Seems that “objectify” is the term du jour in our circles. Many of the brethren need help understanding this. I suggest asking the closest female.
Steve Gaines says we are at a “pivotal” time. In my best curmudgeonly way, I’d call it the wrong term. We are clearly in the midst of a generation change, and that whether the youthful J. D. Greear or the senior adult Ken Hemphill is elected. But “pivotal,” is ridiculously overused these days. The SBC doesn’t pivot. It shifts direction by tiny degrees and fractions of degrees. Regardless of the election outcome, we will change little. The new Executive Committee president is a better candidate for a “pivotal” change, though I hope he is not such an individual. Let’s go with “divot” not “pivot.” We have scarred the denominational landscape here of late. Needs repairing.
One of the tinfoil hat crowd has some sort of SBC same, lame conspiracy nonsense up elsewhere. It is worth ignoring except for his use of “mute point.” This is a common language error. I see it all the time. My guess is that readers who know the difference instantly categorize the user as being not too sharp. Sometimes we define ourselves.
Bart Barber wrote that God used some faithful and indefatigable Southern Baptists to rescue it from the brink. Where, O Lord, are such people today?
So, Dave Miller objects to intellectual vapidity does he? Would he fare as well as an indefatigable blogger were the blogging universe not such a rich mine of intellectual vapidity? I think not, brethren and sistren.
When I read the loudest voices (and bloggers can do all kinds of nifty stuff, like read voices) of the rabid and militant anti-Cals, my concern is that the SBC might be pulled in any direction by folks who promote lawsuits against the SBC, allow all kinds of absurdities, and pump out fake and misleading news by the gallon. But when I read folks like Eric Hankins, who is concerned about the monochromatic theology at SBTS, I’m inclined to welcome a conversation even if I don’t share the same goals. Pity the movement cannot filter out the hair-on-fire element.
A religious celebrity offers a notable prayer, a confession of sorts, to the Lord and to hundreds of thousands of his or her closest friends on Twitter. Who is the main target for this? The Almighty or his/her multitudes of followers? Has the Sermon on the Mount (“pray…in secret…”) been superseded by the church of social media? Just asking. All the big Twits do this.
Best quote lately is from Beth Moore: “I’ve been talked down to by male seminary students and held my tongue when I wanted to say, “Brother, I was getting up before dawn to pray and to pore over the Scriptures when you were still in your pull ups.”” It’s good for some seminarians to have their diapers changed occasionally before the stink wafts too far.
Some of Paige Patterson’s loudest, most strident, and shrill defenders are upset…that the old war horse apologized. They have been defending him, circulating petitions of support, anointing him with august titles, pilloring critics mercilessly and now he apologizes. No one could script this stuff. I don’t know what to expect from the SWBTS trustees meet next week but I’m hopeful that there are some wise heads inside of those ten gallon cowboy hats everyone in Texas wears. The convention sermon is a must-be-at-event for the time being. I’m looking forward to it and not because I like train wrecks. I think Patterson will do an outstanding job. May be the most important single sermon he has ever preached.
