Greeting all my blogging friends. I have missed you all. I have been away for a while and made some serious changed. I resigned my position of Associate Pastor, working to start a non-profit, and trying to do more writing. You can see by my lack of blogs that the last one hasn’t been going to well. I have left the church with a desire to reach out to those who are not coming to church. I have spent much of my ministry in front line ministry, on high school and college campus doing outreach and evangelism. That is where I feel led to go back, and with this in mind, I woke up to the tragedy this morning.
In case you live under a rock, a young man opened fire in a movie theater at a midnight showing. As of right now, there isn’t any reports of what was going on with the guy, why he opened fire and what was the focus of his anger, but one thing is clear. That young man needs Jesus. I don’t know anything about him, but I know that the darkness in his heart is symptomatic of the darkness in our society. We live in a dark world, with dark people trapped by their depravity.
So, it’s time for me to start the fight that needs fighting. I am out to wrestle against powers and principalities and authorities that are dark and twisted. As a Convention, I have concern that maybe we are not fighting the fights that need fighting. We like to fight about Calvinism, we fight about Traditionalism, we fight about communion and baptism and if Southern belongs in our name. These are good conversations, good things to consider, but they are not the fights that need fighting. It’s good to have Robert’s Rules of Order, but if they continue to dominate the convention, we have lost our minds.
I appreciate the fact that NAMB wants to penetrate the darkness, and thinks the answer is church planting. I think that is a good start. Can we do better? Should we do better? Do we as Southern Baptists or Great Commission Baptists or Great Southern Commission Baptists have any chance to begin to penetrate the darkness? Some of you have great ministries and are doing great things, but so many of us lead or work in churches in platue or decline. Are we fighting the fights that need fighting? Can we do better?
Since the SBC added, net, less than one addtional church *per state convention* last year, I’d say we could do better.
What do you suggest?
I am going to work with some people to start a cell church network, that is where God is leading me. Hope it does better.
The issues before us are those that involve a Third Great Awakening for which I have been praying for 39 years (it will be,if I live until this Fall), The first issue is the madness in the heart of man which we call Total Depravity or, better yet, Total Inability. For the madness see Eccles.9:3 What the man did in Colorado today, we all have in our hearts. I sue to murder thousands every Sunday afternoon in the cow pasture, where I was trying to ventilate the anger and frustration of a childhood in deprivation by reason of divorce. I was deprived of both parents, being raised by grandparents from 1944-55 )ages 3-14. Can you imagine the grief of being so deprived? Today, I had the grief of putting my beloved wife in a hospital, and it is a grief but the griefs of a child can scarcely be imagined. One has to experience them to catch the real fury unleashed by such soul searing pains.
Dr. Willingham, prayers that your wife will be well again. It always encourages me to hear that you are praying for an Awakening. I join you in this. Blessings!
I think the fight we need to fight is listening to the very specific prompting of the Holy Spirit and doing that we neither puffing up nor getting discouraged. When we don’t perceive a specific directing, then we ought to look to work within the existing ministries and evangelistic outreach of our local congregation and serve faithfully and happily.
Let’s be honest: doing the above is much, much more challenging than it sounds or churches would be filled with volunteers who sense the need to share the work so no one gets worn out. And Satan’s chosen role of advocacy against us would be much more difficult because our sense of direction would be so precise that we would “know” when we are in the sweet spot of God’s will for us. In addition, the extra junk that distracts us wouldn’t because in faith we would be able to discern a normal bump in the road from a continuing spiritual issue or thorn or other faith challenge.
I believe we have Paul’s extensive witness precisely because it is not obvious and because it can become QUITE “non-obvious”. The specificity of what you are attempting has to be a source of encouragement to you, Dan. Write down how that happened and hold onto it.
In my own limited experience, one of the root causes stems from what I’ve called “practical atheism” among Christians (I just recently came across Craig Groeschel’s 2010 book “The Christian Atheist”). Many Christians live as if God doesn’t really matter, thus, the “practical” part. Maybe that’s why there is such a problem with decline. These folks believe IN God, but they don’t really BELIEVE God. There is a difference.
Transformation of life can’t come apart from believing God to be the God that He says He is. But so many want Him to be the God that THEY say He is. And it isn’t because proper theology isn’t being taught from our pulpits. Every week preachers across this nation hold up the glory of almighty God, and people nod their heads, assent to the idea, then go out and live like it makes no difference. I see it all the time.
If NAMB’s approach is so great, then why isn’t it having a greater impact? Over the past 30 years their approach has moved from an eclectic mix of ministries to the church planting focus. The IMB has done the same thing. Have they thrown the baby out with the bathwater? We’re baptizing fewer and seeing less of an impact than we did when the focus was on a more holisitic approach (i. e., medical missions, language work, social ministries, etc.). In my opinion, we need to support and encourage a variety in ministry, even if our main focus is church planting. NAMB might say that the variety needs to happen within the context of church planting, and I would agree. But why can we not support a variety of those ministries as they undergird the work of local church ministries that are NOT church plants? It seems to me that we did it once, and it worked!
I apologize if this comes across as a rant or mere rambling. I am concerned, and it is frustrating to watch.
NAMB is aiming for 50% of their budget to go for church planting. It may surprise some to learn that they have put considerably more towards infrastructure rather than direct support for planters. Since their new planting initiative is just beginning, it may be prudent to give it time before evaluation.
You are correct, William. It would be prudent.
I’m not talking about their new initiative, I’m talking about what I’ve seen over the past couple of decades. I won’t attempt to explain further. It’s just my observation.
I’ll add what I’m sure will be a minority opinion on SBC Voices, but this is SBC Voices and I am SBC.
How easy it is to criticize the SBC–or any Christian effort for that matter. I mean, how could one defend against the charge that we need, and can do better. That’s sort of like answering the question, “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
It’s good to go do what the Lord leads one to do. But, why throw a grenade on the way out the door? Just go and do. No need to take a final, parting shot as you leave.
I’m currently dealing with members who are doing that very thing in my church. We’ll survive. God will see to it. But, that doesn’t make it right.
Just for the record: I’m currently starting a cell church, and helping start another cell church in another state, and I’m serving as the pastor of a SBC church struggling to make a difference in a major metropolitan area. So, starting a cell church and remaining part of the SBC is NOT mutually exclusive as your post implies.
Many people have started many parachurch non-profits over the years. They come and go. They rise and fall. They decline like so many other ventures. But, Jesus never promised to bless a “non-profit.” He promised to bless the church–whatever particular form it might take at any particular time or place in history.
I can’t argue with your points about the darkness in society. I deal with this battle every day. My church is one SBC church in a sea of lost humanity of about 150,000 people. Our church doesn’t know much about Robert’s Rules and we haven’t said anything about changing our name. We would never follow a man–especially a man as cruel and controversial as John Calvin.
We are just trying our best, even when we are at our worst, to reach one more soul for Christ. We spend too much and take too long, but I’m not ready to blame it all on the SBC.
Please forgive me for being a little offended at yet one more reference of, “I’m leaving to do my own thing because the SBC is so corrupt or inept.” I have a soft spot in my heart, I guess, for the SBC. So, such a post is for one, not new, and for two not particularly encouraging.
As I said, this is just my opinion. Your opinion was offered on SBC Voices. I’m an SBC Voice. I’m just one voice of very many, but I am a voice. Go, do what God has placed on your heart. But, please don’t feel obligated to slam the door as you leave.
And, I will apologize in advance for offending the one making this post because I doubt he meant this post to be as anti-SBC as I have taken it. It is not just this one post, but a blogaspheric condition of anit-SBC posts and whining that I am reacting to. For the most part, I can agree with everything the post says–but, I’m preparing myself for those darts and daggers that will be pulled out against the SBC.
Frank, I said I was resigning my church position, I never said I was leaving the SBC or that my cell churches wouldn’t be part of the SBC, you assumed that, and you assumed incorrectly.
Frank:
In Dan’s defense, since I’m not Dan, he didn’t say or imply any of what you point out as a problem.
He has left his previous church position, but there is nothing in his post to indicate that he’s jumping the SBC ship.
In a comment above he states that he too is starting a cell-church network. Is it going to be SBC? Dan will have to answer that question directly, but nothing in his post states otherwise.
You state–“Please forgive me for being a little offended at yet one more reference of, ‘I’m leaving to do my own thing because the SBC is so corrupt or inept.'”
He didn’t say that he’s leaving the SBC to do his own thing or because of corruption or ineptitude. Where do you see that?
Also, he asks some valid questions. He isn’t casting aspersions on the SBC. No darts or daggers have been thrown in his post.
Dale. Are you suggesting that the non-profit is unrelated to the cell church? Are you also implying that the “non-profit” or new cell church is unrelated to the criticism of the SBC?
Are you arguing that starting a non-profit rather than work through one’s church is not doing one’s own thing?
If these are your arguments we see things differently.
I don’t see how one cannot see the argument “I’m doing A because of B” at least strongly implied in the post. As to whether the cell church will be associated with the SBC I do not know
I would not be surprised if it were not given the information in the post.
You also did not address my main point. That is the worn out criticisms of the SBC. Do you know of any Christian entity that could not do better? Do you know of any organization that has recently made such sweeping changes as the SBC?
Like Dan I’m tired of the bickering. I am also tired of the negativity toasted the SBC. If you want out. Get out. But turn in your Free Pass to criticize the SBC.
That’s my point and it may not even apply to Dan. His post just raises the possibility. Perhaps Dan will expand his remarks and show me to be an old fool. It won’t be the first time
My post was not a out Dan which is why I did not use his name.
“Dale. Are you suggesting that the non-profit is unrelated to the cell church? Are you also implying that the “non-profit” or new cell church is unrelated to the criticism of the SBC?”
The non-profit is unrelated to the cell church. The beginning of the cell church is my attempt to do better personally. You totally misconstrued a lot Frank, but Dale didn’t. He is right.
“Are you arguing that starting a non-profit rather than work through one’s church is not doing one’s own thing?”
My leaving my church has NOTHING to do with my issues with the SBC and everything to do with what I feel God calling me to do.
If these are your arguments we see things differently.
You and I also see things differently
I don’t see how one cannot see the argument “I’m doing A because of B” at least strongly implied in the post. As to whether the cell church will be associated with the SBC I do not know
I said I was doing A, you assumed it was because of B.
I would not be surprised if it were not given the information in the post.
You also did not address my main point. That is the worn out criticisms of the SBC. Do you know of any Christian entity that could not do better? Do you know of any organization that has recently made such sweeping changes as the SBC?
Like Dan I’m tired of the bickering. I am also tired of the negativity toasted the SBC. If you want out. Get out. But turn in your Free Pass to criticize the SBC.
That’s my point and it may not even apply to Dan. His post just raises the possibility. Perhaps Dan will expand his remarks and show me to be an old fool. It won’t be the first time
My post was not a out Dan which is why I did not use his name.
It doesn’t matter if you use my name, it was my post. You made a huge assumption. I didn’t criticize the SBC, I criticized US. Those of us who argue and bicker over things, we can do better. I didn’t say “the SBC needs to do better, I said WE. If I said WE and I am talking about the SBC, why do you assume I am tossing a grenade on the way out the door? I don’t understand your logic at all.
” I am out to wrestle against powers and principalities and authorities that are dark and twisted.”
it is very, very dangerous to dwell on and confront darkness . . . I must caution you not to engage it directly . . .
the people in my own Church do not discuss this kind of confrontation lightly, knowing the great danger . . . those exorcists in my Church who do encounter evil directly are highly trained to do this dangerous work, and it is not discussed openly or advertised because of the seriousness of what is done
do not dwell on darkness, please . . .
“‘Draw strength from the Lord and from His mighty power’
(Ephesians 6:10)
Frank: I’ll copy your reply to my comment here so I don’t miss anything–
“Dale. Are you suggesting that the non-profit is unrelated to the cell church? Are you also implying that the “non-profit” or new cell church is unrelated to the criticism of the SBC?”
No. I was just pointing out that Dan stated that he’ll be working to start a cell-church network. That is what the non-profit is about. The two are obviously related.
In addition, Dan never criticizes the SBC. For you to react the way you did puts words in his mouth. I’ve been on the receiving end of that at times. I’ve also been on the giving end. Neither end is all that great.
“Are you arguing that starting a non-profit rather than work through one’s church is not doing one’s own thing?”
Nope. But then Dan never says he’s doing this without the support and encouragement of a local church. Ask him. I don’t know if he’s a Lone Ranger in this or not, but I kind of doubt it. But as he is “doing his own thing” I would also trust what he says in his post–he feels “led to go back” to some previous method of ministry that is not within the context of his previous local church ministry. It’s his calling. Let him have it. It isn’t yours. It’s his.
“If these are your arguments we see things differently.”
These aren’t my arguments, but I can certainly admit to my own fallibility. I would also say that you and I would likely see many things differently, but I would hope that we could work together in a spirit of Christ likeness and single-minded passion for His kingdom. Can we agree on that?
“I don’t see how one cannot see the argument “I’m doing A because of B” at least strongly implied in the post. As to whether the cell church will be associated with the SBC I do not know”
You see it, I don’t. I can’t explain it. It just isn’t there, in my opinion. And if it is, as you say a “strong implication,” then why couldn’t you just ask him straight out about your perceptions instead of throwing it out as a certain fact?
As for Dan’s association with the SBC, again, ask him.
“I would not be surprised if it were not given the information in the post.”
Assumption is never the best option.
“You also did not address my main point. That is the worn out criticisms of the SBC. Do you know of any Christian entity that could not do better? Do you know of any organization that has recently made such sweeping changes as the SBC?”
I’ve been in the SBC all my life. I was in a crib in a Southern Baptist church nursery the Sunday after my birth. I attended Southern (Texas) Baptist colleges. I attended SBC seminaries (though some would argue that Golden Gate doesn’t really count since it’s in California and will fall off into the ocean when the great earthquake comes). If I decide that the SBC is not where I need to be, I’ll leave. If I want to criticize it, I will. That’s my prerogative as an individual.
I think my comment above addresses the fact that I think the SBC could do better. I also know that we do it better than many if not most other denominational entities. To be sure, the SBC has made sweeping changes. I applaud many of those changes. I also believe I have the right to speak critically to those with which I disagree. It is my right and responsibility to do so.
That being said, my reply to you was about the way you took Dan’s post as being critical of the SBC when it wasn’t being critical of the SBC at all. He points out that the fights going on, while important, also may be distracting us from our main goals. It is his observation, and I’m willing to give him that much. He’s asking questions.
“Like Dan I’m tired of the bickering. I am also tired of the negativity toasted the SBC. If you want out. Get out. But turn in your Free Pass to criticize the SBC.”
I would agree with that. The bickering is tiresome. But I don’t see it as my chance to tell them to not let “the door hit you on your way out” either. Any criticism should be approached with an attitude that seeks to address real concerns. It should be looked at as a way to fine tune our work. To simply say, “I’m tired of all the negativity, doesn’t accomplish much. It just states our frustration with the negativity.
Again, Dan never stated anything that would imply that such was his intention.
“That’s my point and it may not even apply to Dan. His post just raises the possibility. Perhaps Dan will expand his remarks and show me to be an old fool. It won’t be the first time”
Okay. Now Dan’s not the problem. So everything I said above doesn’t really matter, does it? I appreciate your humility in that, and I humbly apologize if I implied that I thought you are an “old fool.” I don’t. I have enough trouble keeping myself out of that club……..
“My post was not a out Dan which is why I did not use his name.ything–”
No, you didn’t mention him by name. But you DID say: “And, I will apologize in advance for offending the one making this post because I doubt he meant this post to be as anti-SBC as I have taken it. It is not just this one post, but a blogaspheric condition of anit-SBC posts and whining that I am reacting to.”
The “one making this post” is not naming Dan (almost sounds like the Harry Potter books not wanting to call Voldemort by name but using the descriptor “he who shall not be named”–relax, it’s a joke). You did “apologize in advance,” so you recognize the possibility for tension and even offense at your statement, I take it? You also said that you don’t think he intended his post to be as “negative as [you] took it.” Then I apologize for making it an issue.
I would agree that there are some “anti-SBC posts and whining.” If people don’t like the SBC, they should find a more appropriate entity with whom they can align themselves. Or maybe they should just “do their own thing.”
Frank, I’m not battling with you over this. That would be silly. And you have the right to your opinion. I apologize for any offense in my reply.
I don’t know Dan, I just didn’t see anything of what you were writing about in his post. Your reply was connected to his post. Thus, I took it upon myself (arrogantly, I suppose) to step in and offer a defense based on what I saw in his post. It’s in my nature to be a bit of a crusader, I guess, and it sometimes puts me at odds with people.
You may reply to this if you like, but I shall not respond further. I think I’ve made my position clear, and I have other things to do. I’ll give you the last word.
Blessings to you today.
Thanks for being in my corner Dale.
I never imagined that we would go from arguing Calvinism to arguing . . . me. Where is Dave Miller when I need him?
You’re welcome, Dan. I’d be a poor substitute for Dave. I don’t have a lime green coat and I can’t stand the Yankees.
Blessings on your new venture in ministry.
As I said. We see things differently. As you said criticizing the SBC is your prerogative.
My point is that exercising such a perogative seems to be a spiritual gift in some peoples’ minds.
I’m actually sorry I even replied. I really don’t have anything but the best wishes for Dan or anyone else doing what they feel called to do
I just don’t like the “because A I’m doing B” when A is related to “the SBC could do better.”
Again I’m sorry I even brought it up. I hope both Dan and the SBC continue to do better.
Frank, me starting a non-profit and cell churches has NOTHING to do with the SBC. You don’t know any of the details what is going on, just that I resigned my position and I am doing something different, and your
1. Lack of any compassion for me and
2. Attacks based on assumption
leave me heartbroken and trying not to be just plain angry. I am sorry your brought it up too, because I didn’t attack the SBC, I said we can do better. Quote me one negative thing I said about the SBC! I simply said there is a lot of darkness and asked if we can do better.
Dan,
Although I don’t know how “compassion” has anything to do with it — whether I have it or not — really seems immaterial. You make my point by pointing out that your post focused on two things: you were leaving your church to start a non-profit and the SBC “could do better.”
Now, you seem to be saying that although these two things are juxtaposed in a post, they are unrelated. OK, that’s what you say, so that’s what you say.
It’s the juxtapostion of the thoughts in the post that made your post seem negative — otherwise, you are simply stating the obvious as I said. We all can do better whether Presbyterian or SBC or nothing at all.
OK, so we can be better. That merely states the obvious, unless it is meant to be negative. In the former case it serves no purpose, but in the latter case I don’t think it would serve any purpose either.
As I said, I may have been completely misreading the post and I’ll accept your admonishment that your leaving your church and starting something else are completely unrelated.
As far as whether I have compassion for you or not, I tried to go out of my way to give my response to your written word and not you as a person, but Dale preferred to make it personal.
You’ve made your point clear, and so I apologize. But, I won’t apologize for what I did not say, which is I have no compassion for you whatever you mean by that. What I do have is what I stated forthrightly, “I hope you succeed exceedingly.”
I hope that at least makes that part clear if the other parts of my interaction with your words were simply the thoughts of an “old fool.”
So Frank, you seem to rage against my post as an “attack”, are you saying the SBC if perfect and can’t do things any better? Should we not look at ourselves and wonder if we can do better? Should the SBC be above examination? Is the SBC flawless in all things? Am I not right to look at the convention that I was raised in, licensed, ordained in, have a seminary degree from, worked in and I am starting a cell network in and ask the question “can we do better”? I assume from your backlash, you feel the SBC is above reproach, so do we just exist on as things are because it’s mean to question the SBC? Do we ignore what happens at the convention and assume everything written about the SBC has to do with our church? Do we become so inwardly focused that we are afraid to deal with our own issues?
You have said a lot about how I was wrong. You never did show me where I criticized the SBC, I simply asked if we can do better.
Dan,
Have a nice day.
You too Frank, God bless you.
If you are interested in what my non-profit will be doing, check out
http://revolution-inversion.blogspot.com/2012/07/what-is-ri-updated.html
While it’s purpose and the cell church network will have overlapping themes and ideas, the mission of the RI is mostly resourcing, training, equipping and supporting, not actually doing. I will actually be doing the ministry that the RI will be supporting and championing. Separate entities, same goal.
Good stuff, Dan. I look forward to seeing how it progresses.
Dan,
I hope you succeed at what God wants you to do.
In reading your blog on RI though i am a bit confused.
Why couldn’t you do those things as part of your local church outreach and ministry. I don’t mean as an Associate Pastor, but as a member. Does the new work mean you will be moving away from your church?
Isn’t the church you are [were] attending doing outreach and seeking the lost?
Well, God bless you and your Endeavor.
peace brother
My leaving was more complicated than me just going to do something else. It’s complicated.
The church I was at does incredible outreach. I had no issues with being there, in a perfect world I never would have left. Some things are beyond control.
I wish I had an emoticon for “face palm”……
Blessings, brother.