We are waiting for IMB to follow in NAMB’s footsteps and name a new president. My hope is that when they make their nomination, they will forgo the “We have found God’s Man” tactic that was used by NAMB trustees and their search committee. Ted Traylor, Bryant Wright and others put on a full-court press for the nomination of Kevin Ezell as NAMB president. They designated him as “God’s Man” for the job.
Before I dig in, let me say that I think that Kevin Ezell may just be exactly the man we need at NAMB. NAMB needs a visionary leader – he seems to be that. NAMB needs integrity – everyone who knows him seems to believe we will get that with Ezell. NAMB needs a good administrator – I’m told he fills that bill. NAMB needs someone who is forward thinking, ready to face the challenges of the future – a seeming specialty for Kevin Ezell. I have some concerns about his relationship to the Cooperative Program, about how he will handle criticism and how he will relate to the state conventions. But what I have heard about him indicates to me that he may indeed be a home run choice. We all hope so, don’t we?
This article is not about Kevin Ezell’s leadership or character, it is about the nomination process – something Ezell is not responsible for. The focus here is on a common tactic of promotion used among Southern Baptists. This is not really a criticism of NAMB or even of those who have used the tactic, but of the tactic itself.
It is a tactic that I wish we would send to the sidelines permanently. I believe it is an unfair pressure tactic.
Pressure-Packed Nomination
In announcing the nomination, Ted Traylor chairman of the presidential search team, said,
“I am delighted to report to you that our search team has found God’s man to be nominated as the next president of NAMB. Our team has prayerfully considered several impressive candidates. On Monday, Aug. 30, I received a unanimous vote of the search team for our candidate. We are convinced the Spirit of the Lord has given us His perfect plan in this endeavor.”
Traylor reported to us that Kevin Ezell was God’s “perfect plan” for the SBC. He is God’s man. That really casts those who oppose Ezell’s nomination in a bad light. You are not just disagreeing with a nominating committee, you are opposing “God’s man” who was revealed by “God’s perfect plan”. It put David Hankins and Emil Turner in a really bad position, doesn’t it? They questioned the wisdom of the nomination. Clearly, they are disobedient and rebellious, right? When you use the “God’s Man” tactic to announce a nomination, you are aiming a bazooka at those who do not agree with you.
Tim Dowdy, chairman of the entity’s board of trustees, said the vote was the culmination of a 10-month process.
“It has at times been discouraging and at times encouraging, but along the way God has been faithful to give us guidance. When He introduced us to Kevin, it was evident through the interview process that this was the man.”
Notice that it was not just an opinion made by human beings. God introduced them to Kevin Ezell and gave them guidance. Makes it really hard to argue with the committee, doesn’t it?
On the day the NAMB trustees were to vote, Bryant Wright put the icing on the cake.
“Today is an historic day in the life of NAMB. Today your big decision is to follow God’s will with a man the search committee clearly feels is God’s man for leading our churches as they go about the harvest.”
Am I reading that right? The decision is whether you will follow God’s will (as revealed to and through the committee) or not? That is just not the way to treat people. That is an unfair tactic.
I have had it with this kind of presentation. Essentially, when you tell me, “He’s God’s man” you are pressuring me to ignore my own judgment and discernment and to accept yours. “You don’t have to pray or think or judge on this one, Dave. We have made the determination that he is God’s man and you just need to accept it.”
That is not the way we should do business as Baptists.
Remind You of Anything?
This attitude was on display at the SBC Pastor’s Conference and Annual Meeting in relationship to the GCR. I drove to Orlando fully supportive of the GCR. By the end of the pastor’s conference, I was tempted to vote against it because of the manipulation and pressure tactics used by those who promoted it. (I think David Platt’s sermon was the exception – he laid out a case for sacrificial service without these kind of pressure tactics). Basically, we were told that this was God’s solution to our denominational problems. We could either enter the GCR Promised Land or stay in the wilderness of doubt. NONSENSE! (Yes, I’m shouting!) I supported the GCR, but I would never cast its opponents as unrighteous or faithless.
Our denomination is run now by megachurch pastors who may be used to telling their congregations what God wants and expecting the congregations to walk in lock step thereafter. (I’ve tried to suggest such a plan to the people of my church – but just got some amused grins and a few hostile glares.) But I do not think it is an appropriate tactic for Southern Baptist Convention discourse.
Why I Dislike the “God’s Man” Tactic
I have several problems with this tactic. I think people use the tactic without really thinking about the problems associated with it.
1) It replaces the Holy Spirit with powerful men.
I think this is a fundamental problem with some leaders today. I don’t think we trust the Holy Spirit to do His job. My job is to present the truth; present my convictions. It is the Spirit’s job to convict and convince. When I step beyond my role as presenter of truth and begin to pressure people to conform to my will, I am taking the place of God’s Spirit.
Paul, in 2 Corinthians 4:2, renounces “disgraceful and underhanded” ways. He then says,
“We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.”
When we serve a living God whose Spirit is at work among us, we do not need to manipulate or pressure people to conform. We simply commend ourselves to the Spirit-influenced conscience of others in the sight of God.
Please, SBC leaders, stop trying to be our Holy Spirit. Speak truth and let the Spirit convince and convict. The same Spirit who moved you will move us, if indeed you heard Him correctly. You don’t need overwhelm us, pressure us or burden us to conform. Just tell us what you believe and let the Holy Spirit lead us.
2) Does God sometimes select the WRONG man?
Here are the words of the chairman of the NAMB search committee recommending their new President.
“We determined what we were going to do was seek God’s man. There was never a predetermined person. We were faithful to follow our process and allow God to reveal His choice. We considered a wide variety of candidates from all corners of Southern Baptist life: pastors, seminary professors, state executives, missionaries, evangelists, as well as staff members of denominational agencies.”
No, this was not Ted Traylor about the selection of Kevin Ezell, this was Greg Faulls, on February 28, 2007 about the nomination of Geoff Hammond, who resigned under pressure a couple of years later. When did Geoff Hammond stop being “God’s Man”?
How often is someone nominated or elected to an SBC or local church positions after being identified as “God’s Man” and then fails miserably at the post? What is the problem? Surely we don’t believe that God is bad at revealing His man, do we? Are committees making mistakes in selection?
3) It flirts with “using God’s name in vain.”
The prophets of the OT saved some of their harshest words for those who said, “This is what the LORD says” when it was their own ideas they were promoting. That is, essentially, a violation of the commandment against taking the Lord’s name in vain and it borders on blasphemy.
I have stood before my congregation and said, “I believe that this is what God wants us to do.” But I am very careful when I do it. I share my view that this is God’s will. I ask people to study, pray and discuss things. I do not demand that they suspend their own discernment and accept my judgment. My job is to lead, but leading is not dictating. I seek and I speak; then the people test and approve.
We ought to be very slow to invoke the name of God in our efforts to convince others to accept what we believe is right.
4) It is simply unnecessary
We have the Holy Spirit living in each and every believer. When I am leading in obedience to the will of God, I can trust that God’s Spirit will convince the congregation that what I have said is right. I do not have to demand conformity. I do not have to pressure, campaign or manipulate. I do not have to make people feel that disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with God.
There are two possibilities when I say, “This is God’s Man.”
- I am wrong. If so, I shouldn’t be claiming that he is God’s Man. I am sinning against God by saying someone is God’s man if he is not.
- I am right. If I’m right, then God Himself is behind the nomination. I don’t have to manipulate or pressure anyone. If Kevin Ezell was God’s man, God would promote his election. Do you think that NAMB trustees could thwart the will of the Sovereign God? If you believe in a sovereign God and a powerful Spirit, the tactic becomes completely unnecessary.
Conclusion
It is time to leave the “God’s Man” rhetoric in the holster. I hold to the hope that Traylor and Wright and others do not mean to be manipulative or to use undue pressure. I think they are just using a tactic that is familiar and common. But it needs to stop.
Here’s to the hope that when the IMB announces its selection, they will use a different tactic. Just tell us who you nominate and why. Speak to us, not down to us. Give us reasons. Information. Tell us what you think then respect the trustees to test and approve your nomination. Respect the trustees that we have elected. Respect us as you deal with us.
Maybe 2 Corinthians 4:2 can become one of the SBC’s core values.
“But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.”
Dave,
I couldn’t agree more. Good post.
Les
Other than what I find explicitly revealed in God’s Word, I have never been convinced something was ‘God’s will’, whether it was a Pastor selection or job choice or anything other of the hundredsnof decisions I have made. I have personally felt certain choices or directions to go were indeed from God’s leading through prayer and consultation with Christian friends, but I have never been totally convinced. Hindsight is alway 20/20, but peering into the future is very hard. I think want they probably meant, and should have said, is that they feel this is God’s man for the job, because that’s what it really is. But as you wrote, saying it the way they said it make you feel like a Godless heathen if you disagree. Smells like power politics to me rather than spiritual discernment.
I do believe that God leads and guides in a more direct way. I just think that we should not elevate those guidances and promptings to a “Thus saith the Lord” level. Nor should I demand that others act solely on the basis of what God has put in my heart.
And I certainly do not believe that someone should use their inner guidance promptings as a tactic with which to motivate conformity.
Dave,
Spot on. I will guarentee you that if someone were to say “God showed me in a vision…” or “God has granted new revelation…” that these men would be the first to denounce them. However, what they’re doing is the same thing, in my book.
There is only one divinely inspired revelation of God–His inerrant word. These men are putting their subjective impressions on par with that perhaps without meaning to. Sounds like a bad idea to my ears.
“We are convinced the Spirit of the Lord has given us His perfect plan in this endeavor.”
And yet, open charismatics are often shunned in SBC circles. How is this statement any different? How did they arrive at such a conclusion? From his Word? Or from a “word” from the Lord (read: subjective feeling of a stamp of approval on what the board wanted anyway).
Darby
What’s that they say about Great Minds??
LOL
Now, Darby is VERY afraid.
Your #3 absolutely nails it. Attributing God’s work to man is unthinkable; how much more so is attributing man’s work to God.
He’s not “leverage” to help man get man’s way. And if that’s flirting with “using God’s name in vain”, it’s doing it from the inside, not the outside.
Fine post.
Bob said – He’s not “leverage” to help man get man’s way.
Dave wishes he’d said that!
You nailed it. Unfortunately I don’t believe we will see the end of this in the near future. It’s funny how God’s man always thinks exactly like the men who searched for him. It is a cycle that feeds on itself.
I’ve had similar thoughts and have been disturbed by such language. Though I have to wonder if some of it is cultural. There seems to be a certain generation of SBC folks who have certain key words they use. Kind of like the word “missional” today. I’m not saying it’s bad or good, just observing.
Good thought, Mark. I actually used the word missional in conversation the other day. I was so proud of myself. An old fogey grandpa using hip words like missional.
I think the “cultural” part may also be a megachurch culture thing.
Watch out—“missional” was coined by the CBF some years ago! Next thing you might use “partnering” or some of those other ugly words denoting the pre-mainipulation SBC days.
The use of God’s man is similar to another churchspeak phrase that I dislike very much. The phrase is “I feel led.” Now a good many good people with good intentions use this phrase all the time, but I think there are troubles inherent in it. What does feeling led feel like? Likewise, how do you know when someone is “God’s man”? The two terms also carry an air of authority. If you say “I’ve had an idea”, then people can argue with you. But if you say “I feel led” then you are arguing against God. Likewise the term “God’s man” smacks a little too closely to “touch not the Lord’s anointed.” The two phrases also carry an air of private revelation and mysticism that we ought to be uncomfortable with.
Why do we feel we need to embellish our words with churchspeak just because we are Christians?
It IS using God’s name in vain.
Because when you state “God told me” or “God said…” or “God’s hand in on…” then if it EVER, I mean EVER goes south, then either
1. You were lying to promote your own agenda
OR
2. God was wrong
Those are the ONLY outcomes of these scenarios.
The only problem, congregations have been too dumbed down to see it and not call it for what it is and that is prideful, sinful behavior.
I think you are crystal clear on this observation!!!
Try another: “Grieving the Holy Spirit” which is the unpardonable sin = read in context it appears to me to be the sin of turning black into white / it cites the Pharisees saying Jesus was “of the Devil” instead of recognizing him as “The Son of God.”
Dangerous—very dangerous!!!!
Dave,
You, sir, are “God’s Blogger” for posting this most excellent article! Therefore, anyone who does not heed your divinely inspired words and bow to your heavenly opinions must be blogging for the Enemy himself and will surely pay a price for it on the Day of Judgment.
Messengers, are we ready to vote?
I felt led to post this.
When I served as a bi-vo minister of music, I had little blue haired ol’ ladies coming up to me all the time telling me how God had told them we needed to sing such and such song or whatever. I handled it thusly: I said “Yes ma’mm” and then did what I wanted to. When they’d ask me about it the next week, I’d apologize and tell them I’d try to do better.
Evenutally, they just left me alone. 🙂
Translation: “When I consider myself to be God—I do the judging / you do the listening!!!”
I love it Joe!!!! The truth comes out at last!!!
Sorry, that is the last smart remark from me about you–it’s just a leftover from the Ezell blog where you and your buddy wouldn’t quit and still haven’t.
Dave, I apologize and promise to not do it again here—provided Joe, et al, give me the same courtesy (we have been doing better of late).
My prior comment was, of course, a feeble attempt at satire. I agree entirely with your post. I also wish people could describe God’s work in such humble terms as you did. “I felt led” not “God says do this or you are disobedient.”
Instead of, “God wants this to happen so you better get on board,” we should say, “I feel led to propose this course of action” or “I BELIEVE God would have us to do the following…”. Just a little more humility so we don’t put words in God’s mouth.
Rick: I would take it further. Why not just say “I think this is the best idea” or “I believe this is the best course of action”?
Bill: You mean actually “owning” our opinions? Why, if people did that, the next thing you know, we would all be going around taking personal responsibility for our own words and actions. Imagine the chaos!
I hope you realize my response was also a satire.
Yes, and a great contrast to the “God’s Man” tactic.
Good word, Dave. Not sure God wants credit for some of our decisions.
Jesus said our attitude ought to be that we are unworthy servants, only doing our duty. That does not elevate us to the position of the Official Press Secretary of The One Who spoke the universe into existence.
If we believe God wants us to do a certain thing, that’s what we need to say. That clearly establishes that God gets the credit if we’re right, and we get the blame if we’re wrong.
If, on the other hand, our argument or our logic is weak, or may be met with principled resistance, we might resort to some ….
well …
you know.
My concern in this is that it makes it so hard to disagree. Someone told me recently that “God had spoken” to them about something.
contrary to many, I do believe that the Spirit of God can speak to the heart to guide us. But this person’s “word from God” was directly contrary to scripture.
But what do you say when someone says “God told me.” “God spoke.” “this is God’s man.”
Perhaps the committee was strongly led of God to call Ezell. But when they phrase it that way, it makes it impossible to disagree. I hope that is not their intent, but…
“I disagree.”
Of course, I confess it’s a lot easier to say when you’re really old, not in a position to represent anyone else (like a pastor, committee member, denominational employee, etc), and don’t care what anybody else thinks.
Under my circumstance, it’s fun, even.
🙂
As I say, I don’t think the committee language is unusual. This is an all to common part of evangelical culture. What does feeling led feel like? How does having an idea differ from “God laying something on your heart”? Evangelical culture is steeped in (the language of) mysticism.
I wrote the following article a few years ago. It sums up my feelings on the subject nicely.
http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/V/voicehead.html
Bill Mac,
I am glad to see another person ask this question, “What does feeling led feel like?” I am also glad you ask it publicly.
When God saved me, I had no biblical or “church” background whatsoever. So there I was, a newly saved guy still dripping with with paganism, submersed into a church culture.
I would hear guys as they stood up in “testimony services”, talk about “feeling led” to do various things. I remember wonder what “feeling led feels like.” I found myself praying all the time for God to help me “feel led” to pray.
Then one night in one of those meetings, I heard a guy say he had been praying and “God told him” to do a specific thing. That one really flipped me out. Here I was trying to get the right feeling to feel led to pray and this guy was actually having God talk to him.
For a long time I really “felt” low on the testimony service totem pole. 🙂
cb–
I know what you mean about people claiming “being led.” For me it never was a voice from above. It was a sense that God was directing me to walk the aisle / commit to full time ministry / get my Psychology degree / etc.
I think every part of life, if it is genuine, has a sense of “being led by God.”
The danger in such things is “How can you be sure God is the leading spirit of could it be Satan?”
Spiritual is spiritual. That means without clear empirical evidence. A part of mental illness can be voices telling you what to do! How do you differentiate God from Satan from mental illness???
I have found that God always leads in accordance with the model we have in Christ. For example–if “God leads” the Pastor to lead the church to a $5M Sanctuary in the midst of a Recession / Depression, would Jesus do that while walking among the poor and needy around the Temple at Jerusalem???
I will leave the specifics to you, but I think you know what I mean. Sometimes “God told me this” = “I want a big show assuming all things God are big.”
What about the leven and the mustard seed images Jesus so clearly shared?????
What about God not being in Isaiah’s wind and fire and lightening, but in a “still small voice?”
Gene,
Truthfully, I don’t think we are on the same page. Maybe not even the same planet.
Of course not, cb. You believe and teach the gospel–the one that Jesus preached. You believe the Bible to be God’s not, not a “record of God’s word”. Therefore, you’re not going to be on the same planet with Gene. No Christian would be.
Gentlemen–
I’m going to rise above the insult and ignore it.
cb–your comment really says nothing. If you will be more specific, I’ll be glad to dialogue.
Joe–go gnaw on your 45 record / balsa caveman club–whatever–just go gnaw on something besides me–PLEASE!!
It reminds me of when Christian artists claim they were ‘given this song by God’ and many of us want them to give it back!
Many use this language however, to show that they are praying about this. I can just imagine the Committee Chairman saying, ‘We talked about this and this is what we decided.’ Would we not then say, ‘Hey, are you guys going to pray and seek God’s way? Are we guided by the Spirit or our own wisdom?’
We need to let everyone know we are praying and seeking God but at the same time hold our decisions out humbly and ask for real counsel. Good word Dave.
Yeah, Strider, that is the kind of balance we need. Seek God, but don’t claim some kind of divine authority as you do.
Dave, you asked: Am I reading that right? The decision is whether you will follow God’s will (as revealed to and through the committee) or not?”
don’t know if you were reading it “right”, but you concluded what I thought when I read it; it pinched something in my gut when I did. My mind wanted to rebel. I’ve always been one to trust committees we put in place in our churches, but this rubbed me the wrong way. Our pastor always tell us to pray about our decision and seek God’s direction and voice. My husband used to tell us when he preached, “Don’t trust me…trust the Word of God…read it, pray for God to speak to you.” It doesn’t seem as though that is what Bryant Wright was saying to the trustees. I may be wrong, of course; this is just an opinion…I pray God directs Ezell and he hears God’s voice and obeys. May God be glorified…and the kingdom grow as a result of Ezell’s leadership. selahV
Yours is the classic example of naive trust in church members. The Pastor won’t tell you that “you are stupid or wrong because you disagree with him.” Instead, he implies that–since he is the Pastor–his “word from God” is more valid than your “word from God.”
We used to resolve these conflicts with a Business Meeting / good discussion / majority rules. If there were too much of a minority vote, many churches wisely decided to “refer it back to the Committee for further study and a future report.”
How many churches ever have a monthly Church Conference anymore???? The megas certainly never have them. God tells the Pastor / Pastor tells the Staff / Staff tells the people = “We are always doing “God’s Will!”
Gene, I can see some truth in what you are saying but in Scripture, when God wanted to make a move, he always called a man — not a committee — such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc., not to mention the judges.
It seems to me that a “committee led” church has weak support in the Scriptures. I don’t think the Pastor is “one voice among many.” Obviously, he is not infallible either.
If there is no sense in which God’s people can identify God’s man when the circumstances call for it, then we are left with nothing more than man’s opinion — however good or bad that might be.
SSBN–
I understand what you are saying, BUT—you are citing the “great stories of the Bible” for your observation.
What does God do in our day-to-day personal and corporate activities? While Moses parted the sea and got the 10 Commandments, the people were griping and grumbling and building an idol to Baal!
I think a “committee led church” is based on fair representation among the congregation so they feel a part in asking someone to lead. It encourages a team effort over a showboat entertaining the new attendees.
It also, in reverse, obligates them to realize, “We called him, now we must support him.
I can cite you a bus-load of good churches which called a mega church minded pastor who could have cared less about their traditions and making all members a part of the ministry. In most cases the church ended up splitting with terrible injury to many involved.
Meanwhile, the arrogant and pompous minister is crowing about “how God used him!!!”
I thought following Christ had to do with love / forgiveness / showing an ability to get along despite personal differences / teamwork / etc.
If you want to make it just a numbers game where “God’s man” is rated by the numbers he can generate—then I think you would idolize Elmer Gantry / Jim Bakker / the pastor in Atlanta now accused of homosexual activities.
For me = It’s not how high you jump, it’s how straight you walk when you hit the ground.
“”I can cite you a bus-load of good churches which called a mega church minded pastor who could have cared less about their traditions and making all members a part of the ministry. In most cases the church ended up splitting with terrible injury to many involved””
It is a fine line to walk between honoring a church’s past and promoting a new vision for her future. I agree you cannot have much success ignoring the former in favor of the latter.
I believe a pastor is obligated to minister to the people that called him and not see them simply as means to an end.
“”BUT—you are citing the “great stories of the Bible” for your observation.””
Gene, I think this is where you and I differ the most — you start with anthropology and move to theology; I start with theology and move to anthropology.
Just as many splits have been caused by out-of-control committees as with pompous preachers — perhaps more.
Brave blog Dave. Right on.
I’m glad my faith is not tied to a denomination. If it were, I would have serious reservations about it after seeing what I have seen in the SBC.
You are almost spot on 🙂 and I agree with your essay. Point three is a little soft. It is a violation of the commandment in taking the LORD’s name in vain. Using God’s name as a bully club to beat down your opposition makes God a “weapon” in order to get your own way. Too long have we ignored the Baptist principle of “tell the saints and trust the Holy Spirit” to guide the way. BTW…if this was clearly “God’s man” why was there the need to have the final discussion and vote behind closed doors and then carefully script the news release. Hmmmmmm.
#3 is right on… except more than just a bit of flirting going on…
The truth is every man on a commitee is human. Reminds me of the catholic process of selecting a new pope… and I don’t think God is too happy with all that the popes have allowed to happen under their watch either….
I one time had a girl break up with me because God did not want us to date, a week later God clarified his will in such a way that she thought we could once again date. My response was that God may want us to date, however I did not. Teenagers….
That’s funny
Dave–
I have never seen the SBC leadership analysed any better. Thanks!
If you were to use a single word, it might be “bombast.”
We need to recognize where these men (God help us to have any woman) come from:
* Each is at a mega church
* Each is the absolute authority in that church
* Each is at “center stage” with all the “showboat” tools on him
* The video screen blows him up
* The sound system makes him sound like the Wizard of OZ
* The lights give him a halo he does not have on the street
Given enough of “being God” you can easily couch your language toward you friends in those terms as well. The problem is, they are using “God’s man” as a substitute for “the man we want!”
My father was Assistant DOM in Atlanta when this stuff started in the 60’s. There would be a vacancy in a large church and the Pulpit Committee got appointed. Charles Stanley always found out!
“Strangely” the Chairman and members started getting calls and letters from W.A. Criswell / Jerry Vines / etc. with the same pastor to recommend each time.
The Chairman of the Committee sometimes called my father for consultation and would say, “God must be in all the calls and letters from great SBC leaders to recommend the same man.” Most church leaders would never consider being manipulated or used—because each church is Autonomous and no other church would seek to unduly influence it! We were taught it from birth.
My Dad would simply say, “Have you considered the possibility they are conspiring to get another one of their friends into a prominent large church in Atlanta which would normally go with seeking input rather than taking it so quickly within a few weeks of the Pastor’s leaving????”
Jacksonville / Nashville / Mobile / etc. is just a quick phone call away and no one would ever mess with a local Baptist church. All the “big boys” do is pray and seek God’s Will for themselves. None of them has a computer or email / none attends the School of the Prophets / none ever gets on the Board of his friend’s Christian College / we are innocents simply being “used of God”–they say!!!!
It’s been going on since the 60’s folks—the 60’s!!
Manipulation or GOD = That is the real question here!
What does it REALLY take to be a ‘man’ in the Kingdom?
Maybe a little bit more than ‘being popular’ with the right people.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091209.html
L’s—
That is a beautiful story of a man filled with faith.
What I note when comparing him to these “God’s Man” folks of the SBC is that he had no mega church / was not seeking any high position / was taking care of a son who could not take care of himself / never thought of his own safety when the septic tank cover gave way.
We had just such to happen when working on a church building our new group was renovating in Loris, SC. You have no clue how fast you can be over your head and be in the worst mess imaginable. Fortunately, men were close by and saved the lady whose feet were dangling! There is no time to think–just act instinctively as did this father.
It takes a whole lot more than being popular to meet God’s standard for being His man/woman/child. It starts with faith and not works. It ends with integrity over popularity.
It CERTAINLY does not require a 15-year mortorium on what went on behind closed doors!!!!
Hello GENE,
I am fond of St. Paul’s letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor, the whole thirteenth chapter). And there we find out what is really important regarding faith, and hope, and charity. We hear a lot about faith, and less about being saved by hope, and surprisingly even less among certain Christian people about the importance of love.
I do not know why that is.
BTW, don’t let J.B., bless his heart, get to you ANYMORE.
What I am now going to share with you came from Aaron Weaver who is known as ‘Big Daddy Weave’ who said ” once-upon-a-time he wasn’t spewing hate. Here is a comment from a blog interview Joe did back in 2008:
“I think first of all a Christian blogger should present a Christian worldview based on God’s word. it is important that we do not come to people with clever words of man’s wisdom as Paul said. I also think we need to demonstrate the love of Christ when dialogueing with those who disagree with us. We need to have the humility to realize that we can be wrong and the willingness to learn from people.”
Gene, everytime J.B. starts with you, just quote his own words back to him. It will do him good. It can’t hurt to try this. Good luck.
Sorry, GENE, forgot to add Joe’s name at the end:
“I think first of all a Christian blogger should present a Christian worldview based on God’s word. it is important that we do not come to people with clever words of man’s wisdom as Paul said. I also think we need to demonstrate the love of Christ when dialogueing with those who disagree with us. We need to have the humility to realize that we can be wrong and the willingness to learn from people.” JOE BLACKMON, 2008
Thanks, Christiane—
Actually, old Joe should worry far more about God dealing with him than me. I think he would be the I Cor. 13 example of “if I have no love, I am nothing.”
As usual, with your heart full of love and peace, you share a good word from God. I am so grateful that a devout Catholic is kind enough to grace us with your presence and biblical knowledge.
What is strange to me is that when you look beneath the surface of several bloggers here, they are somewhat young in the faith and are struggling, themselves, to find something real with God.
I was blessed to find it long ago through the influence of a Baptist Preacher Father who lived what he preached and insisted I do the same. At age 64, life has more peace than anguish for me.
With Paul I say, “I have fought the good fight / I have kept the Faith / henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of glory.”
I just hope Joe and others find this wonderful walk of love and peace before they stand before God. He is never fooled and calls all people into account for their “love quotient.”
See you on the other side, if not in this life. At least we will enjoy the rewards of our faithfulness as do ducks with water streaming off their backs in rough water—knowing none of their enemies is out to get them today.
By the way, I live beside the Pamlico River, just off the Sound, and it has been an intresting rainy / windy / rough water day here. Somehow, even in rought weather, the colors are lovely / clouds are seen at great distances / a calm in the storm resides at my little cottage beside the mighty Pamlico River.
Blackbeard passed here to bring fame to himself. Maybe, like Joe, his bark was worse than his bite!!!
L’s,
The story is a story of heroic love, no doubt about it.
But certainly you would agree that the sacrifice of one’s life for another does not Christian faith, would you not? I have known men who sacrificed their lives for the lives of others, yet they were not Followers of Christ.
Sorry L’s,
That should have been “….does not ‘constitute’ Christian faith….”
Now that I think of it, ‘the sacrifice of one’s life for another’, as you call it, couldn’t possibly be motivated by Christ’s example, or could it? 🙂
Actually, C.B., I do understand your point.
But as far as Christianity goes, talk is mighty cheap these days,
and sometimes examples of the ‘loving-kindness’ (chesed) of God are seen abundantly among those non-Christians,
who, like the Magi, watch, in hope, from afar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POm7_WBMJTI
L’s,
As I said, the story is one of a heroic nature and it seems the man lived boldly all of his life.
My statement about the sacrifice of one’s life for another not being a statement of Christian faith is simply of a doctrinal nature. And as I said, I have known men who gave their lives for the lives of others or for a specific cause who were not Christians. They were great heroes in my opinion, but they were not Christians.
But I will agree with you about talk being cheap. I will go a little farther with that idea if I may?
Talk has always been cheap. But, it seems that in today’s cultures, both secular and Christian, it has become much “cheaper” than in the past and it was pretty cheap then.