Things have changed around here, and I am not talking just about the format of this website.
While I was in Israel, I gave Dr. Frank Page an earful one day. “You have absolutely ruined Baptist blogging,” I chided. Now, as anyone who reads this blog knows, I have an open and undeniable man-crush on Frank Page. I believe that God’s grace brought Frank Page to the convention presidency in 2006 and then to the Executive Committee in 2010(?) “for such a time as this.”
But that doesn’t change the fact that Dr. Page and all his reasonable, peace-loving, unifying efforts have put a serious crimp in the blogging world.
Let me share some facts and figures with you. Since its inception, SBC Voices has grown in the neighborhood of 50% per year (based on page views). Last year, we topped out somewhere around 1.2 million page views for the year. As of June of this year, we were on track to surpass that number in 2013 (not by a 50% margin, but significantly). Then, things changed.
Boy, did things change.

1) Google did away with Google Reader
May the bird of paradise fly up Google’s nose. May an elephant caress Google with his toes. May Google’s wife be plagued with runners in her hose. May the bird of paradise fly up Google’s nose.
Sorry, I’m still sore about that one! Google Reader was the engine that drove our very popular aggregator, one of the unique reasons this site was so active. Why did Google do away with it? I suspect it was a plot of certain bloggers who wanted to silence SBC Voices. Scoundrels. I have no proof, but the lack of proof just shows how good their conspiracy was, doesn’t it?
Other feeds are available, but none of them was designed to work with our blogroll format, so we could not continue with it despite its popularity. We tried a twitter-based feed, but that did not seem to work well. Eventually, Tony redesigned the homepage that we have now. It is actually working well as a portal to other blogs, but the traffic to our posts has not kept pace.
2) The SBC is as peaceful as it has been in a decade.
All that peace and love Frank Page has promoted is KILLING us!
Since the early days of blogging, we have traded in conflict. The IMB and its onerous policies was the first battleground. Then, the war shifted to “Big Tent vs Smaller Tent” views of Baptist life, leading to the “Baptist Identity” wars. Strange to look back on it now, but Calvinism was not a huge issue then. There have always been trigger issues – moderate alcohol consumption, tithing, women in ministry – that ignited debate. There have been battles over leadership at several of our entities, which gradually morphed into the mother-of-all-battles, the Calvinist Conspiracy!
And, without a doubt, the battle over the big C has dominated blogging in the past few years. Tensions escalated slowly until they hit a fever pitch with the release of the Traditionalist document in 2012. As a result of this turmoil, Dr. Page stepped in and formed his Calvinism study group, which presented its report last summer. I doubt that there are many who would be fool enough to say that the Calvinism Committee solved all our problems or ended all debate, but what they did (it seems to me) is put all of this in perspective, and to help us see that Calvinists and non-Calvinists of all stripes could work together and cooperate in missions. (Of course, it is possible that one side or the other has gone underground and will break out with some kind of unforeseen guerrilla warfare tactic, but I don’t think that is the case).
The simple fact is that controversy drives blogging, or at least it has. A couple of weeks ago, John MacArthur hosted an anti-charismatic conference called “Strange Fire.” During that conference, MacArthur’s right-hand man referenced an article I wrote here, and falsely labeled me as a charismatic. For about three or four days, our traffic returned to levels from our Google Reader days! I probably could have milked that controversy a little with a couple of follow-up articles, but that kind of thing does not interest me and we slowly returned to our new normal. That kind of blog traffic we can do without. But that incident showed me that the lack of significant controversy may be driving our numerical lull as much as anything.
3) Perhaps, a sense of shame hit us all.
Honestly, there are times when I would sit at my computer and wonder how Christian people could behave as badly as bloggers sometimes did. And yes, I’m sometimes amazed at the power of my own flesh when I sit at the keyboard. Some of the most irenic, high-minded bloggers today used to be battle-bloggers. Perhaps they gradually realized that the Kingdom was more important than many of the internecine battles we have engaged in. Perhaps they simply got tired of treating others the way that bloggers have so often treated other Christian bloggers. Perhaps we just all realized that there were bigger fish to fry than those we were pursuing.
4) Dave has been lax at the controls of SBC Voices.
The simple fact is that in the last 6 months or so, a series of circumstances – personal and ministry-related – has forced me to be much more absentee as a blog administrator than I should have been. Not only have I written less (which may or may not be a good thing – not for me to decide) but I have spent less time interacting on posts, less time searching for new writers and good posts to republish. When the blog is not managed, things seem to dwindle.
I keep telling myself that I need to get back engaged and be more faithful in writing, in managing this blog and in promoting it, but then things come up and once again, I don’t. Writing is not a hobby for me, it is a calling, and I want to see this blog prosper, but it takes an amount of time I haven’t really had and am not sure when I am going to have.
The result of all these factors (and perhaps others) has been a reduction in our daily traffic that amounts to between 25 to 35 percent, within a few months. We have gone from having between 3500 to 5000 views a day (on weekdays) to averaging less than 3000 (I’ve not really done the most recent math). We’ve stabilized at that lower number, with spikes when a topic hits or some controversy rears its head.
I get the impression that there is a general lull in blue-collar blogging (whether a new era or a temporary calm is hard to say) and there has certainly been one here. I’m not sure if the big-time blogs are down or not (Stetzer, Wax, Rainer, etc), but they operate at a different level than the blogs like this one. What affects us may not touch them.
So, how should we respond? We aren’t going to get Google Reader back (those communists!), so is there something we can do to move SBC Voices forward? There are some options, of course.
Looking to the Future
1) We could fade away.
It is kind of ironic, isn’t it? Many of the leaders of the Baptist world railed against bloggers and cursed our existence (metaphorically – not sure any of them actually swore at us). I’ve sat in meetings listening to luminaries lower the boom on bloggers. More recently, though, many of the entities and their leaders have opened the doors to us. We are no longer viewed as lepers in the Baptist world.
Who’d have thought that acceptance would also be a curse? We are no longer outlaws, the outsiders who aggravate and irritate those in power. Many of the key bloggers of the “wild west” days of Baptist blogging are now actually convention employees!
There is a greater openness today among our leaders. I am amused when I hear newer bloggers complaining about how closed and secretive leadership is today. They should have been around “back in my day.” Many of our leaders seem to have realized that they cannot simply act in a vacuum. If they do things in secret, bloggers are going to talk about it openly.
Here is the irony. The fact that leaders are more open, that they have befriended bloggers, that things are not what they once were may tend to do what the leaders wanted to do back in the wild west days – hinder the work of bloggers!
It is not my intent to just fade into the night, at least not yet!
2) We could rake some muck!
There are blogs that specialize in muckraking and yellow journalism, looking to create controversy where none really exists. We will simply not do that. This is the SBC and controversies will come. Some leader will say or do something silly or aggravating. An issue will arise. Past controversies may again rear their ugly heads.
In Teddy Roosevelt’s famous 1906 speech, “The Man with the Muckrake,” he referred to the Bunyan classic, “Pilgrim’s Progress,” saying this:
In Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress” you may recall the description of the Man with the Muck Rake, the man who could look no way but downward, with the muck rake in his hand; who was offered a celestial crown for his muck rake, but who would neither look up nor regard the crown he was offered, but continued to rake to himself the filth of the floor.
In “Pilgrim’s Progress” the Man with the Muck Rake is set forth as the example of him whose vision is fixed on carnal instead of spiritual things. Yet he also typifies the man who in this life consistently refuses to see aught that is lofty, and fixes his eyes with solemn intentness only on that which is vile and debasing.
Unfortunately, some bloggers refuse to leave behind their muckrakes. They are fixated on the ugly, the dirty – “the filth of the floor” – and keep their vision fixed on the lower things. This is, of course, the conundrum of blogging. One of our roles is to hold those in power accountable and to call them on their misdeeds. We have done that – sometimes well, sometimes poorly. But there is a fine line between holding powerful people accountable and becoming muckrakers. It is a hard line to draw, but we must constantly be seeking to define that line!
Yellow journalism is also a temptation in times like this. The term refers to those who create controversies, who make up stories to draw readers. There are blogs that labor hard to create controversies where not exist and to build even the smallest molehill of disagreement into a mountain of division. That tendency must be avoided by those whose desire is to honor Christ.
The best thing to do with muckrakers and yellow bloggers is simply to ignore them. Do not react. Do not respond. No, I am not talking about trying to silence them. They have the right to say any outrageous thing they wish. But with their right to speak out as they please comes our right to simply ignore the raking of muck and the self-serving creation of controversy. I have no right to silence anyone, but neither does anyone have the right to demand that I listen! I will admit that one man’s yellow journalist is another man’s truth-speaking hero. Again, I am not naming names (and will delete comments that do so) because these categories are so subjective.
My point is that I think muckraking and yellow blogging have been common, are not godly activities, and should be ignored. It is my intent that SBC Voices will not ride that artificial wave to greater traffic.
3) We can keep plugging away!
That is pretty much what I intend to do. Keep writing. Keep posting. Keep on keeping on.
SBC Voices has had a unique place among SBC blogs. Most blogs are focused more on the writings of the author. You go to Ed Stetzer’s blog to read what he says, not to talk about it. SBC Voices is a discussion forum. We write things and then you discuss them. It is obvious that after about 25 comments, the post itself is generally ignored and the discussion takes on a life of its own! But that is who we are. We are not a star-power blog, but a place where people come to talk about issues.
That is why the changes that were forced on us, making the discussion a little more of a challenge, have been difficult. We are continuing to seek ways to facilitate that discussion. We continue to seek good writers who will share their thoughts with us. I’ve had to, for the time being at least, give up my 3-posts-a-day plan. Simply don’t have the articles! But I’d love to get back to posting 2 or 3 times a day if we can get the posts.
If you’d like to contribute let me know. But first, consider the following.
Some Guidelines for Potential Contributors
1) If you contribute to SBC Voices, people will tell you how wrong you are – frequently. If you are hyper-sensitive to criticism, SBC Voices is probably not for you. I have been called just about every name in the book over the last few years as I have managed this site (much of the criticism probably true). It goes with the territory. If you put your thoughts out there, someone is likely to disagree. Some are going to forcefully disagree. It happens!
We’ve had some pretty good writers come through SBC Voices, who wrote well but were just not set up for the discussions that followed. This site is just not for everyone. But if you are willing to have your ideas challenged, this may be a good place for you!
As I’ve told many before, I have no money to offer anyone, but we can offer you an audience. It may not be what it was six months ago, but it can still be significant!
2) We are not interested in muckrakers, yellow bloggers or controversialists. We are free to deal with controversial topics (that is our bread and butter), but not in a belligerent or disrespectful way. Now, here’s the catch. In the general world, everyone gets to decide for themselves what is muckraking and what is not. For the time being, at SBC Voices, I make those decisions. There is always our blog owner Tony to appeal to, but frankly, to this point, he has not interfered with my editorial decisions. He may someday, but so far, not.
I try not to make those decisions based on point-of-view. I have turned down articles from both Calvinists and non-Calvinists (and offended people on both sides by doing so) because I thought they were excessively combative or conspiratorial. I am probably unfair, as people have accused, but I try to make wise decisions. The point is, for the time being, the decision is still mine.
3) We like people who write well. To be honest, bad grammar and sloppy writing drive me nuts (except when I do it, of course). But what you need to do here is clearly develop an idea about the Bible, about theology, about ministry, politics or some social trend, articulate your position clearly and let the discussion commence.
4) We desire writers with a unique perspective on ministry issues. We are primarily a blog for SBC pastors. If you write about what is grinding the rubber on your road, it will probably speak to other readers.
5) If you simply wish to rehash the Calvinism issue repeatedly, other sites might be better. There are sites that will publish pro-Calvinism articles. There are several sites that love non-Calvinist or anti-Calvinist fare. I am not interested in going over that ground again and again. Thoughtful articles on Calvinism issues will always be considered. But we need to move beyond just gnawing the bones of that topic, ad nauseum.
So, that’s where I am right now. I hope to do better as a blog editor and writer. I am constantly looking for people who want to contribute. Now, it’s your turn!
For the record…this post is not intended as a subtle response to any other article.
I just noticed a post written by another – after I had set his one to post. This post has nothing to do with any other post – specifically at least!
Dave,
I think you are absolutely correct that what makes SBC Voices unique in the blogosphere is the fact that we are discussion based. I think part of the problem with traffic has to do with the new format. I don’t think it’s working on the aggregator end or the discussion end.
As one that benefits from Voices linking to my site, I can say that my traffic is way down from what it was before Reader went down. And it’s even down from what it was on the hybrid version that appeared for awhile before moving to the new format. My guess is that people don’t go to Voices FOR the aggregator but for the discussion. But once here–when it was front and center things caught their eye and they clicked.
Secondly, the discussion is very difficult to follow. It has helped putting the comments on the front page–but I think we are missing a good number of our past lurkers simply because you can’t follow which comment is on which article.
Having said all of this–I don’t have a solution. I’m too stupid to have a solution. I’m learning WordPress myself. But I do know anytime that someone has to click a couple times to get where they want it isn’t gonna help traffic. It goes down exponentially each time.
Just my thoughts….
P.S. I’m proud to be part of Voices and glad that we don’t muck rake….much.
Well, the #1 thing that brought people here was my good looks – and my fashion sense! (Jealousy of the Lime Green Suit is sad).
Tony has worked hard to figure out the format, and we aren’t sure at this point what else to do.
I’d be willing to take a pay cut if Tony would hire somebody that does web-design that could solve the problem. You can cut my salary by 50% even.
The only reason any of us write here is for the cash, right?
I do it to give me street cred.
Works out about the same as the cash, right?
Dave,
You could always do the aggregator manually, updating it once or twice a day. It would simply be a list of links to the latest articles by the most prominent SBC blogs…
As one of those non-SBC lurkers, I’ve been reading SBC Voices for the past year or so. When Google Reader went away, I switched to Feedly.com which handles posts in a very similar manner. I can easily read new posts on my reader page (and I enjoy doing so).
But agree with Mike’s assessment of the new interface, and the difficulty of accessing the discussions in the comments. I can’t really see what’s happening on the site without the use of serious diligence on my part. That, and I think since the main page is aggregating so many other blogs, it causes a lengthy delay in displaying it. Even with high-speed internet, it takes up to 30 seconds to come up.
Is it possible to have the SBC Voices posts on the home page, and a separate page for all of the other blogs that you share?
I’m very non-technical. I manage content, but do not understand formatting at all. Do’t know whether it is possible or not.
“We are primarily a blog for SBC pastors.”
I don’t know that it quite started that way, but I’m fine being one of the outsiders who isn’t a pastor. Some posts are certainly more insider-oriented and almost seem to be sneak-peeks into a pastor’s-only club.Often I just skip past those articles.
So, on the one hand there’s nothing wrong at all being a blog that is oriented toward pastoring in the SBC. On the other hand, it might be limiting the readership.
Jim, I really should have said, “SBC church leadership.” It is not just for pastors, though most of us are. We actually have quite a few non-pastors who are involved, and I am very glad.
For what it’s worth from a perpetual SBC Voices lurker but sporadic/rare participant, I agree that the change in the format has really decreased my ability to stay engaged, (reading-wise, that is), in the discussion. I still actively read the new posts, but it is harder to stay engaged and follow the ensuing discussion.
I still really appreciate the work that everybody puts into this blog. As long as y’all keep posting, I’ll probably keep reading.
Apparently, I’m also incapable of double checking the “name” field in the new comments section. Dave: If you’re able to edit that bizarre double name I somehow entered, I’d appreciate it.
Well, darn. I have no idea where my original comment went. I give up.
Because of the name issue it went into moderation. I had the choice to go classy or to ridicule your mistake. Guess which I chose.
It’s good to see that our fearless SBC Voices leader hasn’t turned the moderation system into an instrument of autocratic malevolence. We wouldn’t want the power to go to his head.
Oh, wait.
Dear Zachary SteppZach Stepp. Weird name.
Oh, and I appreciate your comment.
The experience of the blog is the combination of the post and the comments, and the new format does not allow us to easily keep track of the comments and which posts they belong to. I think the new format is driving traffic to other blogs at the expense of itself. I think if we could track the comments along with the blog posts like the old days, that would help.
Ahmm! How about a focus on the First and Second Great Awakenings and the launching of the Great Century of Missions, and the theology that produced them? Of course, I have written responses on this blog for a number of years (not sure just what year I hooked into it), and probably most people would know where I am coming from. But what they might fail to realize about the period and my perspectives on it is that there are definitely factors and elements about that time from 1740-1820 which defy ideological analysis. Just consider how Sandy Creek in the period 1755-1771 could have eldresses. Consider, also, how the Baptists in Virginia could hold out against the temptation to become, along with other denominations, the state church (Washington and Patrick Henry’s offer, and the Presbyterians who had been going along with the Baptists until then suddenly switched horses in the middle of the stream, but the Baptists had the vote). And then there is the matter of Charleston Assn. recommending John Gill’s works to its ministers. We might also consider how Mt. Pisgah which joined SandyCreek Assn. in 1816 and sent out the first missionary of Southern Baptists to China, Matthew T. Yates, could hold that Christ died for the church and not say one word in their articles of faith about Him dying for the world? There is also the fact of two ministers from Philadelphia Assn. coming to NC and converting some General Baptists to Particular Baptists and that group would experience the Second Great Awakening 46 years later. We might also consider how Dr. George W. Truett could say at the Spurgeon Centennial in London where he was introduced by the Prime Minister of the British Empire that Calvinism pressed down on the brow of man the crown of responsibility or why as one American Intellectual Historian could say that theological viewpoint could produce some of the most committed people to be seen in history. Why does religious liberty get established in law and practice with that theology (e.g., Rhode Island under the leadership of Roger Williams and Dr. John Clarke)?
While these topics are controversial, they also are rich deposits for future awakenings to be mined by those who have a mind and a heart for the same and even for those who don’t. Consider how Jonathan Edwards could make the greatest calls for a yearly recommitments or, as we might say, rededications? He also wrote that Humble Attempt which was the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the modern missionary movement, moving people like Carey, Fuller, Judson, and Rice. We could also consider Whitefield and how he related to all of this. There is also the rebuke which Edwards delivered to Whitefield during the ride from the appointment in Edwards church to Whitefield’s next appointment, something Whitefield fails to mention, if memory serves correctly, and something Edwards does mention. O, and by the way, did you know that Sandy Creek Assn. corresponded with the Philadelphia Assn., something that most people would not know as being practically equivalent to fellowship or that two of the ministers of Charleston from approximately 1775 to 1825 and from 1825-1835 were Separate Baptists? (Which would mean that Gill’s works were recommended during the pastorate of the first Separate Baptist?) There is also the issue of Whitefield’s Methodist chickens becoming Baptist ducks.
And then there is that beloved tendency of Baptists to wrangle; they would rather fight that do anything else (it is more exciting you know, and more of the flesh and the devil for the most part, though it can serve the purposes of God). One historian quoted some disenchanted Episcopalian (he might have been Anglican then, if before the Revolution), who threw cold water on the whole Baptist affair, and while he was doing that there wrangling attitudes were already getting the missionary movement started (before Carey, mind you), uniting Separates and Regulars (try that today; we came close with Dr. Page’s committee, but the folks still don’t know or understand their great past), supporting the American Revolution, securing religious liberty, establishing the first schools, convincing General Baptists to become Regular Baptists (that is give up general atonement and adopted particular redemption or limited atonement and do it in such a way as to be more evangelistic and missionary than General Atonement)
O well, I was trying to whet some appetites, but I suspect I could more easily file an old hoe for chopping cotton than get a bunch of Baptists to see what I am saying. It is sort of like herding cats. O yes, and, intellectually, the theology in our past is the most challenging, engaging, exciting, attractive, entertaining, magnetic, interesting, stirring, moving stimulating, winsome, and it came directly from the mind of God Himself. Besides this it enables and empowers Baptists to become the leaders of Western Civilization for a brief period by being the most balanced, flexible, creative, constant, and magnetic representatives of the Gospel. You don’t agree? Then ask yourself this: Why in the world did 200 Congregationalist Churches in that period become Baptists? O, and in answer to the Reformed Baptists and any idea some of them might have about the elders being the church by representation, why in the world did the folks in England who were Puritan and Reformed become Congregationalist in church government?
Enough of this excitement. I might go to preaching.
It’s good to see some things don’t change. Always enjoy your comments Dr.W
Dear Brother: I am sold on the idea of the praying for, and the promoting of, a Third Great Awakening. That was the desire that first prompted me in 1973, and it became a passionate desire, in fact, a raging fire in my heart. I just finished my morning prayers in which I besought the Lord for the whole earth and every soul upon it beginning, hopefully, in this generation and continuing for a thousand generations and a million billion planets in the next 20,000-900,000 years just to fulfill the prophecy of Rev.7:9. As a postmillennialist, I do not deny that we are going to have some tough times, but I do insist that we be as bold as lions, expecting to take the whole earth for the Lord Jesus Christ, just as our Calvinistic (so-called, I dislike the term, preferring Sovereign Grace, because folks were dying for the doctrines of grace before John Calvin was ever conceived, much less thought of. If I could, I would put a copy of Jonathan Edwards’ Humble Attempt in the hands of every reader of this blog plus all of our ministers int he SBC and I would urge them to plead the promises/prophecies in prayer which he listed and which were pleaded by Carey and the others that led to the launching of the Great Century of Missions and the Second Great Awakening.
Personally, the format change has been really tough for me. I guess maybe it was because the old Voices was so easy to follow. Also, so many of these blogs that hardly post new material just get in the way.
I miss my old friends
Personally, I think Google’s changes suck; they must have taken leave of their senses. Perhaps we need a replacement for that approach.
The best way to help SBC Voices would be to get a new commander and chief. Someone that is not so political, and would allow us to talk to one another without interference, and shoving his ideas down our throats. With an attitude like Dave Miller has, and his micro-managing the blog, most people don’t dare to comment. It’s a shame.
Dave only has a few that he will comment with and the rest he ridicules.
But, Jess, my mom thinks I’m wonderful!
For our readers, “Doc” is Jess Alford, who was a regular commenter here. If you look back, he was allowed to comment often and unimpeded. Evidently, I did not respond often enough or positively enough on his comments and he got his feelings hurt.
However, on a post about racial issues, he made some unacceptable comments about interracial dating and marriage – which I felt were beyond that which is acceptable. The article was “We Need to Stop Talking about Restoring America.”
You can read the comment stream for yourself if you are interested.
I called him on that, but he got in a snit and said he would never come back.
He couldn’t stay away, though, recently returning under a different name, “Doc.” When I called him Jess, he got very angry and sent me some abusive emails, calling my character and basic Christianity into question.
I offered to do whatever I could to reconcile with him, but he refused, saying (again) that he would never come back to SBC Voices. Of course, he came back tonight to tell everyone what he thinks about me.
I believe I did exactly the right thing in confronting Jess’ statements. We allow a lot of things here at SBC Voices, but I get pretty strict about racially-charged comments.
Anyway, I just thought the readers of SBC Voices might wonder about the comment coming from some unknown guy named “Doc”.
While I would never tell anyone who to marry or not marry, I think you are right David to call anyone’s hand on racism. We have blacks attending our son’s church, blacks and whites in interracial marriages, both ways, just as we had at the last church we attended. Only difference now is that we are attending a rural North Carolina Church, whereas the other church was a city church in one of the most prosperous areas of the state. I count the people in interracial marriages as my friends, love them and their children.
In telling anyone whom to marry or not marry, I would be especially fearful in trying such a thing with my own children. Just as surely as I did, they would do the opposite. I have said this, I would prefer that they marriage a devout Christian Black than a lost world White and vice versa. Marry a Christian, but even that is no guarantee of success. Why? We do not always know that the other person is really a Christian, and we don’t know whether we can handle their differences or that they can handle our differences.
David: Your Mom never saw you as we have seen you. Could be that is the reason she has such exalted feelings about you.
Wow. That stung a little, Jim!
Actually, mom sometimes read the blog, so if she gets upset, you will have to deal with her wrath.
Now, David, that was totally unfair to one meaning nothing but fun. I fear to face any mother’s wrath, only fearing my grandmother’s worse. And I just imagine your mom spoiled you to death. Had, too, for anyone to wear a lime green suit which every one complains of.
Doc, if you think David Miller is bad, you should try Norm Miller at SBC Today. He is tough as nails, but I found out that he is just simply trying to keep the bloggers on course and civilized in their comments. Both Millers, it appears, are trying to be fair, while, at the same time, seeking to maintain a Christian and charitable atmosphere in the discussions.
Dave, feel free to delete this if you wish, but I’m going to go ahead and say it:
Actually, Doc, Dave is far from being a problem around here. He is called upon to manage a monumental task, and commenters like you are the problem. You lack civility, logic, and a sense of common courtesy. You state your opinions as gospel with no regard for others’ views. When someone calls you on it, you resort to ridicule and maliciousness. Your “sense of humor” is harsh, critical, hateful and abusive. You misuse and abuse scripture in order to support your own prejudices and doctrinal weaknesses.
Sorry, Doc, but your approach can hardly be held up as a higher standard around here. It is, in fact, the low road.
By the way, it shows a lack of courage and personal responsibility to come on here now under a pseudonym. I could have told who was commenting simply by the comment. Dave has been right to call you out.
“The best way to help SBC Voices would be to get a new commander and chief. Someone that is not so political . . .”
Jess Alford,
You want a less political administrator of Voices? Are you not the guy who voted for the current POTUS for “political” reasons only?
Tell me, Jess Alford. How’s that workin’ out for you lately, Ole Buddy? Have you gotten any nice letters from your insurance company?
You know good and well that Dave Miller does not micromanage Voices.
Lately, I’ve barely even managed it.
Once you get past the glaring errors of Yankeefandom and Dispensationalism, Dave’s not a bad guy.
But o the pain, duh main pain, the great pain of getting past the burning down of the Willingham family home place in southern Arkansas by them thar Yankees, the loss of downtown Memphis due to great great grandpa Beasley’s PTSD from the war and his signing over the power of attorney to handle that land to a lawyer. There is more, O yes, that was over a 100 + years ago, and my grandpa Bankston was a Yankee. Sigh! Can’t win for losing. Guess we’ll just have to accept David with his good points (whatever they are???) and his bad points, yankeedom and dispensationalism; it is choking me, but I think I can manage it.
Not really much wrong with the Dispensationalism.
But the Yankeefandom puts him up there with needing to be rebuked by the global council of true sport.
Lest he be trampled by rampaging elephants…
Though not a member of such and such council, I second the motion to rebuke.
Praise the Lord! Our prayers have been answered. CB is back in his old self, ascetic, austere, assertive, assiduous, and astute. His only flaw is the crimson crud. Perhaps, one of the teams from the ACC, like FSU or the Rambling Wrecks from Georgia Tech, might revive him. I would duck, but he still might take aim on a Baptist, regardless of whether he was a protected water foul or not (figure that one out).
I still read the posts, I just don’t comment as much. I found that I was spending too much time paying attention to the comments and trying to stay engaged with the discussions than was necessary.
I honestly don’t see how you do it, Dave. And how the blog writers keep up with the wild comments and drive-bys is amazing.
Also, to be honest, some of the posts just haven’t piqued my interest much lately.
In addition, a few of the commenters are simply ridiculous and just say the same stuff over and over. It gets old. And we haven’t had any good football hijacks in a while–SEC CB, where are you?
So, I spend my time creeping on Facebook. There are pictures over there!
Dale and CB,
CB weighed in recently when my character was assaulted based on a drive-by disagreement with my last post here. I was so appreciative of CB. CB has a heart of gold and strong beliefs and convictions. But as you know, in the blogging world, words are often open to multiple interpretations. Some of CB’s words have been misinterpreted by me-at times-and others. Being misunderstood, or falsely accused can take it’s toll on any one. I miss CB’s commenting here also. As a matter of fact, I stroll this blog to see what CB, Dave, Bob Cleveland, Alan Cross, Louis, Bart Barber, Debbi, and others think concerning the subject of the hour. I even miss the comments of Joe Blackmon and Frank L. But, blogging is by it’s very nature is opinionated, therefore, controversial. I’m sure all of us who post and comment here, at times, have had to evaluate if this is the highest and best use of our time. Hopefully, CB is enjoying his rest period away from blogging. His post on liquor consumption was probably the most commented on post in Voices history. Dave would have to verify that. Again, I was so thankful and blessed when CB returned to commenting long enough to defend my character. Although, some of my words had wounded him. That takes a big man. CB, we love and miss you. If nothing else, comeback and boast about the Crimson Tide.
Dwight
I agree, Dr. McKissic, we need Cb and the others to come back and take part in the discussions. It is easy to get one’s feelings hurt, even when the comments that seem abrasive which were meant to be helpful.
I miss CB, too.
He’s an ‘original’. I hope all is well with him and with his family. I too noticed that he supported the good name of Dr. McKissic when his character was attacked, and I thought that was admirable.
Football season without CB is not the same around here, no.
I believe that CB lurks around the site, but doesn’t engage in comments.
If that is the case, I will say that I am glad he is not around. He is insufferable during NCAA football season. Something about the Crimson Crud.
Wow! What happened? The blog seems to have changed again? Any way, David, your comment re: CB, noted sports commentator of Crimson Crud fame, if that does not draw him out of his shell, nothing shall. Anyway I wanted to make a comment, that CB had said he had planned to come up this way (North Carolina) back in May, and that if I needed help to move, he would come by. Now anyone that good natured deserves accolades for goodness, but I ain’t saying what he deserves for tooting those self-serving Crimson Cruds.
Yeah, with CB not around lately, I haven’t been able to engage in speculations about rolling cardboard detergent boxes (I still maintain that Clorox rolls better).
Clorox in boxes, Ben? Who ever heard of such a thing?
That’s why Clorox rolls better – it’s in a round bottle!
Even Tide liquid comes in an oblong bottle that rolls poorly, yet CB still wants Tide to roll.
Maybe SEC CB is a little concerned about my well-dressed men in green from the great Pac 12 Conference? Hmmmmm???????
How ’bout it SEC CB? You’ve got to admit that my Ducks are playing some pretty good ball and the schedule just gets tougher from here. Could it be that the boys in crimson will slip and fall going into the post-season? I say, “Yes!”
Alabama holds the power to make me cheer for a Pac 12 team. However, I’m still pulling for an FSU championship. Famous Jameis!
I’d go for FSU vs. Oregon. I’d also go for Baylor vs. Oregon. Either one would be a great game if both teams actually showed up.
Great post. Keep blogging. Blogging doesn’t have to be controversial, and the number of comments a post receives is not indicative of the quality of that post.
I guess I started coming to this blog right around the time that the reader went away, and during those early months I mainly read the articles and didn’t get into the comments as much. I now see the comments are equally (and sometimes more) helpful as the original posts, but I’m not missing the reader since I never used it.
I do hope you’ll all keep on keeping on as I think this has been a really helpful blog. I’m thankful for you all sharing your thoughts and for the insight it provides.
“During that conference, MacArthur’s right-hand man referenced an article I wrote here, and falsely labeled me as a charismatic.”
Are you a cessationist?
Normally, I am a cessationist, though I wasn’t the one asked, except in those cases where God has used someone in a time of dire need. E.g., the wife of a friend of mine. She was in a Guerilla Unit in the Philippines during WWII, when the American Captain, called her in. Seems a group of little Black men were coming toward the camp with baskets on their heads. The Captain told her to communicate with them, as she was Filippino, but, as she said, they were Negritos. So with handsignals and words she did not know, she found out that the Great Spirit had told those Negritos to bring the unit food (as the latter were on their way to starving to death).
I was a cessationist up to that point (there was another example I had heard about), but I came to accept in the Gospel’s introduction into frontier areas the unexpected can and does happen. All of my personal experiences with tongues only served to convince me that it had ceased, that what I saw and heard, personally, was fakery, deception, etc. Like the husband of my friend, the Filippino lade, said about some fellow who advised people to learn to speak in tongues by going la-la with their tongues real fast until they would began to speak in the unknown tongue, “Baloney!”
There are a few other instances, but I will save them for another time as I find the subject uninteresting, distasteful (had you seen the madness I have seen in connection with such practices as tongues, you would think the same), repugnant, and etc. In fact, I know about cases, reported even by those who are committed tongue talkers that are demonic in nature.
Our honored and esteemed blog-owner Tony is trying some new stuff. Hopefully, his brilliance will find something grand!
I wish I knew enough about WordPress to help, but I build sites in Drupal, not WordPress.
Wow! It’s deja vu all over again!
What is missing, of course, is the feed for other blog articles.
Senior Tony is working on it. He will have a solution, I’m sure!
I like your going back to the old look. Overall much better, in my opinion. Now if you can just get a list/feed of other blog articles, you’ll have it made!
Dave,
I think you are a very fair moderator and I appreciate you changing the format back to more conducive one for following conversations.
Dave
I am always incredibly blessed by your blog posts. I really learn a lot and find them very enlightening.
For what it’s worth, here are “My Ideas for Southern Baptist Convention to survive:”
http://jaroland74.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/646/
Thanks
John