who give still 10, 15 percent and more but may I quote Adrian Rogers here? “Dollars pay the bills, not percentages.” I think Adrian is an icon to the SBC, including the alternate SBC universe. I suggest listening to him if not me.
Church Planting: The Summit has planted 248 churches, 208 of those outside the U.S. I’m not a big fan of the mother church/satellite church system but I’d make some allowance if a church is doing their franchises and spinning off dozens of churches and giving to the general mission support of the SBC through Lottie Moon, Annie Armstrong, the Cooperative Program, and associational misisons. Isn’t this exactly what we want done, local churches voluntarily choosing to serve the Lord as they feel led and cooperate with the thousands of other likeminded churches?
Mission personnel: It is reported that The Summit has more members, 158 is the number reported, serving with the International Mission Board than any other single church. It would be difficult to find fault here but, let’s not despair, the rabid critics are nothing if not creative. The slam is that The Summit is a net consumer of SBC mission dollars. That is, the number of members under appointment by the IMB cost far more than the church gives to the CP and the mission offerings.
I’ve pastored churches with members serving overseas with the IMB. My church was, accordingly, a net consumer of SBC support. Enormous sums are required to take a missionary family through candidacy, appointment, and field support sums that would have required my church’s entire budget year-after-year-after-year. The entire idea of cooperation is that many churches pooling resources for the benefit of all will generate the support that enables the smallest, most impoverished SBC church to tell their members that if they respond to God’s call, we have, together, the means to support them. God help us if we, for whatever reasons, define cooperation down to a base, vulgar level of net contributing churches and net consuming churches. Whom, I would ask, is the more cooperative Southern Baptist under that philosophy?
Generational Transition: Steve Gaines is 61. Fred Luter is 61. Ronnie Floyd is 62. Johnny Hunt hit MediCare age last year. J. D. Greear, he who seems to be able to find his razor only once a week or so and who never met a tie he liked, is 44 years of age. Greear says one of his emphases will be “engaging the next generation in cooperative mission.” God knows we need that.
I thought Greear was a good choice in 2016 but Steve Gaines, a Traditionalist, was elected. Fine. I thought he did and has done a good job. I voted for him last year. I think Greear is a great choice for 2018. I may sweat it out in Dallas for the election. And, who knows, maybe the convention will come together in another awesome, authentic moment.
J. D. Greear to be SBC presidental nominee again
Greear to be SBC president nominee
Good post. Why would anyone oppose JD? It cannot be because of anything substantive.
We have sadly transitioned from worship wars to theology wars…not totally unrelated. As a Trad, I believe the best thing that could happen is for JD to be elected by large margins and demonstrate having an alleged YRR as SBC President is nothinganyone need fear.
Bart,
Thanks for this post and for making it clear that opposing JD on any of the grounds you listed is foolishness in the extreme.
I’m ok if someone wants to run against him. That’s how the election system works, but trashing him and his church should be out of bounds. He’s one of the truly good guys in the SBC.
I haven’t had coffee. Hence the reason I attributed this to Bart not William.
Wow. 🙁
Excellent post, William. Excellent, indeed.
I don’t know that Greear has ever admitted to being a Calvinist; I think people just assume that he is based on some things he’s said and who he’s associated with.
I personally think Greear is a good candidate but think it would be beneficial for at least one other candidate to throw his name into the hat (Trad or otherwise). Having to choose between two good candidates would be a good problem to have.
William, I hope you do come to Dallas in June. I hope to meet you at the SBC Voices gathering. I heard that Bart Barber has arranged for Chuck Norris to speak at our Voices meeting. Maybe Dave Miller can confirm this.
We are negotiating.
You don’t negotiate with Chuck Norris. Chuck argues your side, his side, and then decides which way he wants to win.
With recognition that a) anyone who qualifies can run and b) votes are at the individual’s discretion, I suspect that any anti-Greear movement will be agenda driven (anti-Cal, attempt to stack trustee boards so they can fire entity heads they don’t like, etc).
There seems no reason to believe that Greear is not a capable and qualified candidate.
But remember, any agenda driven candidate will only run out of need because of the super-secret, Freemason-led, Illuminati-backed, liberal-leaning agenda being pushed by the other side. And by other side I mean everyone who does agree with absolutely everything they say.
Or something like that. 🙂
Not sure whether to applaud you or ban you.
Dave, is this not what happened with the so-called conservative resurgence?
There is a difference between defining core doctrinal parameters – inerrancy, fundamental Christian doctrine, etc – and denominational distinctives and splitting over interpretational differences and tertiary issues.
We need to value the truth of God’s word and hold unswervingly to sound doctrine. But we need not enforce conformity on every issue beyond the BF&M.
It is seen by the anticals as another CR type takeover. I said a few years ago that I’m not up for another. Time for a generational change not another war.
The CR strategy is being used again. Let’s hope it fails this time. It will destroy the SBC this time around.
Is it just me or has a certain blog site in the SBC “alternate universe” turned into an odd combination of The Pulpit and Pen (Trad remix) and Info Wars?
Appreciate your level headed analysis as always William.
No comment.
SO not making a comment.
But, just FYI – it is our preference not to discuss other blogs here. If necessary, we may discuss a concept written there or confront attitudes, etc. But we do not want to return evil for evil by blasting them.
Not trying to rebuke you or anything, just thought I’d give a little “word of knowledge” here.
Of course, didn’t mean for it to come across that way.
The Convention didn’t “come together” in 2016. We were brought together by an act of God, and no man or group of men get any credit. I have no reason to hope that we will “come together” this year, but many reasons to hope that we shall be brought together, again, by the good and great shepherd of the sheep.
“Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”
Acts of God are usually mediated through human agency. I think that JD’s sacrificial act in laying down his candidacy was a tool God used.
It is not contradictory to say that “God did it” and at the same time that a man’s choices or actions were significant in the outcome.
This, of course, taps into the great mystery of life and theology – the interaction of divine sovereignty and human agency. That’s something only Chuck Norris can explain.
Where are you hearing all this disturbance about Greear? Is it online somewhere? I couldn’t seem to find it.
Consider yourself blessed not to be on those sites. We are certainly not going to steer you to them or encourage patronage of such blogs.
I like JD and was encouraged by his nomination but I do have concerns about Summit’s CP giving. Is the CP not the single greatest distinctive of Southern Baptists? There are other denominations and churches that hold to inerrancy, etc. The thing that separates us as SBCers from other conservative, evangelical churches and denominations is the way we have organized ourselves to do ministry and missions. To have a president who has not led his church to give sacrificially to the CP seems like a problem. How will he be able to call other churches to do something that he has not led his own church to do?
To simply say that large churches don’t typically give large percentages seems like a weak defense. If dollars mean more than percentages then that affirms some of my concerns about SBC life. If dollars matter more than percentages and sacrifice then there are thousands of small churches that don’t amount to much in the SBC economy. Maybe it would be better if we honored giving the same way Jesus did with the widow and her pennies. Maybe we will see real growth in CP giving when we start pursuing leaders who promote it through both word and deed.
Again, I like JD and I especially appreciate that he has served with the IMB and that he has been a part of a church revitalization. I love his passion for church planting. I just wish that his church had a stronger record of CP support.
The fact is, Lee, that almost all SBC presidents are below average CP givers. Start with Adrian (“dollars pay bills, not percentages”) Rogers and continue right through Bryant Wright, Ronnie Floyd, and now Steve Gaines. All were below the SBC average but gave large sums.
CP dollars don’t necessarily mean more than CP percentages but neither should they mean less, in isolation from other measures of SBC support.
Right, William… and each of those, good men and Presidents all, were very, very active in other demonstrations of Southern Baptist cooperative missions support.
“He is as bad as the last guy.” Again, not the best defense. How does that encourage greater giving? If we are not serious about the CP then why don’t we just get rid of it. If we are serious about it then why don’t we elevate leaders who are serious about it.
So Lee if I read you correctly, you would support a nominee whose church gave , say, 15% to the CP but otherwise did nothing else in missions over a church that was doing large amounts of mission work but only gave 5%?
My preference is that we wouldn’t have to choose. Surely among our 40,000 churches we could find someone to lead us who is doing both.
Lee,
Do both? Among 40,000 churches? Is your church doing either? [Rhetorical question] Mine isnt. Many of our folks are on fixed incomes. We have sent some families and individuals on missionstrips through IMB and not through IMB.
And my church is probably representative of most of those 40K churches -small. And not rich in money.
Don’t be that guy who wishes for what isn’t. But look at what is there and be thankful. [not that you aren’t -I don’t know]
…as is the current crop of candidates.
Imagine you were presented with a choice between two godly pastors with sterling reputations from similar sized churches. One pastor’s church gives 20% of their 20 million dollar budget to missions but was only giving 5% to the cooperative program. The other pastor’s church was giving 10% of their budget to the cooperative program.
What criteria would make you favor the second pastor over the first?
I am a layman in a church like the first one. There are a lot of factors that go into missions giving over time and the pastor’s preference is not the only one.