Baptist Press is reporting that Dr. Ken Hemphill, former president of Southwestern Seminary, will be nominated for the office of president of the SBC. 
He has served as a pastor and in other denominational roles.
The Baptist Press article can be found here.
He is the second announced candidate. North Carolina pastor JD Greear’s candidacy was announced a few days ago.
The choice for Southern Baptists here is excruciatingly hard. Ken Hemphill and J.D. Greear are both solid, solid choices. I fear that both men are going to be villified unfortunately by some of those who will chose sides and fail to see they are both good men. If you like Greear, understand that (among other things) Dr. Hemphill did an extraordinary job stepping in at Southwestern when the atmosphere at that Seminary was toxic due to the fallout from the firing of his predecessor. If you like Hemphill, understand that Greear (among other things) may not do things in a “traditional manner”, but his church is being used in the Kingdom in an extraordinary way. I hate that we have to chose between them and that a possible third candidate will emerge who is less solid and may beat both of them.
Unfortunately as long as there are people in the SBC who are more concerned with their tribe and dividing us up along those lines this may be the new normal.
It may also be a great opportunity for unity in the face of division as men like Greear and Hemphill work together for the betterment of our Convention.
If you had asked me yesterday to list the top 100 people most likely to be the next president of the SBC, Ken Hemphill’s name would not have appeared on the list. As far as I know he’s a good & godly man. To allow himself to be swept along with this group who was desperately searching for an opposition candidate is disappointing.
I kinda feel bad for him. From what I know about Hemphill, he seems to be a kind, Godly, qualified man and yet that group has reduced him down to an agenda pick.
Why cast his decision to run as a bad thing. Maybe he feels lead of God to run like the other candidate. The SBC can withstand two candidates and if not we are in far worse trouble than we think .
Agreed, Greg. We should all be grateful that there are now two good candidates from which to choose.
The problem is that the most vocal supporters of one candidate are framing the election as a “watershed” moment for the SBC, as hopefully another president in a continuation of “year-after-year-after-year” elections after which current trustees are replaced with more acceptable ones, as one to steer the SBC towards Zion (presumably, and not away from Zion as the “wayward ship” is being steered now), as the one to steer the ship “in the direction Jesus would have us go” (presumably, not away from where Jesus wants us to go as we are now), as a time when the SBC avoids the “point of no return”, and the like. It’s apocalyptic language.
We will see how this unfolds. I’d favor a candid disclosure of intent. We’ve always had theological and political tensions in the SBC. I had thought that the 2016 election was the watershed moment but that has been disparaged and discounted by some. So be it.
Thank you, Greg. To view or frame Hemphill’s candidacy as opposition to Greear’s is to make the assumption that the presidency is Greear’s by divine fiat. No matter how godly a man is, that is not how things operate in Southern Baptist life (yet).
Two high quality candidates should cause delegates to think much and pray fervently about who the Lord is directing them to choose, much like it did when the choices were Gaines and Greear.
Agreed in part.
A vocal portion of the SBC is and will frame Hemphill as an “opposition” candidate. Greear has no “right” to election and does not deserve to go unchallenged; however challenging him based solely on the idea of resistance will be detrimental to the SBC long term.
This is not a matter of differing ideas moving forward, or visions for the future of the SBC, this election will be pitted as a choice for the soul of the SBC and as part of a strategy aimed at marginalizing what some perceive as threat to their traditions.
Greg,because reality is real. This is an announced strategy, not some conspiracy theory.
Agreed. Simply consider why a certain other blog did not have any announcement on Greear’s nomination.
Disappointing to read some of the comments in lamenting the fact that Southern Baptists should be able to have a choice when electing a president. There will be some very obvious differences between the 2 present candidates for office, such as age, experience, and soteriology. There may be some who feel an older candidate would do a better job, and some who feel that a candidate holding to unlimited atonement is a non-negotiable as far as casting his/her ballot. Each representative should be able to vote his preference. Elections are about choices.
We are blessed to have two candidates who demonstrate strong conviction and good character. It isn’t fair to hold them responsible for agendas their supporters may have. Two years ago I thought either Steve Gaines or J D Grear would be a good president. The same is true this year.
Mark, I have gone on record here at Voices as saying that I believe any Southern Baptist should feel free to run for SBC President. However, there is no denying that this particular nomination is coming from a segment of the convention that believes Calvinism is the greatest threat to the SBC and must be subdued if not eradicated. They’ve made that crystal clear. It’s this segment that asked Dr. Hemphill to run. Therefore, it is my opinion that he cannot be separated from his supporters.
I have a couple of other questions. 1) Will we get any articles about when Ken Hemphill became a hero 2) will we get any agency heads praising his decision to run.
1) Not at this blog. 2) I doubt it. Unless you want to count the rabid anti-Calvinist state exec. down in Louisiana.
I would actually like to know how many of us visit this blog and the other blog with SBC in its name.
Adam,
Dr. Hemphill is a hero. If you had been at SWBTS in the 90’s you wouldn’t be so dismissive. Dr. Hemphill did a great job getting SWBTS off probation, restoring campus morale, and otherwise getting a crippled Seminary back on track . And he brought Ricky Skaggs to campus while he was at it as a bonus. I equally admire JD Greear and I guess I will eventually defend him over at the other website.
I have nothing against Ken Hemphill. I am vehemently opposed to the agenda of those who are behind his nomination.
And let me say that I have been using Steve Gaines’ Pray Like This curriculum in my church. Ken Hemphill is one of the speakers on the video. His contributions have been some of the best. I have nothing against the man.
SBCThis Week has this on reaction to KH’s candidacy:
http://www.sbcthisweek.com/sbc-leaders-reacted-ken-hemphill-presidential-nomination-announcement/
Mr. Thornton I always read your comments because they shed light not smoke.
Just like mine, right?
Quite the Who’s Who of SBC personalities, huh?
If someone wants to write one, fine.
We are going to try to be fair, but I am making no secret that I believe that the best president for the SBC right now is JD Greear. I have little bad to say about Ken Hemphill – never thought ill of him. But the process is what the process is and we can’t pretend that he isn’t being used to further an agenda of divisiveness that I do not want to see advanced. The people behind him have not been secret about wanting a war – a CR type anti-Cal resurgence. As an antinomist/wishy-washy Calvinist/non-Reformed whatever I have little desire to be involved in a Cal war and I certainly do not want the next 10 years of SBC life to be a battle to rid the SBC of Calvinists.
heaven help us.
As will always be the case, there are no ‘bad guys’ nominated for SBC President. You’re going to get men nominated (you could have a woman, but we seem to have made the tradition that it must be a pastor/preacher, so we’re not going to see a layperson or a lady) who love Jesus, love the Word of God, love the SBC, and serve their churches well.
The real question will be between: 1) whether we find the way in which they show those loves the way we want held up as an example; 2) whether or not the supporters and connections that man brings to the office are going to be a step forward.
Take as an example the election a few years back when Dave Miller became PC President. Both choices were good, godly men. You knew that voting for Miller meant you would also see some of the names you see on this blog involved in his work–so, while he was responsible, if you felt that Dave was affiliated with some folks who would do harm to the PC, you definitely did not vote for him.
That wasn’t the only thing–I doubt anyone who voted for Dave thought that
MeadorAvant (edited. I forgot who it was) had bad backers–but it’s a factor.So you’re really choosing: 1) how has the candidate demonstrated that they would be worth following for the SBC; 2) who will rise in visibility with this candidate?
Because I think we’re past the “will this candidate nominate people who believe in the Bible?” question, that one’s been settled for a while.
If you think that Greear will raise to prominence, either through endorsement or nominations, people who will lead us astray or increase division, you’ll want to go another way. If you think that Hemphill will do so, then you’ll want to another way.
Because I don’t know that you can find much fault with either one of these men directly. They’ve spent their time in ministry striving to Christ to the nations. Methods have been different–but methods are judged by their fidelity to the Word of God (both ways seem to pass) and then by their effectiveness (both seem to have worked).
Anyway, it’s a blessing that we’re seeing good choices. But it’s not just about whether Hemphill or Greear alone are right for the SBC. Look at who will follow with them. And don’t be so pie-in-the-sky to think that Southern Baptists don’t follow men. We do…we try to follow Jesus first, but we end up following men, too.
As one who walked through the convention halls from 1979 until maybe 5 years ago and voted along inerrancy lines every year… Ken Hemphill was a blessing to have as a part of that battle.
Many years have passed and I have not heard of him and his work, nor have I looked but I have a major concern.
Is Hemphill being promoted and brought as a nominee because he is…
1 – Not a Calvinist
2 – An anti-Calvinist
3 – A rabid – rid the SBC of Calvinists
…candidate.
My concern is that is might be closer to # 3 than we realize if the other guys are so glad he has agreed to be in the running and they are swooning as they proudly wear a # 3 badge of self-honor.
I hope my concerns are unjustified.
I really did not want to get in this little set-to at all but . . . .
Jon Estes, Ken Hemphill is not a “rabid” anything. That word has never been and is not now a proper descriptor of Ken Hemphill.
Actually, and I am not willing to engage with anyone beyond this statement, the fact that Ken Hemphill was unwilling to be “rabid” about some things back in 02-03 cost him the presidency of SWBTS.
Now, I am not telling anyone to vote for Ken Hemphill or not to vote for Ken Hemphill. Who any of you vote for between these two Southern Baptist to the core guys is up to you, but I think it wrong to cast any aspersions on or create nefarious suggestive snibbits toward either guy simply because you may or may not be of their specific soteriological persuasions.
Hemphill is a white hat good guy. Greear is a white hat good guy. So pick yourself a white hat good guy . . . and don’t throw mud on the other guy’s white hat. In doing so, you stain both.
CB –
I made no accusation, I asked a straight forward question. I have read some of the things in support of him from some rabid’s. From what I know of him, I have never seen it. I have not heard anything from him in many years. Also, I have not looked to see him either.
I have always liked the guy. Everything I know is, he is a stand up guy.
I must say though, that if he is anti-Calvinist… I would have problems with that also. I do think Gaines has shown us a great deal in how the two sides can work together.
If he is a candidate that will work to fill trustee boards with anti-Calvinists, I will have a problem.
I would hope that all of us would be concerned if this became a move to begin the move to remove any Calvinist from their job, just because they are Calvinist.
If you think such a question should not be asked from someone who doesn’t know… I find that a bit odd.
Jon Estes,
Here is what you stated:
“Is Hemphill being promoted and brought as a nominee because he is…
1 – Not a Calvinist
2 – An anti-Calvinist
3 – A rabid – rid the SBC of Calvinists
…candidate.
My concern is that is might be closer to # 3 than we realize if the other guys are so glad . . . ”
Now, you are correct that you did ask a question. Then you presented a “concern” that it might be closer to #3 than we realize. .
Brother, the way you couched that is fairly close to an accusation.
However, let’s agree that it was no accusation, but a “concern.”
I want to engage your concern.
First, there is a difference between an anti-Calvinist and a non-Calvinist. I am sure you know that.
Second, I want to assure you that Ken Hemphill is not an anti-Calvinist.
Third, I will bet you seven Strong, Beautiful, Crimson Elephants to one Filthy, One-eyed, Featherless Hawkeye that he embraces a non-Calvinistic soteriology.
Fourth, I know for a fact that he has worked alongside, and in cooperation with many Calvinists during his long history as a leader in the SBC.
Fifth, The fact that some anti-Calvinists are glad he is running for President of the SBC should mean no more to you than the fact that some Cage Stage Calvinists are glad that JD Greear is running.
Non-Calvinist does not mean anti-Calvinist, Brother and we all need to keep that in mind as we approach the June meeting.
CB,
I have no desire to debate this with you. I do beIieve you misread my comments and concerns. They were more due to those who support him, than KH himself. I posed the question because it was a question I had. I had the question because of some, who are rabid, who gleefully support him.
Could I have stated my thoughts differently… obviously so but I stated them as I thought them.
I take your word that he is not anti or rabid. Everything I know about him would say the same… but the anti and rabid guys caused me the concern.
I hope that we can express our concerns in an honest way, the way our minds put them together, without causing a clash that is unnecessary. I hope my attempts to clarify why I have concerns makes sense. I have no ill will towards KH and if my question/comments said that, they were poorly written.
Jon Estes,
You don’t have to debate anything with me. You made a comment I responded. Nothing more nothing less.
I too hope “hope that we can express our concerns in an honest way.”
That’s all I was doing. I have no beef with you. I just wanted responded to make sure the guy had a clear playing field. I would do the same for JD and have.
I think one thing some people find troubling is not anything about Ken Hemphill personally, but the fact that some “Southern Baptists who are concerned about the direction of the Convention…asked that he allow his name to be placed before the Convention for consideration.” Some of the names in this press release will likely be viewed as “Anti-Cals.”
http://baptistmessage.com/ken-hemphill-sbc-president-nominee/
Right on Robert!
That’s exactly it.
CB: I agree with Jon Estes and his concerns. Robert Vaughn has hit on those concerns.
Of course the Trads also supported Steve Gaines and as Jon has also mentioned, he worked well with both sides. I was impressed with Gaines leadership. The Trads lost in the area of anti-Calvinsim with the election of Steve Gaines. It could be that if Ken Hemphill wins the election, they could be disappointed again.
Debbie Kaufman,
Whether you like it or not, you have to agree with me also. That is, if you read all my comments.
Yes CB, I do agree with you and should have stated that too.
Thank you, Debbie Kaufman.
Ken Hemphill is one of the great leaders of the previous generation. I have several of his church growth books in my library. I have no objections to him as a leader or as president. However, given the choice, I believe the better candidate for the present moment is J.D. Greear. I believe that we need an SBC president that represents the Convention’s future. I want a president who can/will make appointments from among the diverse Gen-X and Millennial generation of leaders and who is currently leading his church and Southern Baptists to greater cooperation and missions involvement.
Todd,
I think your comment demonstrates the proper way to approach this election. You recognize the positives of both guys but then you state a reasonable basis to make your choice rather than being against the other guy. May we all select the same way.
Sooooo, 175 yrs later and we still have had only 1 minority for 2 yrs as SBC Prez. Unbelievable
I sodo not mean this as a troll. Its just crazy that there is always some who think that a political statement needs to be made about something
Dont get me wrong I have nothing against either
“First Baptist Church in Hendersonville, N.C., where [Ken] Hemphill is a member, recorded 20 baptisms in 2017, with an average worship attendance of 1,475, according to data from the SBC’s Annual Church Profile database. Over the past decade, the church saw a high of 78 baptisms 2009.
The congregation told BP it has given 10 percent of undesignated receipts through the Cooperative Program annually since at least the mid-1990s and is among the top CP-giving churches in North Carolina.
First Baptist’s percentage of CP giving as indicated by ACP data is slightly higher than 10 percent for some years and lower for others, but such differences generally can be explained by the use of different fiscal years, the timing of payments to the state convention and other factors.
The church said its Great Commission Giving exceeded 15 percent of undesignated receipts in 2017. Great Commission Giving is a category of giving established by SBC action in 2011 that encompasses giving through CP, Southern Baptists’ unified program of funding state- and SBC-level ministries, as well as direct gifts to SBC entities, associational giving and giving to state convention ministries.”
http://www.bpnews.net/50297/ken-hemphill-to-be-sbc-president-nominee
David R. Brumbelow